They complain about the freedom to wear it, yet they stay silent when their sisters have acid thrown on their faces for refusing to wear it in Kashmir and other Muslim countries.

Here goes:

Most secular government, I think, have developed the principle, more or less, that respect for religion means you have a right to do whatever your religion commands, as long as its not otherwise illegal. I think we’d all agree that a religion that called for, say, human sacrifice, sould be subject to some, er, restrictions. (I’m assuming here, a law that treats all religions as equal, not some as “right” and some as “wrong”) In that case, a valid law with a compelling need to protect society overwhelms a religious obligation.

So, what if some guy — a unitarian, say — decided to start walking around all the time and going to work dressed in a ninja outfit like from Batman. (unarmed, of course) Or in one of those Haloween-looking “facial prosthetic” things. And say he had a reason for it: his personal beliefs meant he didn’t want to be subjected to the gaze of others, he felt judged by being seen, whatever. A reason based in personal choice, not religion.

Would he be allowed to walk down the street? Or go to work? Would he be able to hold a job? I think not — his boss would fire him, claiming he couldn’t do his job looking like a halloween costume. He’d get picked up on the street, and the cops would cite public safety reasons, because he couldn’t be identified.

And, when he was fired or hassled by the cops, would people rally and support his right to wear what he felt was appropriate? I don’t really think they would.

So, if this is an issue of personal freedom — of people to do what their beliefs dictate, not just what the beliefs of one or another large world religion dictate — then don’t we need to talk very seriously about all the OTHER issues of what is acceptable and unacceptable in public comportment?

Because, if those justifications about safety and job efficacy are valid for the guy in the ninja suit, shouldn’t they be valid for the woman in niqab too? And if they’re NOT valid in either case, then shouldn’t that lead us to take a long hard look at what we consider “social standards” ?

Now,

With that said, the teacher’s assistant should not wear the Niqab while she works just because it works against her performance in the field of education. Being a professor myself, more specifically a professor in communication studies, the Niqab would only hinder the communication process between she and her students. As a teacher, it would be in her best interest to take down any road blocks in her communication process between she and her students, especially since they are grade school students. Non-verbal communication is an important aspect of the communication process and if her students cant see her face, well then they will probably not be able to understand many of the messages she is trring to share with them.

This story reminds me of the woman who refused to take her niqab off when posing for a picture for her ID. Now come on. We cannot identify people only by their eyes.

Again, like I said no one should be forced to do anything, there are certain situations where you just have to common sense. This teacher can still dress very conservatively and wear a head scarf as well and I am sure no one would bother her. My fifth grade teacher was very proud of his African heritage as he should be and he would dress in traditional African clothing with head pieces that covered all his hair. No one ever said anything. But, when it comes to your face, how can you expect your students to trust you and come to you for help when they cant see you? It just does not work.

Itâ??s a paradigm shift they just donâ??t want to make.”

This “paradigm shift” would be a shift backwards to those who fought for the rights of women to be treated as human beings, not as chattel. Considering your remarks about Free love and sex manipulation, I must assume you have not spent much - or any - time in the west.

“Men being forced to understand women for their mind instead of what they look like”?? This is so difficult for you? You consider the mother who carried you in her body for nine months and suffered pain to bring you into this world to be just an animal that has nothing but physical beauty? No wonder so many men of your part of the world have trouble dealing with the western world. If you are willing to DEHUMANIZE over half of your country’s population, based ONLY on their sexual apparatus, then you are denying your country full use of all of its’ resources.

It is my understanding that the teacher who was fired in Britain was a teacher of English. She was not fired because she was religious. She was fired because her insistance on wearing a full face veil made it impossible for the children to watch her mouth form the words, and thereby made it almost impossible for them to learn the language.

Oh, but they don’t mention THAT part in the news, do they? They just play on the “bad bad western people who fired a poor woman for not removing her hijab”.

I think when living in a Western society, people should try to be a little moderate and not force their more extreme ways on society - think of it this way, would a Buddhist be allowed to teach if he came in wearing a monastic robe?? or an Orthodox Jew with overgrown sideburns and a black fedora?? Some people need to start being a little bit reasonable and stop over-victimising themselves.

Niqab is a controversial issue in Muslim theology and is still debtable. Most scholars say it is not obligatory.

And it isn’t … otherwise, women would be required to wear niqab in hajj…and it is a known fact that they cannot wear niqab during i7ram when performing hajj!

Liberal:

2. politics: progressive politically or socially: favoring gradual reform, especially political reforms that extend democracy, distribute wealth more evenly, and protect the personal freedom of the individual.
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2004. © 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Personal Freedom of the individual. What’s liberal in sending men who wear short Jallabiyyas and women who cover up everything out of a society? That’s not liberal in my opinion Batir no offense, that’s their CULTURE, if one says ‘that’s their culture and we’re just different and such a big difference in manner won’t click in 1 society’ that I’d understand, but liberal, they’re liberal to what they want to be categorized under liberal.

I was watching a program debating the issue of Egyptian TV banning shows with mohajabat actresses, after the first 3 minuets the debate turned into weather hijab should be forced on or off females. At that point all I could remember is your comments once on a blog…how silly that might be(posting your comment on your comments section) but I want every one to read it too…because it already helped me in saving time and effort and I used it 1000 times, with out forgetting the copyrights of course

Nas: ” The hijab is just another topic in islam non-muslims love to pick apart and muslims love to make a big deal about. itâ??s been talked about to death, never has such a simple request from God ever caused so much nonsense within the ummah. itâ??s as if He asked for muslims to set their hair on fire…..personally, to each his or rather her, own. we will all be judged in front of Allah swt one day thatâ??s for sure, and at that point whatever arguements anyone has they can take it up with Him. there are too many muslims who have trouble obeying the 5 pillars that make them muslims in the first place, let alone the dress code.”

It’s a paradigm shift they just don’t want to make.

Peace,

M.

Regarding forcing women to wear hijab, it depends on one’s ‘method’ of convincing. But to argue the obligation as mandatory or optional, is arguing the interpratation ad teaching of Muhammed PUBH.