Recent hype regarding the Burqa causes opinions to arise and people to vehemently defend it or condemn it. One can not know of this issue and remain indifferent, one must decide whether to be pro or con because the heart of the issue is based solely on humanistic motive and commonality of consciousness that we all share. The lack of indifference is comforting and the difficulty to reside with a sense of political numbness can almost be defined as charming. People have opinions.... hmmm how quaint? So what causes this charming uproar? It is incorrigible charm no doubt, yet this issue speaks directly to societal and individual values regarding freedom. It speaks to peoples opinions about religious and cultural boundaries and concepts. Islamic, Christian, Atheist, Jew, whatever you are, this is an issue about freedom first and foremost before it can ever be an issue about politics, religion, or national security. However, it's not wishy washy, it is not easy to formulate solid opinions or stand your ground without considering both sides.
The opinions we form on this issue identify the way we live our lives and speaks to the philosophies we each hold regarding freedom. At the heart of the issue, it divides without supports from either of the two sides. One must formulate an opinion on the legality of the ban based on personal ideals rather than the factuality and constructed arguments that each side presents.
I can not help but think of John Locke and also the statement by Jean Paul Sartre again pounds in my head, it is undeniable... again... "it is we who are the zombies." Lockean philosophy would would have refuted the pro side. Despite the fact that Locke supported a type of conformity, he also understood that coercing religious uniformity would lead to more social disorder than allowing diversity in the first place. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that preaching equality and freedom through a codified type of "sameness" could rally many, (it has already, after all.) However, Roger Williams (of the Rhode Island variety) would argue that something such as this can be categorized as "soul Rape" which he so boldly defined as being forced to affirm convictions you do not hold. I have to question if a woman who has worn a burqa the entirety of her life is forced to unveil would define the action as affirming a conviction she does not hold. Is it affirming anything, Or.. will it simply enhance social disorder as Locke would predict? At the moment Spain, along with a slew of other European countries are considering banning this religious statement.
I have contemplated this for the past few months, thinking and desperately trying to see both sides, however, the more I consider banning it, for reasons that do make sense i.e. the suppression of women and security, the more I see that it doesn't make sense.
I don't live and breath for feminism as some women do, but I do believe in equality and justice and have come to the conclusion that creating a law banning such an expression goes against the ethical fabric of mankind ( given that we all have some ethics in common.) This is also the case with requiring the Veil. It should be a personal decision and people should be educated to make decisions on their own instead of ingraining a "there's no other way" policy. This I believe increases happiness and a sense that one has the ability to control their own life and make their own decisions.
Furthermore, contrary to popular belief, this veiling does not represent oppression from a woman's partner. However, it is an ingrained oppression of women, that has been so long a tradition that when labeled as such, even women behind the veil will disagree. It can be defined as a type of structural violence that is buried and resurfaced again and again.
Reason #1 that people give for the ban is security. People are incapable of seeing someones face which immediately instigates fear. This is a fear of the unknown, it creeps and can not quite be defined as a phobia in certainty but rather is the basis for all fears. However, if we give into this fear, it seems we might as well be afraid to live in general, because as we move forward we are constantly crossing from the unknown to the known. Nevertheless this fear of the unknown, is the main reason I hate clowns after all. However, even with that said, the contemplation to ban the burqa is of much greater importance because banning it is not only a political move but is a symbolic move for a society. Banning the Burqa is a move that shows humans moving backward retreating back to dark age mentality and enhances the lack of appreciation for our differences. Differences are becoming less and less in the modern world, and as much as we emphasise diversity, it is disappearing with each MC Donald's Big Mac and Forever 21 pair of shoes.
Forcing people to unveil through law will create more sameness and has repercussions that will reverberate through what is now our future history. Perhaps this is a new Human Law of Entropy, at this point it's hard to tell where exactly we're heading but it is clear that we are heading there together integrated and flowing downhill at a record pace. At this point, I don't know what to believe is better, trying to uphold differences or coming together. It is possible that only time will tell but investigations are necessary and we must continue to question societal movement to determine where we are going and if it is indeed what we want.
yours in wanting to predict what lies in the unknown but allowing it to be so,
wishes,
-stitches
No comments:
Post a Comment