Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on symbolism of the veil
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An essay on symbolism of the veil
Many countries around the world decide to ban clothes and jewelry with religious significance in public places. France, Belgium and Britain decide to ban all religious significance like veil, turban and cross in Christianity. These countries decide to ban religious significant after they provide evidence that it might affect the safety of society and it’s against human rights (Islamic veil across Europe - BBC News, 2014). But this ban is also will affect the rights of other people in the society. This ban affects people life and changes it negatively. Also, it maybe affects the society in negative way. This paper will argue that people should be free to wear clothes and jewelry with religious significant, because ban religious significant is …show more content…
Many people consider leaving their work instead to take off their religious symbols. Some research shows that when people leave their work which leads to loss freedom, and financial well being, shared standing and deterioration in their social position,( Questions and Answers on Restrictions on Religious Dress and Symbols in Europe | Human Rights Watch (2010)). Some people tried to start new business by changing to home business. In addition, banning religious significance can affect individual life by deprive them from their personal information. According to Neyyar (2012), some Sikhs refused to remove their turban when they want to take their official photographs. As a result, they lost their ID and passport. Then they lost their medical treatment and national and local government help and services. Religious significance ban can lead to affect the individual life, so they should allow people to wear clothing and jewelry with religious …show more content…
Firstly, by banning religious significance they will help women who their families forced them to wear banning these clothes and jewelry, will help woman to live their life without any limitation and will make them feel equal with others. At the same time, it will help women to be freedom from wearing clothes and jewelries with religious significance( Questions and Answers on Restrictions on Religious Dress and Symbols in Europe | Human Rights Watch,2010). As a result it should ban religious significance to help those who was forced to wear clothes and jewelry with religious
In the article, Chesler uses several persuasive appeals in an attempt to convince readers to support France’s ban on head coverings. While some may argue that banning religious clothing infringes on Islamic law, Chesler points out that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” In an appeal to logos, Chesler uses facts, gathered from educated Muslim women and Islamic scholars, to show that this argument is illogical because the burqa is not required. Chesler continues logos appeals by citing the Sheikh of al-Azhat University as saying “The niqab is tradition. It has no connection to religion.” This passage demonstrates ethos as well, but carries on the idea that burqas and niqabs are not required by Islamic law, making the ban perfectly logical. The idea is that, since these garments are not mandatory in the Koran’s broad requisite of “modest dress,” the ban does not infringe on religious rights, making the ban a logical choice. Chesler takes the argument one step further by insisting that the burqa is not only optional, it is detrimental to wearers. The argument that “it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard and is a form of torture” to women who wear burqa exhibits both logos and pathos. By pointing out that burqas are a possible “health hazard,” Chesler uses unappealing syntax to make readers believe that burqas are unhealthy and i...
The author of this essay thinks it is ridiculous that women cannot wear their hijab in certain places around the world. Many people think the hijab is not necessary. However, it is part of what Muslim women believe. She explains in her essay, "So next time you hear about a hijab ban think about your best pair of jeans or your faded t-shirt with the logo of your favorite band" (Fakhraie 461). A hijab is just like every other piece of clothing that covers up the body. It can be part of their religion, or they can wear a hijab just because they like how it
For some women wearing a veil is not something that is forced on them but rather a choice of their own. Martha Nussbaum and Maysan Haydar are both authors that try to explain their reasoning that veiling isn't an oppressive tool used against women. Martha Nussbaum's article “Veiled Threats”, is a political and philosophical take on why banning the burqa is a violation of human rights. On the other hand Maysan Haydar’s article “Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering”, is a more humorous and personal take on why veiling shouldn't be as judged or stereotyped. Though Nussbaum and Haydar have equal goals this essay is being used to understand the main argument, claims and whether or not each article has any weaknesses.
Muslims, Sikhs, and many other religious affiliations have often been targeted for hate crimes, racial slurs, and misfortunate events. We are all different in our own ways some are good and some are bad yet one event changes everything for everyone affiliated with the group. The book The Politics of the Veil by Joan Scott a renowned pioneer in gender studies gives a detailed and analytical book of about the French views towards the Muslim females in France during 2004. The author talks about why the French governments official embargo of wearing conspicuous signs is mainly towards the headscarves for Muslim girls under the age of eighteen in public schools. The main themes of book are gender inequality, sexism, and cultural inequality historical schools used in the book are history of below, woman’s history, cultural history, and political history. In this essay, I will talk about why Joan Scotts argument on why the French government’s ban on wearing conspicuous signs was
The First Amendment’s Free Exercise and Establishment clauses guarantee the freedom of religion. Allowance of this fundamental human right creates a clear barrier between life in America and life in illiberal nations like Iran and France. After the revolution in 1979, Iran turned into an Islamic state (“The Veil of Oppression”). Religion police adopted radical dress codes for the public and there wer...
...na, for example, is practiced in many religions throughout the world, but is illegal in the United States. Referring back to Sultaana Freeman, veils for identification photos are forbidden, even though in other countries it may be permissible. These exceptions are chiefly for the safety for the people, for their health, and for protection against violence that may erupt as consequence.
7 weeks ago, an Indian-American actor was going through security check. This actor was wearing a turban and had been asked to take it off in public. He asked for a private screening room but the certain officer declines. Instead of getting on his flight, he’s stuck at the airport having to pay for a new one on a different airline(“American Sikh Actor Waris Ahluwalia Barred from US-bound Flight over Turban Row”). In a result, the actor wasted his time and money just because he required religious garb. Wait, what is religious garb? Religious garb is a piece of clothing or accessory that a person wears that is involved in their religion. For example, a hijab is a religious garb because it is an accessory that women wear who are Islam. In a lot
If the Charter claims that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and expressions, then why is the discussion of prohibiting public employees from wearing clothing with religious symbolism even brought up? Why are the majority – 60 percent – of Quebecers in favour of the Charter's ban on religious symbols? Perhaps it is difficult to understand the importance of such religious symbols when someone is not practicing any religion and are not required to wear anything to show their faith. However, imagine having something that you find greatly important and highly value being taken away from you. It does not have to be a cross or a hijab, maybe it is a favourite piece literature, or a piece of jewelry passed down from an important family member, whatever it may be, it holds high sentimental value. Taking away an object of high value would offend and upset anyone, no matter what that object may be. When it comes to taking away someone's right to wear whatever they wish, and on top of that halting their right to properly practice their religion is a definite infringement of the Rights and Freedoms possessed by any person living in Canada, which is just
There are many different views towards Muslim choice of clothing especially wearing the veil. “I wear it believing it is necessary, but someone else can be wearing it believing that she is doing something extra” said Hamna Ahmed. One of the many reasons a Muslim can be wearing the veil are their own personal decisions too. Hamna has been wearing it for seven years now, despite her mother and three of her four sisters staying uncovered. Socially this causes an issue with the meaning of the veil and conflict with other groups. With many different consumptions of religion, what it means, what is considered to be practicing and what is not can lead to negative misunderstandings. Ultimately the decisions are up to the individuals although; there is likely to be misinterpretation between the meaningfulness of religion to family and society. On an even bigger scale of things this could also impact society and it...
Culture is a way of life that allows a diverse group of people to interrelate with one another. It is usually passed down from one generation to the next by communication and imitation. The term itself has a set definition, but it normally relates to the behavior, beliefs, values, and symbols that are accepted by a group of people. Culture can also be used to describe the time period and events in history. In the sense of what was deemed as popular during a specific stage in time and its impact on the culture surrounding it. Micro-historian have been dissecting and interpreting the meaning of popular culture and the courses of action that lead up to the events.
International human rights standards protect the rights of persons to be able to choose what they wish to wear, and in particular to be able to manifest their religious belief. Thus, Human Rights Watch in their report, focusing on the hijab ban for state officials in Germany, said that: “Restrictions should only be implemented where fully justified by the state, and be the least restrictive necessary”.1 Proclamation of wearing the hijab in public institutions as illegal is undermining the autonomy of individuals, their right to choose, their right to privacy and intimacy, and their self-determination. In addition to this, several European countries such as Germany and France directly prevent women wearing hijab to work or attend school in the public state institutions, which further intensified already negative attitude of Western public towards wearing hijab.
In our daily lives, without even recognizing it, there are religious symbols present all around us. If we are carrying money, “In God We Trust” is a religious symbol that is present on our currency. If we happen to say the pledge of allegiance we are saying “one nation under God” which alludes to God and the Catholic religion. Around the holidays, there are Christmas decorations present everywhere, which are religious symbols of the Catholic faith. None of these things seem bad or harmful to anyone in any way. They are not harming anyone. Are they? Well, they are not harming anyone directly, but have impacted people because it is through the presence of these symbols that neglects all other religions and is feeding into the issue of the ongoing church versus state argument for separation.
I chose to use a total of ten symbols all incorporated into one symbol designed and drawn by me (on Microsoft Paint). The entire symbol has eight points and looks like the star of David with two extra triangles on top. I chose to use the star of David to represent the religion of Judaism and then I added the two extra points to make an eight pointed polygon, to incorporate the eight spoked wheel of Dharma. The top right point is colored red to represent the North and the bottom left point is blue to represent the South. At the top is a symbol of the almighty Flying Spaghetti Monster to represent Pastafarians and Atheism. The top left point has the letter S going through the golden letter D looking shapes for the symbol of Scientology. To the top right inside of the red point is a Pentagram
Banning of personally religious displays like wearing religious headpieces; turbans, yamakas, and jewelry like crosses, would be unacceptable in so many levels.
The hijab is a very important and powerful Muslim symbol that is worn by billions of Muslim women all over the world. Many wear the hijab as a symbol of faith, while others wear it to protect themselves from society’s expectations of women. Some people think that banning the use of the hijab in public is a violation of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. However, others think the banning of the hijab is a necessary precaution. The wearing of the Muslim hijab should be banned in public because it is impractical, Muslims use it to separate themselves from society, and it is a security risk.