MUSLIM WOMAN SUPPORTS FRENCH BAN ON BURKAS

This is about a distinguished physician, author and Muslim woman living in the U.S. who supports the controversial ban on burkas and facial coverings as imposed by the gutsy Sarkozy government in France.

Dr. Qanta Ahmed is the author of In the Land of Invisible Women: A Female Doctor’s Journey in the Saudi Kingdom. She is a board certified sleep disorders specialist at Winthrop University Hospital in Mineola, New York and Associate Professor of Medicine at the State University of New York (Stony Brook). Previously, she has practiced medicine at the National Health Service in the United Kingdom and in the National Guard Health Affairs in Riyadh, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and also at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, SC.
In her writings, Dr. Ahmed identifies herself as a secular, or heterodox, Muslim who decries the culture of abayas and burkas. In this article (linked below) she talks about the history of veiling woman and the sense of oppression it imposes on Muslim women who yearn to be free and equal. Beware, her writings will cause some to reach for a dictionary, but her message is refreshing and pragmatic. Big words don’t impress a Hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobic like me.

Too bad there are not more Muslims in this country like Dr. Ahmed and Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, of Arizona, with the courage to speak out in favor of reform and dignity for all, with a willingness to assimilate into American life. If the majority were of her ilk, the minority radicals could be better repressed from their jihad frame of mind.

Here’s her article:

Click here: France’s burqa ban: A brave step that we Muslims should welcome

More about Dr. Ahmed:

Click here: Qanta A. Ahmed (Author of In the Land of Invisible Women)

If only for reasons of security, I’m of the opinion that all free nations of the western world would do well to follow the lead of France in this issue. Would certainly make Juan Williams feel better on airplanes.

Click here: France Burqa Ban Takes Effect; Two Women Detained

18 Responses to MUSLIM WOMAN SUPPORTS FRENCH BAN ON BURKAS

  1. Jan van Waardenburg April 21, 2011 at 11:11 am #

    French President Nicolas Sarkozy seems to look better to me by the day.
    A few more like him and most problems will be over
    JVW

  2. Chris April 21, 2011 at 11:14 am #

    Are the Muslim only zones still in effect in France? That is as worrisome to me as women being required to wear the burka.

    • Jan van Waardenburg April 21, 2011 at 1:08 pm #

      I think you did not get the problem about the ban.
      It is NOT what one should or not wear, but what people can do when they conceal their faces and most of their body.
      The “concealed” figure could easily me a female or male preson with bad intentions.
      It seems in France and the emancipated world, nobody is force to wear anyhting.
      That, I think should be acceptable toyou
      JVW

      • Chris April 21, 2011 at 1:30 pm #

        I get the ban. The important question here is are there still Muslim only zones in France? By that I mean the areas where the police are not allowed to, or are deathly afraid to go? One of which has gotten one female business owner beaten and raped repeatedly, because she continually refuse to wear a burka, nor leave.

        Jan, I DO get what a concealed figure can do. If some areas in France still enforce the wearing of concealment (burka or anything like it), then France is not so emancipated. Until all those areas lose Sharia rule, it is unacceptable. Just like Sharia law would be if allowed in the U.S.

        • Jan van Waardenburg April 21, 2011 at 8:42 pm #

          Good, I thought you were in favor of wearing the burkas
          Jan

          • Chris April 21, 2011 at 8:52 pm #

            OMG, Hate them.

  3. Pat H. April 21, 2011 at 12:53 pm #

    In our UU Women’s Circle, we tried on the muslim garments that Rosemary had brought from her life there. Very confining. For even more insight on the life o tradiktional muslim women and on the effect of the burka, read “The Bookseller of Kabul”
    I support France’s stand and hope we will do the same in the USA if necessary.

  4. Bahia Abrams April 21, 2011 at 6:32 pm #

    I have read Dr. Qanta Ahmed’s book, “The Land of Invisible Women: A Female Doctor’s Journey in the Saudi Kingdom.” It is a real eye opener and I highly recommend it. She tells the reality of life living inside the Kingdom.

    Bahia Abrams

  5. Ron Kenerly April 21, 2011 at 11:16 pm #

    First, if you can not see them, then who is really behind that veil?
    Second, the courts already said this can not be done, so why hash it over again….remember the KKK?…and these folks make the KKK look like a fairy tale, so what is the problem with enforcing existing law?…except that politicians must babble and spew to create another problem so they can whip out a 11th hour solution that normally ends up being some B.S. with a hidden agenda which they can tell everyone how wonderful they are in keeping us safe.

  6. Jan van Waardenburg April 22, 2011 at 8:19 am #

    Your comparison with KKK hit the right spot. That was a reletive local issue.
    This is world wide!
    I hope the people will not wake up too late to see that.
    Jan

  7. Dr. Marlowe April 23, 2011 at 9:16 am #

    To the lady who questioned me (a friendly question) regarding my feelings on the wisdom of the “posting” by Marshall of this topic & my opinion of the use of the veil by Muslim women.

    Answer: It’s Marshall’s blog & he can post what he pleases. I know Marshall, & this wasn’t posted to “Inflame” the populace as regards the question(s) of burkas or any other garments. I believe his motive was (and is) to give the reader “SOMETHING” to think about!

    On a personal note (opinion), as regards the veil?…, I have always contented that I am suspicious of “ANYONE” who hides behind a “covering” to conduct their activities; Be it the KKK or Muslims. (Actually, my father told me that was his opinion & I accepted that and adopted the same philosophy as a VERY young kid).

    I’m also of the opinion (seems like I am full of opinions today huh?) that, legitimate men & women conduct their activities (unless they are military ‘Dark Operations’ folks on a mission) in an open manner. I wouldn’t want to be associated with any “social” organization, including the Mason’s (as much as SOME Masonic Temples do for sick children, etc.) that meet in total secrecy & again like the KKK who must conceal their faces to conduct their activities. Legitimate folks functioning in a upright manner don’t cover their faces; they don’t have the need to do that… they just look you in the eye & greet you and go about their day.

    Last opinion for this particular blog subject……”A REAL gentleman never intentionally insult a lady!!!” To force a woman (just because he is physically stronger than her) to wear a veil over her face is an insult to her & renders the man (or a society) who enforces that on a woman, less than a gentleman. He (or the society), is (in fact) so very insecure of his/its own gender.

    Marshall, thanks for the post.

  8. Jan van Waardenburg April 23, 2011 at 10:30 am #

    Indeed trying to be a gentleman is to be admired.
    Unfortunately, in nature a genltman does not last the day.
    Of course the comparison is very limited, but the Muslem fanatic loves to confront a Gentleman. He, the gentleman is breakfast for him. Our good intentions and bowing to the political correctness syndrome Will be our downfall.
    Jan

  9. Dr. Marlowe April 23, 2011 at 5:11 pm #

    Jan,

    YES!!! You’re correct. BUT…….if someone mistakes my good nature as a sign of weakness, then they have indeed made a grave error in judgement. I “AM” a gentleman; but a tried & true warrior as well (20 plus years of military service& three combat tours to back that up). So, there are gentlemen and warriors out here. Anyway, a good post & I thank you for it.

    • Jan van Waardenburg April 24, 2011 at 8:51 am #

      I understand and I feel the same. Unfortunately the world does not see that and the people “on the fence” are easy pickings. The problem is that the fanatics are seen as criminals and should be treated as such.
      Wrong: A criminal is a product of the conditions he lives in.
      The criminal in most cases will admit his wrong doings and promises to do “better” but he can easily be bought and turned and so on.
      Unfortunately that does not happen a lot, because the way we keep him behind bars is not very contusive to real repentance.

      No, the Fanatic-suicidal- Muslim is not a criminal. He and some times she, fears his God and he loves his family (his way) does not steal or tell lies, unless he is told that is is for the greater good for Islam.
      There is no way to convince him otherwise and I we are stupid enough to put him in jail he will have gotten his wish as a martyr.
      He will die in jail with the same conviction that he is right.
      And if he is released he will be twice as dangerous.
      No there is only one way to deal with him.
      Any body caught in a terrorist act should be destroyed immediately.
      No court is necessary. It is just self preservation.
      I also consider myself a gentleman.
      Jan

  10. Dan Townsend April 23, 2011 at 11:22 pm #

    The Burkha, and similar body coverings predated Islam. Nomadic Arab tribes subsisted for millenia on the proceeds of caravan robbery, slave trading, “tribute” for unmolested passage through Arab lands and ransom payments for abducted travelers.
    This criminal behavior occurred between tribes as well.
    The key point is that mandated full-body coverings for women served as masterful disguises for men fleeing retribution from rivals and various aggrieved parties.
    Continuing this tradition, terrorists of Mid-east origin routinely disguise themselves as veiled women wherever “traditional” Islamic communities exist. This is the unmentioned reason why President Sarkozy pursued “Burkha bans” with such vigor.
    Ironically, the women in Muhammed’s immediate circle were not veiled, and the merger of “veiling” women and Islam did not occur until the “Hadith” era, many years after Muhammed’s death.

  11. anonymous May 16, 2011 at 12:44 am #

    “Dr. Ahmed identifies herself as a secular, or heterodox, Muslim” . You can’t identify with a religion and claim to be secular, that is a complete oxymoron. Since she first listed herself as being secular, I don’t see how anyone can take her opinion to be that of a “Muslim” one since she is clearly not and doesn’t claim to be. As for the comment that free nations should follow France’s lead on the ban, that would also be be an oxymoron. A free country is just that, a free country. Whether I choose to cover myself or walk around in a bikini should be exactly that: MY CHOICE. FORCING a women to take off her veil is just as disgusting as forcing a woman to take it off.

  12. anonymous May 16, 2011 at 12:45 am #

    “Dr. Ahmed identifies herself as a secular, or heterodox, Muslim” . You can’t identify with a religion and claim to be secular, that is a complete oxymoron. Since she first listed herself as being secular, I don’t see how anyone can take her opinion to be that of a “Muslim” one since she is clearly not and doesn’t claim to be. As for the comment that free nations should follow France’s lead on the ban, that would also be be an oxymoron. A free country is just that, a free country. Whether I choose to cover myself or walk around in a bikini should be exactly that: MY CHOICE. FORCING a women to take off her veil is just as disgusting as forcing a woman to put it on.

  13. Jan van Waardenburg May 16, 2011 at 8:15 am #

    Who forced th women to cover her face in the frist place??
    Over the many years, she might have been used to having her face covered. (So that other Man could not see and look at her!!
    Your saying: “forcing a Women to take off her veil is just as disgusting as putting it on”
    is just word play and smells of Political correctness. We don’t live in the past anymore.
    JVW