Source http://www.ariannaeditrice.it/articolo.php?id_articolo=30229
On 2 July 1798 a young military, like it or not, is the one who gave meaning to the French Revolution and remains, thanks to his work as a secular legislator, one of the "historical Fathers" of Europe, landed in the port of Alexandria in Egypt and launched an astonishing proclamation, in which it was alleged that the Republic created by the Revolution and Islam rested on identical values \u200b\u200bof Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Beyond his genius demagogue (he was also something else), General Napoleon Bonaparte had a good knowledge of Islam, perhaps more than many politicians today, and not French. Then: He was wrong, and wrong now his countrymen who see in some traditions (albeit minority) of some Muslim groups have become a slur and a attack on those values?
The French republic in recent years is not new to experiments disguised as freedom-libertarian measures: it is already in place by the time the ban on the hijab veil simple head, almost a headscarf) in schools. The alibi was legal, in this case, that of "no more ostentatious signs of religious affiliation" means a standard ambiguous and dangerous. When does a cross or a Star of David around his neck becomes "ostentatious"? If you have an inch in diameter? Or two? Or five?
Now, it enacts a law which prohibits Muslim clothing full coverage (burqa and niqab), without even try the alibi ostentation: and much less - although that would be plausible - safety in the name of which you can ask anyone to show it openly as an element of immediate recognition. No. In this case, reference to the "values \u200b\u200bof the Republic". And the chairman of the committee responsible for declaring that the burqa and niqab are "just the tip of the iceberg" because it actually represents only one aspect of the repression of women's rights in Islam. It 'an old speech, but it is repeated uncritically, without ever giving it a shred of evidence dogmatic assumption according to which Muslim women, se potessero, insorgerebbero in blocco per sbarazzarsi di quegli odiati indumenti. Al contrario. E’ sempre più frequente imbattersi – piaccia o no – in donne musulmani giovani, istruite, magari carine, che adottano l’uso di quegli indumenti o che, pur non portandoli, ne difendono la legittimità. Capita sempre piu spesso di leggere e di ascoltare difese della copertura integrale per nulla retrograde e reazionarie, ma al contrario intelligenti e spiritose: dove per esempio si rimprovera alle “occidentali” la schiavitù costituita dall’ostentazione continua a tutti delle loro grazie, l’implicito mercimonio che in essa è presente, lo stress derivante dal dover esser sempre belle e ordinate anche when you go to the market compared to the freedom of a beautiful burqa worn quickly for five minutes, in which maybe one is in tights and curlers.
Exaggerations? Not really. In Muslim countries are mounting a fierce and serious feminist movement that aims at something else: and that in fact defends the traditional garments. As for the values \u200b\u200bof a "secular republic" which paradoxically protects the right to public lewdness, but punishes the assault, it must be said clearly that the true secularism is not to ban religious symbols and attitudes, but in enabling and protecting all conduct will not preclude the coexistence and the exercise of the rights of others. And impose on others their own royalties by supporting a priori the moral "superiority" is not secularism. E 'arrogance.
On 2 July 1798 a young military, like it or not, is the one who gave meaning to the French Revolution and remains, thanks to his work as a secular legislator, one of the "historical Fathers" of Europe, landed in the port of Alexandria in Egypt and launched an astonishing proclamation, in which it was alleged that the Republic created by the Revolution and Islam rested on identical values \u200b\u200bof Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Beyond his genius demagogue (he was also something else), General Napoleon Bonaparte had a good knowledge of Islam, perhaps more than many politicians today, and not French. Then: He was wrong, and wrong now his countrymen who see in some traditions (albeit minority) of some Muslim groups have become a slur and a attack on those values?
The French republic in recent years is not new to experiments disguised as freedom-libertarian measures: it is already in place by the time the ban on the hijab veil simple head, almost a headscarf) in schools. The alibi was legal, in this case, that of "no more ostentatious signs of religious affiliation" means a standard ambiguous and dangerous. When does a cross or a Star of David around his neck becomes "ostentatious"? If you have an inch in diameter? Or two? Or five?
Now, it enacts a law which prohibits Muslim clothing full coverage (burqa and niqab), without even try the alibi ostentation: and much less - although that would be plausible - safety in the name of which you can ask anyone to show it openly as an element of immediate recognition. No. In this case, reference to the "values \u200b\u200bof the Republic". And the chairman of the committee responsible for declaring that the burqa and niqab are "just the tip of the iceberg" because it actually represents only one aspect of the repression of women's rights in Islam. It 'an old speech, but it is repeated uncritically, without ever giving it a shred of evidence dogmatic assumption according to which Muslim women, se potessero, insorgerebbero in blocco per sbarazzarsi di quegli odiati indumenti. Al contrario. E’ sempre più frequente imbattersi – piaccia o no – in donne musulmani giovani, istruite, magari carine, che adottano l’uso di quegli indumenti o che, pur non portandoli, ne difendono la legittimità. Capita sempre piu spesso di leggere e di ascoltare difese della copertura integrale per nulla retrograde e reazionarie, ma al contrario intelligenti e spiritose: dove per esempio si rimprovera alle “occidentali” la schiavitù costituita dall’ostentazione continua a tutti delle loro grazie, l’implicito mercimonio che in essa è presente, lo stress derivante dal dover esser sempre belle e ordinate anche when you go to the market compared to the freedom of a beautiful burqa worn quickly for five minutes, in which maybe one is in tights and curlers.
Exaggerations? Not really. In Muslim countries are mounting a fierce and serious feminist movement that aims at something else: and that in fact defends the traditional garments. As for the values \u200b\u200bof a "secular republic" which paradoxically protects the right to public lewdness, but punishes the assault, it must be said clearly that the true secularism is not to ban religious symbols and attitudes, but in enabling and protecting all conduct will not preclude the coexistence and the exercise of the rights of others. And impose on others their own royalties by supporting a priori the moral "superiority" is not secularism. E 'arrogance.
0 comments:
Post a Comment