Encore - some more on the veil issue

Today we discussed the veil issue in my French history class. It was interesting to hear another French perspective on it. My professor said he goes both ways on the new law because it's such a complex issue. However, he did have some more points for the law.

In French public schools, teachers are forbidden from even mentioning religion. They view it as a place where students are taught reason free from religion and therefore have decided that students should be bound to the same rules as the teachers - which means not bringing religion into the classroom in any form. Does this prevent students from expressing their religion? Yes. Does it mean the school is avoiding teaching religious tolerance? Yes. But if the teachers can't talk about religion, they won't be teaching religious tolerance anyway and that is not a responsibility that is seen as belonging in the schools here. (I have yet to find out where they do think it belongs or if that's something that would only come from parents.)

According to my professor, love of the Republic is something of a religion in itself, but the French have had problems in recent years with national unity crumbling. For example, people would whistle at the national anthem in stadiums and national morale was going down. Gradual change in the mentality of a nation is achieved quite, if not most, effectively through the public schools. Therefore, by making all the students equal, the government is also hoping to bring more unity to the student population and help reignite some of the national unity instead of dividing the population into religious groups.

As far as the veil controversy specifically, our professor noted that not all of the girls choose to wear the veil - for some it is forced upon them and it is those girls that they hope the law will benefit. He said that in the French junior high where he taught there were Muslim girls who were forbidden by their families to come to class because they had to stay home and clean the house. He told stories of oppression of females in the predominantly Muslim suburbs and the incredible inequalities he witnessed when traveling to French-speaking countries in Africa with his theater group. As he put it, if they choose to follow these oppressive regimes in their own countries, fine - but they chose to come to France and the French government doesn't have to support oppression.

Apparently the situation became extreme in hospitals as well when Muslim men would forbid their wives from receiving treatment if they were going to see a doctor the husband didn't like or had to remove their veils to be examined. So, if I understood correctly, a law has even been passed regarding the wearing of veils in hospitals. I don't know what the wording of the law is - whether it forbids wearing veils or forbids husbands from interfering in the treatment of their wives, but either way, the intention is to allow everyone to receive medical care as a human right. So these girls who still go to public school and don't wear their veils will be seen as whores by their own people but why should the French government support that? The French see all people as being equal - therefore, they seek to provide a place where these girls are equal - no longer wearing a symbol of oppression. Yes, there are some girls who choose for themselves to wear the veil and for them, I imagine it will be a difficult decision whether to stay in the public school and remove their veils there or go to private schools.

The more I talk to professors about the law, the more I'm for the law - in France. Again, it wouldn't work in the States - the people wouldn't support it nor would it be logical under our Constitution which allows freedom of religious expression. However, the bottom line is that French philosophy says the public schools exist to provide an education free of religious influence. Therefore, I think the law is logical in that context.