>>>The article was about the wearing of Burkhas in France. The poster asked what we thought. I responded to that question. I still stand by my view. As long as a woman is wearing a burkha by HER own choice then it should be allowed as a part of religious freedom.
>>
>>If you ask a French Muslim woman if she wants to wear a burka, and she says "Yes", what does that mean? Maybe she'll be beaten if she doesn't.
>
>There are many women in the states who are repressed by their spouses and dress or behave a certain way out of fear. There are women who don't cut their hair because their husband or father will beat them if they do. That is out of fear. Do we enforce every person, male and female, to cut their hair now because a few may be forced to grow it long? We don't outlaw every mode of dress because a few may be making the choice out of fear.
>
>You are making an assumption that every women who wears a burkha is doing so out of fear or repression. You cannot make that assumption. We cannot start creating laws to control religious dress because it may be done out of fear. The issue is coercion and force and fear. That is what must be dealt with in western countries. A government enforcing or restricting is not that much different.

I did NOT make that assumption - don't put words in my mouth. I was pointing out that you can't always rely on what some Muslim women (or as you point out, some Western women too) say is "their choice". For that (hopefully) minority, letting them have their "choice" means their subjugation/repression continues.

OTOH, I generally agree that banning religious dress is not feasible. It means creating "morality police"; will they be any less hated in the West than they are in Iran, Saudi Arabia etc.?

Once the burkha is banned in France, some fashion design house will come out with a "winter collection" that covers from head to toe, and call it an Ah-Krub. Available in basic black, of course ;)