The Historical Hatred of French Govt. towards Islam Re-emerges in a Sea of Contradictions
 

Subsequent to the introduction of a bill banning the display of religious symbols in public office and schools, Mps in France have now overwhelmingly voted to ban what the wearing of the Islamic headscarf. The covering of the whole body except face and hands in public places and in front of marriageable males is an Islamic obligation that is made clear by the commands of the Quran, Sunnah, Ijma as Sahaabah and is known from the religion of Islam by necessity.

After the colonial invasion of the Muslim world and the subsequent imposition of anti-Islamic ruling, judicial and education systems even some countries previously ruled by Islam also banned the headscarf for women such as Tunisia and Turkey. We should remember that the original deviation in the social law or dress code with regards to the head scarf was not its banning but rather the permission of rulers and their governments for women to remain uncovered in public places, that in itself was an act of kufr on the part of the rulers, let alone the banning of it.

The recent bill in France which is similar to other bans in some German States shows the growing hatred of Islam among governments, secular political parties and the public that often supports them. This however is expected as the ayah says “Never will the Jews and Christians accept you unless you follow their way of life” (al Baqarah 2:120) and “O you who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside of your religion since they will not fail to corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed, We have made plain to you the signs if you use your intellects” (aali I’mraan 3:118)

It is sad that some Muslim women choose to justify their wearing of the scarf on the sole argument of personal choice. It is true the French government and those who support them have contradicted their own principles here, however, the issue is not personal choice as in reality a Muslim like many other people are hindered by the secular laws from many personal choices, from this angle, the law is nothing new. The crux of the matter is that the Islamic dress code is part of Islamic law and thus Islam itself and banning the headscarf amounts to banning Islam in schools in France. Of course, many aspects of Islam are banned throughout the world and in every place. However, the issue here that marks a development in the hatred of Islam is the deliberate exposure of a woman’s sexuality and beauty in opposition to her religious beliefs. This law is like telling a nun or monk to attend a public event in their underwear. This analogy is not exaggerated at all although it may seem so to those who are used to a constant flow of nudity in advertising and sexual promiscuity as an open way of life. In the frustration caused by the inability of secularists to convince Muslims of atheism, man-made law and irreligiousness, they have resorted to imposing their poisonous secularism and vulgarity upon individual women who desire to submit to their Creator and avoid moral, social and personal corruption.

The benefit of this recent test for the Muslims is that again many people who carry Muslim names have exposed their disbelief by agreeing not only with the removal of the clothes of Muslim women which contradict the Quran and Sunnah but also by agreeing with secularism and man-made law as a basis to govern society. A clear contradiction of the basis of Islam and the basis of worship as Allah (swt) says "The only religion with Allah is submission" (aal I'mraan 3:19) and "...The law is for none but Allah..." (Yoosuf 12:40)

The truth is that not only have France failed in their neo-colonization of Algeria, Lebanon and other countries as seen by the many movements calling for Islamic law and rejecting secularism, they have also failed even to convince many of their own populace who are either immigrants who are seeking to preserve their Islamic identity and revive the Islamic way of life and have also failed more to their annoyance to even convince many of their own ancestrally native populations who are embracing Islam including the Islamic dress code, the majority being young women. Below we list some points demonstrating the nonsense and contradiction of the French unclothing of Muslim women.

1) France have contradicted the European Laws which they call to. Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights enshrines the freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs, subject "only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

2) The French Masonically influenced revolution upon which Modern Secular France is built calls to the slogan of ‘Liberty’ How is there ‘Liberty’ if someone is not free to cover themselves in public? This is a most vile oppression and intrusion into personal freedom and dignity.

3) Modern Secular France calls also to the Masonic revolutionary slogan of ‘Equality’ [Egalite]. How is their ‘equality’ in a society when those who dislike to cover themselves have their view imposed on others who choose to?

4) How is there ‘equality’ when atheism and man-made philosophy is made to impose in the personal affairs of people?

5) The French government has shown its defeat in failing to convince muslims of secularism and failing to remove Islam from them by persuasion. Muslims are convinced of Islam and the Islamic way of life and so they are frustratedly trying to force anti-Islamic values. They say Islam is only force and oppression but people are entering Islam in France by choice and so too are hijaabi women, yet France uses force to oppose it. This contradicts the claims of French academics and secularists that society progresses through reason and discussion and freedom of choice.
 

6) France has shown its contempt to women by demanding that they be exposed to men. A law which serves the desires of men at the expense of women who come to be viewed as sex objects. This shows an inequality in French law between men and women. Women are forced to expose their beauty to men, the hair being part of women’s beauty. A law which clearly serves the desires of men at the expense of the security of women. The headscarf is something warn by women and so it targets them.
 

7) The hijaab is an excellent tool of equality among women, where they are not judged for their expensive hair styles etc but are made equal with non exposure. Again France turns away from its own principles.
 

8) France claims that the hijaab is a symbol of oppression when in fact the hijaab is symbol of liberation from colonialism. France even after its so called revolution towards equality and Liberty went on to invade Algeria and many other Muslim countries and imposing its laws and education by force. Now the French continue to contradict liberty by forcing their anti-Islamic culture by banning the hijaab.
 

9) The Hijaab is a symbol of liberation of women because Islam arose to give women many rights she did not possess before. As for Europe including France, they were debating whether a woman has a soul.
 

10) If women are to be honoured and protected from rape, sexual assault and its like. Then what do we tell them to do remove their clothes or put on their clothes? Again a French oppression of women.
 

11) France has not only oppressed women through the banning of hijaab but also refusing women the right of refusing treatment from male doctors, again a sexual oppression of women serving the desires of men. The French government does not only want to remove the clothes of women but they want to make sure that men can touch their naked bodies as well. In france women are enslaved to men’s desires it seems.
 

12) How do children at school learn principles of liberty and equality if they are then all forced to see each other as secularists? All children will carry the view it is ‘normal’ to be uncovered. They become less tolerant of muslims, they accept only those who dress as they want to. This is teaching children oppression, bigotry and shallow-mindedness.
 

13) If some people claim that the scarf should be banned as parents force their daughters to wear it, then we should then ask will they be interfering with all parents commands to their children in France? Will all non-Muslim parents also be commanded by the state to stop influencing their children’s lives? Indeed they will not, rather they are oppressing muslims alone and are not interested in other issues.
 

14) Secularism is actually a religious viewpoint i.e. it is the view that religion should not be in state affairs. That is a view on the limits of religion. It can not be claimed that ‘secularism’ is equality and non-religious. Rather it is view on religion that other religions are forced to follow. It is saying that religion is only for church and personal life. As for other people they will agree that revelation is needed for every sphere of life. In reality the French secularism is forcing one religious viewpoint onto everyone although it claims to be neutral.
 

15) People in France express their feelings through all sorts of clothing with brand names, fashions and styles. These have not been targeted although they clearly represent a culture, a viewpoint and a view on the world. To allow them this right but not a muslim is another sign of oppression and inequality.
 

16) Is France also going to ban the dreadlocks of the Rastafarian, the shaven head of the buddhist, the uncut hair of the sikh, the pony tail of the hare Krishna? Will it also ban the tie, which was itself a sign of the cross, will it ban the croissant in schools which was originally made to remember the massacre of Muslims?
 

17) The hatred of the French legislature towards is made clear by the fact that they base the banning of the head-scarf on the argument of ‘maintaining separation of religion and the state’. However, in reality the banning of the head-scarf is a view adopted with regards to 1) Women’s dress and 2) Islam in particular. If they would have been true to their principles they would have ignored the wearing of headscarves in public life. However, the State has adopted a view whereby the State makes religion relevant in public life. If you are a Muslim then you are discriminated against by a law which targets you. Or from a wider perspective, if you hold a religious view that you should cover your hair or something similar, then you have been targeted. Those who adopt a view that either i) Dress code is not related to religion or that ii) Religion does not require one to be covered in a particular way, then they have been favoured by a law which promotes their religious viewpoint. The consistent method of a secular government, would have been to adopt no position on veiling or un-veiling…..i.e. they would have left this choice to the individual as the government is supposed to be secular. By this law the government contradicts the principles of secular legislation by interfering in something which is related to religion. From another perspective, the government could argue that this is not a religious viewpoint as clothing has nothing to do with religion…..in that case they contradict themselves again by banning the scarf because it is a ‘religious symbol that contradicts secularism’. By this they also contradict themselves by defining that religion does not apply to the dress code, as this itself assumes a position on how religion relates to the individual. France does indeed see the dress-code as religiously relevant as proven by its banning the scarf on the basis of it ‘compromising secularism’ and banning it due to it being a ‘religious symbol’ This means instead of being true to secularism and not legislating on personal religious issues or in defining the parameters of what is a personal religious issues they have shown their hatred outweighs their secularism. Therefore it becomes clear that the law of banning the Muslim headscarf is not about upholding secularism but is about the hatred of Islam and the desire to see muslim women exposed and humiliated.
 

18) If the French legislature considers that a headscarf should be banned because it is a religious symbol, then we should ask them concerning their prohibition of nudity. Why is it that nudity is prohibited, if they say ‘it is indecent’ then we should ask on what basis is nudity ‘indecent’? Is this not a religious view to regard ‘nudity’ as indecent? Should not people be able to wander in public places naked if they truly believe in liberty, equality and separating religion from all affairs of legislation?
 

19) One of the claims of the French ban is that they are enacting this law due to the oppression on Muslim women and girls who are forced to wear the headscarf by their parents. Despite this being a ridiculous interference into family affairs the contradiction is manifest. The French government is replacing this supposed ‘oppression’ with the large scale oppression of a State enforcing every woman in public life to remover her veil. Not only is this a much more serious infringement due to the humiliation of being unclothed before strangers but it is also a vile oppression because it imposed not by caring family members but instead a State who is hostile to the individuals freedom, culture, religion, dignity and well being.
 

20) The French government wants to remove all signs of religion from public life and State affairs, so we must ask where is this line drawn? Muslim women also are obliged not to wear short skirts, must they also wear short skirts now? Muslim women and women must not shake hands with the opposite sex, must Muslim girls now be forced into touching men? Muslims are not allowed to have sexual intercourse before marriage and are prohibited from homosexuality. Must all Muslims in France now be forced to become fornicators, homosexuals, lesbians and adulterers in order to show their integration with French secularism?
 

21) To demonstrate further the contradiction and lie that the banning of the hijaab is based upon removing religion from the State and that in fact it is based upon hatred of Islam, we see that French State schools continue to have holidays based upon religious beliefs. Schools have holidays at Christmas and Easter which are Christian festivals or at least pagan religious festivals if traced to their origins. Even the New Year is based on pagan months named from the gods of ancient religions.