Ban it, Damn it

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. This famous quote by Voltaire echoed in my head time again last week. Echo was caused by two troubling pieces of news, both flirting dangerously with the Voltaire’s idea of freedom of action and of speech. The first news came from closer home UP. Girls have been banned from wearing jeans and carrying cell phones within the compounds of Colleges in UP. Second came ironically from the France, land where Voltaire made his famous quote. French Prez Sarkozy announced his support for ban on Burqas. Irony continues as Sarkozy’s ban is to upheld Individual freedom.

Ban on wearing Jeans is easy to denounce as it violates individual’s freedom to choose. Such violations should not have any place in progressive society like ours. Progressive we are, so what if we celebrate Balika Vadhu, it’s just a silly tele programme.

But not so the ban on Burqas. It has sparked controversy all over the world with US President Barack Obama condemning the ban saying we don’t tell our ladies what to wear and what not to. After all freedom of speech has been the foundation laid down by founding fathers over which this land of opportunity has prospered. So what if we have killed thousands of innocent people in Afghanistan and Iraq. Founding fathers never said anything about not killing innocent people. In India response has been of usual rhetoric about minority rights. And by doing so we continue to hold our number one position in political correctness. Cheers!!

Funny part is that the ban on Jeans is to protect the chastity of the young and vulnerable girls. Apparently jeans, cell phone and chastity don’t go along (Man somebody should have told me this). Chastity was the reason why Burqas came in first place. Quran never mentions the Burqa or any other form of veil. It only asks women and men to maintain their chastity. So actually Burqas came only because men when they see flesh, pounce on it like hungry dogs.

But the larger question is about liberty, individual’s freedom to make a choice. Underlying argument is that many women wear burqas by choice and not by force. So a ban is denying them of choice not only of clothes but also of religious freedom. Would you then force the nuns to wear jeans? Of course not.

So is it about the religious intolerance? Intolerance of mainstream French society towards Islam? and also the intolerance of Muslims towards the rest of the world?

Or is it the vagaries of growing multiculturalism? Certainly, calling women wearing burqa, a cross between prison cell and a tent; and Sarkozy’s apparent discomfort while talking to women in burqa points to failure to conform to foreign culture.

To put things in perspective, I would say argument of freedom of choice is flawed. There may be women who wear burqa by choice but one they are outnumbered by millions who are forced to make that choice. Second, those who claim to have made the choice should ask themselves, did they really have a choice. Also there is question of freewill. Most of the time what we think is freewill, is in fact not. When you are born in a family/society infected by religious dogmas, you are slowly programmed/poisoned into believing these dogmas. And what you think is freewill is merely a mirage and you become not an individual but a mere carrier of attributes that created the mirage in the first place.

Second question is about religious intolerance. I will shed my political correctness to say that Islam in its current form is a bit of anachronism**. Any religion as sacred as it may be, has to reform itself with time. Christianity did it, it was a bloody process with lot of resistance from Church and from the people themselves but it did it for the good. Hinduism may not have reformed itself in the same scale but it still pruned itself from evils like sati system, child marriage, polygamy and even to certain extent parda system. Ignorant as I may be but I don’t see any reforms in Islam. Polygamy exists so does Burqa; You can get divorce by uttering three dreaded words (in fact just one dreaded word uttered three times). And the worst (and rather dangerous) part is that instead of reforms there seems to be a movement backwards towards radicalisation. Sufism is dead and Talibanism is thriving. This anachronism of Islam has led to confrontation or as George W Bush would say- Clash of civilisations. It’s like somebody driving a bullock cart in a freeway full of high speed cars. There will be a lot of honking.

Third question is about multiculturalism. French have fought hard to create a secular society. It took a French revolution to separate church from state. Secular nature of their state is reflected in the ban(yes the dreaded word again) on religious symbols like Jewish cap, Sikh turban in schools. So onus I believe is with the immigrants to maintain that fabric of society. Not suggesting that society can be insensitive towards immigrants but onus has to be with immigrants.

Last is my personal view on religion. Religion is your personal faith and it has to remain personal. There should not be any place for religious symbols. Religion creates civilisations, Religious symbols destroy them. So if it requires a ban to kill these symbols, so be it.

Note** I am no authority on religion especially Islam. I’ve not read Quran. My views are based on my observation of the world around me and a little bit of common sense.