This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← France rejects Muslim woman over radical practice of Islam

France rejects Muslim woman over radical practice of Islam - Comments

82abhilash's Avatar Comment 1 by 82abhilash


Daniele Lochak, a law professor not involved in the case, said it was bizarre to consider that excessive submission to men was a reason not to grant citizenship. "


No, the reason for not granting citizenship is the lack of knowledge about the secular values of the country you want to be a citizen of.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:03:00 UTC | #198745

Nova's Avatar Comment 2 by Nova

France may not be dealing with Muslims perfectly, but it way outstrips Britain in that regard.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:19:00 UTC | #198750

Cartomancer's Avatar Comment 3 by Cartomancer

What puzzles me is why someone who is such a recluse, and so apathetic about political participation in the state, would be so motivated to pursue a legal case to these ends? Surely the mere fact of pressing so hard that the case reaches the highest authority in the land indicates some significant ability to manipulate state institutions for one's benefit?

Is her husband orchestrating all this for his own ends?

Sounds like we're getting a decidedly incomplete picture here.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:24:00 UTC | #198751

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 4 by Bonzai

Must they deny her citizenship on such flimsy ground?

Even though I despise the burqua and her "total submission" to her husband, as I hope many modern women would, it doesn't sound right to deny her citizenship on the grounds of reactionary attitude, masochism and bad fashion sense,--well but this is France. It is not like she was caught advocating Sharia or Jihad.

If, as the report says that she is a recluse who has no knowledge of the secular state and the right to vote, then I would expect her to naturally fail the citizenship test. I assume that an immigrant does have to write some test in France to become a citizen, or am I wrong?

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:30:00 UTC | #198754

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 5 by mordacious1

I think this is a bit reactionary, are they going to toss out the husband? It's his views on women that is at least half the problem. They should toss the kids out too, can't have them spreading their evil ideas.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:31:00 UTC | #198755

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 6 by Bonzai

mordacious1,

I don't think she will be 'tossed out'. If France's immigration system is like North America, she would still a landed immigrant. She can still work or go to school, buy a home etc,--though I am not sure if any of these would interest her. But she wouldn't be able to vote or get a French passport. I think she can always apply again.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:39:00 UTC | #198758

Jiten's Avatar Comment 7 by Jiten

She has adopted a radical practice of her religion, incompatible with essential values of the French community, particularly the principle of equality of the sexes,
But then so have many others. Are they now going to be deported too? And what about being in total submission to her husband? So are those who live in fear of their violent husbands. This case is very odd.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:41:00 UTC | #198760

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 8 by mordacious1

Bonzai

So she remains in France, unable to vote, while her husband who is probably a real a-hole, gets to vote. Doesn't make much sense.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:45:00 UTC | #198763

History_Junky's Avatar Comment 9 by History_Junky

Id have to say that both the woman and her husband are unfortunately the product of a male dominated culture. You can easily blame the husband for making his wife submissive to him, but it becomes a little more tricky when you realize that the husband is the product of a specific culture just as the woman is.

Of course at the end of the day Id rather have her receive citizenship and educated about her rights and have her husband and male relatives thrown out.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:54:00 UTC | #198765

phil rimmer's Avatar Comment 10 by phil rimmer

Cartomancer

Is her husband orchestrating all this for his own ends?


Yep. (Just a guess)

Is the Council of State's response an acknowledgment of this fact? Their complaint is squarely directed at his behaviour, not his wife's. Do his children lose any rights because of this?

Anybody?

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:57:00 UTC | #198766

rod-the-farmer's Avatar Comment 11 by rod-the-farmer

I wonder how many other countries have some sort of similar litmus test for becoming a citizen ? In Canada I think you have to pass a questionnaire about Canadian history, current events and such. I imagine you just go back to being a landed immigrant if you fail. I doubt ANY country would deport those who failed. I expect you can try again, like for a driving licence. I bet there are other things she cannot do, like run for office, get a job working for the government, etc.

In any case, the ruling has my support. The English areas of Canada have many people who came here as immigrants decades ago, but who still cannot (apparently) speak English, because they immersed themselves in cultural ghettos where they had no need to speak English. But it IS interesting that she (a) can speak French fluently, and (b) only began wearing the burka AFTER she came to France.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:00:00 UTC | #198767

SRWB's Avatar Comment 12 by SRWB

As always, the crux of the issue is whether she has adopted the trappings of this culture voluntarily or has been coerced by her husband or others, i.e. family or friends in her wider social circle. If she truly believes in this way of life, why should anyone care, as long as she does so as a result of her convictions and not due to external pressure.

This aspect needs to be researched. Until the reasons are clear it's premature for France to deny citizenship.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:02:00 UTC | #198768

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 13 by Bonzai

Phil

Their complaint is squarely directed at his behaviour, not his wife's. Do his children lose any rights because of this?


Well the article says that he is a French national, and since the children were born in France, I think they are as well. It seems that they are using her to make a point since nothing can be done to her husband. By the look of it I don't think she is a "radical" Muslim, chances are she is a village girl who was brought up to be meek and submissive to her men folks.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:11:00 UTC | #198771

8teist's Avatar Comment 14 by 8teist

No doubt a claim for financial compensation will be the next step in this circus.
Interestingly she did`nt feel the need to wear the burqa in her native land of Morocco but now it`s important to wear it in France .
The French surrender monkeys will back down on this ,no doubt, she has the right to exercise her right to be an idiot.
It seems to be a feeble attempt to inflame outrage as per usual on a slow news day.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:15:00 UTC | #198772

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 15 by Bonzai

Rod

The English areas of Canada have many people who came here as immigrants decades ago, but who still cannot (apparently) speak English, because they immersed themselves in cultural ghettos where they had no need to speak English.


I think that is mostly older people, many of whom come via family reunification and are exempted from English (or French) test. I don't have a big problem with that.I think the ghetto phenomenon is overstated. Hey, our former Prime Minister's English is atrocious, and from those who know French, he is not that great in his native French either. I am talking about big Jean. :)

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:17:00 UTC | #198773

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 16 by Bonzai

Interestingly she did`nt feel the need to wear the burqa in her native land of Morocco but now it`s important to wear it in France .


That is interesting. I was just scanning the article, I missed that.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:18:00 UTC | #198774

noamzur's Avatar Comment 17 by noamzur


Daniele Lochak, a law professor not involved in the case, said it was bizarre to consider that excessive submission to men was a reason not to grant citizenship. "If you follow that to its logical conclusion, it means that women whose partners beat them are also not worthy of being French," he told Le Monde.


Actually it means that their husbands aren't worthy of being a part of the human race and should not vote or procreate... But 82abhilash's point is also in order

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:24:00 UTC | #198777

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 18 by mordacious1

I just know that if I felt like wearing a burka (drag, I suppose), I'd do it. Fuck what anyone else thinks. You have a government restricting what one can wear. That is stupid. How does this change ideas, if anything it would, I think, make people want to wear the damn things more.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:42:00 UTC | #198779

mesha's Avatar Comment 19 by mesha

this is bullshit

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:47:00 UTC | #198780

robotaholic's Avatar Comment 20 by robotaholic

I'd hospitably invite her over to eat pepperoni pizza!

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:53:00 UTC | #198783

phil rimmer's Avatar Comment 21 by phil rimmer

Bonzai.

Thanks. I suspect, on reflection, you are correct.

It is still quite a smack in the teeth to have it implied that your wife, because of your own actions, is too sub-standard to be a French women.

Substandard how?

She has no idea about the secular state or the right to vote.


How can she fulfill her duties as a citizen? Her rights (such as her husband allows, that is) come with obligations. Her ignorance of these obligations must be repaired, before those concomitant rights are conferred.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:55:00 UTC | #198784

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 22 by Bonzai

This article may provide a general background to what goes on in the France's Muslim immigrant ghettos and may give some insight to this woman's situation.

http://www.time.com/time/europe/hero2004/amura.html

The feminist group featured in this article supports the decision to deny her French citizenship.

activist group Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Whores Nor Submissive) that champions secular and feminist causes said it was "relieved" by the ruling. "The Republic can in no manner validate this kind of tool of oppression and submission of women," a communique by the group said-referring to what it has called the "green fascism" of misogyny practiced in many of France's blighted suburban housing projects under the cover of Islamic fundamentalism or Arab cultural machismo.


http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1822189,00.html

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:11:00 UTC | #198787

D'Arcy's Avatar Comment 23 by D'Arcy

The women's lib organisations used to have the slogan "ban the bra". When will muslem women start shouting the slogan "ban the burqua"?

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:12:00 UTC | #198788

ergaster's Avatar Comment 24 by ergaster

"France is home to nearly 5 million Muslims..."

If she appeals long enough the Sharia will kick in. Then she will have the god-given right to be the cattle that she is fighting to be.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:22:00 UTC | #198790

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 25 by mordacious1

D'Arcy

"ban the bra"

Except in Ireland, where it was "Erin go braless"

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:31:00 UTC | #198796

Dinah's Avatar Comment 26 by Dinah

I have to say I think this is the right decision, if only because of the message it sends out that anyone else who refuses to integrate into his or her host country may be denied citizenship, and I think the UK would do well to take note of it. Too many problems have arisen in Europe from immigrants and their descendents who cannot speak the language of the host country, live totally separate lives and who reject Western culture and values. The classic reaction from liberal apologists is either 'their culture is of equal value' or 'it's because of racist attitudes'. While there may be a certain amount of truth in the second statement, there have been enormous strides in recent years to try to combat racism, and to increase opportunities to those from different cultures. The indigenous population cannot be held entirely responsible for the ghettoisation of certain groups within their societies - part of it at least has been caused by the determination of some within those groups to hold on to a way of life and customs quite alien to modern democratic societies, as well as the disastrous policy of multi-culturalism which has encouraged and celebrated difference and separation rather than promoting integration.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:41:00 UTC | #198799

mark8's Avatar Comment 27 by mark8

rod-the-farmer

We have a citizenship test here in the U.K. Alas they find way's around even that.

" Foreign nationals are being helped to claim British citizenship by cheating in citizenship tests. A BBC undercover reporter filmed a language school giving the candidates answers to an English test in advance."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7330338.stm

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:49:00 UTC | #198803

ukvillafan's Avatar Comment 28 by ukvillafan

This is straightforward.

The husband is a French national so he cannot lose his citizenship because of his religious views.

His wife is not a French National but will, presumably, have a right of residence in the country because of her marriage. That does not make her a French citizen. The children will be French citizens because of their father.

The French are perfectly entitled to uphold the secular basis of their nation in this way if they wish. This is a test for citizenship for foreign nationals (edit) and I see perfectly why they would not want to give citizenship rights to those who cannot live up to secular ideals. OK, so it doesn't allow her to vote but it does not stop her practising her religion. She is not being discriminated against because of her gender or her faith but because she does not fully accept the secular nature of the country she has chosen to move to sufficiently well to properly integrate. I say three cheers for thr French!

They are very clear on the separation of chuech and state and the secular nature of their country. Those of you who are quick to rubbish the country should look to your own before being so disrespectful of a nation that achived a degree of sophistication whilst some of you lot were still murdering "savages"!

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:11:00 UTC | #198812

Tenochtitlan's Avatar Comment 29 by Tenochtitlan

Holy shit, I don't get it, France is basically kicking her out to Morocco? How is this supposed to help her leave her idiotic religious beliefs? And what was she doing that in any way threatened France or reduced her qualifications for citizenship? I mean, it's not as if there are no French citizens that are complete idiots when it comes to voting, or that at least some women in France sadly do live in complete submission to their husband. The woman speaks good French and has kids for Pete's sake!

Sad, I'd have thought that living in a liberal, secular democracy would have been the best shot at at least moderating her craziness, but it's not to be I guess.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:19:00 UTC | #198816

Nairb's Avatar Comment 30 by Nairb

8teist

Referring to french as "surrender monkeys" I suppose is intended to mean that the French tend to roll over in face of any regression.

Have you read french history? Have you heard of the french revolution and follow on effect on europe? Have you heard of the commune? Have you noticed the way french society defends its "acquis"?

The facts dont fit your insulting and ignorant term.

Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:26:00 UTC | #198819