Ban On The Islamic Face Veil

[philothea]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1303951399' post='2234076']
[font=arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=2]I am 100% biased in favor of the Christian Faith too, I think most of us here are. But that doesn't mean that I think that gives us the right to impose restrictions upon their religion. Obviously if a religion involves practices that are immoral or harmful to others, society has every right, and even a duty, to restrict them. I really don't see the wearing of a face veil (or whatever the correct term is) as something that is inherently immoral or harmful. If they choose to freely wear one, then that's their choice. We should definitely take steps to make sure it is not forcibly imposed upon them, which i think is the intent of the French ban, but for a government to do this by forcing them [i]not [/i]to wear it is just nonsensical.[/size][/font]
[/quote]
Indeed. But how do you actually go about doing that? The things I said about women being horribly abused by these fundamentalist groups are well documented. A woman who defies these men in any way will have her life ruined. I'm sure it already is illegal in France (or in most civilized countries) to force your wife (or anyone) to dress a certain way under threat of violence.

Is there anywhere in the world where groups of women, un-coerced, freely choose to cover their entire bodies when they go outside so that men can't see them? Is there any reason to think that they would freely choose it, if they hadn't been raised that way and mistreated? Historically, given a couple generations of freedom to choose, devout Muslim women settle on wearing head scarves and modest clothing.

I think Catholics get confused on this particular issue because we know and admire nuns who take habits. As we should! But it's a [i]totally[/i] different practice. It's like someone fasting out of devotion vs. starving because they aren't allowed to eat. Sure, maybe we can't tell the difference in all cases for certain, but since we [i]know[/i] people are being oppressed, maybe banning the practice isn't such a bad thing.

[Amppax]

[quote name='philothea' timestamp='1303953603' post='2234089']
Indeed. But how do you actually go about doing that? The things I said about women being horribly abused by these fundamentalist groups are well documented. A woman who defies these men in any way will have her life ruined. I'm sure it already is illegal in France (or in most civilized countries) to force your wife (or anyone) to dress a certain way under threat of violence.

Is there anywhere in the world where groups of women, un-coerced, freely choose to cover their entire bodies when they go outside so that men can't see them? Is there any reason to think that they would freely choose it, if they hadn't been raised that way and mistreated? Historically, given a couple generations of freedom to choose, devout Muslim women settle on wearing head scarves and modest clothing.

I think Catholics get confused on this particular issue because we know and admire nuns who take habits. As we should! But it's a [i]totally[/i] different practice. It's like someone fasting out of devotion vs. starving because they aren't allowed to eat. Sure, maybe we can't tell the difference in all cases for certain, but since we [i]know[/i] people are being oppressed, maybe banning the practice isn't such a bad thing.
[/quote]

I just can't get past the heavy-handedness of a full-scale ban.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1303849843' post='2233560']But in the end...it is an issue of cultural acceptance and expectations about what is 'normal' in public places.
[/quote]
And I think this gets to the root of the problem - the new trend of "my culture trumps yours" (which by no means is limited to Muslims/middle easterners, nor does it include all Muslims/middle easterners). I have female friends who are of varying middle eastern descent. When they go visit their ancestral countries, they are expected to cover their heads, regardless of whether or not they do it while they're in the US. Even non-Muslim women are expected to cover their heads while in Muslim countries (which, arguably, is reasonable). However, when a woman is living in a culture in which it is not protocol to cover one's head/face - or at least not to the extent that it begins posing problems with issues of security - then that woman should either adhere to the new cultural expectations placed on her or remain in the previous culture that accepts and demands the full-face covering.

[Sternhauser]

The root of the problem is that some people think they have the right to use violence against other people who wear a particular piece of clothing.

Saying anything more is circumlocution.

~Sternhauser

Edited April 28, 2011 by Sternhauser

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302807688' post='2228678']
I am very against the banning of face veils.

I don't even know what this poll means. Did Dairygirl proof it for you?
[/quote]

yes the poll was worded poorly. i dont know what i'm voting about the way its worded.
he skipped me in the proofing process. you dont even wanna know what i'd have done to it.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1303951399' post='2234076']
[font=arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=2]I am 100% biased in favor of the Christian Faith too, I think most of us here are. But that doesn't mean that I think that gives us the right to impose restrictions upon their religion. Obviously if a religion involves practices that are immoral or harmful to others, society has every right, and even a duty, to restrict them. I really don't see the wearing of a face veil (or whatever the correct term is) as something that is inherently immoral or harmful. If they choose to freely wear one, then that's their choice. We should definitely take steps to make sure it is not forcibly imposed upon them, which i think is the intent of the French ban, but for a government to do this by forcing them [i]not [/i]to wear it is just nonsensical.[/size][/font]
[/quote]
Philothea's answered this more eloquently than I could.

If the French want to ban a public practice related to a barbaric and oppressive religious ideology (which has been behind much violence and discord in that country) more power too them. It's not our place to tell the French how to conduct their affairs in this matter.

If anyone wants to live that barbarous lifestyle they should stay in any one of the Islamic countries which sanction such oppressive practices.
There's no good reason that France need accommodate the practices of "radical" Islam.

And there are places and circumstances, obviously, where it is perfectly legit not demand that people not cover up their faces, whether the face-covering relates to Islam or not.

[RezaMikhaeil]

I haven't posted here in quite a while, thou I still read it occasionally and converse with a few people that post here [such as Harold, who I admire] but I thought I'd comment on this particular thread because I have been engaged in the debates, given my own background.

First, I'd like to begin by saying that the covering of the face [Niqab, or Burqa as Muslims refer to it] has a history, not just in Islam but in Christianity. Just because Christians have abandoned the practice and Muslims have not, doesn't mean that we shouldn't acknowledge it's significance in our own history. If you were to read St. Clement of Alexandria's literary work called "Paedagogus" [Instructions], you'd see him write, "But I do not wish chaste women...it is prohibited to expose the ankle, but because it has also been enjoined that the head should be veiled and the face covered; for it is a wicked thing for beauty to be a snare to men." Surely the Catholic Church has abandoned such a practice but it once had relevance in some Catholic [preschism] communities.

A previous poster had also asked the question of weather we are discussing the face covering that is used in Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan. To answer that question, the Afghan Burqa and the Burqa being banned in france are both called the Burqa but are two distinct pieces of attire. In the context that is being debated, the Burqa and Niqab are the same in that they are the two being debated.
Muslims that believe that it is necessary [most scholars do not], say that it's because of modesty. Modesty is what St. Clement also cited as the cause for such so we cannot say that it has nothing to do with modesty for all those who chose to believe that it is required by their religion.

Having said that, someone here had mentioned that there is no purpose to a photo identification card if a woman has her face covered. This would be true, if those women who do cover their faces, did not uncover it regardless of the circumstances but that isn't the case. All women that wear it, weather in America [I know a few] or in France, do temporarily uncover it for identification purposes, such as in banks, at airports, etc. After their identity is varified, it's immediately covered again, as is their choice. In places like Afghanistan, they use finger prints to identify women that have their faces covered, but who also still chose to partake in civic duties, such as voting.

Now it's important to note that France has a particular form of secularism that the United States of America does not have. According to the 1st Amendment of the Constitution in America, government cannot establish a religion, cannot build churches, and what not but they also cannot limit people's right to express such in public. In France [and Turkey], they have a form of secularism called Laicite, which is a strict form of secularism that regulates religion in the public domain. In the United States, public schools cannot limit a Catholic's right to wear a crucifix, but in France, Catholics are not allowed to wear a crucifix considered to be "medium or large" [who defines such is an open question]. Similarly, Muslim girls who chose to wear a headscarf are prohibited from doing such in public schools, at public jobs, etc. The idea is to have a pure form of secularism, reducing one's adhereance to a particular religion to the home or a religious venue [such as a Church]. Weather you agree with France or not is a matter of opinion but it has been their tradition for quite some time. This isn't just limiting of a Muslim girls right to wear a "hijab" [headscarf] but also on a Nun that may wear a similar style headcovering, who choses to teach at a public university, college, or school, or partake in other public civil services.

Now as for the Niqab being "radical", that's a matter of interpretation. There are many sisters [in humanity], that are Muslims and chose to cover their faces, but that would be considered moderate in their religious interpretation. Many of them are teachers, civil servants, volunteer with charity and are very involved in making this country a place for all religions. Since it is not that common of a practice, I don't know "lots" of Muslims that do it, but I know a few of them and from my interactions with them, they have no desire to restrict someone else's freedom of religion. They do not have a radical interpretation of the Qur'an, etc. Sure there are some that do, and those individuals should be addressed on a case by case basis, just as a Catholic that might be overzealous should be dealt with on a case by case basis, rather then collectively judging all catholics according to the actions of an individual.

Now comes the most interesting part of the debate. If one choses to say that it shouldn't be restricted due to "religious beliefs", those who support it, have the obligation to prove that it has to do with their religion. Many scholars, such as Tariq Ramadan [who is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim brotherhood] and Muhammad Sayyid Tantawy [who was the leading scholar at Al Azhar till his death], do not believe that it's Islamic and have made compelling cases for their opinions. Those who support it are often self appointed "leaders" and thou they claim to be "scholars", have no religious education that would recognize them as such. In Islam, those who have a right to issue "fatwas" [clarifications of the law], have such a privilage because they have earned it through obtaining scholarly degrees. When we talk about the term Ijazah, we're talking about someone who has achieved a level of education that warrents him/her [it's open to women too] to issue clarifications of the law. Not all but many of the people that support the Niqab [theologically], have not achieved that level of education and therefore according to tradition do not have a right to speak on such matters.

Reza

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' timestamp='1304032394' post='2234366']
yes the poll was worded poorly. i dont know what i'm voting about the way its worded.
he skipped me in the proofing process. you dont even wanna know what i'd have done to it.
[/quote]
Sometimes I love your sense of humour and wish I understood what you're talking about the other 99% of the time.

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='philothea' timestamp='1303953603' post='2234089']
Indeed. But how do you actually go about doing that? The things I said about women being horribly abused by these fundamentalist groups are well documented. A woman who defies these men in any way will have her life ruined. I'm sure it already is illegal in France (or in most civilized countries) to force your wife (or anyone) to dress a certain way under threat of violence.

Is there anywhere in the world where groups of women, un-coerced, freely choose to cover their entire bodies when they go outside so that men can't see them? Is there any reason to think that they would freely choose it, if they hadn't been raised that way and mistreated? Historically, given a couple generations of freedom to choose, devout Muslim women settle on wearing head scarves and modest clothing.

I think Catholics get confused on this particular issue because we know and admire nuns who take habits. As we should! But it's a [i]totally[/i] different practice. It's like someone fasting out of devotion vs. starving because they aren't allowed to eat. Sure, maybe we can't tell the difference in all cases for certain, but since we [i]know[/i] people are being oppressed, maybe banning the practice isn't such a bad thing.
[/quote]

Wouldn't ya know, I actually agree with you! But I still have a problem with the law. Is this going to help these women at all? I believe someone in this thread said that these women will not basically be confined to their houses and they'll actually have less freedoms because husbands who impose such controlling and manipulative restraints on their wives then one law from a secular gov't isn't gonna change that for those women. Instead he'll just force her to stay inside all the time.

Maybe over time this law will help bring about the desired change but I don't see women in France benefitting from it any time soon.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1303870005' post='2233763']
i want a burqini
[/quote]



[IMG]http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh165/hamburgerpatty_2008/burkini.jpg[/IMG]

[Amppax]

[quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1304087394' post='2234580']
[img]http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh165/hamburgerpatty_2008/burkini.jpg[/img]
[/quote]


Oh my.... [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img]

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Lilllabettt' timestamp='1303845438' post='2233502']
ok, have it your way:

[i]
Dear Ed,

Mohammad's wives did not wear [s]burqas[/s] face-veils. They wore abaya - this is like a long dress. Only later did they add a veil (headcover), and when they did it was in imitation of the Christians. [/i]

better now?
[/quote]

Not really, but thanks anyway, perhaps you have some citations to prove the point you are trying to make? It has been many years since I studied anything about Islam, at least thrirty years to be certain, I do remember that the facial covering was a mandate by their prophet Mohhamed, I would think he would have had his wives wear them too, but if you have proof I will accept it.

ed

[Amppax]

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1304091781' post='2234597']
Not really, but thanks anyway, perhaps you have some citations to prove the point you are trying to make? It has been many years since I studied anything about Islam, at least thrirty years to be certain, I do remember that the facial covering was a mandate by their prophet Mohhamed, I would think he would have had his wives wear them too, but if you have proof I will accept it.

ed
[/quote]

Here (quote from wikipedia without source...take with a grain of salt):

[quote][font="sans-serif"][size="2"][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Esposito"]John Esposito[/url], professor of Islamic Studies at [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_University"]Georgetown University[/url], writes that the customs of veiling and seclusion of women in early Islam were assimilated from the conquered [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Empire"]Persian[/url] and[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire"]Byzantine[/url] societies and then later on they were viewed as appropriate expressions of Quranic norms and values.[/size][/font][/quote]

also, there is nothing in the Qur'an that specifically mandates the face being covered (at least that is my understanding, i don't consider myself well versed in the Qur'an) the verse in the Qur'an that people point to for information on the hijab is this:

[quote][font="sans-serif"][size="2"]And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khimar"][color="#000000"]khima[/color][/url][color="#000000"][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khimar"][color="#000000"]r[/color][/url] o[/color]ver their bosoms and not display their beauty except to [...] ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur%27an"]Qur'an[/url] [url="http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/024.qmt.html#024.031"]24:31[/url])[/size][/font][/quote]

which is really just a call to basic modesty, it says nothing about the face per se.

Can't really see anything right know that Mohammad said about a face veil...but there is that. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/like.gif[/img]

Edited April 29, 2011 by Amppax

[RezaMikhaeil]

[i][quote]Mohammad's wives did not wear burqas face-veils. They wore abaya - this is like a long dress. Only later did they add a veil (headcover), and when they did it was in imitation of the Christians.
[/quote]

[/i][quote]Not really, but thanks anyway, perhaps you have some citations to prove the point you are trying to make? It has been many years since I studied anything about Islam, at least thrirty years to be certain, I do remember that the facial covering was a mandate by their prophet Mohhamed, I would think he would have had his wives wear them too, but if you have proof I will accept it.
[/quote]

[quote] [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Esposito"][color="#b4453b"]John Esposito[/color][/url], professor of Islamic Studies at [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_University"][color="#b4453b"]Georgetown University[/color][/url], writes that the customs of veiling and seclusion of women in early Islam were assimilated from the conquered [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Empire"][color="#b4453b"]Persian[/color][/url] and[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire"][color="#b4453b"]Byzantine[/color][/url] societies and then later on they were viewed as appropriate expressions of Quranic norms and values.[/quote]

[quote]also, there is nothing in the Qur'an that specifically mandates the face being covered (at least that is my understanding, i don't consider myself well versed in the Qur'an) the verse in the Qur'an that people point to for information on the hijab is this: And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khimar"]khima[/url][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khimar"]r[/url] over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to [...] ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur%27an"][color="#b4453b"]Qur'an[/color][/url] [url="http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/024.qmt.html#024.031"][color="#b4453b"]24:31[/color][/url])
which is really just a call to basic modesty, it says nothing about the face per se.

Can't really see anything right know that Mohammad said about a face veil...but there is that.
[/quote]

You're correct to say that there is nothing in the Qur'an that mentions it and that it was practiced by some Christian groups before Muslims. However that doesn't end the debate. Muslims follow the Sunnah, which are the habits - customs - and usual behavior of Muhammad. Much of that is recorded within the Hadiths, that are not considered as reliable as the Qur'an but still hold authority. If I were to make a comparison, it would be like saying that Catholics believe in the Bible but also take instruction from the Catechism. Just as the Catechism helps to clarify some verses that are often misunderstood in the Bible [particularly amongst Protestant groups], so does the Hadith help clarify verses in the Qur'an that may be general, or not clear.

Hadiths are classified into categories according to authenticity/reliability. It's a known fact that the [color="#0645ad"]Sahih Bukhari[/color] hadiths are considered the most reliable.

[size="3"][i]Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282[/i]
[color="#000000"]Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba [i]([/i][font="Times New Roman,Times"][i]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/i] [/font]"Aisha [i]([/i][font="Times New Roman,Times"][i]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/i] [/font]used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and[u] covered their faces[/u] with the cut pieces.[/color] [/size][size="3"][i]Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Hadith # 368[/i]
[/size][color="#000000"][size="3"]Narrated 'Aisha [i]([font="Times New Roman,Times"]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/font][/i][/size][font="Times New Roman,Times"][size="3"] Rasulullah [i](Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam)[/i] used to offer the Fajr prayer and some[u] believing women covered with their veiling sheet[/u]s used to attend the Fajr prayer with him and then they would return to their homes [u]unrecognized [/u].

[/size]

[size="3"][i]Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Hadith # 148[/i]
[color="#000000"]Narrated 'Aisha [i]([font="Times New Roman,Times"]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/font][/i][font="Times New Roman,Times"]: The wives of Rasulullah [i](Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam)[/i] used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Rasulullah [i](Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) [/i]did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha' time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab [i](the observing of veils by the Muslim women) [/i]may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab"[i] ([u]A complete body cover excluding the eyes)[/u].[/i][/font][/color]

Now comes the question, do these verses drive the final nail into the coffin on this issue? No, they do not - scholars have continued to debate this issue and shall continue to do so in the years to come. The most popular opinion amongst conservative Muslims is that it's not a requirement of a Muslim [woman] but that it's highly encouraged or recommended. However there still are very highly respected Muslim clerics from Al-Azhar university [the most respected in all of Sunni Islam] that doubt the authenticity of these Hadiths and their application today. Muhammad Sayyid Tantawy , the highest ranking cleric at Al-Azhar, who wrote a Tasfir [or commentary on the Qur'an] that took him over a decade to put together, believed it to be unIslamic, a pre-Islamic tribal custom, just as female circumcision, which he also took a stand against as unislamic.[/size][size="+2"]

[/size][size="3"]Note: I'm not saying that John Esposito, the Roman Catholic and George Town University Professor is wrong, he has his own conclusions, which I highly respect. I actually really enjoyed his book that he wrote with Dalia Mogahed, but his conclusions also do not settle the issue.[/size][/font][/color]

As far as the verse from the Qur'an being just a "basic call to modesty", that's incorrect. Nearly all scholars within Islam still believe that it requires the headscarf to be worm by Muslim women. This is almost impossible to irrefute as a result. The term "Khimar" is the only term that appears in the Qur'an, but what is a Khimar? It's a headscarf that is wore, which drapes down over the upper chest of a woman, to about her waist. It's still a very conservative piece of clothing that is worn, so as not to reduce the verse to just a common modesty.

Edited April 29, 2011 by RezaMikhaeil

[Amppax]

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1304098673' post='2234660']
[i]

[/i]





You're correct to say that there is nothing in the Qur'an that mentions it and that it was practiced by some Christian groups before Muslims. However that doesn't end the debate. Muslims follow the Sunnah, which are the habits - customs - and usual behavior of Muhammad. Much of that is recorded within the Hadiths, that are not considered as reliable as the Qur'an but still hold authority. If I were to make a comparison, it would be like saying that Catholics believe in the Bible but also take instruction from the Catechism. Just as the Catechism helps to clarify some verses that are often misunderstood in the Bible [particularly amongst Protestant groups], so does the Hadith help clarify verses in the Qur'an that may be general, or not clear.

Hadiths are classified into categories according to authenticity/reliability. It's a known fact that the [color="#0645ad"]Sahih Bukhari[/color] hadiths are considered the most reliable.

[size="3"][i]Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282[/i]
[color="#000000"]Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba [i]([/i][font="Times New Roman,Times"][i]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/i] [/font]"Aisha [i]([/i][font="Times New Roman,Times"][i]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/i] [/font]used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and[u] covered their faces[/u] with the cut pieces.[/color] [/size][size="3"][i]Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Hadith # 368[/i]
[/size][color="#000000"][size="3"]Narrated 'Aisha [i]([font="Times New Roman,Times"]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/font][/i][/size][font="Times New Roman,Times"][size="3"] Rasulullah [i](Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam)[/i] used to offer the Fajr prayer and some[u] believing women covered with their veiling sheet[/u]s used to attend the Fajr prayer with him and then they would return to their homes [u]unrecognized [/u].

[/size]

[size="3"][i]Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Hadith # 148[/i]
[color="#000000"]Narrated 'Aisha [i]([font="Times New Roman,Times"]Radhiallaahu Ánha)[/font][/i][font="Times New Roman,Times"]: The wives of Rasulullah [i](Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam)[/i] used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Rasulullah [i](Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) [/i]did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha' time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab [i](the observing of veils by the Muslim women) [/i]may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab"[i] ([u]A complete body cover excluding the eyes)[/u].[/i][/font][/color]

Now comes the question, do these verses drive the final nail into the coffin on this issue? No, they do not - scholars have continued to debate this issue and shall continue to do so in the years to come. The most popular opinion amongst conservative Muslims is that it's not a requirement of a Muslim [woman] but that it's highly encouraged or recommended. However there still are very highly respected Muslim clerics from Al-Azhar university [the most respected in all of Sunni Islam] that doubt the authenticity of these Hadiths and their application today. Muhammad Sayyid Tantawy , the highest ranking cleric at Al-Azhar, who wrote a Tasfir [or commentary on the Qur'an] that took him over a decade to put together, believed it to be unIslamic, a pre-Islamic tribal custom, just as female circumcision, which he also took a stand against as unislamic.[/size][size="+2"]

[/size][size="3"]Note: I'm not saying that John Esposito, the Roman Catholic and George Town University Professor is wrong, he has his own conclusions, which I highly respect. I actually really enjoyed his book that he wrote with Dalia Mogahed, but his conclusions also do not settle the issue.[/size][/font][/color]

As far as the verse from the Qur'an being just a "basic call to modesty", that's incorrect. Nearly all scholars within Islam still believe that it requires the headscarf to be worm by Muslim women. This is almost impossible to irrefute as a result. The term "Khimar" is the only term that appears in the Qur'an, but what is a Khimar? It's a headscarf that is wore, which drapes down over the upper chest of a woman, to about her waist. It's still a very conservative piece of clothing that is worn, so as not to reduce the verse to just a common modesty.
[/quote]

I will defer to your superior knowledge, thanks. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/like.gif[/img]