The possibility of a ‘Burqa ban’ has been big news lately, what with all them ~Muslim terrorists~ fangin’ around.
In actual fact, the ban that’s being bandied about is a restriction placed on anyone with a facial covering from entering Parliament House. This came after a review of security policies by The Department of Parliamentary Services and on account of Tony Abbott finding them “confronting” [eye rolling intensifies].
As we were reminded after calling Parliament House this afternoon – potentially landing ourselves on a watchlist in the process – it applies to anything that obscures the face. We asked what it was about and if it extended to nuns wearing a habit (which covers the head, not face, obviously), and were nervously passed on to the media liaison who ensured us that “it’s about facial coverings, whatever facial coverings that person is wearing” (they’re getting back to us on the nun thing).
Real talk, though. This is supposedly because of isolated instances overseas where suicide bombers and those wishing to inflict harm upon others have disguised themselves as women and hidden weapons underneath a full veil (and because Australia is currently on high terror alert).
Much in the same way – aside from the obvious fact that the burqa itself has spiritual significance – that some people who rob banks like to wear novelty masks.
. Look, it’s a government building and it makes sense that they need to have people properly identified. Walking in wearing a horse mask isn’t chill (although, nor is it specifically banned in the Conditions of Entry). However, if Parliamentary Security are really that concerned about the Burqa and anticipate women wearing them will be routinely entering Parliament House – as they rightly should be and obviously need to be, since not many people on Capital Hill seem to know jackshit about Islam – why not hire a Muslim woman who could perform a private security check for anyone wearing a Burqa or Niqab?
After all, as long as you’re not encroaching on the rights of others, how you worship is a personal choice. If someone is Catholic their religious adherence can range from a casual ‘please, God – If you do me a solid and get the test tomorrow cancelled I will chuck $5 at the charity of your choice’ to confession and self-flagellation every second day. In the Quran the Hijab (Arabic for partition) refers to the principle of modesty for both men and women and it’s up to the individual as to how they practice that.
via ABC
Although, presumably the standard check to enter Parliament House would already have some kind of bomb detection element, one which transcends mere cloth. Like, if someone tries to hide a bomb in their jeans surely they’d still set off detectors without having to strip down to their naked body?
Could it be that this is one massive PR stunt by certain politicians aimed at appeasing their bogan constituents? Who knows, but the Muslim community of Australia – members of which have been attacked simply because of their faith and the ignorance that currently abounds surrounding that faith – would thank them to stop.
As for the general ban being talked about by Senator Jacqui Lambie and other persons of that ilk, whereby “identity concealing religious garments” wouldn’t be allowed to be worn in public – their reasons are both unconstitutional and stupid, and they can fuck right off.
If you want to make it illegal for people to cover their face in a public place – like the Loi interdisant la dissimulation du visage dans l’espace public, “Act prohibiting concealment of the face in public space,” in France – you best be prepared to say goodbye to the freedom Australians currently enjoy to dress how they damn well please.
Oh, and R.I.P Halloween.
🙁
