The hijab — the scarf-neck-head covering worn by some Muslim women — is not actually dictated per se by the Koran, but is a traditional dress in some parts of the Muslim world that has been tied to religious and theocratic rulings. It’s controversial in a number of places as religious wear, and as Muslim religious wear, but also as a sign of oppression against women in the Muslim world (and, as such, often conflated with other and more restrictive garb to hide, mask, or enforce the modesty of women).
The first article below demonstrates, though, that it’s not a matter of either-or. Some Muslim women (such as Ilhan Omar) wear hijab as a sign of their religious devotion, and celebrate it as a personal freedom. Others, esp. those living in some Middle Eastern Muslim nations, have it forced on them by state law, and consider it as a constriction of freedom.
The conflict seems perfectly understandable to me, analogous to another example of religious identification. I know a number of Jewish people, especially women, who wear a Star of David as a necklace, as an expression of their religious belief. Nobody (aside from anti-Semites) thinks a thing of it, save perhaps observing how cool it is that someone can choose to wear the symbol openly and without government sanction.
But if you had a law (as in Nazi Germany) where Jews were forced to wear a Star of David on their clothing to identify them as Jews … that’s clearly oppressive.
From there, it seems straightforward to celebrate that Muslim women who choose to wear the hijab have the freedom to do so … but to condemn nations who mandate that all women do so (or even more).
Do you want to know more?
- There are two types of hijabs. The difference is huge. – The Washington Post
- Five myths about hijab – The Washington Post
Title via Mark Twain, who put it regarding work and play in Tom Sawyer:
Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do, and that Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do.
A point or fact you may want to consider or ponder. The wearing of the hijab, yes, is a sign of their devotion to Islam. As, you stated, people of the Jewish faith openly wearing a Star of David. The one slight difference is that a Republic as the US is, that right of freedom of religion is your choice and not a government mandate. I’m not saying that the hijab must be worn by all in Arab countries-so hold on-I’m getting to my point. The point is that the vast majority if not all of the Muslim countries are ruled by the Islamic Religious laws, not individual rights. The government and religion are one in the same. As, say our Republic, their is a separation of Church and State. This doesn’t mean that our laws are not based on Judaism or Christianity, far from it, but our laws respect the minority or individual freedom.
So, it might be taken by many, that she isn’t faithful to the Constitution, but Islam. Just like the Christians-Mike Pence-get hammered for their beliefs, why should she be free from question? That’s the point. People that are faithful to Islam, want it as a form a government, not a religion. And, that might scare a lot of people.
Think about it, off all the Muslim countries she could have gone to, why the US?
So, you might think it’s great, maybe it is, but she’s showing her true beliefs on the Foreign Council.
Mike, your original comment (the one I’m replying to) was held up in moderation because it was the first one from that email address. And I’ve been a couple of days away from the blog, so I didn’t catch it.
I believe it is correct to say that the majority of majority-Muslim nations have some sort of civil law that includes religious elements from local interpretations of Islam. Similarly, though to a lesser degree, most majority-Christian nations include elements in their civil law that they attribute to Christianity, Israel has elements of civil law that are attributed to Judaism, etc. These nations may all have greater or lesser devotion to or protection of individual rights in their civil law as well. The US has developed and honed that over almost 250 years, though personal freedom vs. instituted community religious sentiment is significantly greater today than it was when we were kids, let alone at the founding of this country.
Your jumping from the nature of civil law in, say, Saudi Arabia or Iran or even Somalia, to the binary question of whether Ilhan Omar is devote to the Constitution or to Islam, though, seems abrupt. It’s hardly an either-or, and the idea that her being Muslim means she wants to take away Constitutional rights in favor of some sort of Islam-based civil code seems no more reasonable than suggesting that a Jewish-American wants to impose national bans on work during the Sabbath and peyot for men, or a Christian American wants to dictate fishless Fridays or getting rid of lending money at interest or burning of witches.
The question for an Omar, or a Pence, is not what their faith is, but how that reflects in their actions and, as a government official or member of society, how they seek to impose that faith on others.
As to why she came to the US instead of “all the Muslim countries,” she was 11 years old at the time, so didn’t have a lot of say in the matter. Her family fled Somalia during the civil war there, ending up in a refugee camp over the border in Kenya before coming to the US.
As far as I can tell, she has a strong appreciation for the individual liberties of the United States, including freedom of religion. Your suggestion that “People that are faithful to Islam, want it as a form a government, not a religion” is, honestly, a argument used to suggest that Muslims don’t deserve “freedom of religion” because it isn’t one. If that’s where you’re going, we can stop right there.
Something you may want to ponder is there might be a difference between wearing a Star of David or other religious item is that Islam is a form of government. The governments in the vast majority of Arab/Muslim Nations use Islam as there laws and regulations.
Where in the US and our republic, we separate the Church from the State. Even though our laws and constitution are based on Christian and Judaism, we have allowed for those that don’t adhere to said beliefs, even though they are against murder, stealing.
So, with her devotion to Islam and her many statements towards Jews, one might be a little concerned with her allegiance. Is it to the constitution or her faith?