Headscarves In Schools Research Articles

Children's Right to Education versus their Right to Religion and Culture in South Africa: With Specific Reference to the Wearing of a Headscarf in South African School

In terms of section 29(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution), ''everyone has the right to basic education''. At the same time the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion, and the right to participate in the cultural life of his or her choice. Children's right to education versus their right to religion and culture is a highly debated topic in South Africa. The Constitution guarantees both the right to education and the right to religion and culture. In the culturally diverse South African environment the right to education and the child's right to participate in the cultural life of their choice may conflict with each other. The conflict referred to can mean that the child's right to participate in the cultural life of his or her choice might be sacrificed to the right to education. One such instance is the wearing of a headscarf in schools. The headscarf, also known as a hijab, is a traditional piece of clothing worn by Muslim women in accordance with their religious beliefs. The wearing of a headscarf in schools has become a contentious issue as it is seen by some as conflicting with the principles of education and the dress codes of schools. The government has a constitutional obligation to provide basic education to all children in the country. This right is seen as a crucial factor in ensuring that children can develop to their full potential. On the other hand, the right to religion and culture is equally important as it allows individuals to practice their religious beliefs and maintain their cultural identity. To evaluate discrimination against children in a culturally diverse classroom, it is mandatory to look at what the right to basic education entails and what obligations this right place on the state – more specifically on the Department of Basic Education – when it comes to promoting the right to basic education while protecting children's other constitutional rights. The government must adopt a balanced approach to ensure that both the right to education and the right to religion and culture are respected and protected. This study will investigate whether the state fulfils its obligation to protect the child's constitutional right to basic education without infringing on the child's right to religion and culture.

Young Belgian Muslims: between religious reactivity and individualization

ABSTRACT In Belgium, since the first instances of girls wearing headscarves in schools in 1989, the public discussion on the place of Islam and Muslims in Belgian society has been almost constant. That debate has become more polarized in the wake of the attacks of 22 March 2016. The results presented in this paper are drawn from sixteen group discussions and twenty individual semi-structured interviews. We investigate the weight of discrimination processes on identity formation in the light of both reactive religiosity and individualization and secularization theoretical frameworks. Our data show that strongly identifying as Muslim is not experienced as being exclusive of other types of identifications claimed simultaneously. Then, we illustrate the processes of reflexivity, appropriation, and individualization of belief, as well as the negotiation or even circumvention of certain religious norms that are ongoing among Brussels’ Muslim youth.

Desiring the Secular: Capital, Cohesion, and the Fantasy of Secularization

Towards the end of the twentieth century, religion re-emerged as a topic of pressing concern in a number of the most self-consciously secularized states of the global north. From disputes over the wearing of headscarves in schools to debates over accommodations for religious practices in the public sphere, religion, particularly the ‘foreign’ religiosity of migrants and other minority religious subjects, appeared on the scene as a phenomenon whose proper place and role in society required both urgent and careful deliberation. This article argues that in order to account for the affective potency produced by the immanence of the figure of the ‘foreign’ religious subject, it is necessary to understand secularization as fantasy. It is within the fantasy of secularization that the secular emerges as an object of desire—as something that, if attained, appears as a solution to the problem of ‘foreign’ religiosity—and figures of inassimilable religiosity assume the role of scapegoats for the failure to resolve these concerns. In this sense, within this fantasy scene, the secular promises to provide ‘us’ with something that we are lacking. However, this promise has been undermined by the apparent persistence of religious difference. As such, as a result of their continued religiosity, ‘they’ appear to be taking something from ‘us’.

Wearing Headscarves in the Workplace: Comparing Approaches of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union

The article sets a brief comparative review of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights as well as the Court of Justice of the European Union with respect to the limitations imposed on the right to freedom of religion, by shedding light on the example of wearing the Islamic headscarf in the European sphere. It examines the background giving rise to the first European ban on wearing the headscarf in schools, followed by a reflection on its proscription in the university stage. The analysis explicates the interaction between the unhindered state interventions on the one hand, and the extent of the supervisory role exercised by the esteemed supra-national courts. In so doing, it unveils the recurring deference of Europe’s top courts to the arguments of the member states regarding the manifestation of the right to freedom of religion in public space. Arguments such as preserving secularism, state neutrality and respect for the rights of others were rhetorically employed in tandem with a wide margin of appreciation accorded to the member states to the extent of inconsistency with the provisions of the normative instruments (the ECHR and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights) and former jurisprudence of the courts.

Restriction on Religious Muslim Clothes in Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan has always been linked to Islam religion. However, the question of Islamic religious clothes has only arisen recently and presents a controversy in secular, contemporary Kazakhstan. The main purpose of the present article is to review the development of Islam religion, the current situation regarding Islamic garments, and the reasons why the government is cautious about the presence of Islamic garments, moreover, the decree on prohibition of wearing headscarves in schools. In addition, the right to religion will be taken into account in order to understand the situation of citizens and their fundamental rights.

Ban on hijabs in Russian schools: traditional values and the realization of the right to education

Abstract: In October 2012, in the Stavropol region of the Russian Federation was a scandal associated with the wearing of Muslim religious headscarves (hijab) in several rural school pupils. The school director forbade girls to wear the hijab while studying. Due to the fact that the girls wearing the hijab is not admitted to the classes, the main question was whether the ban on wearing headscarves in schools violates the right to education, and whether it was possible to consider the ban as gender discrimination in the implementation of the right to education. Keywords : human rights, right to education, right to conscience, traditional values, hijab, religion. Two years ago Russia has faced a problem that Western Eu-rope has solved 10 years ago. It concerns banning Muslim girls wearing Muslim religious headscarves (hijab) in schools. In Oc -tober 2012, in the Stavropol region of the Russian Federation was a big conflict related to the wearing of the Muslim headscarf (hijab) by several rural school pupils (girls). The school direc-tor forbade girls to wear the hijab in the classroom. As a result, girls wearing the hijab were not allowed to attend classes.Due to the fact that girls in hijabs are not admitted to the classes, the main question is to whether the ban on heads-carves in schools violated the right to education, and wheth-er it was possible to consider the ban as gender discrimina-tion in the implementation of the right to education.First of all, it is necessary to determine the legal basis of non-discrimination based on gender in the field of education at the international level and in the Russian Federation.At the international level, there are a number of docu-ments, recognizing the right to education [9, 31–40] and the prohibition of discrimination in education.Thus, the prohibition of discrimination in education is set in the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education 1960 [1], which enshrines the general provisions on the measures that States Parties undertake to adopt in order to combat discrimination in education. In accordance with Article 1 of the Convention the term “discrimination” includes any distinction, exclusion, limitation or preference which, being based on sex, has the purpose or effect of nul-lifying or impairing equality of treatment in education and in particular of depriving any person or group of persons of ac-cess to education of any type or at any level (1 a).Furthermore, under Article 10 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 1979 [2], all States Parties “shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in order to ensure to them equal rights with men in the field of educa -tion and in particular to ensure”.As Party of this Convention the Russian Federation has to fulfill this obligation.At the national level, according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation 1993 (art. 43):“1. Everyone shall have the right to education.2. Guarantees shall be provided for general access to and free pre-school, secondary and high vocational education in state or municipal educational establishments and at enter-prises” [3].Therefore, in Russia for everyone without discrimination must be guaranteed and secured the right to education, in-cluding free access at all levels except for higher education.A free higher education in state educational organisations must be guaranteed for everyone without discrimination on a competitive basis (art. 43 (3) of the Constitution).This is also confirmed by the provision of Article 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which states that “the recognition, observance and protection of the rights and free-doms of man and citizen shall be the obligation of the State”.The basic general education is compulsory. Parents shall enable their children to receive a basic general education (art. 43(4) of the Constitution). This provision means that parents have a duty to provide education for all children (boys and girls).The relevant provisions are also contained in the Fed-eral Law “On Education in the Russian Federation” [4]. Ar-ticle 3 establishes the right to education for everyone and the principle of non-discrimination in education (1(2)). Thus,

Opposing Muslims and the Muslim Headscarf in Western Europe

This article reveals that while Muslims have a surprisingly good reputation in Western Europe, the wearing of the headscarf in schools is opposed by a large majority of people. Several arguments are developed in this article to explain why people make a distinction between Muslims as a group and legislation on their religious practices. While attitudes towards Muslims vary little across countries, there is a lot of variation in levels of opposition to the headscarf. It appears that the more state and church are separated in a country or the more a state discriminates against religious groups the more opposed people are to allowing new religious practices in schools. At the individual level this article will test the extent to which general xenophobic attitudes, liberal values, and religiosity help us understand why attitudes differ. The article will show, among other things, that religious people are opposed to Muslims but not the rules that allow them to practice their religion. On the other hand, people with liberal values are tolerant of Muslims as a group but feel torn when it comes to legislation on religious practices such as the wearing of the headscarf, which for some people stands for the illiberal values of Islam. Data from a survey in six Western European countries will be analysed. Despite all the heated political debates this is one of the first studies that analyses attitudes towards Muslim immigrants across a number of countries, and for the first time attitudes towards Muslims as a group and legislation on the headscarf are compared.

Controverses by Larbi Oukada, et al

students to discuss and analyze Herbert’s perspective on the Francophone populations in the United States. Canisius College (NY) Eileen M. Angelini OUKADA, LARBI, DIDIER BERTRAND, and JANET SOLBERG. Controverses. 2nd ed. Boston: Heinle, 2012. ISBN 0495797774. Pp. 304. $75. Versatility distinguishes this intermediate-level program with numerous options for teaching and learning. The text and Student Activities Manual (SAM) contain eight chapters and a chapitre préliminaire, each organized into nine sections accentuating vocabulary and reflection. Critical thinking boasts a prominent role in Controverses. The program structure, which allows students to give initial thoughts, read, reflect, react, and then ask questions and debate, is very effective. The topics are provocative and multicultural. Students must exit their comfort zones to examine both sides of controversial issues and how the French treat them, to synthesize ideas through comparative thinking, and to draw contrasts from their experiences as Americans. The Hegelian-style “Rédaction guidée” also offers an intellectual and rhetorical challenge. This style does not resemble the American educational system’s standard partisan essays, as the authors emphasize. By applying Hegel’s thèse/antithèse/synthèse process, students explore topics globally, strengthen critical thinking skills by scrutinizing the validity of arguments, and are encouraged to look beyond opposing perspectives to propose solutions that consider multiple viewpoints. Various packages include supplements like audio programs and a premium Web site. New to the second edition, the site provides access to text and SAM audio programs, auto-graded vocabulary and grammar quizzes, flashcards, cultural Internet activities, podcasts, tutorials, and a glossary. This abundance offers multiple possibilities for course design. With its short articles and literary excerpts that facilitate reading comprehension, expand vocabulary, and accommodate grammar review, Controverses is a logical choice for an intermediate II language course; however, instructors could adopt the text for conversation courses or even more advanced content-focused classes on contemporary France. The variety of textbook activities caters to and can be adapted for intermediate and advanced learners. In addition to the Web site for which students purchase an access code, the second edition features contextualized “Liens grammaticaux” in the textbook, a useful section lacking in the first edition. It equips instructors who wish to focus less on written grammar and more on oral proficiency with reference points to keep students mindful of key grammar concepts and usage. Efforts have also been made to produce stronger thematic links between the text and the SAM. Moreover, some content has been replaced: The first edition chapter on reality TV now discusses technology, while the tabagisme theme has been replaced by the Islamic headscarf controversy. Half of the readings from the first edition have also been replaced by updated selections, and seven other previous readings have been rewritten. Still, the relative rate with which information can become outdated from the time the authors revise the text to its publication date presents a challenge. Since the text treats recent developments and ever-evolving perspectives in French 1222 FRENCH REVIEW 85.6 society like the banning of the headscarf in schools, immigration, and current political leaders and party platforms, it is certainly vulnerable to this. For instance, Sarkozy was elected president just after the publication of the first edition, which cited Chirac as the President of France. In like manner, the second edition labels Jean-Marie Le Pen as the president of the Front national, whereas he has since retired and passed the torch to his daughter, Marine Le Pen. On the one hand, this is not a bad thing: It provides opportunities for further discussion, thereby enhancing learning. On the other hand, it may spur some instructors to skip chapters with outdated information or previous controversial themes that are no longer relevant. Nevertheless, along with its structure and rich multimedia supplements , the content of Controverses embodies a significant strength. Students thrive intellectually when given the chance to think critically about another culture and cognitively when they do this in another language. Ultimately, Controverses helps produce globally aware citizens, a goal to which all teachers should aspire. Elon University (NC) Sarah Glasco STILLMAN, DAVID, and RONNI GORDON. The Ultimate French Review and Practice: Mastering French Grammar for Confident Communication, Audio CD Edition...

Religious Symbols in Educational Institutions: Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract The issue of religious symbols in educational institutions has been a source of vigorous legal and political controversy. Two types of cases have been litigated before the European Court of Human Rights: those concerning the wearing of the Islamic headscarf in schools and universities, and those concerning the presence of the crucifix in school classrooms. In this article, I shall analyse these cases, assessing how the Court balances different rights and State interests, focusing in particular on the Court’s interpretation of the principles of neutrality/secularism and of gender equality. I shall criticise the Court’s deference to the State, arguing that it should more strictly supervise how States respect human rights. Respect for human rights requires that the States respect individual’s religious freedoms, be autonomous from the religion and safeguard the principle of plurality. While the Court has proclaimed these principles, it has failed to apply them in these cases.

Rights of Ethnic Minorities in Liberal Democracies: Has France Gone Too Far in Banning Muslim Women from Wearing the Burka?

After a controversial ban on Islamic headscarves in schools in 2004, the French government now goes further in banning the wearing of the full-body burka by adult women in public spaces generally. The ban raises important questions regarding constitutional politics, liberal political theory, identity formation and the legitimate social expectations of majority cultures. Seemingly clear answers in multicultural liberalism are complicated by the informing French principle of laïcité, through which the French state seeks to legitimize what would otherwise appear to serious, even incomprehensible, breaches of minority religious and cultural freedoms. However, nuanced theoretical arguments are overwhelmed by the trivial nature of the threat to French legal, political, and civic culture. One argument is that social opprobrium ought to be left to respond to an issue which must ultimately be characterized as de minimis . Should that not happen then the burka ban, together with the earlier headscarf ban, will likely come to be seen in retrospect as incremental steps in a progression of repressive policies. In all likelihood these policies will end badly, not only for Muslim minorities in Europe, but for the legitimacy and integrity of modern European liberal values as well.

Religiosity, the headscarf, and education in Turkey: an analysis of 1988 data and current implications

Previous research highlights the continuing relevance of family culture in explaining educational inequalities in Turkey, especially patriarchal beliefs and practices that discourage investment in the education of girls. We extend that research by introducing two much‐debated, but empirically untested, aspects of family culture – parental religiosity and headscarf preferences. An analysis of a nationally representative sample of 15–19 year olds in 1988 shows that while religiosity had no significant effect on educational attainment, children who lived in families whose fathers expected them to wear a headscarf in public had lower educational attainment, especially girls. The large negative headscarf effect suggests that the government ban on headscarves in schools may be an obstacle to eliminating gender inequality in education. The results are discussed in light of recent trends in Turkish society.

'Not Another Hijab Row': New conversations on gender, race, religion and the making of communities

Headscarves in schools. Sexual violence in Indigenous communities. Muslim women at public swimming pools. Polygamy. Sharia law. Outspoken Imams on sexual assault. Integration and respect for women. It seems that around the world in the media and public debate, women’s issues are at the top of the agenda. Yet all too often, support for women’s rights is proclaimed loudest by conservative politicians intent on policing communities and demonising Muslims during the ‘war on terror’. This edition of the Transforming Cultures eJournal offers critical reflections on the contemporary politics of gender, race and religion, and provides a platform for those perspectives which are too often sidelined in the debate, perspectives that seek to go beyond simplistic debates such as ‘hijab: to ban or not to ban?’ or ‘Muslim women: oppressed or liberated?’

The demands of liberty: civil society in France since the Revolution

How does France reconcile the modern movement toward pluralism and decentralization with a strong central governing power? One of the country's most distinguished political historians offers a radical new interpretation of the development of democracy in France and the relationship between government and its citizens. Since the publication of Tocqueville's Ancient Regime and the Revolution, French political structures have been viewed as the pure expression of a native Jacobinism, itself the continuation of an old absolutism. This interpretation has served as both a diagnosis of and an excuse for the inability to accept pluralism and decentralization as norms of a modern democracy, as evidenced in such policies as the persistence of the role of prefects and the ban on headscarves in schools. Pierre Rosanvallon, by contrast, argues that the French have cherished and demonized Jacobinism at the same time; their hearts followed Robespierre, but their heads turned toward Benjamin Constant. The Demands of Liberty traces the long history of resistance to Jacobinism, including the creation of associations and unions and the implementation of elements of decentralization. Behind the ideological triumph of the state lies the conflicting creation of an active civil society. In exploring these tensions, Rosanvallon takes the debate far beyond traditional views of liberalism versus republicanism and offers an innovative analysis of why the French system has worked despite Jacobinism.

From a Community of Believers to an Islam of the Heart: "Conspicuous" Symbols, Muslim Practices, and the Privatization of Religion in France*

Based on interviews with North African women immigrants, this article examines how religious practices are constrained and the meaning of being a good is transformed in France. When Muslim women cannot celebrate religious holidays or pray five times a day, they instead focus on what is in one's heart, an adaptation to a country engaged in an ongoing battle to keep religion out of the public realm. While many immigrants affirm that Islam should be kept at home, in private, an increasing number of their children seek visible symbols of religious/ethnic identity, such as the headscarf, suggesting the emergence of generational differences in the experience of Islam in France. The new French law banning headscarves in schools is decried by some first generation women, but just as many support the law, including many older, religious women. This article compares American and French perspectives on the separation of church and state and questions the underlying motives behind the contemporary arguments about secularism in France.

Headscarves, Human Rights, and Harmonious Multicultural Society: Implications of the French Ban for Interpretations of Equality

Through the lens of the French law prohibiting Muslim headscarves in schools, this article examines the way in which societal tensions that arise in the context of religious and cultural pluralism are translated into legal discourses relating to human rights and equality. It explores the way in which the law is rooted in France's broader sociopolitical structure and history and contrasts it to the United Kingdom and Turkey. It proposes that the law is based on an anachronistic, formal interpretation of equality that is inappropriate for addressing the inevitable cultural diversity of modern French society, and through its permeation into law and policymaking more widely, it is a primary cause of the heightened social tensions involving the Muslim minority. An assessment of the legitimacy of a law that restricts minority groups' cultural practices in this way in any society should be based on a substantive interpretation of equality and should necessarily involve an active endeavor to understand the meanings of those cultural practices for those groups within their distinct context. Upon this foundation, law and policy can be developed in a way that better reconciles the pluralism of modern society with the common objectives of social harmony, stability, and tolerance.

The Cartoons: Two Perspectives

DOSSIER The Cartoons: Two Perspectives THIS PAST WINTER a storm spread across Europe, the Middle East, and beyond ostensibly because of the publication in a Danish newspaper of cartoons depicting Islam's Prophet, Muhammad. Amid the violence and uproar, an extraordinary statement was published in the French press written by Tewfik Allal in collaboration with his colleagues at the Association du Manifeste des Libertés, based in Paris. Dissent does not normally publish statements by organizations, but this is the second time we are publishing a declaration by this Association because of its courage and remarkable moral and political intelligence. In summer 2004 we published its "Muslim Manifesto from France." Its signatories announced, "We are of Muslim culture. We oppose misogyny, homophobia, antiSemitism , and the political use of Islam. We assert a living secularism." The architect of this declaration was Allal, an unemployed French proofreader and trade unionist who was born in Morocco of Algerian parents. He had been shocked by some of the political rhetoric that accompanied protests against the French law barring headscarves in schools. A long list of non-Muslim sympathizers then signed up to express their solidarity. Now Allal and his colleagues have made their voices heard again, this time with the statement "For Freedom of Expression" that we publish here. It originally appeared in the February 8, 2006, issue of Charlie Hebdo, a Paris weekly—along with the offending cartoons. The French and European newspapers have been filled with varying perspectives on the cartoon controversy, and we follow the statement with an article by philosopher Alain Finkielkraut that appeared in Liberation, the left-wing French daily, on February 9, 2006. Although Finkielkraut offers a vigorous defense of free expression as well, he provides a different take on the protests and current developments in the Middle East. Finkielkraut lives in Paris and is the author of numerous books, including The Defeat of Thought and Au nom de l'Autre (In the Name of the Other). — Mitchell Cohen For Freedom of Expression Tewfik Allal and the Association du Manifesto des Libertis W HEN THE JORDANIAN newspaper Shihane published on February 2 three of the Danish cartoons that sparked so much controversy, its editors wondered out loud, "What is a greater source of prejudice against Islam? The cartoons or the images of a hostage's throat being slit in front of a camera?" (Liberation, February 3, 2006). The newspaper was then pulled off the newsstands , and its editor was dismissed. There are people in Islamic countries who think the same way as these Jordanian editors do, but who are not allowed to express it. They lack freedom of expression more than anyone else. We can discuss and argue about the quality of these cartoons and whether or not they were influenced by the rightist and racist atmosphere in Denmark and some other European countries. But it is something else entirely when there are calls for the murder of the cartoonists , indeed of an entire nation in the name of God. The secretary-general of Hezbollah in Lebanon declared that "had a Muslim been found to carry out Imam Khomeini's fatwa against the renegade Salman Rushdie, then this rabble in Denmark, in Norway and in France who insult our prophet Muhammad would never have dared to do this." Copyright 2006 Tewfik Allal and the Association du Manifeste des Libertes, manifeste@manifeste.org. Published by permission . 42 n DISSENT / Spring 2006 FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION This much is obvious and urgent: We must defend those who are being attacked by extremists in the name of Islam. "Are we going to wait until another Theo van Gogh is murdered, perhaps in Copenhagen or in Oslo?," asks the Arab writer Magdi Allam in the Italian newspaper II Corriere della Sera. Are we going to wait for another tragic incident to realize that the "party is over," as a French journalist wrote at the time of the Theo van Gogh affair? A challenge has been issued to freedom of expression. It was orchestrated four months after the fact, after the cartoons were originally published. Its aim is to bar freedom of thought and expression by artists, intellectuals, and by any critic of religion...

Secular Philosophy and Muslim Headscarves in Schools*

Secular Philosophy and Muslim Headscarves in Schools*