Muslim Girls Gone Wild

By John Bloom | 11/27/2007


So I’m reading this old Christianity Today article about discrimination against Christian women in India, and suddenly I notice the picture: they’re all wearing headscarves. All the Christian women in India (at least in the picture selected by Christianity Today) are wearing headscarves. Come to think of it, I’ve seen a lot of Christian women wearing headscarves, especially in the Orthodox churches, and in fact, in most of those churches, it’s a requirement to even go inside. So the only difference between the Christian headscarf and the Muslim headscarf would apparently be that the Muslim woman wears hers all the time, and the Orthodox woman occasionally takes hers off, with the possible exception of grandmothers, the famous babushki of Russia, who seem to always be pictured, nostalgically, in headscarves of a plain rustic sort. And isn’t this tradition equally honored in Judaism? Don’t all the daughers in “Fiddler on the Roof” wear headscarves?

women with headscarves

All of which is to say: What is the big deal about headscarves in Europe? Why do people get so upset about it? Why do you read that it’s a “provocation”? How can this many people be this angry about several thousand teenage girls who want to wear a headscarf to class? The defenders of the French republic seem especially agitated on this issue, as though the honor of France might be besmirched by covered teenage heads. And yet if you travel back and forth very often between France and the U.S., you eventually notice that the most popular item on those duty-free carts on the airplanes is . . . the French headscarf! Christian Dior has sold more of those scarves to businessmen who have no idea what to bring back to their wives from France than any other item available at an airport kiosk. And doesn’t the headscarf, come to think of it, define the classic French cinematic woman of the fifties and sixties, whether Bardot or Moreau or Anouk Aimee running on the beach in Un homme et une femme? Maybe it’s my faulty memory and Anouk Aimee didn’t wear a headscarf at all when she cavorted through
Anouk Aimee
the autumnal landscapes of Claude Lelouch, but I seem to remember her face peering out from the tightly cinched silk, and at any rate the whole headscarf thing was a French fashion, much less common in Italy or England.

So if we get down to what the French headscarf controversy is really about, it seems to be: We want to know the motive behind your headscarf.

Of course, being French, they want to know the motive behind everything. Gone are the days of Maurice Chevalier, whose classic version of “Live and Let Live” implied that the French preferred not to know anyone’s secret reasons for anything. If we really delved into the complexities of the female psyche—never a good idea, but I’ll try—I would suspect that the motives behind Anouk Aimee’s headscarf and that of a 16-year-old Muslim student are similar. They are both saying, “Here I am, look at me.” In the United States, land of “Youth For Christ” t-shirts and crucifix jewelry sold at amusement parks, we have no trouble recognizing this impulse in a certain sort of teenager flush with the zeal of a paranoid minority. The expression in the schoolyard would be, “Yes, I believe in God! What of it?” It’s a pre-emptive action, a way of making your piety so obvious that you don’t have to feel uncomfortable in the company of atheists and infidels who don’t realize what you are and therefore try to include you in their confidences. And it is, in its simplest form, similar to any teenager’s myspace page: “Here’s what makes me different.”

Grace Kelly

You would expect the French to understand this better than any other country, France being made up of people who pride themselves on their individuality. But the problem, I think, is that, whereas America has separation of church and state, France has always had superiority of state over church. One of the goals of the French Revolution, after all, was to wipe the Catholic Church off the map, or at least prevent it from having any public voice. Then, in 1905, the French passed a law actually restricting religion in public spaces—thereby going much further than the American First Amendment—and the Catholic church eventually accepted that law, but not until 1924. Ever since then, anyone who wants to use any form of religious symbol in a public square needs to get permission from the government. And on this basis, the headscarf is considered fair game. (Ironically, they seem less agitated about the nun’s habit, which is a much more bizarre form of dress and directly related to the Catholic church the 1905 law was directed against.)

The spokesman for the headscarf in Europe is Tariq Ramadan, the Swiss Muslim academic famous on this side of the pond for being appointed to a professorship at Notre Dame, only to have his visa denied by the State Department for “supporting terrorist organizations.” (When it comes to deporting imams and banning fellow travellers, the United States can hang right in there with the best police actions France, England or Holland can muster.) As Olivier Roy points out in his new book, Secularism Confronts Islam (Columbia, 144 pp., $24.50), attacks on Ramadan inevitably point out that he’s “handsome”—which he is, but which would seem to be beside the point. Why point it out if not to say “the devil wears Prada”? The idea seems to be that someone who is educated in a western university, speaks perfect French, and looks good in a suit, shouldn’t be speaking out so strongly for sharia law.

In fact, what Ramadan has said is that he believes sharia should be “suspended” in the nations of western Europe—that, for now at least, Muslims should be satisfied with the laws of their home country. This is apparently not good enough for Ramadan’s critics, though. The idea that those same Muslims might try to change the law seems to infuriate them, and they’re constantly trying to get Ramadan to “be reasonable” and say that sharia law is something that should never be brought to the west.

There are several things wrong with this attitude. First of all, Islam is not in the east or the west. Islam is everywhere. There’s a tendency to assume that Islam is a Middle Eastern religion, and of course it is, but only in the sense that Judaism and Christianity are also Middle Eastern religions. Nobody would say to a Jew “Take those hostile ideas back to Jerusalem where they belong,“ or to a Christian “Take those hostile ideas of St. Paul back to Greece and Turkey where they came from.“ (One of those St. Paul edicts, by the way, is for women to always keep their heads covered—it’s part of his letter to the church at Corinth.) But there’s an assumption, when it comes to Islam, that we should contain it in its place of historical origin, namely Saudi Arabia and its neighbors. In Europe this takes the form of movements to identify the national culture as Christian—especially odd in France, where the children of 1789 spent two centuries trying to eliminate the church. There’s a similar movement in America, but it’s not as strong, perhaps because the Muslims of America are not concentrated in slum cities, the way they are in France. People react one way when a Pakistani doctor sets up his practice in the neighborhood strip mall, and quite another way when there are 2,000 unemployed Moroccans crammed into a housing project. It’s the shame of Christianity, more often than not, that we accept the wealthy professional and ignore the ghetto hordes.

But the second thing wrong with the attacks on Ramadan is that all these frightened Christians, atheists and Jews say they want to enter into dialogue with the Muslim world, but when a real live Muslim who can speak their language shows up, they prevaricate and back away, saying, “Well, we want to talk to moderate Muslims, to reasonable Muslims, to Muslims who are not sympathetic to terrorism.” (Ramadan is not sympathetic to terrorism, by the way, but no Muslim intellectual in today’s world can avoid entanglements with Palestinians and others who have been placed on various government target lists.) Seen properly, Ramadan is a godsend. He’s an intellectual who speaks perfect English and French and can articulate in the strongest possible terms the worldview of a reactionary mullah who never leaves South Yemen. Ramadan is a resource, not a threat. We need Ramadan a lot more than he needs us.

What the French really want Ramadan to say is that the French constitution takes precedence over any religious law. That would make everyone breathe easier. But how could he possibly be expected to say that? Would the Pope say that? Would James Dobson? The only theologians I know of who ever said that God’s law is a lesser law than the nation’s constitution were the German liberals of the 19th century, the same ones who supported the aggressions of the Kaiser and the atrocities of Hitler, first by their sermons and then by their silence. If Tariq Ramadan believes there’s a law from heaven that’s greater than the law of the Fifth Republic, or the law of the American Constitution, then he’s no different from half the pastors in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Which brings us back to the headscarf. How many types of common religious headgear can we name? The yarmulke, of course, which young boys often wear to schools in America. (I don’t know about France.) The habit, which teenage novices wear in convents. And, of course, the Orthodox headscarf, which girls from Eastern Europe wear in church and sometimes in school as well. How is the Muslim headscarf different? That it’s cinched tighter? That it covers more of the face? That it’s worn for a different reason? Let’s look at that different reason. Frequently the girls who don the headscarf are violating the wishes even of their own parents. They want the world to know who they are. They’re wearing the headscarf as an act of rebellion. And in that sense, the reason is to reveal our own hypocrisy. They’ve done a good job.


Comments(36)

Andy in Germany | 04:26 am on 11/28/2007

In my home state in German it is banned on the basis that if you want to live in a christian protestant state (which this state is) then you accept that in the schools that the christian protestant state finances and provides. The ironic thing is that many of the 'foreign' students we have who are pushing this are turkish, and claim that it is part of their national identity, but hang on: Turkey is a secular state, and headscarves in school are illegal there as well...

Teresa | 07:08 pm on 11/29/2007

I wonder: why is it that there are plenty of bible thumpering Christian women who proudly display their faith by wearing a cross around their neck (come to think of it, wearing a guillotine instead of the cross would be more humane) which is no where mentioned in the scriptures; instead of wearing a head covering, which is? I always thought that becoming/being a believer requires an all or nothing approach instead of selective religiosity.

Anonymous | 01:14 am on 1/06/2008

we are at war with islam and alwys have been since its inception in 600 ad, before that we were at war with the peoples who subsequently adopted islam.
why are we still at war with them? cuz they do noit know when they are beat.
as the jamaicans say, 'soon come'

Anonymous | 08:27 pm on 11/30/2008

muslim women should wear scarf freely without anybody discriminating its not bothering anybody else if scarves are worn by chrisitian why does it matter what does it have to do with religion its just fashion i think muslim should wear scarves they look beautiful with their scarves

David | 07:08 pm on 11/28/2007

Well said.

Melinda | 08:03 pm on 11/28/2007

Question: How is the Muslim headscarf different (from other headcoverings)?

Answer: Europe is facing a cultural invasion from masses of Muslim immigrants. They have every reason to get upset about something as small as a headscarf.

Anonymous | 11:20 am on 5/28/2009

"Europe is facing a cultural invasion from masses of Muslim immigrants. They have every reason to get upset about something as small as a headscarf."

How is a headscarf going to bother anyone in Europe? What I wear is not going to hurt someone. TOLERANCE is the right answer, my friend, and Europe is not showing tolerance to the people who are simply wearing headscarves. The women aren't wearing it as a gang symbol or anything else of the sort. It is simply something for religion! As long as I'm not hurting anyone, no body has any right to be upset over my religion!

Anonymous | 03:10 am on 8/04/2009

i live in the uae and this is the heartland of the muslim faith
i personaly have no problem with people of the muslim faith but i do have a problem with them coming to the uk and europe and demanding we reconise there faith and god dam clothing styles but when your in there country you have to do as they say
example in sharjah recently two younng expat boys 11 and 15 jailed for wearing a male braclet.
it is also not allowed for men to wear shorts
women are not allowed to have shoulders uncovered
i have also had a nutter with a cane smack my 15 year old daughter ankles while we were on a shopping trip because her skirt was to short and it was a below the knee skirt.
i understand he was some head priest or something but needless to say he needed a new cane after i snapped the bloody thing and then made a quick retreat because it would not be him charged by the police for assualt but my daughter for immoral dress and me for damage and violent behavour

Siarlys Jenkins | 08:23 pm on 11/28/2007

Cultural Invasion??? America has been subject to cultural invasions since 1492. First those arrogant Spaniards, then those avaricious French fur traders and sugar plantation entrepreneurs, then those conflicted English, then the newly independent Anglo Protestants faced Irish Catholics, Jews, Germans of both Catholic and Protestant varieties, Polish Catholics, Italian Catholics, Greeks (mostly Orthodox), and by 1900 there were Arabic speaking immigrants of both Christian and Muslim varieties. People move all around the world. That's not a cultural invasion.

When it comes to Europe, there is a special poetic justice to it. Europeans financed their comfortable lifestyles by draining money from two thirds of the world for over 200 years, and almost immediately, they started seeing a trickle of people from those countries they drained who "followed the money" back to the colonial power. That accelerated in the 20th century. Incidentally, it is why people from Latin America come to North America also... they are following the money.

Europe also invited all kinds of Guest Workers to come take menial jobs that Europeans didn't really want to do anyway, and now some of them are living in slums and out of work. That is not a cultural invasion either.

Is there a basis to maintain some control of religious expression? Yes, the same ones I insist on as an American citizen when some of my more fanatical fellow American Christians try to make this into that great oxymoron "A Christian Nation." Your religious beliefs are your right to practice and witness for and OFFER to the world. We have a government that is not allowed to endorse any religion, including yours, so you and I can live side by side without having to kill each other over the difference. Case closed. (IF you insist on a state-mandated religion, then by all means migrate elsewhere, not because you are Muslim, or Christian, or Jewish, but because we are not having that from ANY faith here).

Parrish | 10:56 pm on 1/01/2008

Good reply, though I would make a distinct note to the fact that it was a matter of manifest destiny that ultimately led to the colonializing powers manipulating and exploiting the Native Americans through a baptized divine providence of nationalistic identity, which continues today through the current administrations endorsement of many faith based (christian by selection and domination) organizations and no-compete contracts for their corporate lacky's. I agreed with your conclusion, just thought admitting the manipulation of world markets and exploiting of people for greed amongst other sins must be added to the resume of the United States... and all this from a Veteran and Ordained Minister... frightening isn't it!?!?!?

Anonymous | 01:23 am on 1/06/2008

here we go again with the colonialist guilt burden.
move to cuba already!
let me make it REAL CLEAR,

SOMEBODY IS GOING TO DO IT

If we were not leading someone else would have been, maybe even your precious muslims that you love so much.

Randall Giles | 07:29 am on 11/29/2007

Here in India, the photo of Christian Dalit women the writer saw in the Christianity Toady article he mentions at the beginning of this piece are not likely wearing headscarves but instead, their Saris. When a Christian woman prays, whether in church or in the home, she almost always covers her head with the decorated part of the sari that hangs over her shoulder & down her back--it's often more highly decorated than the rest of the sari. Wearing it for prayer has the same effect and purpose as a separate headscarg, but is not usually a separate item of clothing.

Sean Fowler AKA Frozen Tex | 10:20 am on 11/29/2007

Christians are told by the Bible to go out into the world and win converts by witnessing, by example.
Muslims are told by the Koran to go out into the world and win converts by witnessing, by example, by lying, or by deadly force. There's your difference.

Anonymous | 10:42 am on 11/29/2007

The difference is, for example, that some people contort the truth of Islam before sharing it with others. You need to get a REAL copy of the Qur'an and read it before you spread lies that claim are coming from Muslims.

No one can 'win' converts by lying or deadly force. No one can take control of a person's beliefs...it's not a physical item to own or control. But if you want to talk about converting through deadly force, take a look at the Crusades........

Toad | 04:22 pm on 11/29/2007

Whoever you are, you're either misguided or an apologist for islamic radicalism. Osama Bin Ladin's message to America after 911 gave three conditions for the end of Al Qaida's attacks, the second being that America convert to Islam.

What's most tragic is the Muslims, who are rightly offended by the Crusades (although after 900 years, I'd think they could get over it) want to be Crusaders themselves, acting out the same bigotry and religious intolerance that started the Crusades in the first place. I hope that Allah convicts them of the terrible hypocrisy of railing against the Crusades and then becoming exactly what they say they hate.

As far as the article goes, I agree with the concept of locating someone moderate to speak for Islam in the West. I also agree that we cannot expect this person to be our puppet.

I will say that we MUST have such a person. Al Qaida's message to Islam is that all must unite under their banner - that the West hates and seeks to destroy them. If we can't find someone willing to speak against Al Qaida, we assist Al Qaida in becoming the de facto voice of Islam.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend and we need Ramadan ... a lot more than he needs us.

Anonymous | 05:07 pm on 11/30/2007

The crusades were simply a reaction to a couple of hundred years of violent Islamic expansion. OK so the RCC was the only authority that could bring otherwise feudal leaders together in common cause, so be it. But lets not carry on with this revisionist nonsense about the crusades being an 'invasion' when it was simply an defensive action by a continent that was under a very real threat.

Toad | 05:20 pm on 12/01/2007

Anon, you can proclaim whatever truth you want to, but as long as people still have hard feelings over something, your minimizing it isn't going to help. The Crusades are ancient history. Nothing we say about them is going to change how Moslems feel about them. So instead of trying to ridicule their deep-seated anger, let's just agree that the Crusades were a bad thing. Then let's ask how becoming Crusaders themselves isn't a bad thing as well.

You gotta find a way to talk to people. Hiding inside your own secure reality isn't going to resolve the hatreds in the world. We must find a way to have a dialog and peace before Al Qaida becomes the de facto voice of Islam. If we don't ...

Can we kill 1.3 billion Moslems? Yes, especially if someone punches Michael Moore in the mouth first. Do I want to live in a society which can find no other answer than killing 1.3 billion Moslems? Hell no.

Anonymous | 11:00 pm on 12/04/2007

The crusades were a direct result of the wars of compulsion. I have a Qu'oran from Saudi Arabia and it still talks about taqiq and smiting people's heads off. If that's not lying and deadly force, what is? By the way, the crusades ended 700 years ago, the West is being attacked by Muslim radicals today.

Sara | 06:03 pm on 11/29/2007

I'm not reading any Islamic "apologist" language here. Xtians have done some pretty nasty stuff to each other along with other people and civilizations in history. The Reformation, the Crusades, even the current back-biting regarding "controversial" doctrines (Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, Tony Campolo and the likes). We haven't been nice and we most often are known for our pride, our affluence, and our stubborn attitudes along with division among beliefs.

The early Church grew because we were different and loved others despite differences in backgrounds, beliefs, race (Jew or Gentile). As the hymn goes "They will know we are Christians by our love." We agreed on the big stuff and had to be continually reminded that the little stuff was just that -- little.

And also before you go lumping all your Muslim eggs in one basket, I would recommend that you educate yourself on the differences in the religion. There are differences, just as there are in xtianity and our own denominations.

Parrish | 11:02 pm on 1/01/2008

Yeah that's sort of like saying the Hebrew Bible tells Christians to bash babies heads against rocks if you want to overcome your enemies and leave no 'thing' alive ion the camp... a bit shoddy on the comparitve religion analysis there Tex, and it actually does not help to further peace or dialogue to call someone else something they would not admit of themselves. Its kinda like saying christians are baby killers and worship sacrifices from a father god who demands the pure blood of his firstborn... see where that kind of talk gets ya? In a hole with a lot of crap slung everywhere... please keep the crap in the toilet.

Anonymous | 05:52 am on 2/13/2009

I think that you shouldnt be too hasty to quote or explain from the Quraan if you have not actually read or seen that bit which you are quoting or relaying, for yourself....stop spreading religious hatred-we all worship in order to be good...."to each his own..." let those who want to wear headscarves wear it and if you dont want to leave it -just dont hurt anyone in whatever you're doing....a headscarf has never hurt anyone or a cross around the neck for that matter....a bomb has, a bullet has, religious slandering has.....etc etc

Anonymous | 11:22 am on 5/28/2009

I advise you to go get a Koran and read it before you post false information online. You don't know what you are talking about. Who ever taught you that about Islam was feeding you propaganda.

Kelly Norman | 12:02 am on 11/30/2007

The French law, which came into effect during Chirac's socialist presidency, bans crosses and yamulkes (the head covering Jewish men and boys wear) as well.

I watched the French newscasts faithfully during those days (my cable provider doesn't show them now, unfortunately), and remember that the big push against headscarves in France came from feminists, who were benightedly insistent that the act of wearing a headscarf by a child....even if that child was 17 years old and could beat you or me up....was a sign that they were being somehow abused by their parents. There was an element of "Get that headscarf off! You're treading on my rights by wearing it", but children and teachers interviewed definitely seemed to be more concerned that children, particularly girls, might be in patriarchal homes. Why they wouldn't therefore *want* the kids to wear headscarves so that they would be able to tell them apart from children of more "progressive parents", and thereby know which parents to "fix", is beyond me.

One of the most amusing exchanges I heard during this time was an argument between a 15 year old girl in a hajib and her teacher. The kid was really holding her own, explaining it was her decision, not anyone else's, to wear the scarf. The teacher was screaming like a banshee insisting the scarf be removed (at the time, the law had not yet been passed).

But yes, crosses and yamulkes are included, as well.
I'm wondering if the law may end up being tossed out or minimally enforced under the new, more conservative regime of Sarkozy.

Andy in Germany | 04:14 am on 12/03/2007

I can see a lot of the points made. I think I'm seeing the situation in Germany as an first generation (European) immigrant married to an (Asian) immigrant. We understand that things work differently here to our home countries, and though we may not like that, we choose to live here and we have to take the rough with the smooth. I can see that that's a personal decision though, and I probably am being a bit self-righteous about it.
On the other hand, we (Europe) aren't like America, where loads of different races all came together in one new place: we aren't a melting-pot, so it is a different situation. I wish I could provide a definitive answer.
As to the Crusades, well, that's complex too. Yes, there were times of Genocide by Christians, but we were also defending our own at times, so it isn't that clear cut. When we look at one of those 'defending' times, the Siege of Vienna in 1529, the Ottoman ('Muslim') armies were using European ('Christian') engineers to attack the city, so it gets even more confused. Add to this the varius popes declaring crusades agains people, and kings declaring crusades by permission (A sort of franchise agreement existing at the time) and the time, right in the middle of the crusades when the Mongols came charging onto the scene and the two sides made peace and fought side by side againt this threat, it gets very fuzzy, so there is no way either religion can blame the other.

Josh | 08:46 pm on 12/19/2007

Thanks for the insightful comments on the crusades and Europe. I am always glad to read comments and opinions from many differnt countries

torontonian | 07:17 pm on 12/12/2007

just wait till some 16 year old Muslim girl gets killed by her father for not wearing her hijab and "decent clothes" as happened in Toronto (Mississauga) Ontario Canada this week
http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_17610.aspx

Anonymous | 05:17 pm on 2/24/2008

YO MY DICK IS HARD ANY 1 WANNA SUCK IT?

Sam | 04:51 am on 3/06/2008

And on this basis, the headscarf is considered fair game. (Ironically, they seem less agitated about the nun’s habit, which is a much more bizarre form of dress and directly related to the Catholic church the 1905 law was directed against.)

And so many Catholic Nuns and Priests, as well as their Protestant Jesus-praising peers, have been suicide bombing lately. They really MUST be STOPPED!

...er...no, wait...

No one's external vestments depict whether they are an immediate detriment or boon to society. They do however give us a form of identitiy.
If people identify themselves with scum who with to destroy society, "not just make it think more" like Christians do, but actually blow it up, then those people are "bad"...
If they're disallowed to "wear their colors", then they know we're not in "submission" to them. (Note: the word "Islam" means "to submit"...)
They will also know that we don't WANT to be.
If you ask a Muslim boy why he wants to marry a non-Muslim woman, the reason given will not be the truth. It won't be because of her hair; it won't be because she's "so free in her thinking"!
It will be because he wants to show his own personal dominance over her, and over the western (French) philosophies of "Liberte', et Egalite'." (They kind of have a handle on that whole Fraternite'-part, though.) These philosophies were the founding principles of French Society, right up to the point that they adopted the Euro, which doesn't have the philosophies printed on it. THis is why the Muslims have found it so easy to emigrate into France since it gave up its sovereignty.
Also, this is the way a Muslim boy shows his own personal dominance over the other western philosophies of Christianity.

So, yes.
I agree with the French - who wish to keep their homeland free.
Disallow the head-scarves/mini-burkas. If a woman wears a scarf-that's-just-a-scarf to keep the wind out of her ears, that's her business.

Those who ache for the tyranny of Islam, they need to go back to Morocco, Lebanon, or wherever else they came from.
Then they can kill their daughters without impunity for not wearing gloves, or for being talked to by some other stupid boy, or for the suspicion that she might think Christianity isn't horrible, or for getting pregnant when she's raped by her own brother - even though nothing will happen to HIM...

The Faith Voice | 11:08 am on 4/19/2008

At www.thefaithdebate.com you can discuss this issue, share your opinions with others and get to know what other people have to say. Be a part of the debate!

Anonymous | 12:33 pm on 6/22/2008

why is everyone getting race and religion and culture mixed up??
and biased by the media much? you got the wrong end of the stick.

some of you here are really narrow-mided and making dumb, uneducated assumptions that make you look like a knob. where have you been living?

talk about being unbeleivably biggoted
you'r hatred of islam sickens me. especially knowing that some of you've go no undersatnding of the religion whatsoever.
you don't go slagging all of the other stuff that happens, thats not isalmic do you? and seriously, there's A LOT of that

seriously some of you, go read a book.

Anonymous | 11:24 am on 5/28/2009

AMAZING answer. I agree with you 100%

Christian girl form the uk | 11:46 pm on 9/02/2010

I moved to Kuwait all because of my dad’s job and like many of u above I have those scary ideas of how Muslims are. story cut short, I was about to go ballistic and most of all and I dreaded high school!
a month into school though I realized that I was awfully stupid…I love it here now! Oh and by the way most Kuwaiti girls don’t wear the veil, as they have explained it’s a personal choice, and I do now respect those who wear it. I have so much fun hanging out with my friends now they’re cool and up to date with everything I am now tryn to keep up ! and their families are Muslims and my friends father & both brothers(sometimes) wear the “dishdashah” – Kuwaiti men’s national outfit, and her mother is veiled but all of them are peaceful happy family … far off from what I had in mind ! life here is fun and okay, no1 bugs me about being different, I went to Sharjah and Dubai and Abu Dahbi as well and no one bugged me there either …matter of fact Dubai is the most incredible place ive ever been too ! awesome city !
I dnt think the French have the right to ban veils, it’s the women’s choice and its how they represent their religion ..just as nuns represent Christianity ..
so what if they do wear it or not …if its hurting ur eyes that much just look away !

Anonymous | 12:46 pm on 10/01/2010

Read correctly, the Christian Bible shows that God considers it a shame when a woman uncovers her hair, that this is as if she had shaved her hair off completely; which is also a shame. Bad "scholarly" higher criticism of the Bible (introduced) by evil men infiltrating the church and seminary's that innoculated church leaders agains following the Bible as the Lord expects Christians to. The vast majority of professing Christians have erred because of false leaders and their teachings and will also fall into the pit with these blind leaders. Both Paul and Peter mention how the Lord is concerned with the way we dress, as He looks at whether we are keeping His commands and our hearts; but man looks at the outside for a witness...we are to be good witnesses. Christian women are not to go around concerning themselves with overly beautifying themselves and causing their brother to stumble in his thoughts. Christians in general have been lied to and have not listened to the Holy Spirits leading in so many areas; lasciviousness abounds. I could go on but I need to go to bed, the Lord gives his people rest.

Anonymous | 12:56 pm on 10/01/2010

A true Christian never goes to war or kills anyone end of story. Roman Catholicism is not Christian, neither protestantism. Denominations are carnal. True Christians will forsake this kind of fake fellowship as to not partake of their sins.

Anonymous | 01:03 pm on 10/01/2010

The crusades were not Christian at all. They were conducted by the Black nobility/Royal Houses of Europe. The "Christian" masses (you cannot force a person to accept the Christian faith) were used as porns and if they killed anyone and did not truly repent and commit to the Lord then they were not Christians and not saved. The Moravingians/RHoE believe they are related to Jesus through Mary Magdelene and therefore have rights over the "holy land" and Mary M's ashes (the holy grail)and to hell with anyone who gets in their way. They are Lucifarian and believe he is lord. They plan to reduce the world pop. from 6 bill to 2 bill and will kill to do it, most of us are on their hit list. They control the world and the way most people think.

Anonymous | 01:11 pm on 10/01/2010

Teresa you are right,true faith in Jesus is an all or nothing approach and those who pick and chose are not chosen by Him. Religiosity is fake Christianity which is of the Devil. I believe the whole Bible and Jesus shows us which is for today and which was for BCE. There are no parts of The New Testament that are out-dated now, that's a lie from Satan. Most professing Christians will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven because of their unbelief. When a professing Christian says the head covering is not a seperate head scarf from the hair and a Christian woman can cut her hair short, then they have not believed the Lord Jesus and are not his. I am in the process of working out a covering but are considering something more akin to the muslim veil as it is more modest/less shameful.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.