religion offers no justification for its exemption from the behaviors, mandates, laws, and/or cultural expectations of a democratic majority.

islam has proven itself to be the source of fanatical, rabid, violent, and deadly extremism, and that countries should wish to protect themselves from its spread into their borders should scarcely be regarded as shocking to anyone who can understand reality.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

No one else in the “civilized” world is allowed to cover themselves from head to toe. People aren’t even allowed to wear hoodies in stores. It’s a security issue, so why should one group be exempted from the rules? The answer is: They should NOT be exempted from the rules. France would be well within their rights to ban the burqa.

Furthermore, these women are most likely being forced to wear these insane articles of clothing by men following their misogynistic religion. By not banning this practice, they would be condoning misogyny.

“Freedom” to view the world through a tiny slit. GIVE ME A BREAK.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

Liberty, equality and fraternity.

Let’s break it down.

Fraternity is a body of people associated for a common purpose.
Is this purpose religion or is the triptych about the society that may incorporate any and all religions?
To remain fair with the many conflicting religous laws a logical and secular approach must be taken.
It can easily be assumed that a secular law system acts as a foundation that allows the differing religions to apply their specific laws as extensions to it but such is not always the case.
A logical law system will naturally conflict with most religions as they are often sexually bias amongst other imbalances.

Equality.
The burqa and any similar clothing are designed to retain a high level of propriety, effectively an everyday personal censorship of the individual.
We are no different in this respect as we censor many portions of our bodies.
We are accustomed to identifying each other by our faces in a world where more and more information about our lives is being recorded and used in many ways, most for the better flow of everyday society.
For everyday interaction it would be inefficient to take a fingerprint to identify a person you meet in public, thus it is an accepted social standard that the face is used to identify each individual.

Liberty.
The freedom to live without restraint would be an accurate translation of this term but in a social setting compromise must be made and these rules must be fair, a logical morality if you will.
We choose to censor ourselves as we are given a minimum standard of decent exposure, but what of those that wish to further censor themselves?
Covering ones face is beyond decent censorship in that it denies another individual with sight their main form of identifying another individual, as is the natural majority and therefore the assumed default stance.
Modern culture associates masked individuals with those that have something to hide from the society for selfish or nefarious purposes.

Does liberty and equality in the maintenance of fraternity give burqa wearing women the right to assume that their god endorses an environment where their liberty is limited in allowing them to assert their religion is not equal thus creating a fraternity based on denying them identity?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

I do think that the burqa is a sign of repression/opression.  However, to ban it is to give strength to the fundamentalists - they must be delighted!  The Catholic Church is imploding rapidly in Ireland (my home country) without being supressed by the government.  Any supression of religion makes martyrs and gives them strength.  Ignore them and they will die out naturally.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

Banning burqa is definitely a first step toward reducing the influence of 7th century dogma where misogyny was one of the bricks of those backward belief systems. Free countries should do even more, they should ban public practicing of all kind of religions as well recoil all such influence from schools. If people really want dogma, it should be allowed only as an individual practice, but again limiting its influence that may cause harm to individuals from e.g. family that wants to part away from such dogmas (here I mean generally on banning honor killing, forced marriage, dogmatic punishments…). Free countries have right to limit backward ideologies and advance those whose influence strengthen very foundation of freedom, free expression, democracy, literacy and all other things things that make us better.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

much has been said about burqa and this is actually one of the most influencial beliefs in the older times. there should be a strong will for the people to develop their beliefs and ideologies…

france

You don't have permission to flag this entry.