Burkha

Tom G. Palmer I think I know where he was coming from. The Burkha that covers the face entirely and leaves nothing to be seen is used as a form of enslavement of women in some regions, where it's not a choice. If she wears it because she fears a beating (or worse) it's not free. The problem is that, unlike a hijab or a niqab or a scarf, it covers any evidence that would indicate whether it is freely worn or not, such as black eyes. If there were people walking around with slave collars that delivered painful shocks and someone else holding the chain to which it is connected, it might cause people to think about whether that is a voluntary arrangement. It was a foolish thing to say, but the "full burkha" is used in some countries, not as a form of expression, but as a means of enslavement. (In some European countries with ghettos some women complain that they are not, in fact, free to choose what to wear and that they are brutally assaulted by enforcers if they deviate from what is imposed on them. Moreover, "leaving" is not an easy option, because they are sometimes tracked down and murdered in "honor killings.") How to protect religious freedom and ensure that people are not being coerced is not always obvious in all contexts. This was a blunder, but it was not, I think, merely an expression of bigotry.
Category:Planks from elsewhere