Recently, France's Education Ministry has decided to ban the outfit known as "abaya," a loose-fitting, full-length tunic worn by some Muslim students, from state-run schools in the country. Starting from Sept. 4, the first day of the new academic year, donning an abaya and participating in classes will be considered a violation.
This has happened before in France. In 2004, France introduced a controversial headscarves ban in educational institutions before banning full-face veils in public in 2010, sparking anger in its 5 million-strong Muslim community. Alongside headscarves, wearing Christian symbols and kippahs (yarmulke) is forbidden in public schools. In 2010, another law was enacted, banning Muslim women from wearing veils in public spaces.
In a recent television interview, French President Emmanuel Macron's Education Minister Gabriel Attal, a ban proponent, said, "Secularism means the freedom to emancipate oneself through school."
Describing the abaya as "a religious gesture, aimed at testing the resistance of the republic toward the secular sanctuary that school must constitute, he added: "You enter a classroom, you must not be able to identify the religion of the students by looking at them."
Could you please examine the shallowness of these statements?
What does saying, "Secularism means the freedom to emancipate oneself through school" even mean?
Is it possible that the 34-year-old minister, driven by the stress of a live broadcast, improvised these remarks on the spot?
We could easily indulge in pages of mockery regarding the minister's words that bore semblance to aphorism attempts by aspiring philosophy students. Atell's Macron-like style further simplifies our task.
However, the issue at hand is gravely important since these ignorant remarks, reminiscent of the ramblings of senile fascists, are coming from the mouth of the education minister, affecting the lives of millions of Muslims. The words that Attel hailed as a potential future political leader of France will hold relevance for the thousands of young female students who will set foot in school tomorrow morning.
What is your intention, sir?
Do citizens of the republic need to possess the right to determine their manner of attire? Should those who hold differing perspectives or choose distinct clothing fade away? Would it truly enhance French democracy if they confined themselves to their homes and withdrew from public view?
Is the concept of secularism about intervening in the dress choices of citizens exercising their constitutional rights?
If so, according to what criteria?
What is the norm here?
To what extent does an ideal secular state permit aspects of dressing or unveiling?
Could you suggest a resource on this subject?
I'm examining your background, sir, and I notice you're affiliated with leftist ideologies. How do you reconcile your history of advocating for freedom with your apparent discomfort, openly confessing to being bothered by the sight of students dressed diversely in a classroom by the presence of variety and colors? You must be aware that this kind of scrutiny is observed by fascists worldwide.
Were you influenced by the distinctive perspectives of your role model, Macron?
By the way, a few words for the BBC, the channel that reported the banning news: It's worth noting that even in a media organization claiming to uphold liberties and the rights of minorities, this news is presented with a reminder of the tragic incident in 2020 when a teacher was killed after showing caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad to his students.
Given that you've strayed so far from the universal principles of journalism you've passionately upheld over the years, could you provide a clearer explanation? What are you trying to convey?
In fact, by associating this year's tragic incident of a 50-year-old female teacher being fatally stabbed in France with a murder that took place three years ago, it's evident you're trying to send a message.
Are you insinuating that these veiled female students are somehow suspicious as well?
Oh, you cunning fascists.
