Why the French ban on burqas is bad for everyone (including Canada)

As of today it is no longer legal for women in France to wear full (face covering) burquas. While some may try and argue that this measure is needed for security (which is laughable in itself) the fact that the penalties for being convicted of the "crime" include mandatory citizenship classes point to a different reason, namely forced assimilation of a minority through religious persecution.

Currently the total Muslim population of 6 million in France makes up slightly less than 10% of the population and the number of women this will actually affect will be only a small percentage of that, estimates as low as a couple of thousand have been made. In fact some have claimed that most of the women that this law will affect are tourists and visitors from other countries shopping and visiting France. So the direct effect that this law is most likely to have for France is a hit to GDP.

On the plus side it's not clear how much enforcement of this law is going to really happen. While some protestors have been arrested there is concern among police officers that trying to enforce the law would lead to civil unrest. Patrice Ribeiro, head of the Synergie (national) police union said "The law will be very difficult to apply on certain estates, I can't see police going to book dozens of veiled women doing their shopping in Venissieux or in Trappes."

All the same persecution of religious minorities (and that is what this is), is shameful. I personally don't understand, or agree with, a culture, religion or set of beliefs that feels women should be covered in public but, I do believe people should be free to live their lives in accordance with their religious beliefs. That is why, preventing freedom of religious expression, especially in a "Western" democratic country is a bad thing for all of us. If the standards of an open democracy include laws that discriminate against a minority then there is one less moral barrier to other countries, including Canada, having laws that also discriminate against their own minorities.

Besides the "slippery slope" problem there is an additional threat to Canada and other countries as a result of this action and it concerns France's involvement in foreign affairs including Afghanistan and Libya. France has a presence of 4,000 soldiers in Afghanistan (more than Canada) and led efforts to establish no-fly zones over Libya. In both of these cases, Canada and other involved nations have been involved in the name of establishing (hopefully) peaceful democracies rather than militaristic-pseudo religious dictatorships.

Whether this effort is working or not or will eventually be effective or not the idea of being involved in these actions to bring peace and freedoms to the peoples of these countries is a moral high ground that one can argue from against those who might claim that these efforts are really about western "Christian" countries engaged in a modern crusade against Islam. This French law damages the moral high ground around these actions because it call into question the very nature of why western countries are in these countries.

In what should not be a great surprise Al-Queda has already threatened action against France for the passing and enforcement of this law. While this group is certainly the epitome of extremist views it wouldn't be surprising, or even difficult to understand if Muslim citizens in France, Afghanistan or Libya questioned what the real purpose of western involvement in these countries is. Like the law itself it's a shame and worse may expose Canadian soldiers and citizens to greater risks because of it.

If there is one thing that the global age has taught us so far it's that we are all, for better or worse, in this together. What happens in one country will affect us when we go abroad and more importantly sometimes here in our country as well. As a fellow member of a group of countries that claim to stand for freedom, peace and liberty Canada should implore France to remove this odious law as quickly as possible. For the good of France, for the good of Canada, for the good of everyone.