Opinion - Letters to the Editor   

Veil controversy

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams' warning to the British Government against interfering in people's right to wear visible faith symbols such as veils, crosses or turbans (Oct. 28) — in the context of the latest controversy surrounding Aishah Azmi's suspension by her school — carries no weight. Teaching involves communication between the teacher and students. When the teacher can see the faces of the students, how can she deny them their right to see her face? The right to wear faith symbols cannot be extended to wearing the veil in a classroom by a teacher or student.

C. Govindan,
Hosur

* * *

The veil has gone to the realm of unreal. In the past, even Hindu women were barred from coming out of their homes without covering their faces. They were not allowed to meet visitors in their own homes. Such practices are no longer part of the Hindu custom though they may be in practice in some rural areas. Similarly, the veil was a necessity in the olden times. Insisting on wearing it today is akin to insisting on travelling by a bullock cart in an era of jet planes.

M. Srinivasan,
Chennai

* * *

The burqa is not an issue as long as it does not affect anyone. But sometimes, it becomes necessary to see a burqa-clad woman's face. As a supervisor in a nationalised bank, I had to pass a self-drawn cheque tendered by a woman in a burqa. As her signature was different from the specimen signature in our records, I insisted that she identify herself so that I could match her face with the photograph available with us. The man who accompanied her resisted the request and cited her ill-health as the reason for variance in her signature. When a woman colleague took her aside for identification, we discovered that it was a case of impersonation.

At least Muslim women who have dealings with the public should be more practical in their thinking.

K.B.D. Sharma,
Davangere, Karnataka

* * *

Issues such as wearing a burqa should not be hyped so much by the media. It is a matter of personal choice rather than a religious compulsion. There are many Sikhs who cut their hair. There are many Jains who eat non-vegetarian food. Why should the actions of Muslims alone be seen as controversial?

Geetanjali Nenwani,
Bhopal

* * *

It has become a fashion for politicians like Jack Straw to say something against Muslims to remain relevant in the media. Today, he has asked Muslim women to remove the veil from their faces; tomorrow he may ask Muslim men to remove their beard. At this rate, he may refuse to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh if he calls on him in traditional dress.

Mr. Straw's comments on the veil reveal his contempt for other cultures. One who cannot appreciate and respect the way people of different cultures conduct their lives is uncultured. For the record, I am a practising Muslim and I don't have a beard. Nor does my wife wear a burqa.

M.S. Mohammed Thameezuddeen,
Singapore

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

A crisis in Bangladesh
The emerging transnationals
The Asian giants and Latin America
Time to tune up the Congress machine
Scholarships for Pakistani students
An investment in our collective future
Sandinista comeback alarms U.S.
When news value overrides reader sensitivities
On domestic violence
Veil controversy

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu