The Muslim Times has a nuance position of promoting Hijab and modest dressing on the one hand while upholding the ideal of secularism and separation of church and state on the other
The legislation was passed by the Bundestag, Germany’s parliament, on Thursday evening.
“The state has a duty to present itself in an ideologically and religiously neutral manner,” the text of the law states, as cited by AFP.
The ban applies to public servants, including election officials, as well as military personnel and staff working in the judiciary.
“[The ban] obliges officials and soldiers not to hide their faces while performing their duties or during direct fulfillment of their tasks,” a statement on the Bundestag’s website says.
However, the legislation does contain some exceptions. For example, military personnel and public servants may wear a full-face veil to protect themselves from infections. Police officers can also cover their faces in order to conceal their identity.
The new legislation also brings changes to existing laws concerning IDs.
“According to [the new bill], a person who presents their ID should be identified by matching their face with the [ID] photo”
German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere said, if migrants are to be socially integrated, it is essential that the country “makes clear and communicates [its] values and the limits of [its] tolerance to other cultures.”
Islamic head and face coverings have long been controversial in Europe, where they are often seen as incompatible with secular values. In 2011, France was the first European country to impose a ban on full-face coverings. Belgium soon followed suit.
Apart from the legislation on veils, the Bundestag also introduced a package of fresh security measures, one of which would allow authorities to put electronic bracelets on people considered a security threat, if approved by a judge.
Another states that Germany will implement EU rules requiring an inter-country exchange of information on flight passengers.
Why do religious groups themselves not discourage what is a tradition and cultural rather than a religious requirement? Change from within is better than something imposed from without. But there seems a certain determination and stubborness not to change, even if it is in their interests, instead of creating social apartheid. If we want to live together in harmony we have to adjust to those amongst whom we live. That seems to be an accepted rule.