Articles A and B address the conflicting opinions on the Burqa ban. In article A written by Jean-Francois Coupe, he pushes for the implementation of the ban, however in Article B written by Nabila Ramdani, she strongly opposes the ban. If someone were to formulate an opinion on the burqa ban based of these articles they would be forming it on misinformation . Neither of these articles properly represent the perceived pros and cons of the ban due to their faulty evidence and reasoning.
In her article, “Don’t Follow France’s Burqa Ban. It Has Curbed Liberty and Justice”, Nabila Ramdani claims the ban stifles freedom, and allows the persecution and stigmatization of Muslim women. Ramdani supports her claim with flawed pieces of evidence, the first …show more content…
However there is not enough data supporting her four pieces of anecdotal evidence such as statistics that compare the number of attacks before and after the ban. Her evidence is specifically picked to evict an emotional response from the reader and detract attention from the anecdotally nature and unclear reasoning that do not back up her claim. Another one of her prominent claims states that women in these garments do not make others uncomfortable or feel unsafe. To support her claim she creates a piece of evidence about how no, “...veiled woman in the National Health Service...has unsettled patients…” and there is no “...teacher who refuses to take of her niqab in front of children when asked…”(Ramdani 3) She continues on to mention that women will …show more content…
However, as when digging through his polished writing, it becomes clear that is evidence and reasoning are sub par. For instance he claims that these “face coverings” create safety issues because of securities reliance on cameras. Although it may seem logical, this ban is on burqas and niqabs, not masks. Coupe provides only one incidence of the use of a burqa in a robbery, and there is not enough data to predict that it may happen again, which certainly does not warrant drastic measure of a burqa ban. Even if the ban is in place, robbers can use ski masks or other methods of concealing their face, which effectively renders the ban useless. Coupe’s other argument claims that the ban displays France's ideals of freedom. He believes that banning the burqa is a compromise that is necessary to live together as a community. In fact in response to the idea that the ban is against freedom, Jean-Francois equates “...The fact that people are prohibited from strolling down Fifth Avenue in the nude…” to being banned from, “wearing headgear that fully covers the face…” because neither of those, “constitute as a fundamental liberty”(Cope 2). His reasoning is flawed, he is comparing a religious garment being banned to nudism being banned which in no sense is tied to any religion, and is generally viewed as a shameful action. He implies that the burqa and niqab are something shameful. Although this is
In her article, “Don’t Follow France’s Burqa Ban. It Has Curbed Liberty and Justice”, Nabila Ramdani claims the ban stifles freedom, and allows the persecution and stigmatization of Muslim women. Ramdani supports her claim with flawed pieces of evidence, the first …show more content…
However there is not enough data supporting her four pieces of anecdotal evidence such as statistics that compare the number of attacks before and after the ban. Her evidence is specifically picked to evict an emotional response from the reader and detract attention from the anecdotally nature and unclear reasoning that do not back up her claim. Another one of her prominent claims states that women in these garments do not make others uncomfortable or feel unsafe. To support her claim she creates a piece of evidence about how no, “...veiled woman in the National Health Service...has unsettled patients…” and there is no “...teacher who refuses to take of her niqab in front of children when asked…”(Ramdani 3) She continues on to mention that women will …show more content…
However, as when digging through his polished writing, it becomes clear that is evidence and reasoning are sub par. For instance he claims that these “face coverings” create safety issues because of securities reliance on cameras. Although it may seem logical, this ban is on burqas and niqabs, not masks. Coupe provides only one incidence of the use of a burqa in a robbery, and there is not enough data to predict that it may happen again, which certainly does not warrant drastic measure of a burqa ban. Even if the ban is in place, robbers can use ski masks or other methods of concealing their face, which effectively renders the ban useless. Coupe’s other argument claims that the ban displays France's ideals of freedom. He believes that banning the burqa is a compromise that is necessary to live together as a community. In fact in response to the idea that the ban is against freedom, Jean-Francois equates “...The fact that people are prohibited from strolling down Fifth Avenue in the nude…” to being banned from, “wearing headgear that fully covers the face…” because neither of those, “constitute as a fundamental liberty”(Cope 2). His reasoning is flawed, he is comparing a religious garment being banned to nudism being banned which in no sense is tied to any religion, and is generally viewed as a shameful action. He implies that the burqa and niqab are something shameful. Although this is