![[A photo of a woman in a hijab, with a red “no” slash overtop]](https://www.canadianatheist.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/religious-accessories-bans-90x90.jpg)
It’s been a long series, but I think I’ve debunked every argument made for religious accessories bans, and shown the very idea to be absurd, anti-secular, and offensive to human rights. There’s only thing left to discuss: the idea of limiting religious accessories bans to people in positions of coercive … Continue reading
Here’s your Canadian Atheist Weekly Update for 27-Apr-2019 to 3-May-2019.
Today we’re going to do something a little different. Rather than pointing out how wrong religious accessories bans are, I’m going to pretend we actually decide to implement one. Let’s see how that works out.
This series is about religious accessories bans, and technically a ban on facial coverings isn’t a religious accessories ban. Or is it? Spoiler alert: It usually is.
The religious accessories most often at issue in ban discussions are modesty garments worn by women. They are usually condemned by feminists, and thus, the “logic” goes, banning them would be a feminist action. That’s not how feminism works, though.
When religious accessories come up for debate, one of the inevitable arguments made for banning them is that they’re “symbols of oppression”. It’s such a common justification that I felt it worth pulling out and tackling separately.