4 - The Michigan Daily - Friday, March 5, 2004 OPINION 4 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 opinion. michigandaily.com tothedaily@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JORDAN SCHRADER Editor in Chief JASON Z. PESICK Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. NOTABLE QUOTABLE Iknow in my heart that President Bush failed the 3,000 Americans that died there on that day." - Patty Cassaza, whose husband died in the Sept. 11 attacks, commenting on the new series of ads being run by the Bush campaign, as reported yesterday by CNN. 54a * SAM BUTLER THE SOAPBOX .- Ashcroft and me HUSSAIN RAHIM NARCOLEPTIC INSOMNIA T he personal is politi- With a name like Hussain Rahim, perhaps I Next step was questioning about what I did cal. After a brief should be a little less sardonic with the airport at the stamped locations on my passport. respite from the gray lady, but as private as I am, I'd rather not divulge With passport in hand he said, "When was doldrums of ice and bore- what used to be my personal life and activities, the last time you went to Grenada?" dom it was time to return to but like a deal-cutting junkie. So she put my "I don't know, you have my passport in your the magic of Michigan. passport in the little terrorism baggie and said, hand, look at the stamp." Upon the return to Ameri- "Go right on over to C.C.A." I was maybe one step away from the can soil, everyone has to go Ok, well, what the fuck is C.C.A.? Capture lawyer-free, government-sponsored boat through all the usual checks Crazy Arabs or some other inane acronym? ride to Guantanamo Bay. to make sure they weren't So I go off in this little room to the side of it Although I don't memorize passport stamps, hanging out on farms, swapping viruses or plot- all, and I wait for my name to be called. I reach I sure as hell knew the last time I was in Grena- ting with terrorist cells. Upon my reception at the front desk and inquire to what it is exactly da. The reason I can still recall the date is Immigration by an angry-looking white woman, C.C.A. stands for. It's hard to keep up with all because shortly after I came back, I remember perhaps my spirits were still a bit high for what I the new governmental agencies. He tells me that getting off the train at the stop before the World was about to encounter. "It's just the name for who brought you here." Trade Center and then watching a trail of smoke I step up and hand her my passport, and she "So then what is this place?" come over the Brooklyn Bridge with great con- asks me to take off my hat, as part of what I "Oh, this is airport security." fusion, only to later encounter the burnt flesh imagine is the turban-check portion of re-entry. Didn't buy it. Now I didn't even know what I smell and rubble that was downtown Manhattan. She inquires, "Is this you?" To be met with an "I was being questioned by. I have seen terrorism. I know what it does sure hope so," which got the cold stare of her The paradox was undeniable, yet amus- and I know its reality. I also know America. Or already annoying face. Please don't make jokes ing. When I went away for my vacation, I at least I know an America. A retired man I met in airports; they're the new funeral homes. So I was sure to locate the U.S. embassy just in over the vacation shared with me his reasons for quickly amended that to "Um, yes, that's me." case. As I sat there, I wondered whom I permanently leaving the United States. I coun- As she reads through the stamps she says, could call and what the embassy could do. tered his reasoning with what I liked about "You've been to some unusual places." Then I realized, "Hot shit, I am in Ameri- America and why I saw myself living there and That was a little too dumb to even ca." This is the country of my birth and enjoying its remaining freedoms - all pre- respond to. citizenship. Ain't no embassy left to call. shakedown of course. "So why are you going to all these places?" Then, in good old TV courtroom fashion, he This tale is very anticlimactic because More silence. shot off a list of questions about my biography I'm clearly here now, safe and sound, but now I said "Are you serious? Is that a real ques- that I didn't even know the answers to. a little more experienced and world-weary tion I'm supposed to answer?" "Where do you live?" than before. Maybe for the next trip I can stay With some indignation, she says "Well, "Where do you go to school?" away longer until my America comes back. yes, it is." "What do you do there?" "Well, I like to travel. That's still "Do you work? Is that how you paid for Rahim can be reached at allowed, isn't it?" your trip?" hrahim@umich.edu. Forget freedom fries, let's talk scarfheads SHABINA S. KHATRI IT's ALL.. GOOD IN THF HOOD As a symbol of inter- national friendship forged during the American Revolution, France gave the United States the Statue of Liberty in 1886. For more than a hundred years, we've looked to Lady Liberty, the "Moth- er of Exiles," to represent the democracy and freedom we so strongly wish for (wish upon?) the world. How can she not be an inspiration, with her whole: "Give me your tired, your poor, / Your hud- dled masses yearning to breathe free, / The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. / Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, / I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" It's fun to pretend, isn't it? If Lady Liberty could speak today, she would sadly tell France that it has indeed lost its way. On Wednesday, the French Senate voted 276 to 20 to prohibit "signs and dress that con- spicuously show the religious affiliation of stu- dents" in its public schools. The vote paralleled last month's overwhelming approval by the equally conservative-filled National Assembly (494-36). The last formality rests with avid supporter President Jacques Chirac, who is expected to sign the measure into law within the next two weeks. Though the ban includes Jewish skullcaps, large crucifixes and possibly Sikh turbans, many criticize the measure as a thinly veiled (pardon the pun) attempt to stanch the nation's growing Muslim population. Still, most of the French bigwigs contend that the ban is merely designed to preserve the sacred secularism promised to the people by their constitution. The bizarre part is that Article 1, which declares France "a Republic, indivisible, secular, democratic and social," actually affirms free- dom of religion in the very next breath, stating that France must ensure the "equality of citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion. It shall respect all beliefs." It looks like the founding fathers understood that the practice of religion in society would not prevent the application of secularism in government. But now, government is putting its grubby old paws all over that sacred constitution's respect for all origins, races and religions. What's going on here? We've got a sworn democracy that gives out metal women to prove its commitment to liberty - forbidding its chil- dren the freedom to express their religious beliefs at school? How, exactly, has a student's headscarf/skullcap/crucifix threatened secular law or disturbed the learning process? Don't tell me you can't complete a math problem because there's a turban in your face. In 1989, the French Constitutional Council declared it illegal to establish unconditional school bans on religious garb. What changed in the last 15 years to prompt this blatant turnaround? Well, Sept. 11, for one thing. The backlash Muslims saw here in the U.S. was nothing com- pared to France, whose National Consultative Commission on Human Rights has documented numerous cases of harassment, adding that the number of crimes reported "fall well under the real number" of incidences that have occurred against French Muslims. With around five mil- lion Muslims, or 8 percent of the population, France is home to the largest Muslim communi- ty in Western Europe. That growth does not sit well with many of France's higher-ups, who see it as trouble brewing in a "fundamentalist" sense. As Bernard Stasi, head of the French commission on secularism, eloquently put it in a December discussion about the merits of the ban: "We must be lucid - there are in France some behaviors which cannot be tolerated. There are without any doubt forces in France which are seeking to destabilize the republic, and it is time for the republic to act" By act, Stasi must have meant weeding out the droves of extremist Muslims, Christians, Jews and Sikhs who have attempted to sport their religious symbols at school, right? But according to The London Times, French govern- ment statistics show that no more than 2,000 out of 1.8 million Muslim schoolgirls wore a hijab in 2002. To the burgeoning Muslim population, the ban, then, is more a symbolic snub than a sweeping act of oppression. But symbolism smarts - and spreads. I'm afraid it's not all good in the hood any- more, folks. According to CNN, last month's public opinion polls indicated about 70 percent of the French were in favor of the ban on reli- gious symbols. It added that even in the French Muslim community, Muslim women favored a ban 49 percent to 43 percent, presumably because many female students were bullied into donning the covering by their family members. In Germany and Belgium, similar legislation to ban hijabs is on the table, and such restrictive measures already exist to varying degrees in Singapore and Turkey. With more than a billion followers, Islam is certainly not a monolith, and the debate over hijab has always been a rich and passionate one within the Muslim community. I say keep that debate where it belongs - with the people - and not with national governments, where the headscarf controversy has become an ugly, politicized and heartbreaking display of bigotry and intolerance. We spend so much time criti- cizing third-world countries for their "back- wards" ways, and it's hypocritical and insulting to look the other way while a country like France pays lip-service to ideals like liberty and democracy. Enough is enough. Lady Liberty is turning over in her grave. Old-school journalist Dorothy Thompson had it right when she said, "It is not the fact of liberty but the way in which liberty is exercised that ultimately determines whether liberty itself survives." Khatri can be reached at khatris@umich.edu. 4 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Public opinion does not justify a constitutional marriage amendment TO THE DAILY: I am writing in response to Thursday's front- page article (Critics of same-sex marriages speak out, 03/04/04) in which Robert Raham, co-chair of Young Americans for Freedom, supported his opposition to gay marriage with, "marriage obn lAh __ar n mna nt] - _a unm n ing, does not justify the denial of rights. Mar- riage for homosexuals is a matter of ethics; it cannot be denied because a plurality is afraid of granting equal rights to other minorities. Morals and ethics are separate. One's morals may not permit homosexual marriages, but that is of no consequence, because ethics demand equality. JOHN WOOSTER LSA freshman Reader: Where is the dom member Jeston La Croix, whose main argument is "I don't feel it's acceptable." It seems to be one of two arguments that were pre- sented, along with "God said so." Neither of these arguments lead me to give any credit to those making them. My second point about this issue is about the media, which announces that most Ameri- cans are against any kind of gay marriage or civil union. I have many conservative, Republi- can and religious friends, and when I ask them about this topic, they all say things like "Oh, I I canaiuaies act~ountaoie iur I neir ~UULI~ L7 LJiV >