Cabinet Minister, Jack Straw, has voiced the opinion that he would prefer his veiled constituents to remove such when talking
with him as he finds it difficult to communicate when he has only the eyes as a point of reference.
Not an unreasonable request, I believe, as the Human face is an amazing device for visually communicating ones feelings when thoughts can often be hard to express in words alone. Even more so if the level of language refinement differs between the two speaking.
Muslim groups have since taken up the cry that this is an infringement of the Islamic
religion.
Yet the Koran calls only for the covering of womens hair and probably for practical reasons being as it was predominately women who would be spending the day preparing meals and nobody likes to find a hair in their food.
I would argue that the veil has little to do with religion. It is instead a device for sexual repression.
The Christian Nun who voluntarily devotes her life to being a Wife of God and forsaking the pleasures of the flesh, but doubts her own resilience, wears a dowdy uniform. The primary purpose of which is to prevent sexual interest from the male and thus secure her
chastity. The Nun could just as readily wear high heels and Mini skirt or even go naked, as God supposedly intended, but realises she may succumb to the attentions of men. Therefor the wearing of the Habit is a logical step.
The Hijab and Veil is a severe version of the Nun's attire, without protecting chastity for the glory of God but for preventing the adultery of wifes and the promiscuity of daughters.
Fortunatelythis says more about the insecurities of the male than it ever does about the religion.