Because the presumption is that the women in question are being forced to do this and don't want to.

But your solution is to implement a law which punishes the victim, rather then doing anything about their presumed victimizer.

If the women who didn't want to wear the covering didn't want to wear it, what is stopping them from simply not doing it to start with? The answer of course is husband's, brothers, family etc. and probably that they'd be recognized in their community.

But this is someone's religion - a fair bit more important to them then the laws of the state in a lot of cases. So you haven't answered how you're going to protect those women from being targeted and forced to simply never leave the house, if they are being targeted by people who are forcing them to do something they don't want to.

Your law offers no solution to this - and again - implements itself by targeting the apparent victims it proposes to protect with punishment.

Setting aside that the government can stay the hell out of what I choose to wear, this is just a monumentally stupid approach to anything.

Let's stop a backwards custom that is practiced by 30 people with a backwards law that limit's clothing choices for seven Million people.

Because it is a complex cultural issue and banning it probably harms woman further from an already oppressed state. In some cases basically imprisoning them into their homes or forcing them to relocate. No one bothered asking those woman about their thoughts or circumstances.

I don't know, countering an authoritative practice that affects women's choice with another authoritative practice that affects women's choice kinda just seems dumb.

So much for "a woman's right to choose"

i think your point is valid but still shouldn't enter the fray.

This is about swiss nationality and customs. Not about women's rights.

Just like you don't go to your greek neighbor's dinner party wearing a turkish flag, there are things you don't do when you are the guest at someone else's party.

The burka represents a lot of very nasty things, in countries that the overwhelming majority (60%) believe 911 was totally OK and beheading or stoning minorities is OK.

The fact is, you don't frown on people because they are spitting on some ideal of freedom. You frown of them because they don't get the basic rules of decency.

My house. My rules.

In what way does it limit women's rights?

Have you ever been to the beach? Have you noticed that in many western countries, all the men have bare chests and all the women are covering their breasts? Does this custom limit women's rights? Providing that women have the same legal right as men to go bare chested, as far as I can tell no rights are being infringed.

But maybe you disagree, do you think a law banning the wearing of bikinis by women would be a victory for women's rights?