Today, the veil debate is renewed since the number of Muslim population in well-developed countries, such as the USA, is constantly growing, while the veil has already become a symbol of Muslim women. At the same time, the veil evokes quite controversial reaction from the total rejection as a religious symbol and symbol offending emancipated women, while on the other hand, it is important for Muslim women and many people stand on the ground that they can wear whatever they want. In such context, the following passage is quite thought-provoking: “Moreover, since this [USA] is a country where Muslims are a minority, one anxiety over the veil is automatically removed ”“ the idea certainly present in Muslim majority countries, that if Islamists come to power, the veil might be imposed on all of us by law”ť (Ahmed, 156).
In fact, this sentence mirrors the quintessence of the difference between the position of Muslims in democratic countries and Muslim countries, where there is a risk of Islamist radicals coming to power. To put it more precisely, it is obvious that modern western society, which is democratic by its nature, is open for the debate whether the veil is acceptable for Muslim women or it should be banned. In such a way, there is a public discussion, which, nevertheless, leaves Muslim women the right to choose whether to wear the veil or not. In contrast, in countries where radical, undemocratic can be established, there are no public discussions, while rights of women as well as men are not really taken into consideration. Instead, the ruling regime simply establishes rules, which all people should obey.
Thus, the democratic non-Muslim countries can be more tolerant to rights of Muslim women and men than undemocratic, radical Islamist regimes.