BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium

Subject: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: gnu
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 03:59 PM

Here.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 04:22 PM

At some point there are security issues, with full burkas, veils etc. that could disguise almost anything..and there could be legitimate safety issues around machinery, flames etc., but a simple headscarf, yarmulke, turban etc...are we so intolerant and afraid of religious cooties that we can't handle that?

And spare me rantings about how it subjugates women. We can't sort all that out and some of it is quite voluntary by the women and some affects men more than women, turbans etc...and we should be looking for more modesty in public dress, not less.

It makes me want to go out and get a veil. I did have a scarf on hand at one time to wear if necessary. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 05:55 PM

Why burkas, when mirror sunglasses (as worn by rich men's goons as long as I can remember) never elicited a peep of protest? Dark windows on limousines?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 05:57 PM

Well, before all the usual MC BS bigoted hysteria gets going... angels rush in and all that...

Cultural: When one visits an area where such a practice (whatever that practice is viewed as by the visitors) is the culture, the old saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" seems good advice.

So when Western women visit an area where wearing such visually blocking costume is the norm, they mostly comply out of respect for that culture - it puts people there at their ease.

So why, when in the West, where the normal culture is to inspire fear and distrust when faces, most especially EYES are concealed (due to DIFFERING HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL reasons), is it so wrong to ask for a little cultural respect in return?

My mum often wore a scarf covering her hair in the 1950s and 60s - it meant that she could go out without needing to spend ages getting her hair 'right', and also was quite 'trendy and fashionable' at the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 08:01 PM

If our teenagers dress like ladies of the evening, no offense to either party, should immigrant teens have to also?

I don't think we have to take off our clothes so others can feel at ease not wearing their's.

I don't think it works the other way. I think modesty should be respected..not so much that other safety and security issues are breached, but so what if someone does not want to look at someone in a beanie or turban? So what? But to tell a young woman that she essentialy has to expose herself, which is what she is raised to feel like she is doing is nuts. Where does it stop? Can nuns not wear their habits? Hare Krishnas not wear orange in case someone gets frightened by their religion?    I don't believe anything goes, but it is crazy to let people take so many of their clothes off that they are indecent but not let them put on more than the average person. And I do respect the fact that it would be easy for a terrorist or bank robber to wear a burka and commit terrible crimes..that is my only concern with this issue. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 09:04 PM

MG you have a history of anti-sex posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 09:38 PM

Of course, the key to the whole thing is just to stamp out religion: The we can live as one...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Gurney
Date: 29 Apr 10 - 11:51 PM

I would suppose that this measure is to make sure that the surveillance cameras that abound in some places are actually of some use!
Banks and other institutions (here, which is not Holland) won't let people in with motorcycle helmets that obscure the face, so I expect this is more of the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: mg
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:44 AM

So who is next? Do they have Mormon girls with their lavender dresses and puffed sleeves? Amish women with their polka dot scarves? Or is that Mennonite? Catholic schoolgirls in their ugly plaid jumpers and white oxford shoes? Hawaaians in mu-mus? I think it is nuts, except for valid security reasons, to make women wear fewer clothes or less covering clothes than they are comfortable with, or that their religion requires of them. Jewish women with wigs? Where does it stop?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Ralphie
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:30 AM

Dear oh dear.
All we are asking for is to be able to see someones face.
Is that too much to ask?
Turbans, Headscarves, Mini skirts, Kilts, Kaftans....whatever.
Absolutely fine.
Not being able to see someones face is rather unsettling.
What/Who lies behind the mask?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:52 AM

Of course, the key to the whole thing is just to stamp out religion: The we can live as one...

Like the Soviets did.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 11:32 AM

To mg the London "Bomber" who escaped and was finally extradicted from Italy escaped to Europe via the Eurostar through the Channel Tunnel wearing? What was it again? Oh that's right a Bhurka.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Leadfingers
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:03 PM

Surely the Burqua is NOT Demanded by the religion but is purely a Cultural idea from SOME Moslem areas !

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: pdq
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:15 PM

...Douglas Murray, director of the think tank The Centre for Social Cohesion (said): "People shouldn't have the right to hide themselves away in society," he says. "Cutting yourself off from society is threatening when we have known terrorists to try to escape wearing a burka. Men who said they had to wear balaclavas would be very unlikely to be allowed into banks or to travel on most public transport. Ask yourself this: can you imagine asking the time or for directions from a woman in a burka?"

To Murray, Sarkozy is showing "moral leadership", unlike the "spineless" British politicians who would never dare to reflect the majority view. To do so would risk accusations of committing an offence against religious belief. As he, as well as many Muslims, have pointed out, the Koran says nothing about how women should dress, apart from calling for modesty. The call to cover up comes from the hadith – interpretations of the Koran written many years after the death of the Prophet, and largely dictated by prevailing Middle Eastern custom.

"The Koran," says Dr Hasan," says that Muslims should respect local customs." In Britain or France that doesn't have to mean wearing bikinis. A Muslim waitress was last week awarded £3,000 for being asked to wear a revealing dress. Those who do cover their faces should be subject to regulation. "A naturist is free to walk around naked at home, but not down Oxford Street," says Murray. "The same should go for the veil."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:33 PM

It's all western minded racial discrimination fueled by paranoia. This in itself is very dangerous.

Like saying all 17 year old males walking around with hoodies over their heads are all going to stick up a convenience store.

personally I find females wearing burkas rather feminine, intriguing and exotic ... refreshing to see them, as opposed to the baseball hat, pony tailed women wearing sweat pants that I see so much of around here.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:48 PM

Did I not mention twice that I understand and respect the security issues? A full burkha sports many security issues.

So do those huge baggy pants that the teenagers wear...used to conceal guns etc. Although you could conceal a gun, bomb, infectious article under one of the hats the ladies wear to the horse races..or a bowler hat...God knows what could be under those puffy down coats. So I am concerned about security and it has to come first..but some of those lighter veils that some women wear should not be too much of a problem. We have to be smart enough and adult enough to figure out the security issues, preferably before the next bombing, without outlawing the lavendar dresses that might suggest someone is a Mormon out to convert us. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 12:52 PM

I thought the French were going down this route too - the basis being that France was a secular state and the display of public badges of religious allegiance was unconstitutional. Has that died as a plan?

How does either affect the Hassidic (and indeed Freemasons)?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:04 PM

I believe France banned such religeous allegiance from their schools. I can buy that, if it pertains to all in displaying of their religeous allegiance.

Belgium is making it illegal to wearing burka in public. Damned scarry law it is.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: gnu
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:07 PM

sIx... I prefer "the baseball hat, pony tailed women wearing sweat pants". >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: bobad
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:16 PM

Consensus growing on anti-niqab law in Quebec

AFP American Edition | 2010-03-27 22:10:09

Canada's federal government is defending a controversial Quebec bill that seeks to ban Muslim women from wearing face-covering burka and niqab veils in public institutions.

"The law proposed by the Quebec government makes sense," Prime Minister Stephen Harper's spokesman Dimitri Soudas told The Globe and Mail.

But he noted that federal politicians "don't get a vote in provincial assemblies."

The draft bill, presented on Wednesday before the National Assembly of Quebec by Liberal lawmaker Kathleen Weil, the province's justice minister, seeks to ban provincial government employees from wearing the full-face veil at work.

If adopted, the measure would also ban women wearing the burqa or niqab -- veils advocated by ultra-conservative Muslims -- when dealing with provincial services, including educational institutions, private schools receiving government funds, nurseries and health centers.

National Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has also thrown his support behind the bill.

"I think they have found a good balance," he said about Quebec Premier Jean Charest's proposal.

"We watch the Quebec debate with interest," Ignatieff added on the first day of his party's three-day conference.

He was the first federal leader to openly discuss the debate over wearing a full-face veil in public institutions.

The Parti Quebecois has led opposition to the bill, saying it does not go far enough. The party's leader, Pauline Marois, seeks to also ban the hijab, the most common Muslim veil that covers a woman's hair and neck.

French speaking Quebec's debate comes as France has been caught up in a series of controversies that have highlighted its unease with Islam in a strictly secular society.

President Nicolas Sarkozy's government is drafting legislation to ban wearing of the full Islamic veil and is sponsoring a debate on national identity that has exposed fears about immigration in the country home to Europe's biggest Muslim minority.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:46 PM

I'm pleased to see that the usual bigots support the Belgian racists, who hate each other so much that they can't put up a government, but can at least agree that they hate a few harmless women more than each other.

No ones answered yet: if you ban burkas, why not ban tinted windows on vehicles and dark glasses? why not balaclavas?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:48 PM

gnu ... I knew you would make a reply on that one ! .... :)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 01:57 PM

Let me see... Saudi Arabia can ban women from wearing T-shirts and jeans ( the US National Dress) and there is no problem. But Belgium is racist???



Oh, that's right: Only Western nations are subject to criticism.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 02:17 PM

I think the only fashion travesty is the baggy, below the ass trouser twat. That and the Burberry plaid gansta rapper suit I once saw in a shop in my home town.

I have no problem with honouring another's clothing customs whether they are visiting my country or I am visiting theirs. But it is not on to make laws about it in any country.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 02:22 PM

"honouring another's clothing customs whether they are visiting my country or I am visiting theirs"


I agree- but that is what Belgium is doing- asking the visitors to honour Belgium's clothing customs.

There is nothing wrong in honouring SA's and dressing THERE ( in SA) in the manner they want- but why should Belgium be required to tolerate Saudi rules in BELGIUM?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Gurney
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 03:55 PM

Paul Burke, several banks here will not open their doors to people wearing Burkas, full-face helmets, hoodies, and balacalavas. You have to stand in the foyer until the security lets you in. Not all banks. I assume they are reacting to hard experiences.
I have noticed in police-reality TV that the officers demand to see their interviewees faces first.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: SINSULL
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 03:56 PM

So Jacqui Kennedy's trend setting scarves would be banned for covering her hair and neck? Or am I missing something?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Gurney
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:04 PM

Susan, I think we are talking about garments which obscure the face, not which cover the hair. Which the trend to extra-deep hoodies do.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Monique
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:05 PM

Yes, this is the "veil" it's about.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:06 PM

if you ban burkas, why not ban tinted windows on vehicles and dark glasses? why not balaclavas?

I think in some circumstances they should, Paul. I cannot enter my bank wearing my motorcycle crash helmet becuae they need images of me for security reasons. I cannot go in certain shopping centres wuth the hood up on Folk againt Fascism hoodie for the same reason. The veil, as has been pointed out, is not required for religious reasons so why should it be exempt for security purposes? In all othe cases though, I agree with you. There is no reason to ban it from public places just because people do not like it.

There are some very good reasons for it as well. As one female Moslem comedian (is it Shazia Mirza?) points out - It means whole families can share a bus pass:-)

Cheers

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:12 PM

you miss the point Bruce. Belgium is not "asking" it is enforcing.   Custom should not become law anywhere, and that includes Saudi Arabia.

What I am saying is that personally I would honour the clothing customs not for the sake of adhering to a law but out of respect for the custom, by wearing what is appropriate by custom in other countries and by not condemning others for wearing what they wish to wear in my country.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,999
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:20 PM

Try getting on an airplane wearing a veil, hoodie, etc. Ain`t gonna happen.

The law in Quebec states that government offices will NOT interact with people who have--for whatever reason--made visual identification impossible. That makes sense to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:22 PM

BTW - Just remembered. Last time I was in the Farmers Arms in Swinton - You probably know it Paul - I was asked to remove my hat at the bar. Again 'for security reasons'. I was affronted and very tempted to tell them I was Jewish and could not. I didn't and, like a good uncomplaining Englishman, removed it and complained profusely later:-) I can fully understand why the people affected are up in arms!

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:24 PM

Oh - sorry - should have added that I would normaly not wear a hat inside but as I was already having to carry 4 drinks, my head seemed a perfectly sensible place to carry my hat!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:35 PM

"A Muslim waitress was last week awarded £3,000 for being asked to wear a revealing dress."

What are the details of this case? I'd be interested to know if the "revealing" dress was simply standard uniform for the job, or if it was being pressed upon the waitresses to alter their own clothing to specifically become more "revealing". How revealing is revealing, and what was the job?

The word "revealing" will mean different things to different people, and especially to different cultures and religions.

I've no idea how revealing the dress code was, and different jobs will imply different styles of uniform and dress. But I don't believe that if you choose to take a job, you aught ever to be exempt from donning a uniform for reasons based on *religious* objection to the style of uniform or dress-code.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 04:55 PM

Specifically, in regards the so-called "veil" it personally makes me shudder. I find it sinister. But that's coming from an honest personal perspective as a woman.

I was in Manchester recently, and saw a fabulous modern image of Emeline Pankhurst composed of hundreds of tiny photographs of all kinds of women, it actually brought tears to my eyes it was so affecting.

All I can say is that as much as modern Muslim woman may maintain that it 'liberates' them from men's visual ravishment, as a Western woman, the "veil" deeply troubles me on a raw instinctive level.

I find it runs contrary to everything I am proud of and personally value about the labour, work and sacrifices made by prior generations of women, which make life so much less oppressive and difficult for me here today.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:01 PM

we're not talkin about getting on a plane, or God forbid, interacting with government offices .... this is about what you can and cannot wear walking down a street.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:11 PM

I am the opposite. I like seeing women in the milder versions of veils, etc., where they are modestly clothed. A number of refugees from Africa who live in Seattle now wear such clothing..it is quite pretty, in nice patterns and fabric, but very modest and covers the head and sometimes part of the face. I hope no one objects to that. It is so nice to be on a bus with them and not with the women who show way too much..and men too. I would be glad to wear outfits like that in public if it made things safer for younger women..I am not too likely to be the object of much visual ravishment personally (oh please tell me I am much too modest on this ...)mg

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:16 PM

I find those wrap around sunglasses sinister ... but hey, that's just me.   :)


biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,999
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:23 PM

Well, Bill, write to Belgium and give em shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:26 PM

"I would be glad to wear outfits like that in public if it made things safer for younger women.."

It's not true that "immodest dress" incites sex attacks. It's rapists who cause sex attacks. I think it's been proven that most victims of sex assault are normally dressed and covered.

buLL you find sports wraparound sunglasses 'sinister' for different reasons than I (or other women may) do the religious and ideologically motivated full facial and bodily concealment of women.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:31 PM

"the milder versions of veils,"

Mg, I don't think you are describing 'the veil' at all.
African women wear fabulous colourful headscarves, there's no ideologically or religiously based 'concealment' going on there at all. It's adornment, not concealment.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: MarkS
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:40 PM

Should be a fairly easy problem to sort out.

1. Anybody can dress however they choose.
2. Nobody is obligated to interact or do buisness with anybody
    who obscures their features.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 05:53 PM

There is an excellent libertarian and Conservative argument against a burka-ban as Dominic Lawson wrote in The Times

"it is absurd — morally and legally — to force women to be feminist against their wishes." and

"It would be analogous to the legislative fiasco of the banning of hunting with hounds, which occurred largely because Labour MPs regarded as deeply offensive the sight of the English gentry dressed in red charging around on horses "

The argument goes that it really is none of our business, nor the government's what people choose to wear but, in fact, as pointed out previously, it's not true that we don't have laws about what people can wear in public (for example the naked rambler) and at a legal demo I attended several people were instructed to remove half face masks by the police and their personal details taken.

It's also possible to make what looks superficially like a convincing feminist case for the burka

This argument goes -
'it protects the woman wearing it from the "objectifying male gaze", it is a response to a culture in which women are judged by appearance and expected to conform to normative standards of dress and grooming, it protects against harassment (well possibly not), it embodies a rejection of the cheapness and pornography of Western societies"……… and so on.

I agree with the observation that such a pseudo-feminist argument for veiling is apt to catch some 'professing liberals' unawares.

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown writes

"You people who support the "freedom" to wear the burka, do you think anorexics and drug addicts have the right to choose what they do?

This covering makes women invisible, invalidates their participatory rights and confirms them as evil temptresses.

Does it stop men from raping them? Does it mean they have more respect in the home and enclaves?
Like hell it does. I feel the same fury when I see Orthodox Jewish women in wigs, with their many children, living tightly proscribed lives.

Progressive Muslims come out daily against the burka, and against mothers who bind and swaddle their young girls in preparation for their eventual incarceration which they will accept without a cry – both un-Islamic customs.

Yes, the burka will be used by racists against us.

But while fighting racism we cannot allow ourselves to become apologists for another, abhorrent injustice"

I've discussed this issue with friends and hit the barrier of the 'harm principle' - that is to say that if the wearing of total body and face covering is a voluntary choice (even a political statement for some young single radical women) there's little a liberal state can or should do about it

However Alibhai-Brown's answer (and the French one) - would seem to be that in fact they are harming other people through their choice of dress by making it difficult for more socially restricted women to exercise any autonomy
In addition, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown quotes an incident in which one conspicuously veiled woman provokes a hostile response from other Asians, who are heard to mutter "Stupid women, giving us all a bad name. They should send them back."!

The wearing of the burka is NOT a religious requirement, it is uncomfortable and denies simple social activities like eating out etc
how on earth are you supposed to drive - although I understand Saudi women are not allowed to.

The 'security' argument has already been discussed although no one so far has mentioned the fact that the deprivation of sunlight is bad for health.

The real argument IMO is not one of secularism versus multiculturalism, it comes down to our understanding of what it means to be 'liberal'

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 06:25 PM

MarkS - I find that very sensible. Thanks.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 06:30 PM

A lot of nonsense posted here.
The regulation bars face covering, not the veil (or the kilt, apron, etc. if the face is uncovered).

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 06:41 PM

Thank you Q - this is what we are talking about here - NOT a 'veil'

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 07:00 PM

good post Emma B.

guest999 ... screw Belgium. If that's the route they are taking in making a list of what one can, or cannot wear in the streets .... they have been scratched off on my list of 'port of calls'. Hell, don't want to get arrested for wearing a surgical mask during flu season or something.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:47 PM


I find it runs contrary to everything I am proud of and personally value about the labour, work and sacrifices made by prior generations of women, which make life so much less oppressive and difficult for me here today.

I've had enough rows with Emma about this, that I'm ready to howl. I don't want women to cover up- some females might survive to testify the opposite. But what they wear- miniskirt, dungarees or burka- is up to them. Have you asked?

And STILL no one's addressed the dark glasses.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: pdq
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 09:52 PM

"And STILL no one's addressed the dark glasses."

And nobody has addressed the issue of rose-colored glasses, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:06 PM

Do you propose a ban on them too?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:07 PM

I addressed the issue of those wrap around sunglasses.

:)

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Sorcha
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 10:25 PM

Well, I'm agin it, but I'm agin going buck nekkid on the High Street to. However, I'm too tired to argue about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Apr 10 - 11:03 PM

I saw a video recently of a solution some Muslim women have found to the problem of being asked to remove the part of their clothing that covers the bottom half of their faces. They wear a surgical mask under it, and when they take off the cloth that covers the lower part of their face, the surgical mask is there to protect their modesty. Wearing a surgical mask has not yet been made illegal. And I agree that anyone who pretends that we in the West have a cultural need to see everyone's eyes, they're being incredibly dishonest for the reason already stated involving sunglasses.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:09 AM

"being incredibly dishonest for the reason already stated involving sunglasses."

For various reasons, people ARE asked to remove them for various identification purposes - or weren't you sober enough to remember your last police id photo shot? :-P

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:37 AM

I'm sober enough now to remember that I've never had a police ID shot.

Are you trying to say, Foolestroup, that what is being discussed here is only making Muslim women who are covered up reveal themselves for ID photoes, rather than banning the wearing such coverings entirely?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:40 AM

Oh Carol, you are such a fo-o-ol!
Oh Carol, why you treat me cruel!

:-0

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 01 May 10 - 02:21 AM

I still have no problem with the covering of the face. I would hope it would force me to attend to what the woman was saying to me more keenly and not be distracted by what she looks like.

There is one possible problem in a face to face conversation. The importance of facial expression to help one understand the speaker's intent, especially if lingual differences on inflections might cause misunderstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: goatfell
Date: 01 May 10 - 02:37 AM

according to the koran the wearing of the burka or veil is not mentioned so these women are obaying man's code of dress instead of God.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 May 10 - 05:39 AM

And STILL no one's addressed the dark glasses.

I did! I think there are certain circumstances in which facial recognotion is a must and they should therefore be banned in those circumstances. They should be allowed, like the burka and any other sort of fasion item, in day to day life.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:34 AM

Where did bearded bruce get the notion that Saudi Arabia is not generally regarded, even by people who would defend the right of women to wear what they choose, as a sexist and racist country?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:56 AM

I addressed the dark glasses - and my post is now missing.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:59 AM

"I addressed the dark glasses - and my post is now missing. "

Oops! going blind...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:23 AM

People, male and female, other than myself have pointed out that Bikini or Burka – both are symbols of societies obsessed with a woman's body as the sole indicator of her worth, and are both opposing sides of the same coin of female stereotyping

Amongst the number of depressing studies that show many of our children's aspiration is to become a 'celebrity' are those showing that more young girls want to be glamour models than anything more vaguely worthwhile
(At least padded Bikini tops aimed at 7 year olds have recently been removed from a major clothing store following long overdue public condemnation)

Well of course taking your kit off and posing topless on page three is, as I have heard the arguments many times, a woman's 'choice'
But, if you are conditioned from a young age with sexualising merchandize and clothing maybe any 'choice' is tailored to fit and reflect the prevailing 'culture' and the women who follow this 'aspiration' maybe really are unaware of the demeaning objectification of women it bestows on others of their sex or simply don't care about the wider implications of their 'choice' in pursuing their own agenda

As Paul has commented we have had many heated discussions about the subject of the full burka and he has pointed out that an insensitive approach to another culture (lets get this right the burka is a cultural expectation and not a religious one) has, in some instances, produced a polarization one effect of which is that full veils have become a means of protesting against intolerance in our communities for some independent young women.

Similarly to the barbaric practice of female genital mutilation (now illegal in the UK), although fortunately not so permanently, the burka does however represent the exercise of control over most women.
It renders them 'invisibale' and restricts their opportunity for almost any social activity or occupation outside of the home

The 'West' construes the exhibition of the female body as a sign of 'liberation', with an equally stubborn blindness to how such sexualisation debases women.

Both versions are replete with perpetuated untruths .

'Just as a woman in a burka is complicit in the lie that the female form is the source of discord, so is the woman who displays her body complicit in demeaning it to a mere sexual object.'

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:57 AM

Thankyou Emma. Eloquently and elegantly put.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 10:09 AM

Thank you Backwoodsman but far more authoritatively expressed than mine are the views of the Egyptian-born columnist and lecturer Mona Eltahawy who is a Muslim

"I am appalled to hear the defence of the niqab or burka in Europe.

A bizarre political correctness has tied the tongues of those who would normally rally to defend women's rights but who are now instead sacrificing those very rights in the name of fighting an increasingly powerful right wing.

What is lost in those arguments is that the ideology that promotes the niqab (the total body covering that leaves just the eyes exposed) and the burka (the garment which covers the eyes with a mesh) does not believe in the concept of women's rights to begin with.

It is an ideology that describes women alternately as candy, a diamond ring or a precious stone that needs to be hidden to prove her "worth".
That is not a message Muslims learn in our holy book, the Qur'an, nor is the face veil prescribed by the majority of Muslim scholars.

It is instead a pillar of the ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam known as Salafism.
It is associated with Saudi Arabia, where I spent most of my adolescence and where it is clear that women are effectively perpetual children, forbidden as they are from driving, from travelling alone and from even the simplest of surgical procedures without the permission of a male "guardian".

The racism and discrimination that Muslim minorities face in many countries — such as France, which has the largest Muslim community in Europe, and Britain, where two members of the xenophobic British National party were shamefully elected to the European parliament — are very real.

But the silence of the left wing and liberals isn't the way to fight it.

The best way to support Muslim women would be to say we oppose both the racist right wing and the niqabs and burkas which are products of what I call the Muslim right wing.
Women should not be sacrificed to either"


In the same article
Stephanie Street, a non muslim British actor and playwright opposes any ban but nevertheless concedes that -

'There is no denying that in certain countries the burqa is a manifestation of the oppression of women, but in the west it is nearly always worn out of choice.'

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 11:28 AM

Telling women they can't wear a burka if they want to is paternalistic in the extreme. That's not feminism. It's the opposite of feminism.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:01 PM

Carol, I have heard a great deal about the importance of preserving the choice of women who want to wear the burka from a number of perspectives, 'feminist' 'liberal' etc

However, in any community, the choices of some people have a definite impact on the lives of others for example the 'freedom' to smoke in public places

Many Muslim woman do not wear the burka or even the ḥijâb but have voiced their concern that the constant reference in liberal media to those women who choose to wear it has made it increasingly difficult for countless Muslim women to express their discomfort with it as outright criticism of the garment has been portrayed as an intolerant attack on Islam as well as the Muslim women who do wear it.

In some societies the burka is a part of a range of laws and policies designed to suppress women and they are punished severely for not wearing it

The argument is that for those in the west who choose to wear the veil, the garment is a choice, not a tool of suppression.

This argument obscures the fact that there is pervasive, sexist propaganda in many communities, even in the West, and many women are vulnerable to this propaganda and their so-called 'choice' to wear a burka may not be the result of independent, informed decision-making.

Even this independent informed decision making choice however is not carried out in a social vacumn; many women, who are seldom considered in these kind of discussions, may be trying to resist pressures from their relatives, religious extremists in their community or governments and this is undermined when the burka becomes increasingly common in public places

In any discussion of a ban, an important consideration IMO must be the impact of the ban on ALL women - including the Muslim women who want to resist cultural or 'moral' compulsion to wear the 'coffin-like' burka

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:23 PM

"the impact of the ban on ALL women - including the Muslim women who want to resist cultural or 'moral' compulsion to wear the 'coffin-like' burka"

Apart from my personal reaction to it - which is as previously stated, essentially a gut reaction in the same way I might respond to other cultural practices as say FGM or foot binding - I think this is very much the key issue for me. I recall some time ago discussions concerning banning the burka or veil on some University campuses, in order to protect Muslim women from the ABUSE that they were receiving for failing to don "modest" Islamic dress from their male Muslim peers.

As far as an outright ban in the general street, I couldn't personally support that any more than I could a ban on women getting breast implants to do titty pics. I'm not well read on feminist lit. at all, but I do find many of these issues quite troubling - which is basically all I said in response to the thread in my last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Stringsinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:32 PM

As an American, I am a proponent of the Separation of Church and State. For this reason,
I see no reason for a religious expression to be completely banned. At the same time, I deplore the suppression of women for which it represents. The problem is when someone wears an article of clothing that represents a religious point of view in a public forum such as in a government function, this impinges on the Separation. I am opposed to this.

Still, we live in a country that ostensibly recognizes the right of anyone to believe whatever they like in a religious context as long as that belief doesn't affect the rights of others who don't. The burqua in the U.S. is and should remain an issue of choice as long as elected representatives in office don't wear it at official governmental public functions. I feel the same way about the ostentatious Christian crosses or yamulkes. Religion is and should be a private matter. Elected public officials are supposed to represent all of the people and not the few in a religious order. There is a place that is appropriate for such attire. Perhaps on the street or in markets but not at political or governmental functions.

The burqua to me represents a reprehensible imprisonment of women by religious edicts.

Still, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." If people want to wear a replica of an electric chair or a hangman's noose around their neck, it's their prerogative as long as it is not endorsed
by government in any way.



I

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: bobad
Date: 01 May 10 - 12:34 PM

Afghan feminists fighting from under the burqa

Feminists in Afghanistan are forced to operate as underground movement, often using the burqa as a convenient disguise


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/30/afghanistan-women-feminists-burqa

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:15 PM

The Quran does NOT specifically mention the Burka or tell women to wear such extremely confining clothes.

Instead, it instructs men AND women to dress and behave modestly in society.

The word Burka is not to be found anywhere in the Quran
The Arabic word Hijab 'can' be translated into veil or yashmak but other meanings for the word include screen, barrier, cover(ing), mantle, curtain, drapes, partition, division, divider etc.

The word "Hijab" appears in the Qur'an seven times, five of them as "Hijab" and twice as "Hijaban".

None of these "Hijab" words are used in the Qur'an in reference to what the traditional Muslims call today "the dress code for Muslim woman".
Hijab in the Qur'an has nothing to do with a woman's dress code!


Chris Khalil Moore is a convert to Islam who began a spiritual journey of discovery of his faith which took him to Saudi Arabia and other countries.

He writes in "The Burqa – Islamic or Cultural?"

"It is a crime that so many men who have coaxed, or pressured, or demanded that their women wear the burqa, or that their daughters wear a hijab prematurely, are most probably unable or unwilling to read The Quran and uphold its tenants, being totally dependent on the interpretations incorrectly preached to them by immoderate clerics and cultural exhortations not based in pure religion."


And so we have a conflict between two principles – respect for a cultural minority - NOT religious beliefs - and respect for women's equality.

Polly Toynbee, a British journalist and writer, observed on a visit to Kabul

"The veil turns women into things.
It was shocking to find on the streets of Kabul that invisible women behind burkas are not treated with special respect.
On the contrary, they are pushed and shoved off pavements by men, jostled aside as if almost subhuman without the face-to-face contact that recognises common humanity."

She argues that you can't have the concealment without the reification – the concealment is reification, 'erasure of every recognizable attribute of the human, leaving only anonymous amorphous colourless interchangeable blocks of fabric'

Ophelia Benson, whose books and website deal with the necessity of defending objective and scientific truth against the threats to rational thinking allegedly posed by religious fundamentalism, pseudoscience, wishful thinking etc concludes

"It's not just a neutral religious symbol, it's not just a sign of devoutness, it's not just a 'choice,' it's a barrier between women and the wider world.
That's why sensitive liberals need to give up pretending otherwise."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Stringsinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:31 PM

What is the British way of life? What story is Tory?

Women need to be freed from the chains of religion. Quite true.

Not religious beliefs? Cultural as opposed to religious practices. I don't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:32 PM

Women Like You

THREAD DRIFT:

Anyone in the Manchester area interested in the history of women's lives aught to check this exhibit. I found the photographic mosaic of Emmeline Pankhurst both visually impressive and strongly emotionally affecting.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:32 PM

There's no "objective truth" about dress, and the only science involved is that of insulation, protection from (solar) radiation and weather, and sexual selection. As for "a barrier between women and the wider world", why shouldn't women (or anyone else) set up such a barrier if they want to?

If you force a woman to wear a burka when she doesn't want to, you are violating her autonomy.

If you force a woman NOT to wear a burka when she DOESt want to, you are violating her autonomy.

I'm against violating people's autonomy as far as possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: mg
Date: 01 May 10 - 01:33 PM

Reasons I buy:
1. National security -- too easy to conceal weapons, can disguise men, known terrorists etc.
2. Safety -- especially not safe around machinery, flames, cooking. Harder for drivers to see at night.
3. Health -- if out too much, not enough sun, fresh air. Eye problems if eyes covered.
4. Too hot, restrictive etc.
5. If women are truly abused by it, go after abusers.

Reasons I do not buy.
1. Well, it is not in the Quoran. Oh well, wearing big flowerly hats is not in the Bible, but they wear them to some Baptist churches. Lavendar dresses are not in the Book of Mormon but they wear them. It is hard to separate a monoculture from its religion. THey get very entertwined.
2. It is sexist. Probably, but some are choosing to do this and some are probably forced.
3. We know best in all these situations. No, not really. And who will be next and what symbol will be next?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 02:43 PM

It's a pretty safe bet that any kind of ban like this against a custom of a minority will in practice be felt as oppressive, and those most strongly in favour of it will include those who intend it that way.

It's true enough that some of the women who follow this custom will not be doing so as a matter of free choice, but because of pressure by others.   The same is also true of the more extreme examples of attire at the opposite extreme. The underlying sickness is a social pattrern of coercion.

You don't get rid of a disease by legislating against its symptoms.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 01 May 10 - 03:33 PM

I think in the US most of us are descended from immigrants, many of whom wore long heavy outfits, embarassed their children etc. Some old world parents were very restrictive in what their children could wear etc. But we in the US at least should ask ourselves what rules should have been made that our grandparents would have had to follow -- should they have had to give up their national dress, forgo what they considered modest dress in their daughters? How much authority in a patriarchal immigrant culture should men have to immediately give up? We have seen in PNW family tragedies where men could not discipline their children and the children turned to gangs etc. It is complex. Who is to say you can't be a Dukabor or whatever and dress what we would consider funny? Should we legislate their clothing? THe Amish? They might get hot in those dresses? Or the men might get hot in their outfits too. At some point we have to let people decide..the point is where it interferes with public safety, not the point at which it interferes with public desire to stomp on religious looking attire. I do think that really specific symbols, like crucifixes, etc. should be worn under the clothing, but the clothing itself, free of other symbols, should be a person's choice, or a culture's choice, and it probably won't last long but will tend to the majority fashion etc. quite quickly. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in BelgiumLondon club
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 04:46 PM

These things vary with time and place.

The Duke of Wellington (the Battle of Waterloo victor) was barred from a London club for having the nerve to turn up wearing trousers.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 06:16 PM

"If you force a woman to wear a burka when she doesn't want to, you are violating her autonomy.

If you force a woman NOT to wear a burka when she DOESN't want to, you are violating her autonomy."

QUOTE
So when Western women visit an area where wearing such visually blocking costume is the norm, they mostly comply out of respect for that culture - it puts people there at their ease.

So why, when in the West, .... is it so wrong to ask for a little cultural respect in return?
UNQUOTE

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 01 May 10 - 06:38 PM

Most probably do. You don't have any data about how many women would like to cover up, but don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 06:43 PM

The idea that it is an essential part of Western culture for a woman to keep the face uncovered, and that it is disrespectful to be veiled is a pretty new one. The Victorians would have found it very peculiar.

There are always ways round this kind of law anyway. Ban veils and an even more effective way of hiding the face could be something like these visor sunglasses

How long before someone decides that full beards shouldn't be allowed? (Already they seem to be a surefire way of ensuring you get searched at airports etc...)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:00 PM

Emma, I know women who were born and raised in the US, who are of European ancestry, and who have converted to Islam; single women, who don't have any men telling them what to do, who are extremely upset with laws like the one in Belgium. I know women who are from Muslim countries, who are themselves Muslim, who are very upset by laws like the one in Belgium. I think your understanding of Islam is very limited by your Western way of looking at things. I think the attitude that such women don't know what's good for them is profoundly patronizing.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:09 PM

"I think the attitude that (people) don't know what's good for them is profoundly patronizing. "

So you really believe people should do anything they feel is good for them? Unlimited cigarettes, booze, heroin, open slather. The takers of such material will happily tell you (cough, cough) that they feel it doing them good...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:12 PM

"The idea that it is an essential part of Western culture for a woman to keep the face uncovered, and that it is disrespectful to be veiled is a pretty new one. The Victorians would have found it very peculiar."

Haha! Which was a new & pretentious idea at the Victorian time, promoted by the rich as a form of conspicuous consumption to make all the poor feel the superior/worthless divide.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:16 PM

Daily Mail article on the Muslim cocktail waitress. The Daily Mail tends to put as "spin" on things, so I'm not sure I'd trust them. The timesonline story was a little less sensationalistic. Note that the court award was relatively small, much less than the plaintiff demanded.

When I arrived in London, there were two women in Muslim dress among the immigration inspectors, and that gave me a favorable impression of the diversity of culture in the UK. In the US, the inspectors would have been in uniform, and Muslim dress would have been inappropriate.

The Reuters article the first post referred to, indicates that Muslim headscarves are being banned or restricted in many countries in Europe - not just veils. There seems to be a valid security reason for banning veils that obscure the face, but if the ban refers to headscarves or anything that does not cover the face, I think that's going too far.

There are high schools in the US that ban colors that are associated with certain gangs - that kind of ban makes me nervous, too. I think I look sexy in red plaid, and I hate to give up my last claim to sex appeal.

Yes, Arab countries and certain others may be very restrictive about the dress people can wear - but I don't think we can use their practices to justify our own. I don't want to adopt their system of punishment for crime, either.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:26 PM

Carol, I agree with you on many issues but not your easy dismissal of the views of the Muslim women I have quoted and those I know personally and whose views 'I' respect too.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:53 PM

I'm not dismissing the women you've been listening to, Emma. I'm offering a perspective coming from other women who have just as much right to be heard, and to deny them that right, to dismiss what they have to say, is no more right than dismissing what the women you've been listening to have to say. You don't have all of the moral high ground on your side. Only some of it.


So you really believe people should do anything they feel is good for them? Unlimited cigarettes, booze, heroin, open slather. The takers of such material will happily tell you (cough, cough) that they feel it doing them good...

Foolestroupe, your argument cuts both ways. A person who has a different idea of what is good for you might argue that you shouldn't be allowed to decide for yourself what is good for you, and they might think they should be able force you to wear saffron colored robes and eat nothing but tofu, for instance. What makes you think you get to decide for others? Your inherent superiority?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Riginslinger
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:54 PM

Well, I say women are supposed to look sexy. How can they look sexy if they're running aroud zipped up in a sleeping bag?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 07:59 PM

Carol, the point I've been trying to make is that it's exactly the women who don't wish to wear the 'veil' who are totally overlooked in the current controversy.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:03 PM

"What makes you think you get to decide for others? Your inherent superiority? "

Or their "inherent superiority"?!!!!

(cough, cough)...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:13 PM

For what it's worth, being veiled need not in any way stop a woman from looking extremely attractive. In fact it can work the other way.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 01 May 10 - 08:18 PM

Kevin - I don't often resort to 'language' on this forum but really

For fuck's sake am I totally wasting my time?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 02 May 10 - 03:30 AM

For people who don't know: What's being talked about here.

The western equivalent

Either Em or a commentator she quoted compared extreme Western "ideals" and the burka as representing two extreme ends of the same spectrum, I'd say they occupy exactly the *same* end of that spectrum, with extreme conformity to a rigid cultural ideal of how a woman 'aught' to look and why, and genuine non-conformity and individualistic self-expression on the other. The Western equivalent of the burka would be the prevailing trend for young Western women to coerce their flesh into lookeelikee blow up plastic sex dolls.
Though none of this discussion has so-far touched on the burka as a *political symbol* rather than a religious one - which is where the similarity ends.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 02 May 10 - 07:31 AM

CS I wish you hadn't posted that link after a leisurely Sunday breakfast! but maybe someone will find it extremely attractive.


I think I did refer way back somewhere to independent young women taking on the full burka as a political/idealogical statement against the intolerance of Islam in our country (generated and fueled by the more rabid end of the media and political parties) to, as I believe, the detriment of other less independent women who may be subjected to pressure to follow their example.

The question of autonomy has been raised but society does have regulations about what constitutes acceptable 'dress'

Naturism or nudism is a cultural and political movement advocating and defending social nudity in private and in public

Although nudism is often practiced in a person's home or garden, either alone or with members of the family and in restricted venues, public nudity in the UK is a 'dress code' which is very restricted and even subject to judicial penalty.

A naked man walking in the streets to advocate public nudity as a right which should be accepted by the rest of society is indeed a political statement -

"The naked rambler, Stephen Gough, has been told he will spend the rest of his life behind bars if he continues refusing to wear clothes in public." - News report 13 Jan 2010

Mr Gough said he accepted he could "potentially" remain in jail forever and added: "This is about individual freedom."

Banning the full burka would indeed be an attack on some individuals freedom (as indeed the imposition of a smoking ban in public was) but 'freedom' has limits defined by common sense and shared values, which also have the right to be protected.


I don't know how many times it is necessary to point out that wearing the all-enveloping outer garment is
                  NOT A RELIGIOUS REQUIREMENT,
but a cultural tradition from Saudi Arabia.

It cannot be justified in the name of religion because nothing requires it.

According to Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, the dean of Al-Azhar University, the most famous institution of higher learning in the Muslim world, the burqa and the niqab are not Islamic.
Both are a sign of tribal affiliation.
For this reason, he had the full-face veil banned from hundreds of buildings that come under al-Azhar's jurisdiction.

Gamal al-Banna, brother of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, wrote a book and signed several articles in which he argued that the Qur'an does not require Muslim women to wear the veil.

Islam advocates 'modest' dress for men AND women If the full-face veil were the best way to practice modesty, WHY ARE MEN NOT WEARING IT?

We must identify what is best in Western AND Islamic civilisations and what is less so.

I agree with Samir Khalil Samir's conclusion that
"Such work of understanding must be done jointly, in a cultural, ethical and spiritual dialogue that includes everyone (agnostics and non-believers as well, since ethics and spirituality are not a preserve of believers alone)."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 08:34 AM

"For what it's worth" in my comment on Riginslinger's post was intended to carry the implication "not a great deal", Emma.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: CarolC
Date: 02 May 10 - 09:26 AM

Carol, the point I've been trying to make is that it's exactly the women who don't wish to wear the 'veil' who are totally overlooked in the current controversy.

It certainly doesn't look like that to me, Emma.



"What makes you think you get to decide for others? Your inherent superiority? "

Or their "inherent superiority"?!!!!

Who is "they" in this context?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Arnie
Date: 02 May 10 - 10:59 AM

Why this sudden urge amongst Muslim women in the West to wear the burqa or niqab anyway? I lived amongst the Bradford Pakistani community in the '70's and never saw a Moslem woman cover up her face. They wore the shalwar kameez and a headscarf and deemed this sufficient. I think that the burqa originates amongst the Wahabbi sect of Islam in Saudi Arabia so why is it now being adopted by Moslem women in the West? What has changed in the attitude of Western Moslems between the '70's and the present day?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:32 AM

Largely tourists from places like Saudi Arabia, I suspect.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 02 May 10 - 11:45 AM

Why this sudden urge amongst Muslim women in the West to wear the burqa or niqab anyway?

In some cases at least, a statement of allegiance to a culture (both religious and secular) that is demonised and threatened.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 12:12 PM

Here's a piece on a BBC religion page putting all this in context - with an illustration that rather ties in with something I wrote two posts back.

As Arnie pointed out, full veiling is relatively uncommon among Muslim women in Britain, and indeed in most Muslim countries. Trying to outlaw it would be a very clumsy, and I strongly suspect, a counterproductive, way of responding to it. I would anticipate that one effect could be that many Muslim women who currently dispense with headscarfs might decide to wear one in future as a gesture of defiance to a government that was seen as hostile.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: meself
Date: 02 May 10 - 12:39 PM

I've been trying to keep out of this, but I feel that a Canadian perspective is needed:

menacing

threatening

scary

just wrong

criminal

intolerable

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 02 May 10 - 12:45 PM

Paul I have never disagreed that for some independent women the wearing of the burka is indeed a 'political' statement it's the pressure that that puts on more vulnerable Muslim women that concerns me as you know from our discussions on this subject

The authorities in France estimated that approximately 2,000 women out of Western Europe's largest population of Muslims, estimated at about 5 million wore either a burka of niqab
This is a very marginal albeit growing group and initially led me to ponder the expression 'de minimis non curat lex' when considering a legal ban

I don't believe it is possible however to ignore or dismiss the voices and experiences of groups like Ni Putes, Ni Soumises — Not Prostitutes, Not Submissive — an outspoken group fighting to improve the lot of Muslim women and girls in poor areas in France whose leader Sihem Habchi appeared as the first witness before the French parliamentary group studying Islamic clothing such as burqas and niqabs last year

Habchi was described as speaking passionately 'of her family roots in the former French colony of mostly Muslim Algeria, and how France needs to do more to protect women and root out feelings of segregation.'

"The survival of many young women depends on" new laws to protect them, she said, and full-body veils contribute to "the separation of populations."

So who are the women wearing the burka?

Danish researchers who interviewed women who wore these all covering garments found that most were young, or at least under forty, and half of them were white converts

Andrew Brown editor of Cif Belief reporting these findings concludes that 'this makes it entirely clear that in modern Europe the burka is not an atavistic hangover, but a very modern gesture of disaffection from and rejection of society'

MaGrath suggests Saudi tourists :) certainly it is a requirement that is enforced in that country

For an example of how women are regarded there is an interesting insight from an Australian couple who, as health workers, lived and worked in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from June 1993 to December 1998.

"One day in about 1994, my wife and I were walking down one of the main streets in Riyadh. It was about 45 degrees celsius, which for you US citizens, about 115 F or so? We saw a twin cab utility truck (with front seat, back seats and a tray out back) coming towards us and this was the configuration of the passengers...

Father and son were in the front seat in airconditioned comfort.
Two goats were sitting up in the backseat also enjoying airconditioned comfort.
Two adult females wearing head to toe abaya, gloves and veils were seated on the burning metal tray outside in the searing heat of the back of the Ute.

Our jaws dropped and we looked at each other, not knowing whether to laugh or cry. That's the level of respect afforded women by some in the magic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Goats are apparently treated better in some circumstances.

I would like to point out that sometimes the line between religious laws and cultural tradition is blurred.
For example, my understanding about veiling is that it's a cultural dictum and not a religious issue. The Koran states that women AND men should dress modestly. The veil is a cultural issue superimposed over the religious conservatism of the strict Islamic state. There is a Muslim story about Mohammed's wives being hidden behind a veil, but in the context of the story, it meant a curtain inside their residence and not a face veil."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 02 May 10 - 12:55 PM

great photos meself and highly appropiate for your climate but, for 45 degrees celsius, would you really like to be wearing this ?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 01:49 PM

From that link I gave:

"Shaykh Darsh, a prominent UK scholar, did not believe that the niqab was necessary, or even recommended by the Prophet for women to wear. But if you were going to argue that niqab was a recommended act, he explained his opinion for wearing niqab in this country in the following way:

    * Some people believe that niqab is recommended (sunnah)
    * Everybody believes that inviting people to Islam (da'wah) is obligatory (fardh)
    * The niqab is often a very significant barrier to da'wah in the West where the concept of face covering has never been known
    * If a recommended act is a barrier to an obligatory act, one must not sacrifice the fardh for the sunnah."


"Whatever is not forbidden is compuslory, whatever is not compulsory is forbidden."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 10 - 03:46 PM

I can't see how a ban on veils in Belgium or other European countries can in any way help women in Afghanistan like those in Emma B's picture.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 03:54 PM

It's not really a "Muslim" veil, is it? It's a Saudi veil, and Saudi Arabia happens to be a majority Muslim country, with a Muslim ruler and laws based on Muslim jurisprudence.

You could call a baseball cap a Christian cap for the same reasons (modulo the religion).

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Sorcha
Date: 02 May 10 - 04:01 PM

Just a note of lightness here...Alex, they are GIMME caps! LOL
Rather de rigeur where I live....to be seen in public without your Gimme Cap is to be ostracized at the coffee shop!

:)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: mousethief
Date: 02 May 10 - 04:03 PM

Gimme Caps? I've never heard that word! Where do you live?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Sorcha
Date: 02 May 10 - 04:19 PM

Out West in Wyoming....short for give away or 'give me away'....freebies with advertising on them.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: akenaton
Date: 03 May 10 - 03:15 AM

I think Emma's example is a bit disingenuous, if the goats had been assigned to the rear of the vehicle, they could quite easily have jumped out and run off!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 10 - 07:57 AM

"If my husband forced me to wear nothing but stockings and suspenders in public because it pleases men I could take a case against him. The same applies to Muslim women. This is 2010, not 3AD. Women in Britain are protected by British law, not the law of the land of their parnter."

Regretably it's fine in theory but a lot harder to do in practice, the assorted accounts of Muslim women in the UK who "rebelled" against the family (including some of the court reports of "honour" killings) show that it's not that simple when you are trapped within the culture/community/family.

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Paul Burke
Date: 03 May 10 - 09:02 AM

Yes, the power of men over women in some sections of Muslim society is terrible- and all too often partially enforced by traditionally- minded older women. And all to often policed by physical and mental violence. But the breaking of that power is unlikely to be made easier if that community is allowed to see itself as victimised and demonised. Much better is the hard work of programs carried out by people of those communities, to make women (especially) aware of their rights, and aware that stepping outside what some see as their communities traditions doesn't have to lead to social isolation.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: mousethief
Date: 03 May 10 - 11:27 AM

Sorcha, you mean "back east in Wyoming". :)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 03 May 10 - 12:48 PM

I think it is not that men would like to see women in the burka, but that they do not like it and presume other men won't be staring at the women if they are wearing it.

Apart from safety and health issues, if violence arises then that is where the law should step in and hard and deportation should follow whatever other sentence is given.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:37 AM

The burka is extreme, but most clothing that Moslem women wear does not really seem oppressive. I think it's paternalistic to judge it so, unless the women wearing it say they feel oppressed. If they wear it because they want to wear it, who are we to take it away?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: bubblyrat
Date: 04 May 10 - 07:23 AM

Surely,whatever laws are passed by and for the people of Belgium need not concern us ?? Or should we,do you think,invade Belgium and use force of arms to alter the status quo ?? Many of you "Catters" aver that you are committed to "Folk Against Fascism" ----well, it doesn't look like to me !! Quite the reverse !!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Emma B
Date: 04 May 10 - 07:29 AM

Marnia Lazreg is an Algerian Muslim feminist academic and her mother once wore the veil.
Her book Questioning the Veil. Open Letters to Muslim Women. is carefully reasoned and beautifully written.

She is respectful of Muslim women's own feelings and of their religious desires but argues that the veil (face, head, and full body covering) is not commanded in the Qu'ran;
that it is harmful to women's physical and mental health;
and that it is mainly a political statement about fundamentalism and misogyny.

She has little patience for feminist academics who themselves are not forced to veil and who "play" at imagining or de-constructing the veil as "liberatory" or as a statement of "resistance."

In her last letter, Lazreg implores Muslim women to stop wearing the veil.

"It is a symbol of inequality…it undermines faith… it objectifies women for (reasons of) political propaganda just like advertising in Western society does: one by covering, and the other by exposing womens's bodies."


It has long been said that America and the UK are two countries separated by a common language

After reading some posts in this forum I think that we are often separated by humour too

However, it has also occurred to me that there remains a very real difference between the concept of 'freedom to' and freedom from' especially with regard to some expressions of 'freedom of speech' versus freedom from 'hate speech'

Sheikh Mohammed Tantawi, the leading religious figure of Al-Azhar and regarded by many as Egypt's Imam and Sunni Islam's foremost spiritual authority, was "reportedly angered" when he toured a school in Cairo and saw a teenage girl wearing "niqab" which means that her face was masked or possibly that she was wearing a full head, face, and body covering.

He asked her to remove her veil saying:
"The niqab is a tradition, it has no connection with religion."
The imam instructed the girl, a pupil at a secondary school in Cairo's Madinet Nasr suburb, never to wear the niqab again and promised to issue a fatwa, or religious edict, against its use in schools. The ruling will not affect use of the hijab, the Islamic headscarf worn by most Muslim women in Egypt.
Following the imam's lead, Egypt's minister of higher education is to ban female undergraduates from wearing the niqab from the country's public universities, Cairo's Al-Masri Al-Yom newspaper reported. "

Nevertheless President Obama spoke in Cairo saying it is "important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practising religion as they see fit, for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear".

More often than not it is the mullahs, the fathers, husbands, brothers, and sometimes mothers and grandmothers as Paul pointed out, who impose the dehumanising full-face and body burka on younger women.
An increasing number of young girls, aged four and five are being made to wear the hijab to school in the UK.

History shows that forcing women to cover their beauty began long before Islam and existed even in ancient Persia; the majority of Muslim scholars agree that there is no religious proof that face veils are a required part of Islamic dress for women.

Are all cultural customs protected by 'human rights'?
"Cultural diversity" surely should not trump the dictate for sensory deprivation, social isolation, and various Vitamin D deficiency diseases for its wearer that is the burka

As a leading Islamic Indian scholar said

"Purdah should be in men's eyes, not on women's bodies!"

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 May 10 - 08:25 AM

Surely,whatever laws are passed by and for the people of Belgium need not concern us ??

Cobblers.

Laws passed anywhere in the world concern all the citizens of that world. We are no longer insular in nationality. We have a global economy, global media and global concern for everyone. It's why we stump up the money when disasters occur all over the world. It's why we should all care about each other and it's why it is no longer possible to stop the ideas of one nation from impacting on everyone else. Wars are not caused by caring about what happens in other countries. They are caused by ignorance and not caring.

There are people who seem to believe that the world is not a global village and the old barriers should be put back in place. But the less said about them, the better.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Micca
Date: 04 May 10 - 01:44 PM

May I offer 2 Quotes? asking what ever happend to No1?
No1 (allegedly said by St Ambrose to Augustine in 4th century)
" When in Rome live as they live in Rome, when elsewhere live as they live elsewhere"
No2 From GB Shaw "Caesar and Cleopatra" with reference to the "pressure to conform" from the muslim Societyon its women.
"CAESAR (recovering his self-possession): Pardon him. Theodotus: he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 May 10 - 05:09 PM

"...thinks the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature"

Of course that applies to both "tribes", West as well as East.

However, so far as niqab is concerned, that link I gave to a BBC page presenting the Islamic context, is worth looking at - and one point it makes is "Most scholars, including the four main schools of Islamic jurisprudence, hold the view that niqab is not an obligation."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 May 10 - 05:54 PM

"Police stop Muslim woman wearing veil in Italy":

"A woman visiting a post office in Novara, north-western Italy, has been stopped by police for wearing an Islamic veil covering her face. A police official told the AFP news agency the woman would have to pay a 500-euro (£430) fine...The city is run by the anti-immigration Northern League. "

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,The Singer
Date: 05 May 10 - 02:47 AM

On that basis and if it was in the UK, would Morris Dancers get fined for disguising their faces as well as Football Mascots ?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Mr Happy
Date: 05 May 10 - 10:07 AM

..........& then there's blind people, some've whom wear dark specs.

Also some born lacking eyes, what advantage to security scanners?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 13 Jul 10 - 12:11 PM

veil ban now approved in France

"the government also is seeking to insist that integration is the only path for immigrant minorities"

For human beings to survive as a species, integration cannot be in one direction.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: SINSULL
Date: 13 Jul 10 - 12:21 PM

Does this mean that women in mourning can't veil their faces? I have seen pictures of the Royal family in veils at funerals. Jacqui Kennedy at her husband's funeral. What if a woman chooses to wear a face covering veil, whether she is Muslim or not?

In the 50s and 60s women had to wear head covers in Catholic churches but men did not. Is this still the custom? I remember Jacqui Kennedy wearing a mantilla and starting a fashion rage. Were women repressed by being obliged to wear a head cover?

Rambling again. Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 13 Jul 10 - 12:27 PM

It's just a ridiculous law fueled by paranoia.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Big Phil
Date: 13 Jul 10 - 02:24 PM

Well done Belgium, well done France, have we got the bottle to do the same. When in Rome etc etc.

Phil*

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 13 Jul 10 - 02:28 PM

Hate to tell ya Phil .... Rome died out years ago.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Jul 10 - 03:49 PM

I think there are close on two million residents of Rome who would disagree with number 6.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Jul 10 - 03:57 PM

Those are Zombies.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,Kendall
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 12:26 AM

As I understand it, the law applies to ALL. Not just women. There are signs at the doors of many banks that state you must remove hats and dark glasses. Makes sense to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 07:17 AM

They'll be making us shave our beards off before long...

Burkhas or beards - there's not all that much difference in principal between banning something and making it compulsory.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 08:10 AM

Some folk's knowledge is contained in their beards - that would be problem!!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 02:29 PM

Anyone foolish enough to walk into a bank wearing a veil--man or woman--should receive a Darwin Award.

Veils are not about religion. They are about the subjugation of women. Those who rely on the `it`s a religious thing` argument are neglecting to see that all religions have some seriously harmful shit in `em, and it`s a poor defense for something that is pretty stupid.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 02:35 PM

The issue is ... what if a woman wants to wear a veil ... hell, what if anyone wants to wear a veil

I quote a post from the CBC website concerning this issue ...

"look out nuns, your next"

yes, I certainly agree that all religions have some seriously harmful shit in 'em, in fact imagine a world without ... well you know the song ... but governments making laws of what we can or cannot wear in public is also very harmful.

biLL

Subject: Lyr Add: YOU CAN'T ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU WANT
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 02:41 PM

[chorus]
I saw her today at a reception
A glass of wine in her hand
I knew she would meet her connection
At her feet was her footloose man

No, you can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
And if you try sometime you find
You get what you need

I saw her today at the reception
A glass of wine in her hand
I knew she was gonna meet her connection
At her feet was her footloose man

You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you might find
You get what you need

Oh yeah, hey hey hey, oh...

And I went down to the demonstration
To get my fair share of abuse
Singing, "We're gonna vent our frustration
If we don't we're gonna blow a 50-amp fuse"
Sing it to me now...

You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes well you just might find
You get what you need
Oh baby, yeah, yeah!

I went down to the Chelsea drugstore
To get your prescription filled
I was standing in line with Mr. Jimmy
And man, did he look pretty ill
We decided that we would have a soda
My favorite flavor, cherry red
I sung my song to Mr. Jimmy
Yeah, and he said one word to me, and that was "dead"
I said to him

You can't always get what you want, no!
You can't always get what you want (tell ya baby)
You can't always get what you want (no)
But if you try sometimes you just might find
You get what you need
Oh yes! Woo!

You get what you need--yeah, oh baby!
Oh yeah!

I saw her today at the reception
In her glass was a bleeding man
She was practiced at the art of deception
Well I could tell by her blood-stained hands

You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you just might find
You just might find
You get what you need

You can't always get what you want (no, no baby)
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you just might find
You just might find
You get what you need, ah yes...



Great to see you pssting, six.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 02:47 PM

the new world order veil

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 02:51 PM

I should also add ... do you really think this law passed by France and Belgium have "the subjugation of women" in mind ... I think not.

biLL :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 03:15 PM

Certainly not, six. Political for sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 06:06 PM

When a man tells a women what to wear, that's all wrong, but when the government does, that's right?

There are some who believe that all women should go veiled and all men should wear beards, as was compusory under the Taliban - which means that wearing a veil or a beards can certainly be a mark of religious oppression.

So as I said, can we look foprward to a ban on veils being extended into a ban on beards, in the name of freedom from religious oppression. Regardless of the wishes of the people directly concerned.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: gnu
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 06:43 PM

Well, is it a safety issue or not? Isn't that what it boils down to?

Why is it necessary to wear any particular clothing or to carry illegal weapons? Seriously... why is it NECESSARY? Why is it a requirement of countries to bow to the religious "requirements" of immigrants. Immigratns who immigrated to a country where the law on the books stated long before they arrived that carrying their weapons in public is illegal... immigrants who immigrated to a country which had traditions of attire, of uniform in services and..

Oh, what the fuck. Who cares. Let them all come here from far and wide and tell us what to do in the name of their religious bullshit. Let them come here and bring their religious bullshit and hatred and continue their infighting and terrorism. Let them walk around with killing daggers and cover their faces and blow up planes and fly planes into buildings and whatever.

Racist? Paranoid? No... just logical. There is no reason to allow religion to subjugate logic and reality... it does nobody harm. Religious bullshit and hatered does EVERYONE harm. And it has since man invented religion to control and subjugate the stupid.

Divide and conquer. The rich are counting on it. And the sheep are helping while getting sheared.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 07:52 PM

"continue their infighting and terrorism"

?????


I don't know what you mean by that .... but anyway, in your own country the chances are you more likely get shot in the crossfire of a gang shootout, get shot in a variety store robbery, get killed by a drunk driver, killed by a jealous lover or accidently shot by a cop mistakenly, than be slaughtered by a terrorist.

Well .... gotta go now, up to city hall ... it's the weekly council meeting ... whew, talk about infighting.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: gnu
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 09:14 PM

You don't know that they gang fight? or that they place bombs on planes? Never heard of the Air India bombing? Never heard of drive by shootings in in any cities in Canada amongst this trash?

When I grew up, we didn't have gangs, religious bombings, kids carrying - nay - DISPLAYING - killing knives at school. Didn't have people wearing hats in the Legion unless they paid for a round... because RELIGION was practiced at home and not IMPOSED on others.

Religious bullshit and subjugation is what my forefathers fled from when they came to this country and toiled in the fly infested bog country to scratch a living out of poor soil and snow. Now, it is being brought back to divide and cause fear under the guise of "freedom of worship" and we are told WE are "intolerant".

What a load of bullshit.

Ya wanna hide yer face, in this day and age, hide it somewhere else. It's religious bullshit which has no place in a logical and intelligent society.

Sorry sIx, but I really am at odds with you on this one. Unless you can give me a plausible arguement???

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 14 Jul 10 - 10:20 PM

Canada has lost many of it's soldiers in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban because they violate human rights by stuffing their women in gunny sacks called burkas! How in the name of God can we then defend those who advocate such repression? Gnu said that "There is no reason to allow religion to subjugate logic and reality... it does nobody harm. Religious bullshit and hatered does EVERYONE harm."
If only we could separate the truth from the bullshit in both the Bible and the Koran, and throw out the garbage. The truth is too many fools believe every word of this dogma.......... a pity!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: gnu
Date: 15 Jul 10 - 02:56 PM

sIX... I read earlier in the thread that you detest the gubmint making laws regarding clothing. I also read posts by others alluding to the "slippery slope", for instance beards. Some private businesses - shops, malls - prohibit "hoodies" (hooded sweatshirts). What are the Druids and Monks supposed to do?

However, I contend this is about public safety and I believe in "the greater good". It causes no physical harm... only harm in the mind and in the name of religion. And, if beards ever do become a safety issue, I prefer an electric shaver. Of course, the gubmit could make exceptions for peeps who "need" to have a beard for whatever reason. They could create a whole new department for registering beards and issuing FHPs... Facial Hair Permits.

I have said my piece(s). Unless there is sommat new, I am gone, so anyone who wants me to address their posted views should PM me with a heads-up in case I don't get back to this thread in future.

Have fun with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jul 10 - 05:30 PM

"Liberation" is evidently defined as "do what we say or we will punish you"...

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jul 10 - 05:12 PM

Syria bans full Islamic face veils at universities

         
Albert Aji And Elizabeth A. Kennedy, Associated Press Writers – 2 mins ago

DAMASCUS, Syria – Syria has forbidden the country's students and teachers from wearing the niqab — the full Islamic veil that reveals only a woman's eyes — taking aim at a garment many see as political.

The ban shows a rare point of agreement between Syria's secular, authoritarian government and the democracies of Europe: Both view the niqab as a potentially destabilizing threat.

"We have given directives to all universities to ban niqab-wearing women from registering," a government official in Damascus told The Associated Press on Monday.

The order affects both public and private universities and aims to protect Syria's secular identity, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the issue. Hundreds of primary school teachers who were wearing the niqab at government-run schools were transferred last month to administrative jobs, he added.

The ban, issued Sunday by the Education Ministry, does not affect the hijab, or headscarf, which is far more common in Syria than the niqab's billowing black robes.

Syria is the latest in a string of nations from Europe to the Middle East to weigh in on the veil, perhaps the most visible symbol of conservative Islam. Veils have spread in other secular-leaning Arab countries, such as Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, with Jordan's government trying to discourage them by playing up reports of robbers who wear veils as masks.

Turkey bans Muslim headscarves in universities, with many saying attempts to allow them in schools amount to an attack on modern Turkey's secular laws.

The issue has been debated across Europe, where France, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands are considering banning the niqab on the grounds it is degrading to women.

Last week, France's lower house of parliament overwhelmingly approved a ban on both the niqab and the burqa, which covers even a woman's eyes, in an effort to define and protect French values — a move that angered many in the country's large Muslim community.

The measure goes before the Senate in September; its biggest hurdle could come when France's constitutional watchdog scrutinizes it later. A controversial 2004 law in France earlier prohibited Muslim headscarves and other "ostentatious" religious symbols in the classrooms of French primary and secondary public schools.

Opponents say such bans violate freedom of religion and personal choice, and will stigmatize all Muslims.

In Damascus, a 19-year-old university student who would give only her first name, Duaa, said she hopes to continue wearing her niqab to classes when the next term begins in the fall, despite the ban.

Otherwise, she said, she will not be able to study.

"The niqab is a religious obligation," said the woman, who would not give her surname because she was uncomfortable speaking out against the ban. "I cannot go without it."

Nadia, a 44-year-old science teacher in Damascus who was reassigned last month because of her veil, said: "Wearing my niqab is a personal decision."

"It reflects my freedom," she said, also declining to give her full name.

In European countries, particularly France, the debate has turned on questions of how to integrate immigrants and balance a minority's rights with secular opinion that the garb is an affront to women.

But in the Middle East — particularly Syria and Egypt, where there have been efforts to ban the niqab in the dorms of public universities — experts say the issue underscores the gulf between the secular elite and largely impoverished lower classes who find solace in religion.

Some observers say the bans also stem in part from fear of dissent.

The niqab is not widespread in Syria, although it has become more common in recent years, a development that has not gone unnoticed by the authoritarian government.

"We are witnessing a rapid income gap growing in Syria — there is a wealthy ostentatious class of people who are making money and wearing European clothes," said Joshua Landis, an American professor and Syria expert who runs a blog called Syria Comment.

The lower classes are feeling the squeeze, he said.

"It's almost inevitable that there's going to be backlash. The worry is that it's going to find its expression in greater Islamic radicalism," Landis said.

Four decades of secular rule under the Baath Party have largely muted sectarian differences in Syria, although the state is quick to quash any dissent. In the 1980s, Syria crushed a bloody campaign by Sunni militants to topple the regime of then-President Hafez Assad.

The veil is linked to Salafism, a movement that models itself on early Islam with a doctrine that is similar to Saudi Arabia's. In the broad spectrum of Islamic thought, Salafism is on the extreme conservative end.

In Gaza, radical Muslim groups encourage women to cover their faces and even conceal the shape of their shoulders by using layers of drapes.

It's a mistake to view the niqab as a "personal freedom," Bassam Qadhi, a Syrian women's rights activist, told local media recently.

"It is rather a declaration of extremism," Qadhi said.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: gnu
Date: 19 Jul 10 - 05:29 PM

"The order affects both public and private universities..."

"private universities". Well, that seems a tad too far. That is legislating 'religion' beyond the state jurisdiction, innit?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Jul 10 - 05:32 PM

Gnu- you mean 'private' universities can practice segregation?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim veil ban in Belgium
From: gnu
Date: 19 Jul 10 - 05:35 PM

Re my last post.

Possibly, a tactic has been used in this instance which has been used for MANY years in various political systems... make a law which may not or cannot be implemented because the backlash on portions of it debit the whole bill... perhaps?

Done in Canada as routine.