Burqa

[F1KimiFreak]

I am 100% against banning stuff in general. (since this is the new hobby of the goverment here...)
Also in this case i dont think it should be banned...

And i dont see this a lot on the street but sometimes when i do (for exmaple in a public transport bus) it is somehow strange, since you cant see someones face, and thats a very big communication blackhole, but thats no reason to take that freedom awat from anyone.

Also 'Geert Wilders' a dutch politician has raise the idea to make a tax on 'Veils' (i think is the english word for it)... Which proves he is just discriminating... last ten years have not been good for the freedom of holland.

 

[niky]

Also, by this logic, a woman shouldn't be allowed to wear a full-face helmet. And yet they can.

Not banned in France:

The irony. While I've seen terrorists and criminals wear these... in fact, a motorcycle helmet is almost a requirement for petty crime... I've never been held up by a woman wearing a Burqa.

I see nobody has answered my question yet:

Why should Christian women be allowed to cover their breasts when others don't?

Because it's a serious question.

The burka was invented by men.
You deface someone who wears a burka. A face makes you human. Wearing a Burka defaces a woman and makes here a subject an not a human beeing.
it's not even a mask it's a complete deprivation of the most essentials human expressions.

Corsets and tight fitting underwear are instruments of oppression from the middle ages. The wearing of a corset is a symbol of man's oppression of womanhood.

Consequently, they're banned nowhere.

High heels are even worse. It sucks that some offices and workplaces require them... but hey, those are private concerns, and they get to institute their own rules. I'd rather they required Storm Trooper costumes. Those are more comfortable.

Clothing for women, as well as formerly emplaced bans on the amount of skin a woman could show in public were deprivations of human expression (and still are, in some countries... not all of them Muslim... some of them Christian). And yet, when you liberate women... you don't force them to NOT wear corsets, high heels or full-body swimsuits at the beach.

---

May surprise you to know that many women wear Burqas voluntarily. Even non-Muslims (some Jews). My Muslim friends, despite living and working in a Catholic environment, don't go without head-dress, though few go for the full face veil, deciding to leave it open. Forcing them to go uncovered is exactly like forcing a Christian woman to go topless. Both are proscribed by their traditions, and nobody can dictate what you are allowed to wear.

Mind you, I'm not in favor of the laws that require Burqas. either.

---

Maybe Sarkozy has been watching too many bad comedies?

 

[GT_Prologue5]

We know that. However, the kinds of remarks like the one you made are not appropriate for these kinds of discussions. Just a heads up for when you have to speak to someone in person.

Sorry. Can we stop this and get back to discussing the real problem?

 

[Omnis]

Sorry. Can we stop this and get back to discussing the real problem?

Sure, but I'm pretty sure all bases have been covered here.

France and everyone who would want women to not be able to wear their burkas are suggesting that women be forced to stay home to protect their honor and modesty. If a religious woman is forbidden to wear what she feels is appropriate in order for her to leave the house, she is effectively made a prisoner of her own home.

 

[GT_Prologue5]

Sure, but I'm pretty sure all bases have been covered here.

France and everyone who would want women to not be able to wear their burkas are suggesting that women be forced to stay home to protect their honor and modesty. If a religious woman is forbidden to wear what she feels is appropriate in order for her to leave the house, she is effectively made a prisoner of her own home.

Right. And that's not a right thing for government to control. And they can't stay inside forever.

 

[Omnis]

So they have no choice but to break the law in order to be a part of society.

That means that this law is unjustifiably stupid.

 

[niky]

Sure, but I'm pretty sure all bases have been covered here.

France and everyone who would want women to not be able to wear their burkas are suggesting that women be forced to stay home to protect their honor and modesty. If a religious woman is forbidden to wear what she feels is appropriate in order for her to leave the house, she is effectively made a prisoner of her own home.

Somebody save the nuns!

Seriously. Habits should be banned. I like to see more than ankles on my women. Puritanical pervs.

 

[Tornado]

The irony. While I've seen terrorists and criminals wear these... in fact, a motorcycle helmet is almost a requirement for petty crime... I've never been held up by a woman wearing a Burqa.

Some dude robbed a bank or something wearing a Darth Vader mask just a few weeks ago.

 

[Famine]

I didn't expect so many people were in favor of burqa.

No-one's supporting the burqa. We're objecting to any government's attempts to tell people what they can and cannot wear in public places.

You might not like an item of clothing, but you don't get to tell someone else they can't wear it anywhere except a place you own.

 

[LizMcQueen]

Burqa can't be compared with lingerie or high heels, I don't understand the connection, yes, they are clothing, but the problem is not the clothes, is the meaning of those clothes.

Niky, you're right, corsets and tight fitting underwear is a symbol of man's oppression of womanhood, but in the middle ages, not today. About to the covering the breasts, I'm not sure, but I think there are laws that prohibits their exhibition in certain places, that is to say, it's regulated.

What is essential in this discussion is that burqa is something imposed (although many women use it because they want).

Famine, governments shouldn't tell people what they can and can't wear, but this is not the case, because burqa is a sign of the submission of women, it's a question of freedom and of women’s dignity.
Why girls are forced to wear burqa around menarche and not before?

 

[Famine]

Famine, governments shouldn't tell people what they can and can't wear, but this is not the case, because burqa is a sign of the submission of women, it's a question of freedom and of women’s dignity.
Why girls are forced to wear burqa around menarche and not before?

It is the case.

Why girls and women wear a burqa is entirely a private arrangement. They might choose to, they might be coerced into it by family, but wearing it in public is nothing to do with government or public opinion.

Be opposed to domestic violence. Don't support laws banning specific items of clothing in public places. You have no right to tell someone else how they may dress in public.

 

[Ibonibo]

So with your Logic :
i pay taxes i should be allowed to get in public places naked, or to wear all transparent clothes. I don't like clothes at all, still i need to waer something to go out. Gouverment can tell me what to wear.

By the same logic if i would be a citizen in dubai or some other islamic country and pay taxes there, i should be allowed to walk with a naked torso. or a girl with a tanktop. Still it's forbidden there

It's no oppression it's called regulations. The same way you can't drive a nonroadlegal car even if you pay taxes and the car in your opinion is save (no oppression, it's regulation.)
And a gouverment can regulate because that's why their in place. And as long as it's democratic it is not oppression

You come all the time with the same arguments :gouv shoudn't tell what to wear. Freedom at every cost = no freedom.

The western society evolved and trys to put woman on the same level as men. And that should apply to all woman worldwide. The whole argument of high heels and corsets has nothing to do with it. You can say the same for men ybout sneakers, jeans , suits, bas.caps,...

You have the choice to not participate in this commercial dumpster of clothing. And if people are stupid enough to participate in this movement it's their own fault. Nobody imposed to people wearing Edhardys, but most did.

i agree that gouverment should not delibraly make laws about something. But the majority of people of France were in favor of this law. That's democraty. And it was discusted a long time before Sakorsy this law. I was also shocked when i first heard this. But it's their country and they can do their laws.

Nicky as said a lot of places woman can show their breasts (beach, wellness, ....) And i think it's their choice to cover them up and it is not imposed by men because men would probalby perfer to let the breasts free.

"Corsets and tight fitting underwear are instruments of oppression from the middle ages. The wearing of a corset is a symbol of man's oppression of womanhood.

Consequently, they're banned nowhere."

And aren't imposed to women. My ex loved corsets and it wasn't imposed to her neither she was educated to wear them.

I'm not in favor of the laws that require Burqas.

That still it is the case in a lot of muslim countries

Some dude robbed a bank or something wearing a Darth Vader mask just a few weeks ago.
i posted in the funny pic thread Hillarious:tup:

 

[Famine]

So with your Logic

No, this is very definitely your own logic.

By the same logic if i would be a citizen in dubai or some other islamic country and pay taxes there, i should be allowed to walk with a naked torso. or a girl with a tanktop. Still it's forbidden there

Something being banned in a country is not testament to it being morally correct.

It's no oppression it's called regulations. The same way you can't drive a nonroadlegal car even if you pay taxes and the car in your opinion is save

What does road safety have to do with banning an item of clothing?

i agree that gouverment should not delibraly make laws about something. But the majority of people of France were in favor of this law. That's democraty.

So when the majority decide that you should be executed, that'll be fine. Right?

Why not? That's democracy!

But it's their country and they can do their laws.

You're still missing the point. It is not morally valid for them to do so, but they did it anyway.

 

[Ibonibo]

No, this is very definitely your own logic.



Something being banned in a country is not testament to it being morally correct.

Morals is different from laws

What does road safety have to do with banning an item of clothing?

It's an exemple of regulations

So when the majority decide that you should be executed, that'll be fine. Right?

Why not? That's democracy!

american, china and a lot of muslic country still do so yes (and i probably would be killed in some of this counrties for my habits

You're still missing the point. It is not morally valid for them to do so, but they did it anyway.

Again moral have nothing to do with laws. Moral is subjective and is different from person to person. laws apply to everyone the same way

I agree that we have all different opinions about the subject. And that's fine.And i see your point but it's not my opinion and that's also fine

 

[Famine]

Again moral have nothing to do with laws. Moral is subjective and is different from person to person. laws apply to everyone the same way.

Wholly incorrect.

What is moral is objective and immutable. What is legal is subjective and is different from law-making entity to law-making entity.

It is legal to make laws to ban burqas, by the very definition of making laws. France did it. It is not moral to ban burqas - no government should attempt to regulate public space as if it were the government's private space.

 

[niky]

So with your Logic :
i pay taxes i should be allowed to get in public places naked, or to wear all transparent clothes. I don't like clothes at all, still i need to waer something to go out. Gouverment can tell me what to wear.

They shouldn't but they do.

It's no oppression it's called regulations. The same way you can't drive a nonroadlegal car even if you pay taxes and the car in your opinion is save (no oppression, it's regulation.)
And a gouverment can regulate because that's why their in place. And as long as it's democratic it is not oppression

So you would not oppose forcing Muslim women to ride in the front seat of a car? Whether they want to or not. Forcing them to have sex with other men? Forcing them to eat pork?

This is exactly of the same degree. Traditions and religious strictures that you're forcing a subpopulation to discard simply because you don't agree with them.

May I ask you... do you actually have any female Muslim friends? Because I do. And none of them find it an imposition to be "forced" to wear their traditional head-dress.

And aren't imposed to women. My ex loved corsets and it wasn't imposed to her neither she was educated to wear them.

Bras are imposed by society. Your grandmother admonishes you to wear a bra. Your mother admonishes you to wear a bra. Your teachers will tut tut you if you go to class without a bra. Me? I will sit there and stare.

As a consequence, they are forced upon young women whether they like it or not. Eventually, some may choose to continue wearing them to keep men like me from staring at their mammaries. Others may choose to stop wearing them to encourage men like me to keep on looking. Some countries will absolutely forbid a woman to go without due to religious strictures (I live in a Catholic country... men cannot go topless in public in some places here, as it is against our strict Sharia... errh... Catholic law).

By the logic you are using to support banning the burqa, they should be banned.

That still it is the case in a lot of muslim countries

And some are banning mullets, too. Should we retaliate by banning beards?

 

[lbsf1]

It is legal to make laws to ban burqas, by the very definition of making laws. France did it. It is not moral to ban burqas - no government should attempt to regulate public space as if it were the government's private space.

l just wanted to throw another log in the fire. Famine do you think the same about the smoking ban.

 

[Famine]

l just wanted to throw another log in the fire. Famine do you think the same about the smoking ban.

Yep. And I don't agree with the smoking ban in private property either.

See the smoking thread for more.

 

[lbsf1]

Yep. And I don't agree with the smoking ban in private property either.

See the smoking thread for more.

Good.


I've allready read that thread I just wanted to introduce it to this thread to see what people thought of the simularities between the burka and that.

 

[LizMcQueen]

You have no right to tell someone else how they may dress in public.

Theoretically no, but, can you walk through the public park wearing a mankini?

It is legal to make laws to ban burqas, by the very definition of making laws. France did it. It is not moral to ban burqas - no government should attempt to regulate public space as if it were the government's private space.

I know, and you're right, but as I said before, I disagree in this case.

Bras are imposed by society. Your grandmother admonishes you to wear a bra. Your mother admonishes you to wear a bra. Your teachers will tut tut you if you go to class without a bra.
Should we retaliate by banning beards?

Bra is not imposed by society, it's a necessary thing.

Of course not, the problem is the sexist imposition, "you are my wife... you are something mine like my car or my TV, and you have to do what I say" that's the problem.

 

[Famine]

Theoretically no, but, can you walk through the public park wearing a mankini?

I'm reasonably sure you can - though it depends on local decency laws. Should you be able to? Yes.

I know, and you're right, but as I said before, I disagree in this case.

Your objection in this case is of what the burqa represents to you. To you it represents oppression of women by archaic tradition fuelled by misunderstanding or misinterpretation of religion (in this case, Islam). But that's not what the burqa is - the burqa is only a piece of clothing.

To some women, the bra represents oppression of women by archaic tradition fuelled by misunderstanding or misinterpretation of religion (in this case, Protestantism). But that's not that the bra is - the bra is only a piece of clothing.

Some women wear one by choice - you'd ban them from being able to make this choice? Some women wear one because it's simply more comfortable for them to wear one in public - you'd take this away from them? Just because in some other cases they are forced to wear one by convention, or sexism?


The burqa does not represent domestic violence and banning them from public places does nothing to combat domestic violence - it only serves to further subjugate women who are already subjugated. Do you think the sort of asshole who'd force his wife to wear one out in public will let her out of the house ever if she's not allowed to wear one by law?

 

[Bram Turismo]

the burqa is only a piece of clothing.

Except it isn't.

To most it might seem to be a piece of cloth, but the burkha is more than that: It is a religious symbol which hold values that are not accepted in our cultures.

I think most seem to mistake the banning of burkhas because it's just a piece of cloth not allowing you to know whose face is underneath it. In my view it's the fact that the burkhas represents values not accepted by our cultures that makes it unacceptable to be used.

It is kind of harsh, but I can only agree with the ban. After all, you are only making things easier for them. I can never see a women wearing a burkha become integrated in the country/culture she moved to. By banning the burkha, these women now have so more options to explore. By denying decent contact with the outside world they are only making things harder for themselves.

I moved from a Belgian culture to a Norwegian culture and even though this may be off-topic now, I do would like to say that I had to adapt myself to the Norwegian culture to get accepted. There are things that are being interpreted differently here, and it's only logical you wouldn't use or say those things when they offend the people here, even if you are used to doing it in your original country.

 

[LizMcQueen]

Your objection in this case is of what the burqa represents to you. To you it represents oppression of women by archaic tradition fuelled by misunderstanding or misinterpretation of religion (in this case, Islam). But that's not what the burqa is - the burqa is only a piece of clothing.

The burqa does not represent domestic violence and banning them from public places does nothing to combat domestic violence - it only serves to further subjugate women who are already subjugated. Do you think the sort of asshole who'd force his wife to wear one out in public will let her out of the house ever if she's not allowed to wear one by law?

Exactly, and I'm sure burqa (as piece of clothing) could be useful in a sandstorm for example, but our society it doesn't make sense.

That's an interesting question, there are two options, he allows his wife be part the society or he imprison her forever.

 

[FoolKiller]

And as long as it's democratic it is not oppression

This is so incorrect that it isn't even funny.

Again moral have nothing to do with laws. Moral is subjective and is different from person to person. laws apply to everyone the same way

But isn't the debate on whether we agree or disagree with the law? Saying it is the law and was the French prerogative doesn't make a point, it merely restates the situation that we are debating.

Bra is not imposed by society, it's a necessary thing.

It is? Were women dying off from breast failure before the bra was invented?

 

[Famine]

Except it isn't.

Except it is.

It predates - and is not unique to - Islam.

I can never see a women wearing a burkha become integrated in the country/culture she moved to.

And if her family are the sort of dicks who'd force her to wear one in the first place, they'd refuse to let her leave the house. So you'd literally never see the woman.

And if she chooses to wear one, who are we to say she can't? In public - the place she owns just as much as you do.

 

[Vince_Fiero]

I missed till now (sorry if it was mentioned) my main reason of objection.

I was always thought (as bad as for some women) that you can not cover you face in public except on Carnival. These would be communal regulations for safety reasons.
So for me not wearing the Burqa just seemed an application of that law.

Now the "for safety reasons" is an argument where we pay the government for, it is the same rule you need to have identity papers on you, wear clothes, not drive faster then 130 km/h on motorways, etc...

There is a subtle balancing act between rules and freedom, just like with smoking, do you protect the right to smoke (freedom) or the right not to have to inhale smoke (done by rules). Both can be defended.

On the clothing and oppression, I do not believe Eddy Izzard (look up some videos if you do not know him) is searching oppression, but he loves to dress like this, from hhplaceforever.com:

But I fully agree that the government should not put effort in deciding what people should wear and has better things to do.

• Education
• Respect (giving all people all human rights)

is the liberation of the oppressed, but even in that practice there might be some flaws (very few schoolsystems classify people by performance purely, but you need to make choices, which generally make oppressed people to end up in education systems that keep them oppressed).

Finally, the government here decides for "safety reasons"

• I can not wear something that covers all my face
• I can not go around naked

, I'll have to comply.
This till I vote in a government that changes the rules to what I want, "People have the power".

P.S.: I do not like to take off my motorcycle helmet when I go tanking, but more and more I face the rule that I have too, since there were too many people doing hold ups with helmets on. I'm also not allowed to go into a bank without taking the helmet off. I have to comply with these rules as well as other people have to.

 

[Famine]

Motorcycling must be crap in Luxembourg then. Not to mention hockey, respiratory filtration or stopping yourself from being very cold indeed.

 

[Tornado]

By denying decent contact with the outside world they are only making things harder for themselves.

And that isn't their prerogative to do so? If I was to move to Britain and my entire wardrobe consisted of T-Shirts with American flags on the front, it would probably be pretty hard for me to integrate with the culture. But, again, it was my choice to dress that way.

 

[Danoff]

And as long as it's democratic it is not oppression

My signature is here to clear this misunderstanding up.


The question is choice. I see two sides here, pro-choice and anti-choice. The pro-choice would like to see women have the ability to choose to wear what they want. The pro-choice side doesn't want to see burqas forced on anyone anymore than they want to see them forced away from anyone. The anti-choice side is comprised of people who very much hate each other. Some of the anti-choice people would like to see women forced to wear burkhas, the other side would like to see women forced NOT to wear burkhas.

The bottom line is that it is their fundamental right to choose. Force is unacceptable here.

 

[Strittan]

Personally I think it's perfectly acceptable to draw a line somewhere, it's not even an issue of possible threat to me. Should they be refused the right to wear them because it's a security risk? It's a legitimate concern but for me the bigger question is that these people are moving into a culture other than their own. They are moving into western society, not the other way round. It seems that as time moves on that western culture is the one that's constantly being adapted to make allowances for others. In my opinion that's the wrong way round, they come here, they should be the ones that should be willing to adapt, not us. Now I'm not saying that no allowances should be made, but I do think that we should have the right to decide how much of their culture we integrate into our own and that drawing the line somewhere is perfectly acceptable. At the same time you should be respectful of them, but there's nothing wrong with drawing the line somewhere.

This is exactly how I feel. They should be grateful for being allowed into the country and take part of the higher life standard of the western society, and if they want to stay muslim, they can pray and stick to their traditions in their apartment.

As it is in Sweden now our taxes are being used to build mosques in every single town, instead of improving the education and health care, which is just getting worse and worse. 👎