A 26-year-old Tunisian woman has been fined for wearing a face veil while walking to a mosque in northern Italy, stoking an increasing debate on the integration of Muslim minorities in Europe.
Police in the city of Novara, a stronghold of Italy's anti-immigration Northern League, stopped the Muslim woman on Friday while she was walking with her husband to prayers wearing a black niqab that covered her face but left her eyes exposed.
Police handed her a €500 fine under a bylaw introduced in January by the mayor of Novara which bans clothing in public that prevents identification by police.
"We just enforced a local law that stops people from covering their face near sensitive places like schools, hospitals or post offices," said inspector Leonardo Borghesani. "We understand the fine is hefty, but she can appeal."
The Northern League, a coalition ally of conservative prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, is pushing for legislation to outlaw face-covering Islamic garments in public.
That would follow in the footsteps of Belgium and France, where similar laws are expected to come into force in the next few months.
Promoters of bans say the veils go against public security and negate the dignity of women.
Initiatives towards a full veil ban have sparked protests from Muslim leaders in Europe, who resent laws that could discriminate against them on religious grounds.
The woman's husband defended the Islamic tradition.
"I respect the Italian law. I have been living here for 10 years," he told the Corriere della Sera newspaper. "But Amel can't be seen by other men."
The Northern League mayor of Novara said face-covering veils demean women. "We can't accept cultures that destroy women's dignity," Massimo Giordano said in a statement.
The controversy came a day after Belgium's lower house of parliament gave initial approval to legislation that include fines of between €15 and €25 and up to seven days in jail for those wearing a full facial veil.
The Northern League has recently lodged a draft bill, which could be amended in parliament, that reflects the Belgian proposal but could lead to heftier fines of between €250 and €500.
"Our law intends to favour people's integration with the hosting country's culture, not segregation," said the Northern League's Paolo Grimoldi, who drafted the bill.
I don't know about Italy but here in America people used to immigrate with the intention of fitting in as much as possible.
Also, we have laws that the majority agree upon so I would have no trouble with a law like that here.
In fact, having taught in a Muslim school I can honestly say that I never saw one woman with a veil over her face. Mind you, a FEW of them would have benefited from the use of one but-hey-i don't want to be a jack@ss so i won't comment on that any further.
I guess the first amendment to the constitution doesn't matter to you?
By what context do you think people immigrated with the INTENT of fitting in? That is ridiculous. YOU want them to fit into what YOU think is American. BUT, I think that YOU are a bad example of America based upon your statements. My family traces back some of the first Europeans to step foot on this land, so would that mean I have a higher authority to claim what is and is not American than you? No, then you don't have that on them either.
Of course they should be unveiled, in all countries except Muslim ones; then, that's their business.
But I guess you don't think it would also be reasonable for the wearing of huge crosses to be made illegal also.
And by that reasoning, Christian women should wear a veil in Muslim countries.
Hiding something (such as ...duh...a person's face) is a matter that can have an effect on national security, while a cross or SHOWING one's face is NOT.
It constantly amazes me how far this "diversity" tactic and anti-Americanism goes, disguised under "religous freedom".
But hey, yeah whatever, if an American woman goes to a Muslim country, let 'em make her wear a veil! LOL. It might actually keep her safer all around.
You wanting to control what everyone does to your stoneage values is one of the best advertisements against religion in general I have seen for a ling time. Keep up the good work.
Grow up! If I want to hide my face that is MY CONSTITUTIONAL right! National security? By your logic, Halloween is the scariest time of the year for the Pentagon. Grow up!
shades, In many cMuslim countries a christian woman must wear a veil. Don't forget, she may not be allowed to pray.
is wearing a veil aganst the teachings of christanity..does ur bible say...thou shall not wear veil???
well it is a must for a muslim womn...if u force veil on smone.ofcourse it is not acceptable but it is still not like when u foprce a womn not to wear a thing her religion orders her to wear.if a womn isnt wearing a veil she is doing a sin....more over ..i know in two islamic countries namely..iran and saudiarab..the womn must wear abaya..please id like to know in which islamic country de christioan women are forced to wear veil....because in saudiarab and iran de womn do not cover de faces,I ve been to saudiarab n though i was wearing n abaya i never coverd my face once when i was there.
abaya is diferent from veil...u can google it.ofcourse.
That is a lie! There are Christian churches active in almost every single Muslim country, including Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Phoenix Poet & Brenda Durham
What would you say if your government decided you could not decide for yourself what you would wear?
What if your government banned all clothes that allowed anybody to show a leg.
What is your government banned board-shorts, tank-tops, bikinis or two-piece swimming costumes, mini-skirts, see-through blouses, and the only form of clothing you could wear was a government approved full-body suit?
Would you say 'we have laws that the majority agree upon so I would have no trouble with a law like that here'?
What happened to tolerance? What happened to celebrating cultural difference? To hell with conforming. Conforming only keep the status quo and the status quo only benefits those who already have a share of power. If a woman wants to cover her face let her, that's a matter for her to take up within her own culture. if anybody thinks that sinister then they have the problem - innocent until proven guilty!
The laws testify to the work of Big sister
what happened to Tolerance. and Culteral Difference.. LOL your kidding right.. have you tried carrying a bible in public in Saudi Arabia or Iran.
f you want to wear a viel fine, dont really care. but do not expect to be catered to. if you want Islamic Religious foot washing stations, go to mosque's
I tolerate Differences, I even love other cultures.. how ever.. I will not ever tolerate my culture being destroyed and or changed becuase some one else expects me to love theirs and give up mine. in another country Ill do my best to follow their customs and expectations. up to and including learning at least basic language skills.. but in my country I demand the same respect.
Adapt, adopt or go home.
Hi friend outdoorsguy
You are reasonable and rational. It is good.
Sorry, but I find no rational in outdoorguy's submission. By his logic, if it is done in Saudi Arabia and Iran so it should be done in his country or anywhere else. It is myopic thinking. Where does this mentality leave the axis of evil? What difference does it make between the "liberal west" and the "fanatic islamists."
Every sane soul should be against any forms of oppression. However, not everything that is not "western" should be vieved as 'anti-human'
Tolerance allows us to get out of our cacoons and accept and appreciate the others' views and values. Before we come up with any inconclusive judgements lets us educate ourselves and make informed decisions.
The United States has a past history of slavery, for someone to knee before the other would symbolize a 'master/servant relationship. In my African tradition it is a sign of respect.
Veiling in certain circles could be degnifying, the question is through which eye?
I dont remember writing or saying that it should be done in other countrys.. personaly having spent time in Saudi. I would ban travel tp any country as intolerate of others as that country and most middle eastern countrys.
I wonder if you find killing albino's as sorcerer's as oppression. or stoning women who kiss in public. or Tribal elders gang raping young girls as punishment. as oppression.
I find it deplorable at best, despicable and barbaric at worst. so no I dont want it see it exported to another country. what I want.. is in my own country.. the respect for my culture that other countrys demand in theirs..
what you and they do in yours is up to you to tolerate or like.. of change if you desire it. but do not come to my country or any others and demand they adopt or accept your culteral mores. if you dont approve of their cultural mores dont move there.
I lived in Germany for six years. I spoke the language, and general behaved as they did.. yes I screwed up on occasion.. how was I to know that an ok sign was in insult.
What I think has happened here is you didnt understand exactly what I was saying.. which is fine.
through whose eyes. the culture they are trying to intergrate in. and thats what matters.. if your in france and want to follow your customs, then realize the French may not want to change their culture to suit your ideas... which is why its France and not the country you came from.
thats like moving into some one elses house and going.. I watch American Idol everyweek.. so your going to have to change your TV viewing habits to accomodate me. My response would be. " go back to your house and watch it there"
I agree with you Rajab Nsubuga
Viva la difference
Did your people adapt, adopt, or go home viz-a-viz the native cultures. No, you wiped many of them from the face of the world. Now your culture is dominant you 'demand' acquiescence? Sounds to me like a double-standard.
Viva la difference!
actually My people are irish and scottish with a bit of Indian blood in me as well . they arrived here after most of that. andthe Scots and Irish here in America did adapt, adopt or in some cases returned home.
but thats like the pot callng the kettle black. Africa, India, and eastern Europe did get first row seats to the Islamic world tour starting at the founding of Islam till what the 1600's
thats a tired old Hack.. every country has done the same thing thru out history. So dont be ignorant and pretend only America did that or only America had slaves.
I doubt your Irish and Scottish ancestors were the only ones who "adapted" and "adopted." American culture had to adapt to accommodate them, too, otherwise we'd still see "Irish need not apply" signs in shop windows, and no American fire department would organize a Highland pipe band.
Immigrants, whether they "adapt" or not, have an affect on their adopted countries, and more often than not, that affect is for the better.
To force a woman to dress in a manner she personally feels is immodest is just as bad in my opinion as forcing her to wear a veil.
outdoors, Please continue to enlighten pburger.
And here is some more, ridiculous, discriminatory legislation:
The Swiss have banned the building of Minarets.
Apparently legislation is under way to ban face veils also. But the rules will exempt wealthy Persian Gulf tourists, who spend lots of money in Swiss hotels and luxury shops.
I don't blame the Swiss at all.
It is no different then in Islamic countries. No other religion can build or repair any of thier holy sites. Shari'a. Gotta love it.
Too bad. I would gladly pass that law here. And i would bann that god awful screeching they call a call to prayer.
What's the point in essentially criticising Sharia as narrow-minded, then demonstrating the same attitude and using Sharia as a justification for it?
You can't have it both ways. Either narrow mindedness is acceptable or it isn't. If you think it's acceptable, then you've just pulled the rug from under your own criticism of Sharia. If you think it isn't acceptable then don't display it yourself.
Suggesting a group of people's attitude is narrow-minded and unacceptable, while at the same time displaying a narrow-minded attitude yourself is inconsistent, nonsensical and self defeating. It's like the Italian authorities saying it's wrong to force someone to do something (like cover their head) but it's okay for them to force someone to do something (like not cover their head).
have people gone mad?
Religion is the word you are seeking.
Seriously though - I live in Europe and the Muslim garb is being used as a political tool. Like all religions always are. I don't see you arguing for my right to not wear a motorcycle helmet though.
You're right it is being used as a political tool.
As for helmets. Some on this forum might be glad if you fell off a motorcycle and cracked your skull open Mark, but I'm not one of them.
Besides, when my R1 went exploring under a truck, the impact of my head on the side of the truck pushed me off the Bike with nothing more than a broken arm and a bit of a bruised neck. If my head was in the same state my crash helmet was in, I'd have been in trouble. Without the law I would probably have been dumb enough not to wear a helmet, and most likely dead. So the law protects stupid people.
Actually maybe that's a good case against it. Natural selection and all that.
actually I am against the Helmet laws. I feel its an unwarranted intrusion into a persons life. but I would wear one regardless of the law. after 1. having a large june bug slam me in the forehead while I was doing seventy. and 2. a friend of mine going off his bike. his head slammed a concrete barrier and for some reason he had decided to wear his helmet that day and it split instead of his head. he spent six months in a coma. but survived.
Sharia law however.. well if I wanted to live in the 13th century, loved stoning people. legal Rape as punishments. ( at least in some places) sending people to jail for kissing or drinking a beer.
and the list goes on. its totally contrary to what the west believes. just look at the death edict against those who speak out against Islam. Salman Rushdie comes to mind. or the dutch cartoonist. and now threats against the Southpark Creators. any one notice the attemped Car bomb was parked in front of Viacom who owns Comedy central and Southpark.
they tolerate no dissent, no freedom of religion. actively suppress other religion. and still hold witch hunts and executions for said offense.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylon … ians-.html
believe that Harrassment of women is acceptable behavior.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091215/ap_ … 1lbnRhYw--
Consider Torture to be acceptable.. real torture as in removing limbs, ears, genitals. using brands. etc. as opposed to bright lights to keep you awake and dunking.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world … 15517.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/ju … umanrights
I dont consider it narrow minded to stand against something I find abhorrent, immoral and just plain barbaric..
if they chose to live that way in other countrys.. more power to them. but its not something I will ever accept in my own.
hope you folks have a good one.
I would - of course - probably wear a helmet most of the time. The point is that it is a law. A law that directly affects my right to choose.
But - this is the issue with the super being. Once you have persuaded people they need to do XYZ to satisfy the super being's needs - they will do anything. This is what the belief in the super being is used for.
I live here - right in the middle of these Islamic fundies pushing their rights to satisfy their invisible super being's need to see women covered up and the Catholic fundies pushing the Government Inc to do something about it.
Trust me - a law against wearing full Islamic Religious in-your-face "I am different to you and my god is better than yours , and we are being mistreated for our religious beliefs which are better than yours" clothes is far, far better than the old ways of doing things.
Hey - you want to completely cover your body in heavy cloth during 110 degrees sunny weather while your men sit around ogling the local women who do not do that and 40% of your teenagers are unemployed and trying to screw a local girl?
Fine - go do it in a country where that will not piss off 80% of the population or hurry up and breed fast enough that you are a bigger minority.
The problem is much bigger than some one's right to wear whatever they like and arguing that as the point is actually missing the point completely. What you have here is 2 competing political religions that have been going at each other forever. This is just another way of doing that.
Religions - great huh?
I'd be surprised if you weren't flying the flag for anti-religionists. But the issue is not the pros and cons of religion. The religious aspect is just muddying the waters, and allowing legislation to creep through that would otherwise be condemned. The attitude seems to be, "yes it takes away some aspect of ordinary people's civil liberties, but that's okay because it's one in the eye for fundamentalist Muslims".
People are allowing their liberty to be undermined in their eagerness to take a swipe at religion (in your case), Islam (in the case of the fundy Christians), male chauvinism (in the case of feminists) and just Arabs generally (in the case of the white is right brigade).
Because of that people are allowing the law to be used inappropriately in what is essentially a cultural and socio-political debate, which has serious implications.
I understand the sentiment behind the law, but the approach is seriously flawed. The law in question is not stated as a law prohibiting Muslim women covering their heads. The authorities know they couldn't get away with that (which is good, because I don't think that's the best approach anyway), but unfortunately it means that the law now simply outlaws anyone covering their own face in public at any time. That's the issue.
And it's not the same as laws relating to motorbike safety. Those laws relate to a specific vehicle and a specific activity. This law allows anyone, walking in a public place to be questioned and fined, for covering their face, regardless of the activity they are conducting.
Want to wear a gorilla costume on the way to a fancy dress party? Can't, it's illegal. Want to push a cycle along the street wearing your cycle mask? Can't it's illegal. Want to wear a surgical mask to avoid germs like some do in Asia? Can't it's illegal. Want to go outside in your masquerade mask to watch the fireworks? Can't it's illegal. Want to wrap a scarf around your node and mouth and pull your hat down to keep the cold out? Can't it's illegal. And if people aren't fined in these situations, why not? Don't they pose a "security risk"? What does that say about a law created in the name of security? Or does the law only apply to people who look Arabic?
Is there an age limit to the law? Will little Paulo in his spider-man costume be stopped in the street? What if he's in a park next to a government building? Isn't he a "security risk" also? What about kids wearing face paint? Will their parents be questioned and fined in the street? If not why not?
They are really opening a can of worms with this, and it's going to come back and bite their a$$. And all because they want to take a swipe at Muslim fundamentalists, but can't use their bloody brains to work out a way to do that without making stupid laws.
Like I said - religion. They will push and push and push until there is no option but to do this. Just like the Xtians will push and go around being a-holes until some one gets pissed at them and they can become a martyr.
I don't care what your religion is - you stick it in my face often enough and I am going to ask for laws to prevent you from doing that.
How long do you think I could wear a "F*** Mohamed With a sharp Stick!" T shirt before it was necessary to prevent me from doing so legally? Should I be allowed to incite whatever I like and no one stops me?
The issue is these Islamic fundies sticking it in your face to the point where some one says - "OK - I want that stopped" and no matter what you or I think - The Katholic Xtians have political power and have done that here.
And here I am - in the middle of two warring religions. Great. And you wonder why I am against all of them?
Of course it is going to bite them in the a$$. But bow down to the Islamists? LOLOL In a Katholik Country? Sure - no sweat...
I would also like to ride a bike without a helmet. Odd that you think my rights do not count - for my own good? Well.... in that case.
How many laws you think these morons are going to write to ensure they maintain the status quo?
As a matter of interest - what are you proposing instead?
You're forgetting the fact that this is the way laws are made. They are not made for the entire populace, but for those who would seek to break them. It won't open any can of worms as it is the way in which society deals with these issues, they make laws just for the handful of 'bad apples' so to speak.
In this case, the 'bad apples' are the extremists. And, since no Muslim is ever going to stand up against their own extremists, something has to be done.
But that's my point. This law does NOT just affect those it's intended to. If they want to ban Muslim women covering their faces, then they should do that.
They haven't because they know it wouldn't stand up to to article 10 of the The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union which says:
"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance" (my emphasis)
So they have just side-stepped it by banning EVERYONE from covering their face in public, regardless of what they are doing or why they are doing it.
That's draconian and unnecessary. The above Charter exists for a reason. It's there to protect groups of people from discrimination. Side-stepping it by simply removing EVERYONE's right is a dangerous president, regardless of the good intention behind it.
But unfortunately bashing Muslims is more important to some than preserving civil liberties. So they are quite happy to cut off their nose to spite their face.
Trying to improve the situation for Muslim women is a worthy goal, but what all this shows is that the law is not the appropriate way to do that. The alternatives are harder, take more thought, more effort and more time. But since when is it okay not to do the right thing because it's harder? That's exactly what the French and Italian authorities are doing.
When the religion removes the right to freedom of thought and conscience, as it does when it forces women to cover their faces, article 10 has already been violated.
Thank God Judaism and Christianity inspire free thought.
We would be screwed worse than we are now.
Always the comedian. Those two religions would have to actually inspire 'thought' before they could inspire free thought. Blind obedience, violence and ignorance are all they inspire, my friend. That has been demonstrated in spades and that's why we are soooooo screwed already.
If you knew what was preached the Mosques in your country, and the Madrasses. You would want them closed and torn down.
And don't start about..."You don't know what they preach or teach."
We are simply to cowed by PC and White guilt to say anything about it. God knows the ACLU will sue you for pointing it out, and CAIR will demand sensitivity training.
It is the same in every western country. The overthrow of that Govt. and the institution of Sharia. Not to forget the destruction of Israel. And we know the curriculum of the madrasses involve such lessons as... "Jews are pigs &Christians are swine and Israel is full of Monkeys and pigs. Which are the Jews and Christians.
The dirty lil secret about what they teach is out. Any day now we can start shuttin them down and chukin 'em out. I can't wait.
You are a walking contradiction. Your ideas for a solution are as odious as the views you claim to dislike. Both are based on fear and hatred. You are as much a fundamentalist as those you think you are morally superior to. Have you no recollection of history?
A country in Europe once wanted to deal with people of a certain religious persuasion. Certain people were restricted from taking certain jobs. Then restricted from joining the army. Then prohibited from taking government contracts. Then had to be visibly identifiable. Then had their citizenship removed. Then were murdered. Approximately six million of them.
You display the same prejudice, fear and hatred which led to that (assuming you believe it happened). Your "Muslims will be the downfall of the country" crap is the same as the "Jews will be the downfall of the country" crap in Germany which paved the way for the holocaust.
Get a hold of yourself man. Stop acting like a scared child. Muslims aren't the bogey man who's coming to get you. Sure there are fundamentalist Muslims that cause harm. But most ordinary Muslims just want to pay their bills, feed their kids, have a holiday once or twice a year and get on with their bloody lives like the rest of us.
Ordinary Muslims are more sick to death of "jihads" than you are. So don't flatter yourself that YOU are the subject of every Muslims hateful fantasy. The reality is that most couldn't give a toss about you or the country you live in, they're too busy surviving like everyone else. So before you go launching your crusade maybe you should try not to pre-judge all Muslim people by the actions of a few. Otherwise "pig" might be one of the politer terms people apply to you.
the world has gone crazy!
I don't fear anything.
You lefties think any time someone doesn't like or want something or someone, it is a fear.
Too bad if you don't like my opinion of muslims. I know many many of them and my opinion is well founded.
Learn what mosques and madrasses are teaching before you lecture about your BS. They teach thier hate straight from the Qu'ran. Go tell them about the evil of it all.
Read the Qu'ran... 2 63 - 66 and 5 59 - 60 and 7-166
Here they are as a matter of fact...
Al'Baqara... Sura 2
63. And remember We took your covenant and We raised above you (The towering height) of Mount (Sinai) : (Saying): "Hold firmly to what We have given you and bring (ever) to remembrance what is therein: Perchance ye may fear Allah."
64. But ye turned back thereafter: Had it not been for the Grace and Mercy of Allah to you, ye had surely been among the lost.
65. And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."
66. So We made it an example to their own time and to their posterity, and a lesson to those who fear Allah.
Sura 5 Al'Maeda
As to those who turn (for friendship) to Allah, His Messenger, and the (fellowship of) believers,- it is the fellowship of Allah that must certainly triumph.
57. O ye who believe! take not for friends and protectors those who take your religion for a mockery or sport,- whether among those who received the Scripture before you, or among those who reject Faith; but fear ye Allah, if ye have faith (indeed).
58. When ye proclaim your call to prayer they take it (but) as mockery and sport; that is because they are a people without understanding.
59. Say: "O people of the Book! Do ye disapprove of us for no other reason than that we believe in Allah, and the revelation that hath come to us and that which came before (us), and (perhaps) that most of you are rebellious and disobedient?"
60. Say: "Shall I point out to you something much worse than this, (as judged) by the treatment it received from Allah. those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil;- these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path!"
61. When they come to thee, they say: "We believe": but in fact they enter with a mind against Faith, and they go out with the same but Allah knoweth fully all that they hide.
Or how about..
Sura 7 Al'Araf
163. Ask them concerning the town standing close by the sea. Behold! they transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath. For on the day of their Sabbath their fish did come to them, openly holding up their heads, but on the day they had no Sabbath, they came not: thus did We make a trial of them, for they were given to transgression.
164. When some of them said: "Why do ye preach to a people whom Allah will destroy or visit with a terrible punishment?"- said the preachers:" To discharge our duty to your Lord, and perchance they may fear Him."
165. When they disregarded the warnings that had been given them, We rescued those who forbade Evil; but We visited the wrong-doers with a grievous punishment because they were given to transgression.
166. When in their insolence they transgressed (all) prohibitions, We said to them: "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."
167. Behold! thy Lord did declare that He would send against them, to the Day of Judgment, those who would afflict them with grievous penalty. Thy Lord is quick in retribution, but He is also Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
So... Learn what you don't know. Then come see me.
"I don't fear anything". You genuinely believe every single Muslim on the planet is intent on your destruction, but you're not scared? Then either you don't really believe it, or there's something wrong with your faculties.
I think you do believe it, and I think you are scared, and naturally so. But your fear is misplaced. It's based on ignorance. Cherry-picking quotes from the Koran doesn't demonstrate knowledge of Muslims. Just like cherry-picking quotes from the Bible doesn't demonstrate knowledge of Christians and Jews. You can't see past your own pre-judgement.
For example you're completely ignorant of the guy who sells papers from the kiosk in down town Tehran, who's past retirement age, but does it to earn a bit of extra money. Or the guy who runs the local butchers in a suburb of Baghdad who's mostly concerned about the cost of meat and his ever spiralling costs and dwindling profit margin. Or the teenager from a middle-class family in Cairo who's studying hard to be a teacher.
Why? Because you only get to see, read and hear about Muslims who fly planes into buildings, or blow things up, or shout vile messages of hate and intolerance. The Muslims who go about their daily lives, just trying to get on, don't make good headlines. They aren't "news". So they're invisible to you. The fact is there are more ordinary, boring, run of the mill people who happen to be Muslims than there are Muslim suicide bombers, and hateful extremists.
Your perception of an entire group of people seems to be based on what the media feeds you. Muslims are only ever represented in mainstream media as hateful, vile, scary, extremists so that's how you perceive them. That results in the kind of fear you are demonstrating and the knee-jerk emotional responses like those you've been spouting.
Don't let yourself be fooled. Of the 1.2 billion Muslims in the world I guarantee you the majority have got better things to do than sit around planning the overthrow of western civilisation.
If you really don't believe that, then you better go and put your tin hat-on, maybe that will make you feel better.
TM, Nice piece. They think they can scare anyone, wait for the next election.
@TMMason, I do agree that hatred and such stuff is taught at madrassas and mosques but i dont believe that it is straight out of the Quran! I mean most of the Imams at the madrassas and mosques are illiterate, and by memorising(not really understanding) every bit of the Quran, they think that they are superior than other muslims and they are the most pious people in the world and whatever they teach is "Islam". And most students there believe them because they dont have much of a choice!
And Islam supports peace! Muslims even believe in Jesus and Moses!
I like this part about it best: Inspector Leonardo Borghesani stated "We understand the fine is hefty, but she can appeal."
*Sympathy and opportunity to get it dismissed.
It doesn't bother me if they are veiled. I think the only time the should lift their veil, is when identification is required, otherwise, they walk around as they want to.
I was thinking...muslim males should wear veils, too, yeah...so that other women can't look at them, once they finally rise their eye from the floor :-)
I don't like the idea of the government telling people what they can and cannot wear, but those Muslim boys have got to get over their fear of women!
Is it men fearing women, or is it men fearing men leaping upon their women?
My wife, invited by a neighbor to a pre-wedding ceremony by our Muslim neighbors, was curious and asked about the custom. She was told, "We wear them because a woman who loses her virginity has no value."
So, there you go.
It is men fearing women as independent human beings, and fearing their inability to prevent other men from 'taking' them. It is a childish, brutish, animalistic fear that, like many fears, takes something not inherently negative and turns it into ridiculous nonsense.
Actually many people have depicted veil wrongly. For Muslims veil is used so that no other man could see the body of women. Thats it.
Now a days exposing body parts is common and you believe it or not, it not only effects on adults also on kids. People see nudity or "So Called Fashion" and indirectly girls attract boys and boys attracts girls.
Veil is basically to keep man and woman from thinking evil.
Hope you got the point..
ya but Islam experts of france and canada state that veil is not part of Islam but has more to do with arabic culture..secondly read article by muslim woman on burqa..she slammed ban on burqa as well as imposition by some of wearing it compulsory..she made another good point that since she lived in london as well as saudi ,she found saudi man more desperate than in london...
In Nantes (France) last week, a woman driving a car with her face veiled, got a fee for dangerous driving.
Her husband was accused of polygamy (a muslim living with 4 women) and the "attorney general" (Ministre de l'intérieur) asked that he be destituted from his french nationality for that fact.
The man argued that he had only one wife and 3 mistresses, which is not illegal at all.
The Belgians voted a law agaisnt the burqa.
What to do ?
Maybe the worst threat for Democracy doesn't come from these people, but the amalgam with extremists, terrorists, or just social aids parasits is quickly made in the spirits of common people.
I think that muslim authorities and representatives in europe aren't doing their job well enough.
Maybe they should intervene more often to condemn extremist proselitism and actions and clarify the position of serious muslim people who just try to live in peace like the rest, which I expect is a majority.
A piece of cloth is not going to prevent that. Adult men have developed self control. If just seeing a woman's face will get her raped, I think that says more about the men around her than anything "religious".
Just to add...
It isn't worn because the women think they will be raped if they don't. They wear it because it gives them a sense of becoming closer to God, they feel they are moving closer to Him by doing it. It is a way of expressing their devotion to Him. Plus some women (a minority) feel it is an obligation and sinful to not wear it.
And there's nothing wrong with that. But it should be the woman's choice. Not the man's decision because other men in his culture haven't the maturity of self control.
Very true. No one should be forced to wear or not to wear something.
Madame X, how many laws have changed in Britain since 1910 when women were not allowed to vote? How many Constitutions has the United States written since the 1950s' when Black women where not allowed to vote? Should we dismiss these states?
"How many Constitutions has the United States written since the 1950s' when Black women where not allowed to vote?"
Black women were allowed to vote in the 1950s in America, and we have not written a new Constitution since 1789.
Black women and men frequently had difficulty voting in the South in the 1950s and the GOP is still trying to suppress the black vote in several states by putting up various hurdles to registering and voting.
Rajab, Are you living in the past, things have changed.
It makes them feel closer to God because God wants them to wear it so that they won't lose their virginity and become worthless. I get it.
I didn't really get the connection between the veil and the virginity thing.
Uh, that's the whole point. According to the men of the culture . . .
Because men are easily tempted (or women are weak, take your pick or make a combo sandwich with both). They will seduce or rape the helpless woman and then she will be too hard to marry off. No man of worth is going to waste his bride-price on a woman who has been fouled by another man.
And yet, in Muslim countries there is still rape and prostitution and all the rest...
Amazing, eh? Apparently their God does no more to stop that stuff than any of the other gods do.
I'll take the sandwich
Personally I don't think that the veil stops rape....but I don't think it promotes it either. And it definitely doesn't stop some women from being weak or tempted.
I think it is just a personal sign of devotion that means nothing if the woman does it through force rather than choice.
I guess trying to protect your woman from being "fouled by another man" is really just a deep fear that the other man might have been better than you are and now the woman has some basis for comparison.
Personaly I have always thought that the mystery behind the veil or the burqa to be quite erotic. I don't see how it stops any kind of sexual assult which most of the time isn't even about sex, it's about power and control over another human being.
I don't think any government should tell people what is and is not appropriate to wear.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmysterious and forbidden...
like the contents of local bakery while i am dieting
In the UK there is a law that states that a person entering a bank and such like must remove their motorcycle helmet (and other attire that covers the face) for security reasons. This I think is perfectly reasonable. When those that wear the burqa state that this is an infringement of their holy teachings as a reason not to comply, that is the truth. Reasonable muslims will tell you that there is no sharia law that requires muslim women to wear the burqa - it is a state of mind. The sooner it is realised that to enter a country willingly to live (not just visit) has certain obligations the sooner thia issue will go away.
"It isn't worn because the women think they will be raped if they don't. They wear it because it gives them a sense of becoming closer to God, they feel they are moving closer to Him by doing it. It is a way of expressing their devotion to Him. Plus some women (a minority) feel it is an obligation and sinful to not wear it."
That's a load of bull.
And why is it a load of bull? I'm only speaking of the women I know who wear it.
I think it is just a personal sign of devotion that means nothing if the woman does it through force rather than choice.
There are all kinds of choice and all kinds of force...
Franya, Recently in a Muslim country a Muslim woman was walking with an inappropriate man. She was gang raped by ten men for this. Yes, there was a trial. The woman was sent to jail, and received many lashes.
Will these bourgeois governments ban the Catholic nun's habit! They too are signs of a woman's faith... Methinks not... it's a double-standard that makes victims of Muslim women - easy and visible symbols for a tough stance on immigration made by governments losing control of the popular mind...
According to my understanding of the literature on rape, the act is not about sexual gratification but the assertion of power...
Where have you been?
Your expecting a lot from such a male dominated culture.
I agree with Yvonne Ridley...
"men should stay well clear of becoming embroiled in expressing opinions on women’s clothes, unless of course you happen to be called Lacroix, Gaultier, Lagerfeld or Ghesquiere."
That too was very well said.
Full of good sense.
Futhermore, it just is a great idea. (a burqa from dior... )
I don't want to look like I'm distributing medals around here, but I loved the comment.
Men fears himself a lot.
I can understand both perspectives. The first is that it's a tradition and/or religious thing. I guess it would be like saying to a christian to "not wear a cross" while near a school, public transportation, etc.
On the same token I understand that wearing that type of thing in public hides a person's identity, so it makes law enforcers jobs a bit more difficult in identifying people. I guess it's sort of like wearing a ski-mask and sitting on a park bench in front of a school or while riding the subway.
I guess it's just one of those issues that there isn't a clear cut answer that won't irritate or offend one side at least.
I disagree that covering one's face for religious purposes is the same as covering one's face for non-religious purposes.
I also disagree that covering one's face is covering one's identity. Many times I see someone from the back and recognize them, without seeing their face.
And what about ZZ Top - the band - do we ban them? Are they suspicious and sinister? And how many times has a celebrity slipped out of the house covered head to toe because of the media? Do we ban them?
It's a obvious double-standard with a clear political agenda grounded in fear and ignorance...
As a Muslim living in europe, I think i've got something to add here.
Firstly, I support the law that prevents people from obscuring their identity in public like this. Take religion out of the issue and it just makes sense. You don't go to buy milk with a balaclava on and expect to be treated as though you weren't wearing it. If there's nothing to hide, there's nothing to hide.
Secondly, from a religious persepctive, although the global islamic community is incredibly diverse and harbours a range of different views, there is a general consensus in orthodox islamic thought that covering of the face (niqab) is not compulsory. The distinction that needs to be made here is between the full face veil (niqab) and the covering of the head, but not the face (hijab). While niqab is not considered compulsory by mainstream intellectuals, hijab generally is. The authority of this stems from a Qur'anic direction towards modesty that designates areas of both men and women that should not be seen publicly. This, in arabic, is called an awrah. For women, orthodoxy dictates that only the face and hands should be seen in public. For men, the awrah includes the areas between the navel and the knees. The rationale for the differences in awrahs for men and women comes down to the different social obligations that are placed on each gender within the Islamic paradigm, and are also a concession to the biological differences of each gender.
Leaving all that aside though, day to day choices about what people wear in the muslim world is more often dictated by pragmatism and personal preference than anything else. Orthodoxy may require us to dress to a certain code, but many of us choose not to, choosing instead to follow the spirit of modesty behind the rules, rather than the letter of the law. Morocco, west africa and China are great examples of that.
Thirdly, there seems to be the impression that Muslim women are "forced" to dress in this way. While there are certainly some families who live like this, you will be surprised to learn that the majority of women who dress this way do so by choice. Do not underestimate the strength, intelligence or potency of muslim women. Some women prefer to have the final say in how much of thier physical person they allow the world to see. My own personal view is that it can be quite empowering for the women who choose to do it, but that it is very much a personal choice. To assume that all women accross the muslim world are compelled to do anything at all is to live in ignorance of the tremendous variation of cultures and expectations accross the muslim world.
At the end of the day, I think the overriding principle that should apply is that people (men and women) should be allowed to dress in whatever fashion they choose, free from interference from the government, provided that it does not prevent a security risk.
It always amuses me that the irony behind laws requiring muslim women to de-veil (removal of the hijab, not the niqab I mean) generally claim as their basis a concern for the freedom of muslim women - as though a judge telling a woman what she can wear is morally superior to a husband claiming the same right. Each to thier own.
As Muslim living in Europe - you must be well aware of the recent clashes and cultural/religious conflict being caused by political Muslims seeking to make a point and the fact that his is very, very much a one way street here.
When it is acceptable for western women to walk freely in a Muslim country wearing a bikini without fear of government intervention we can talk.
Actually, I have to agree with this... as a woman born to a muslim family, and now living in the west, I have to say that the freedom (not to mention respect) I enjoy here is FAR greater than a non-muslim woman could ever expect in an Islamic state... unfortunate, but true...
No, we can talk now.
That is a link to a video of a coastal city in Morocco. Bikini clad women aplenty. There's a stunner 9 seconds in, and a child without pants shortly thereafter. The horror.
I don't quite understand your comment. To what specific events are you referring?
Your second remark suggests an interesting thing to me though. You seem to hold the view that human rights are only valid if they are reciprocal. If "they" don't follow by our rules, then why should "we" - and by extension reduce human rights to a matter of courtesy, making them not really rights at all. Is this the case?
Human rights? Ah - you mean the right to walk around proclaiming your religious beliefs in a public aggressive way?
Saudi Arabia extends these same rights as Morocco? Interesting.
No - just pointing out that a, there have been a lot of political Muslims causing clashes in Europe and b, most Muslim countries do not extend the same "rights" to westerners.
So - you think that Muslims should be able to proclaim their religious beliefs in public no matter the conflict this may cause? And I assume - as a man - you are nor required to cover your face?
Or are you not aware that Islam is - of course - being used as a political tool?
I mean - I genuinely do not care what you believe. But - why do you feel a need to publicly proclaim it and insult me by covering your face so I may not read your facial expressions?
Mark, everyone knows what would happen if you saw anyone, man or woman, with their face uncovered. You notorious rascal, you.
I just never know how to keep it where it belongs.
may i suggest extra long socks?
It works for me
Mark Knowles wrote:
I mean - I genuinely do not care what you believe. But - why do you feel a need to publicly proclaim it and insult me by covering your face so I may not read your facial expressions?
C'mon man. The answer is obvious.
For more or less the same reasons that make you proclaim the contrary.
I agree with you about facial expressions.
Exactly my point. It is a "F*** you. My god is better than your god statement," that is being used to foment conflict. Which is what religion is for. Any time I interact with Muslim fundies, (and there are a lot where I live) I wear mirrored sunglasses and speak to the top of their left ear. They find it offensive for some reason but insist their women should be allowed to wear 20 pounds of heavy cloth and cover their faces in 95 degree weather to protect their virginities......
And - I am not going to walk down the street wearing something designed to proclaim my atheism.
But - if no one speaks out against this religious nonsense we will keep on having this issue. God wants you to cover your hair or men will rightly rape you? Offensive garbage that has been and will be used to further political ends and keep women oppressed. Some of them even get persuaded they want to wear this stuff. For god....... LOLOL
I can but agree with that.
Maybe I've not yet experienced the need for militantism...
anyways, agnostics are no militants.
Where I live, if you believe in a god or whatever... it's ok.
if you believe in your politicians, it's ok.
if you believe in nothing, it's ok.
What counts is weather you're an asshole or not.
weather you are a prick or kind spirited.
weather you are a cheapskate or a sharing person.
I think this should be universal.
We don't give a fuck about what people believe.
We care about how people behave.
EXACTLY! Couldn't have summed it up better!
And hey Greek, if you're a muslim man, then you definitely have more rights than I could ever imagine! Not only do you never have to put on a veil, but you can marry as many as three women, provided you keep each one happy.... !
is the ability to marry 3 women a positive thing in your eyes?
To bloody right, zampano!
Viva la difference!
If you'd taken the time to read my post, you would have seen that I am opposed to people covering thier face in public. It's a security risk. It's anti social. It makes no sense. It doesn't matter what the rationale is - religious or criminal (ie ski mask) - theres no need. I don't support it. There's no basis - islamically speaking - for it.
As for public displays of religion - I absolutely support it. It doesn't matter what the belief is, people have a right to express it through clothing and jewellry - atheism being an obvious inclusion here. The only restriction being where it presents a risk to others. The last thing we need is more of this politically correct BS trying to create neutral public spaces. The reality is we all have beliefs - different ones. They need to be allowed to exist alongside each other - the exchange that occurs from different views is valuable and necessary. To our detriment we've created a society intolerant to change, hostile to beliefs - whatever thier origin. I think that needs to change. Having different beliefs does not need to mean that we comes to blows. You and I are engaging just fine.
You're right - Saudi Arabia would not have the same standard. You seem to be expecting that they would. I do not understand why. It should not be surprising that a community of over 1 billion people spread accross half the planet should have divergent views and standards. Nevertheless, your line of argument required proof of women in bikinis in muslim countries. You received it. What was the relevance of your request to your argument?
From what I can see, beyond our agreement over the prohibition of facial veils, the argument seems to be that personal rights for Muslims in western countries should be subject to the same rights being given by governments in predominantly Muslim countries. Why is this so? To suggest this infers that our personal rights and citizenship are entirely separate to our beliefs or religion, and that our beliefs or religion should play an equal role in society with our citizenship. I can't support that. The separation of church and state is essential to the functioning of a secular democracy. To conflate the issues of religion and citizenship in such a way by suggesting that a government should selectively apply "rights" to its citizens based on criteria of religion or belief, seems very wrong.
I get the feeling that your line of argument stems from a dislike of Muslims in general. If so, you should admit it. Don't dance around the subject pretending that human rights are universal when in fact you advocate their application on the basis of recipricocity and religious criteria.
Of course, I am presuming you believe in human rights, which may not be the case.
I don't recall mentioning human rights. I don't recall dancing around the subject either. I was pointing out the hypocrisy (and yes, coastal Morocco needs the money and allows bikinis - as does Dubai.
No I have nothing against Muslims - I dislike religion in general - and people who feel the need to publicly proclaim it in particular. Whichever particular ridiculous belief system you care to adopt. I don't care - all the same as far as I am concerned. Guaranteed to cause conflict, especially where two religions come together.
So - why do you feel the need to publicly proclaim whatever irrational belief system it is that you adhere to?
Your belief system is in direct conflict with another major belief system. Neither of which I adhere to - I think you are both insane.
Why should I be told what you believe? Is it OK with Muslims if I wear a T shirt making fun of Mohamed - or do you think I am going to get accosted and attacked by adherents of your faith?
Could me sticking my lack of belief in your face in public be construed as provocation? I suspect so - and there are laws against me doing so in the UK.
Yet you feel you should be allowed to publicly proclaim your faith regardless of the clashes it causes. Why is this? And why would you want to do so? Isn't your faith a matter between you and whichever invisible super being it is you choose to worship?
and may I also add that only last year, a British man and a woman were put on trial for making love on a beach in dubai...!!! Not for blasting themselves up for jihaad, but for making love yes!
come on, get real.... what are the odds that a British man has ever made a woman moan so loud as that they would attract attention??
The same would happen in the West
Public fornication is illegal in Christian countries...
Ok, good - we're getting down to the meat and potatoes now.
We agree on everything in this thread so far, except for this: the issue of whether or not the public expression of belief should be allowed in western democracies.
I say that it should be. Here's why:
Belief can't be separated from our views and actions. In western democracy, government is particpatory. In the course of our interactions with others we make reference to our beliefs. You do. I do. It's natural. It is not practically possible to divorce our actions from our beliefs. We can't deny that we have beliefs. If you do not act according to what you believe, then what do you act according to?
Please note that I am not using the word belief as a placeholder for religion. I'm casting a wide net here. A belief is any opinion you hold about anything which can not be verified by reference to external sources. Nor do I deny that ethics and morality can exist outside of religion - but they inevitably make recourse to beliefs (according to this definition) of some sort. So in this sense, belief is integral to the human experience.
By denying the role that belief plays in our lives, we create an unequal system that favours non-belief over belief. By seeking to remove belief from the public discourse we create a system which favours materialism over other beliefs. In a healthy society no one belief should have sway over others - in the eyes of the law all beliefs should be equal. By removing belief from public discourse we create a default which is not neutral, but in fact disadventageous towards all other beliefs to the benefit of one.
You choose a good example with the T-shirt. In that instance, yes, it would cause offence. There are - and should be - restrictions about the expression of beliefs in public- and the niqab ban is a perfect example of an appropriate measure. I do not say that beliefs should be expressed carte blanche - there are standards to which we should all be held - simply that beliefs should be allowed to be expressed in moderation. The courts, police etc are all measures in place to see that this happens and to curb excesses.
I don't think it's valid to use a fear of provocation as the basis for removing belief from the public discourse. In that sense you give power to the very people you oppose. The principle at work is the same one that (rightly) means that a victim of rape is not responsible for the crime - the perpetrator is. Even if someone expresses a view that is beyond acceptable standards and is "offensive", should someone retaliate against them then the responsibility and punishment is entirely to be borne by the people who became "provoked" , not the person who made the "offensive gesture" - that's what the courts are for.
After all of the above, this is what it seems to come down to. My writing style possibly comes off as a little sarcastic (unintentionally - it's more conversational in my mind). I would be interested in hearing your view on this. On what basis do you assert that belief should be removed from public discourse in light of my rationale above? If we should not act with reference to belief, then what should we act according to?
I see you avoided my question. You want to publicly proclaim your belief and make certain that the first thing I know about you - without having any discourse - is that you believe some bronze age nonsense that I am going to be burning in hell for not believing the garbage you believe and you are publicly proclaiming that you are different to me and setting yourself apart from me. Why is that so important to you?
Now it comes down to - are there more of me than you? Yes there are. Sorry. My being offended by your religion outweighs your "right" to tell me what you believe without even speaking to me.
Although - it seems we agree - public displays of irrational beliefs should be curbed. You are just drawing your line in a different place than I am. It is a matter of degrees. Sure - our "beliefs" - and yours are based on completely different criteria than mine - are a part of us. But - is that the most important part of me? Should the very first thing I say to you be that I think your irrational beliefs are nonsense?
Personally - I think your religious beliefs have no place in the public arena - surely that is between you and whichever imaginary friend you have decided to worship?
Your use of semantics to include religion in with rational beliefs is not working either. Irrational beliefs such as it being necessary to whip to death women who commit adultery do not belong in our society.
I don't know how to go about removing these barbaric beliefs from our society - but I hope that rational discourse with people such as yourself is a good place to start.
The problem is - when people insist on holding offensive, bronze age beliefs that have no basis in reality - sooner or later, they are going to bring the government in to prevent the inevitable conflict caused by evangelizing (wearing religious clothing being one type of evangelizing) about their irrational belief system. I hate government involvement - but I don't wish to know your what your religious beliefs are. Keep them to yourselves please. It is bad enough I have to listen to the Katholics crowing about how great their god is every Sunday.
So - I ask you again - why do you want to publicly proclaim your religion as being the first statement you make to me?
Do you feel the same way about my right to not wear a motorcycle helmet on a bike? And if so - where were you when I was fighting that?
hear hear - and I thought I was the only one who objected to the direct threat to my freedom of this kind of law, helmets on motorcycles, even seat belts.
To answer your question directly: I don't.
The problem, it seems, is one of perceptions.
You're right - it is a matter of degrees, and this is where I draw the line: that in a civilised society, people exercise self control and take responsibility for thier own behaviour and actions - including perceptions.
A rapist or sexual offender often "perceives" the willingness of thier victim to be assaulted - implicitly through comments such as "she deserved it. Look at what she was wearing." The fact that they perceive it does not make it reality.
A racist utilises the same epistemic framework too. They may "perceive" "black" (hate that word) people to be more prone to criminality, stupidity and violence than other races. The fact that they perceive it does not make it reality.
The fact that sexual offenders and racists perceive in a way that is detrimental to other members of society needs to be addressed. Not all perceptions are valid, and if we build a society based on something as subjective as perceptions, then this is the outcome.
(NB: I'm not equivalencing you with people such as these - merely highlighting the philosophical similarity to prove my point.)
Similarly, if a person perceives someone as "trying to make religion an issue" because of the way in which they choose to dress, then that does not necessarily make that perception reality. People - especially those who dress in specific ways due to religious convictions - do so out of resepect to thier own convictions - not to impress or offend others. The fact that you may perceive that clothing as offensive is your problem/decision, and as long as they do not endanger other members of society, then it remains your own exclusive problem.
If perceptions were not in the public arena, then these issues would not be addressed. I think we can both agree that sexual offences and racism are both aberrant and despicable - I cannot support a governmental policy that would cause them - and issues like them - to be swept under the carpet. It would be to our collective deteriment.
To advocate the creation of a society which panders to something as subjective as perceptions is a recipe for disaster. We need concrete, objective standards which are very separate from the personal biases and opinions of every member of society. By removing belief from the public discourse, as I mentioned previously we privelege one belief (non-belief) over others. This is as unacceptable as favouring Christianity or Islam or Hinduism to the expense of other beliefs.
Motorcycles are a great example, and having been a motorcycle messenger for 2 years, I can relate. Whenever I dress to ride (or live, as a muslim), I choose clothing and equipment based exclusively on two factors: a) safety,(or, compliance with my own consciously held beliefs) and b) compliance with the law. My appearance as a motorcyclist (or a muslim) may (but not always will) set me apart from the rest of society - but I do not choose this type of clothing to specifically set myself apart. I choose it for my own benefit. If somebody decides to take offence at the way I have dressed as a rider (or a muslim), then that is thier problem, because I have not dressed for them, I have dressed for me. As long as my appearance does not endanger another member of society, then it is my perogative to dress as I like. Should anyone be offended by that, then the problem remains theirs alone.
As for your right to wear/not wear helmets - I can't really comment. Mine has saved my life twice, and I never ride without it, I don't see the need not to. Is helmet usage not compulsory where you live?
Just out of curiousity though, what do you ride? KLR 650 here
Nonsense. You are fooling yourself here. Surely your invisible super being knows when you respect it? People who wear religious clothing do so to make a statement to other people. By wearing religious clothing - you are making religion an issue.
Once again you avoid my question. Why is it so important to you to tell me your ridiculous belief system?
What does this have to do with you making a religious statement to my face by wearing religious clothes?
OK - Lets talk about last few centuries of wars caused by religion.
Removing belief from the public discourse is not the same as making a statement about your beliefs before we even begin to talk. Once again - why do you feel the need to stick your ridiculous beliefs down my throat and make that the first statement you make to me?
Why is it so important to you to make sure I know that you advocate thrashing women with a whip if they commit adultery?
I see - so - once again - you think that your right to stick your religion in my face is more important than living in harmony with me and it is my problem if I take offense.
Why is this so important to you?
No bike currently. But - the point I was making is not that a helmet is or is not safe to wear. It is the fact that I cannot choose NOT to wear one. I am legally obliged to wear one.
You present a well-thought out position ilmdamaily, Cheers!
that my friend was a great post. My big problem, is how ever not one of perception. what I end up doing though is judge as a group. even though I know individual muslims who are good people. its a fault many of us suffer from.
I do how ever realise and despise Religious cowards who use the faithful of any religion as pawns for their quest for power. and that is really whats going on. I dont see the Imans who preach hatred out there wearing bomb vests but they gladly send the others out there to die. Bin laden hides but doesnt mind stirring up the faithful to die for him.
people like that use religion as weapon against others to get what they want power and wealth. most of the leaders of the taliban lived in relative luxury compared to their citizens.
but heres another problem here in the west. we talk a good game but most people never stand up for what they claim to believe. I dont care what religion some one is.. but when that religion is spouting hatred and allowing things I find evil. slavery for example. or butchering non believers, using rape and torture for converts... ALA somilia and darfur. then I oppose them. I personally would love to see every sick SOB who tortured, maimed or raped a child or innocent adult hung from a tree.
And I would love to see the decent and good muslims stand up as a group and say no more. no more oppression, no more jihads. no more death edicts. Id love to see them embrace people of other faiths for being people of faith regardless of what faith and say no more hatred.
extremists have power becuase no one really stands up to them, and when some one tries. people scream and yell how dare you. all the while deploring the actions of the extremists. Kind words and flowers dont stop a thing, never have and never will no matter what the peace and love movements would have you believe.
as a muslim friend once told me when I asked how the US was viewed in his home land (Iran) "the US is like a lion that roars and has no teeth. they arent respected, all they do is talk tough" thats the west across the board.
anyway its late im starting to ramble.. YOu folks have a good night.
Has it occurred to more than one person here that there are reasons for covering one's face that aren't religious or criminal?
I believe only one person brought up masquerades, health, and weather. As for me, I live in an area where people who wear balaclavas are considered smart, not suspicious- at least for those bitter winter months.
And what's wrong with wearing something for religious reasons? As long as it compromises no one's health or safety, it's nobody's business.
Sorry, but when I see a person with his/her face covered coming up towards me, my first impulse is to drop my bags and put my both hands up and then I remember that it is just a tradition...
i would say the difference is that the ban on 'immodest' dress in Muslim culture is centuries old, whereas governments in the West are changing the rules after these woman came to the West. So governments in the West are moving the goal-posts...
Yes - they changed the rules (or "moved the goal posts" if you wish to be emotive and cause conflict) after there was a problem.
There were no laws against this until people started abusing it to make political/religious statements.
I suspect we will both agree that the last thing we need is pre-emptive laws before there is a problem? It is bad enough the Government Inc interferes after the event.
I take it you are not familiar with France, the Muslim culture, historical colonial issues and cultural problems - or anything to do with this issue?
Stop mud-raking, Knowles
Yes, my take on the matter differs from yours. No, you do not 'know' what I 'know' about the matter. Yes, methinks you presume too much...
Anyone could just as easily assert the opposite - based on 'my' understanding and opinion - clearly Knowles 'you are not familiar with France, the Muslim culture, historical colonial issues and cultural problems - or anything to do with this issue?'
Viva la difference!
Thank you for the clarification, ilmdamaly. There is far too much disinformation floating around and I appreciate your input
Hello ilmdamaily !
Were you raised as a muslim or was it a choice you've made in your adulthood ?
Alaikum assalam zampano
It was a choice I made in adulthood. A couple of months before Sept. 11th. Really picked the timing on that one :s
ok. So I consider what you say in a more careful way. Your "choice" was not determined from birth. It was real.
Because you made a choice at a responsible age you are less candid, meaning that some dogmas won't drive your behaviour, I suppose.
We still have conservative catholics that keep those middle age shrouds and veils. Men and women. And they communicate in latin, as if it was a living language. Vows of chastity (we recently had reasons to laugh (or cry, mainly) about "vows of chastity".
And you may ask yourself why while the western world (Europe) was drawn in it's middle ages, the muslim world was having a flourishing age of expansion. Geographic, scientific, cultural, from which we inherited so much.
And why nowdays when we need intense reflection about ways to keep us from falling again into middle ages and obscurantism, muslims seem like they have started their own.
Maybe we hate burqas and veils, because it reminds us of our own middle ages.
And we remember the fact that our ancestors gave so much blood to get out of it.
Some women cover up willingly, and I am sure some do so as a result of religious, cultural or social pressure
The bottom line is that people should be allowed to wear what they want without government interference (accept in the case of public nudity, or whether the public's safety is at risk).
If these women were just walking on the street, then they should not be harassed
Some Muslims as well as Catholics,Lutherans,Baptists, should remain veiled.
ok.. but who is going to be afraid of that?? lol
I have mixed feelings about the ban. As an American, I generally prefer the government to stay out of issues like what people can and cannot wear. If it's not hurting anyone else, why should we care?
On the other hand, the niqabs and burqas bother me on public safety grounds because they do interfere with vision (the burqa more so than the niqab) and with people's ability to identify someone. You can hide a lot under a burqa, from domestic abuse to theft, murder, or ticking bombs. I also know a woman with congenital hearing issues who relies a lot on lip reading to fill in the gaps, and she's had a couple very frustrating encounters with women in veils at the store where she works.
My husband, who is Muslim, is 100% for the niqab/burqa ban, but he hates any kind of in-your-face display of religious belief. He'd probably support a ban on cross necklaces and yarmulkes, too.
I completely agree. I'm so against that outward display... hence my absolute refusal to ever wear the veil. But thank god, I have that choice here!
And hey Zamp, I so love wearing a bikini, but in most muslim countries I'd be stoned to death for half my beliefs...! (And thank you... )
Btw.... as a good muslim married woman I shouldn't even be alone in a room with all you men anyway! Oh the sin....!!
ilm I respect your beliefs but as a woman who lived both in the middle east and now the west I have never felt more respected, free and independent as I do here. Here I DO have the choice to wear a bikini or a veil...whereas in most muslim countries I'll never have that... so for me, it's all about having that freedom to choose...
I'd love to see you in bikinis.
But the sight of your beautifull face is already so gratifying...
I'm not hijacking this thread.
If MOW is posting a pic with her in a bikini, then I should have the right to do the same!
MOW - exactly - this is my point. It's not up to governments to regulate what people wear, except insofar as it intereferes with the safety of others. I support a ban on the niqab, but I cannot support a ban on the hijab. I see no difference in a judge telling a woman what she can and cannot wear, and a husband who also claims the same right. Women, like everyone else, should have the right to choose what they wear.
The fact is we all have beliefs, and I believe we have a right to express them. I feel like i'm talking in circles lol.
no I know what you mean, and to tell you the truth I disagree with a ban on hijab too... but then, do you blame people for the way they perceive muslims today? Not that I'm justifying the attitude....but muslims in a way are themselves responsible for the 'fear' they now evoke in others...
Anyway, when all is said and done, I feel muslim women are far more liberated in the west than they are in most so called muslims countries....so I really can't complain...
You're right - we've really only got ourselves to blame when it comes to the public perception of Islam. A certain number of c*ckheads have ruined it for the rest of us
It's true - I would even go further: the light of civilisation is currently setting in the west. This is where it's at right now. And it's a shame to see the attitudes that have spread throughout alot of the muslim world. But, there's still good people there.
In a funny way, many non-muslims are better muslims than most of us these days lol.
Not just muslims ilm...anyone too obsessive about their religion just fails to inspire me...! How ironic that the most tolerant, wonderful and amazing people I've ever met in my life never wore religion on their sleeve.... infact, never even talked about religion - not theirs, not anyone else's!
That's the way life should be...doing our own thing and not be ruled by religion and all that old world stuff!
The governments of the West are taking away your choice. To choose you must have more than one option. But the new laws take away the option and only for a select group of people. So, not only are these laws ,sexist, they apply only to one culture and so are also racist.
Circle is a perfect form for it is parent of the sphere.
It seems more or less clear what we're looking for.
Or maybe not...
A niqab is a woman's choice. In some cultures the women do not have a choice but that is a man-made rule. Someone who decides to wear it, it is for the purpose of showing loyalty to Allah by covering oneself so that she is not lusted over. People think wearing niqab or hijab is taking away from a woman's dignity when in all actually it adds to it. What would you rather for your daughter, outfits that show the body for all to see or her modestly dressed so that a man is attracted to her mind and not her body.
What makes you think that by not wearing a hijab, men only look at you lustfully!! You see, that's the problem with this kind of orthodox thinking: some muslim women are soo obssessed with the idea that people are lusting after them, when trust me an average man here in the west couldn't care less if your hair was showing or your body! (Unless you're very hot i.e!)
On the other hand, I lived in the middle east for a year, and there the men would LITERALLY undress me with their eyes and get excited at the mere sight of an arm! So much for the hijab needed to keep their modesty in check! ha!
btw. I do have a daughter and I hope she will grow up to have a normal healthy body image and a dogma free mind...!
They look like ninjas! I wouldn't want to mess with them, they might do martial arts and carry samurai swords and all that jazz!
Yes but what if they are pretending to be women under them masks and they are muslim men....
you're all incorrigible...! Btw. Even with that sexy leg, I swear she scares the hell out of me!
MOW, the ONLY way to spread love and harmony in the world is to mate with every single race.
Now there's a thought...and once aliens arrive from outer space, they'll get the love too! Ding dong!
Yeah she could have an AK 47 strapped to the other leg!
Yeah, I've noticed that too. The more you cover up, the more easily lust is inflamed. In Victorian times, men would go crazy over the sight of a woman's naked ankle. Now they wouldn't even look twice. In some parts of sub-Saharan Africa, the women walk around topless all the time and nobody bats an eye about it.
You would think more Muslim men would be insulted about being treated like they're so animalistic and lacking in self-control that they would uncontrollably rape any woman who showed her hair on the street, but I guess one should never underestimate the male capacity to foist responsibility for their own bad behavior off onto women.
u r right men can't control , so put onus on woman..
Its not to keep Musim men in check. Its to discourage anybody. More importantly its about an oath to Allah. It would be great if people weren't so closed minded that they actually read up on the hows and whys of the situation. But I guess its easier to ignorant. And by the way, theirs no reason to be scared by a woman fully covered, she just like any other woman underneath. Why is it so bad for Muslim women to worship God by choosing to cover but its not bad for a nun? All Muslim women don't cover their faces either.
oath to allah?..can u elaborate on this?
As long as they don't cover their faces, and aren't forced to wear a head covering, I don't have a problem with and I don't think anyone else does either.
Every Muslim woman who wears a veil to whom I speak says she is happy to wear her attire, that she feels more in touch with her culture.
And equally, every Muslim woman who does conform to the tradition and to whom I speak, also says she is happy with her choice.
And the same applies to the men who wear a turban, they do so because it's important to them and their identity.
Our governments should leave them alone and stop imposing a one size fits all mentality...
Celebrate the difference!
Really, though, banning the niqab in western countries isn't about religion at all - anybody else walking about with their face completely covered is going to arose suspicion and be seen as a potentional threat, muslim or otherwise
No hide them...unveiled? as in like the nasty ones in Eastenders! booooo!
@ ilm, zamp, Greek and waynet! How I love you all....! (I swear I'd be stoned for this comment alone...!) hell... good to be people with a sense of humor than carry religion like a chip on the shoulder!
I like you too even though you are going to Hell because you are not Greek Orthodox
So, why don't the Muslim men have to hide from lustful glances?
I can see where the contents of the fridge went! He may already have eaten the washing machine and several small appliances.
Let's have a vote on the burqa
referendum on the burqa
You'll vote after you've seen the campaign.
Why is it in my country we are not allowed to wear a bike helmet or anything covering our face in a shop or bank due to security reasons in case we commit a crime and have to be identified, yet a lady may enter with a full veil with just her eyes peeking out.
I have nothing against veils but :
if I was thinking of robbing the bank I would wear a veil across my face and I reckon I would get away with it.
Yay ....lets all dress like ninjas and rob banks!!!!
That's it hey Wayne, you got any spare water pistols???
Totally. It's been my "one point" escape plan if I ever commit a serious crime. From what i'm aware it's never been used in the commission of a crime...yet. But the prinicple remains: you can't participate in society with your face covered.
So true. I have often thought it won't be long til someone smart uses this to commit a crime lol.
Lol yes, someone smart! Until then though, i'll give it a crack
Yes give it a crack goes well with the Greek method LMAO!!!!
Ohhh I never said a word
Balaclava people that is all I meant...umm is that the name of their dessert???
Talking of cracks I've got a huge crack in my bedroom wall with an arse cheek on either side....
You always have to keep something reserved for those wee lonesome nights.
lol yes, baclava - which *also* happens to be sticky! :-P
Wow - that must have its own gravitational field...it's pulling me...
Good question... and we should not allow our governments and corporations to stop you... but it exposes the fallacy of the bourgeois rhetoric You are not innocent until proven guilty. We are all guilty in the minds of our representatives.
And so, with gods and men
the sheep remain inside their pan
though many times they've seen the way to leave...
Wow - posted this thread yesterday before going off to make the dinner - it really kicked off - it is important that these matters are openly discussed and well done to all those who contributed no matter what your view
i stay in country which has muslims as second highest in numbers..i have many friends which have been muslim..i have studied in school which had 50% muslims..none of girls wore any veil during my school days..although they did wear pajamas along with skirts... i have not seen my muslims friend's sister wearing veil nor my female muslim friends wearing veil accept on some occasions..i guess it is more to do with tradition than religion..
I live in a country where I regularly meet Muslim people I have not meet one person who threatened me. Every Muslim I meet is polite and thoughtful. I think Muslims get a rough deal because they are an easy target. And having lived in other countries I know it's like to be outside the mainstream culture, I know what's like to live in and where i don't speak the language.
What every our view of religion, we share an overpopulated planet and we make every effort to allow every person to be individual - whatever the other person thinks that is...
Is it realy to do with religion - surely these are the type of impositions put on women by the Taliban - I could be wrong
but if it had to do with religion ..all muslim woman would wear it...most in place where i stay dont...also kind of politics which my country sees , no one can force them of not wearing burqa..still they dont which seems that there is no compulsion in doing so..taliban and saudi are extremely strict versions , i suppose...
Personally, I don't have a problem with people wearing what they want to wear. As a woman, I dislike burqas and everything that having to cover your body up stands for, but if other women want to wear it it is their choice. Of course, it not being their choice is a whole new can of worms!
However, for reasons of identification in public places like airports, post offices, banks, police stations etc, the law must be upheld and women required to uncover their faces. At least one guy has escaped via a UK airport dressed in a burqa! The same has to apply for any headgear, like crash helmets, that obscures the face.
I hear that the husband of the lady in Italy is now declaring that she will never be allowed out of the house again, as no other man can look at her. How do you change these attitudes! I know what I would tell him, but I am lucky to be a woman in a free society.
Hmm, the husband's comments make it pretty clear exactly how much of a "choice" that woman's veil is.
That's one of the things that concerns me about these anti-burqa/niqab laws though - is it going to lead to even greater oppression of women? How many are now never going to be allowed out of the house?
The silver lining may be that it will inconvenience the men enough that they will change their minds out of sheer practical necessity (and/or the women may stage a revolt, which I would like even better), but I'm not counting on it. Not for at least a generation.
"The silver lining may be that it will inconvenience the men enough that they will change their minds out of sheer practical necessity (and/or the women may stage a revolt, which I would like even better)"
The available evidence does not suggest that is lkely.
Sab Oh it disturbs me when I have to agree with you.
ha ha...but sab oh is right in his comments ..
The laws are not cast in stone. Laws are made by people and change with time. We can change the laws that say we identify our self in public spaces. Those laws are based on a tiny minority of people - the majority of people are not malevolent... the new laws presume guilt or wrong intent
I think that this can be quite a sensitive subject. We had an incident a couple of years ago where a muslim teaching assistant was employed by our local education authority. When she started work she wore a burka. She refused to remove it and was removed from her position. her argument was that she had to wear it for her religion, although she hadnt worn it for her interview. I belive that people should have the right to wear what they like but I also belive that if what you wear isnt suitable for the situation, then you should be asked to change. For instance with the occasion above, it is very hard for children to learn and feel confidence from someone when they cant even see their face. I must admit I find it difficult to comumicate with a person when I cant see them.
I agree redemption86. In France they really have made an effort since the French revolution to separate religion from state. You go into a state school wearing a crucifix or a Star of David and they'll show you the door. The same with the burka. If it has religious significance they don't want it anywhere near their public institutions and I can see their point.
Have the French banned Catholic nuns wearing their distinct religious habit?
Good point. Looks to me like the Muslim women are being singled out for disparate treatment.
Yes yes Ralph Deeds,
That's also what I think...
Muslim women make an easy target for governments that want to look tough on law and order, immigration, by leveraging nationalist xenophobia
If the rhetoric of global markets means anything, other than a new form of imperialism, we must accept that our world is not some standardized hybrid form of American culture.
Viva la difference
If you don't want your face seen, stay home. It is degrading to women and men, and I don't think society need accomodate that just because it is a religious thing.
We communicate with people via eye contact and facial expression. It's a natural thing, even most animals will look you in the eye.
Face coverings of any sort should not be allowed in public unless it's derned cold outside or you have a medical reason.
Respect for your country, for tradition, for religion, for modesty, for husbands, horse-shit as me deer ol' pappy used to say. Have some respect for humanity.
Of course, I'm not blaming the women. Or even the men so much.
Good points there PB.
Here in Australia I am afraid of religion becoming more of a political force through this sort of nonsense. My dad grew up in a country where Catholics and Protestants kept themselves apart. By the time I was a kid no one gave a damn about religion outside of church. Upon leaving school I often had no idea of what religion if religious at all were the people I was working with. All that mattered was whether the person you were working with was a good person and did their fair share of the work. I would like to keep things going that way.
Most of the time I don't really care if a woman wants to cover up her face or not. I can understand, however, why some bank teller might get jittery seeing anyone covering up most of their face and entering his banking establishment. I can also understand why shop owners that have cash on hand might also be nervous.
As Muhammad himself had over 10 wives, maybe the covering of women was instituted from prevent the greedy from collecting all the good looking ones for themselves.
You might be less likely to buy a car sight unseen
Rod - good point - I wish the State in Ireland was seperated from the Church.
In Canada, a long time ago, we european-transfers (illegal immigrants I might add) forced aboriginal people to not speak their own language, not practice their culture and traditions, took their land away, forced them onto 'reserves', and later ripped their children from their homes and moved them into residential schools to teach them cultures, beliefs and languages that were foreign to them. My ancestors forced aboriginals to immerse themselves into foreign cultures and beliefs but within their own land. I don't know, I wasn't around at the time (my family originally arrived in Canada in 1615) but I suspect the aboriginal people were no doubt curious and receptive of the new people arriving and i figure we european immigrants could have gotten along just fine without enforcing our beliefs and cultures. And...we are still up to it. So...I guess I see this as more of the same in a way. I don't know if we will ever stop telling people how they are supposed to live and what to believe in. my 2-cents on this.
The only problem here SomewayOuttaHere is what happens when immigrants start telling YOU how you are supposed to live?
I was born in my country and grew up with a range of values I cherish and will defend. The Cronulla riot in NSW Australia was really about some, not all, but some Muslim men being rude to Australian women just because they were wearing bikinis on an Australian beach. The law wouldn't or couldn't do anything about this rudeness and so things got out of hand. Respect needs to go two ways.
I don't care if a woman wants to wear a tent on a beach or a burka or whatever just so long as women have the right and will always have the right to wear bikinis if they want and to do so without being harassed by idiot holier-than-thous coming into my country from elsewhere.
The people of Holland have put it on the line to Muslims wanting to migrate to their country. If you are repulsed by women wearing things like bikinis, hot pants and mini-skirts in spring and summer then you had best not move here but live elsewhere. This seems fair enough to me.
In Australia we did rob the Aborigines of much of their culture and identity and that was wrong. Robbing ourselves of our own culture to satisfy someone coming into our country from overseas is also wrong. And two wrongs still don't make a right.
It's already happening . you missed my point. "I don't know if we will ever stop telling people how they are supposed to live and what to believe in" where ever you are from, where ever you live or who ever you are (all people in the world). My only way to make a difference is to strive to allow people around me to be different and hope my small gesture is returned by others somehow. just want peace - but I know it'll never happen - not in my life time anyway. Some people are much more radical in their beliefs and for some reason are compelled to force them upon everyone else - but that is not everyone fortunately. I really have to believe that.
My point Someway is that I will take it unkindly if someone tries to tell me or mine how to live. I don't want to tell someone else how to live but they better not cross the line with me.
I don't agree with what happened to the Aborigines. To say that my kin weren't in Australia until the 1920s and that a lot of the damage had already been done doesn't really help. Maybe I have no right to say I don't want what happened to the Aborigines to happen to me and mine but I'll say it anyway.
People around me and in my neighborhood are free to be different but there's a price they have to pay. They have to also allow others in turn to be different. Am I willing also to pay that price? of course I am.
Peace comes with the agreement from Muslims that my culture has it that it isn't sinful for women to wear bikinis, hot pants, and miniskirts in spring and summer. If they can't stomach that as the newest newcomers they really don't have the right to be in my country. They don't have to accept this for themselves and their own women don't have to but mutual regard means that if they respect our women in bikinis, etc then we are obliged to accept their women in burkas, etc. There is a mutuality here and you can derive peace and even goodwill from it if you will.
Mistreat women around me and I am riled. I think that makes a world of sense. Treat women kindly no matter how they dress and you can call me friend. Pretty simple stuff really. If the radicals can't stand that kind of logic then they really do belong elsewhere.
Easy for a Muslim couple or family to cut a deal with me and my beliefs. I'll meet them half way but only half way.
I think that there is a great deal of anti-muslim feeling at this time - however - In France as some of the posts here have stated they treat all religions equal - they dont want any symbols in their public buildings including schools etc
And anti-Muslim feeling is rife in France because the Muslims resent not being able to take their religious symbols into public buildings. They keep pushing and it fires up the French who believe in their republic and in keeping state and religion separate. There have been Muslim and anti-Muslim riots in France. The French want to remain French and i don't blame them for that. You go to their country you play by their rules. Sounds fair to me. You don't want to play by their rules then go somewhere else.
Yup - I live in France near a largish Muslim community and the tension is becoming palpable. The economic non-crisis is not helping either. Riots in Nice just last week. Not that the newspapers will have reported that. The film festival is coming up.
I despise religion and the way it is used to create artificial barriers between groups. This one is not going to be pretty.
And - guess what? The Catholic Church is lapping it up.
Good for business.
I really 'get' what you are saying especially view points from countries that have a population that originates from it. my thoughts are derived from a country such as Canada where europeans started settling in in the 1600's. Some Canadians (mostly of european descent) have a very difficult time with not allowing Canadian culture to thrive - Canadian culture such as celebrating Christmas in the schools rather now 'holiday seasons' - the Christian ways of the past few hundred years in Canada are being pushed aside so as not to offend anyone from a different culture. Canada is changing as well from where it was a few hundred years ago. Our official languages are French and English. In our province of Quebec, there are some places that do not welcome the English language and all signage is in French only - that province had most of the earliest settlers from France. So in Canada we have this English vs French thing going on and has been for a long time and continues to this day. Violence has erupted as a result too and still does from time to time. I love Quebec btw; it is an interesting province to visit and many Canadians have not experienced that Canadian French culture. We have aboriginal groups here who speak more than 200 languages - none of these languages are official or many Canadians are not even aware of them. And then there is the queen of england that we are supposed to identify with her (LOL) (excuse me for that) -( hope I haven't offended any Canadian british monarchy supporters) And then we have all of the other groups that have come to Canada over the past few hundred years and those most recently that arrived here in the last century. We have a province that heralds helping 'slaves originating from Africa' flee the US. Chinese that migrated a long time ago and worked hard building (and dying while doing it) to help build our railway line through our beautiful Rocky Mountains. We are quite a mix here in Canada. And those Canadians that identify with how this country evolved a few hundred years ago are 'hanging on' and get frustrated with how rights are changing - it is more evident in larger cities (and we have few of those across the country) such as Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal (those are the largest centres here). When I connect with friends who live in those large centres, I regularly hear their frustrations about new comers. Anyway, I just wanted to give you some insight of how we in Canada have been evolving. There of course is much more to say about it - but it is a looooonnng discussion.
As a Canadian of European decent I want to get on record as diagreeing with some of this.. but it is far too early to type anything but sarcastic remarks and funny pictures.
Suffice to say that "Canadian' culture is what Canadians want it to be... not simply the desires of those who were here first.
ha ha - struck a chord! where are you roots btw?
there we go...well, i didn't want to assume anything. so, you'll have to let me know what you don't agree with - later...
And I do agree with your comment somewhat 'what Canadians want it to be' - you might be living in one of the larger centres?
I also want to add to my earlier post to clarify - there are many cultures that have been here for a long time including people from Greece, Italy, Poland, India, etc., etc.
you forgot to mention that the most handsome of which are the Greeks
oh yes - I forgot - I'd like to add to my earlier post to clarify again. Canadian Greek men are the most handsome in Canada! I think they might be the smartest too!
Mark - I think that in these difficult times - there are going to be even greater tensions.
A little bit of honesty and less political correctness might help. It should be asked of migrants whether we can live in peace with them or are our ideologies and views of the world just too different.
I think that political correctness may be the best way for many of us to hide our racism - there are many places in the world where peopel from differnet cultures and religions can live in peace together - there are many places where they cant - at the moment in Europe racism is on the up and nobody wants to address it, even Gordon Brown called a woman a bigot just because she raised the issue - although that Gaff may not have been a Gaff at all as blacks and other ethnic minorities will call the election in 120 marginal seats in Britain today......
Hiding something doesn't make it go away. it just festers and then you have violence. It roars up worse than ever and even the people who can tell you what went wrong won't be able to because you have put a zipper on their lips.
Sure there are many places where people from different cultures and religions can and do live together in peace. Australia is still predominantly one of those places. What's more migrants in the '50s, '60s and '70s did one better. The Greeks, Italians and Lebanese just to name a few have contributed brilliantly to the Australian way of life. One of my neighbors happens to be from Poland and she is a wonderful woman. My brother in law is from Finland. I grew up where there were Italians and that was all right.
Again we go back to the beach - the heart of Australian society in summer. Respect the women whatever they choose to wear and you are on my side. If you can't do that then goodbye. And do keep religion out of politics as much as possible. There's a good fellow.
okay I have an honest question here..
Ive read thru the responses. and I tend to agree with most if not close to all of them in one fashion or other.
but what is the real reason we have have for agreeing with the ban. I can think of and agree with every logical reason. hiding identity, it riles up people. terrorists and criminals can hide under them etc..
but is it also possible that the viel and the burka. tick us off, makes us think of all the things it represents that we find wrong with the culture and the reilgion. in short it offends us.
that doesnt invalidate wanting to ban it in my book, each country should stay true to their own culture, changing it only when they as a people see the need and have the desire to do so.
as an individual Id not only ban the viel but American Idol, all reality shows and sensible shoes.. okay that last one I admit is weird but they just bother me LOL.
Our true culture in the U.S. is multicultural.
What is more, the world is a multitude of cultures
No country is a single culture
Every modern country has a youth culture, a women's culture, grey-power, gay & lesbian culture, white collar culture, blue collar culture...
A single uniform culture is a myth promoted by members of the male bourgeois culture
As an Australian with a migrant background I disagree that RM describes 'the' Australian view. 'The' singular view cannot exist in a multicultural society such as Australia. Celebrate the difference!
My Australia is my Australia and is worth defending. Why the difference anyway? Why shouldn't everyone on an Australian beach in summer be treated with courtesy and respect no matter what their background? Sounds good to a lot of people. In celebrating any difference I do not agree with people on the beach who cannot be courteous and respectful of others. If you have a problem with women enjoying the beach then don't go onto the beach. If I do not describe everyone's Australia I describe my own and if my own is close to Earnest's then that is fair enough to me. As for your Australia who the hell knows what that is. It has nothing to do with everyone being treated fairly because that is my Australia. Multicultural? Does that mean anything goes regardless of who gets hurt. Sounds like chaos to me.
For all the rant you make - you reiterate one point - 'my Australia'
And according to you 'that is fair enough'...
Well the thing is, 'my' is not your property so you have exclusive rights on 'my Australia'. Otherwise you and Earnest could share the view.
So clearly, if you can share 'my Australia' I can use 'my Australia' to refer to something quite different to you...
That is not chaos - that is just how it is... we have a multitude of view of what our culture condones. But I suspect you think the dominant culture is what you proclaim as truth...
Hence I will continue to debate the matter from my own point-of-view
Viva la difference!
This is indeed a difficult topic - perhaps religion should be banned all over the world and replace it with something like painting by numbers but only with pretty colours
One very bad use of the burqa in Australia!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldne … urier.html
I was just thinking - perhaps we should ask the Spooks to veil us from the truth
hey u kno theirishobserver - I completely forgot to include the irish that came to canada a long time ago - i don't really identify with european roots anymore. mother's ancestors are french (1615) and father's irish (late 1700's) - can't believe that slip! shame on me! we can mow the lawn where i live all year round if you want - primarily get rain in the winter but only on the south west (wet) coast of Canada. And you can ride your motorcycle all year long - Yahoo!!! now really...off to work...later!
Sharia Law allows Muslim men to have sex with their slave women, even if the slave was married prior to captivity. There is no limit to the amount of concubines a Muslim man may have.
With this in mind, do you actually think Muslim men have any respect for their own wives?
I have relatives in Canada, USA, Australia all over as we Irish have big families who went to other countries to find work and make our home...thanks Canada
And nobody condemns the Irish for spreading across the entire globe taking with them their culture and language. Why do our current governments resurrect the age-old fears and condemn the new wave of migrant?
well see according to my irish grand mother theres a reason for that.. The Irish were on the verge of taking over the world peacefully.. but the scotts didnt like this idea.. so they gave the Irish whiskey and got them drunk..
well the irish werent happy but they liked the whiskey so they created the bagpipe and gave it to the scotts . who stil havent gotten the joke. LOL
and yes thats actually what she told me one fine day after I had been out riding with a friend whose family was scottish LOL.
strangely it turns out the huge skeleton in the family closet.. was that my great great great grandmother had married a Scottsman from Clan Mclauren LOL.
I will say this on a serious note.. in the US in various parts of the Country it was easier to get a job as a black man than if you were Irish. I used to have a picture from NYC 1910 that showed a black male sweeping the side walk in front of a store. wearing a store apron. in the window of the store was a sign that said " Help wanted.. Irish need not apply"
seems theres always some idiot ready to hate some one else for some obscure and moronic reason.
Perhaps the French have thright idea - ban all religious out showings
mandatory miniskirts for all (women... ok, well MOST women)
The French have been right on keeping religion away from the public domain for quite some time and no French person is likely to allow the set standard to slip for anyone.
Always good to let the women decide what they want to wear. When it comes to clothes they are pretty much the experts.
Have the French really banned ALL signs of of ALL religions? Id France really a completely secular society?
No. There are churches, synagogues, etc in France. You already know that without asking. They do, however, make a point of separating the secular from the religious.
No. You wanted me to claim there are no religious signs in France. Silly thing to do. I know that the country is predominantly Catholic with some Protestants and other religions. I also know that since the French Revolution the French people have attempted to keep secular activity and religious activity apart or as apart as it is possible to keep them. Some force comes into their country that wants to, needs to or tries to change all that and naturally they will resist. Here I am on their side.
I replied to the post by theirishobserver who said 'Perhaps the French have the right idea - ban all religious out showings' so your claim that I wanted you 'to claim there are no religious signs in France' is simply another example of your projection... and if theirishobserver can use irony then I too can be ironic... IMO you do not put much thought into your posts
by theirishobserver.6 years ago
France - Belguim - the ban is spreadingPresident Nicolas Sarkozy urged French Muslims today not to feel hurt nor stigmatised by a planned ban on full face veils that will fine women who hide their faces and jail men if...
by KK Trainor4 years ago
In some countries face-covering veils are being banned because they can present a security risk and some feel they show a lack of assimilation. Australia is the most recent example. Their proposed law would require a...
by karl3 years ago
There is at the moment another debate going on in the UK about the wearing of the niqab, it seems that freedom only goes so far when its against ancient oppression. The niqab has nothing whatsoever to do with freedom...
by Steven Escareno41 hours ago
According to young turks, a new line of sexy lingerie is being mass produced specifically for men that want to wear them. It's also interesting to note that the company making the undergarments are saying that...
by DannyMaio5 years ago
Curious if everyone thinks Paris is wrong for banning Muslim Veils? Just seems very odd that you go to another country and refuse to obey their laws? If you do not like it why not go back where you came from? If it was...
by Susie Lehto15 hours ago
IT WAS OBAMA who on ABC News referenced - "My Muslim faith."IT WAS OBAMA who gave $100 million in U.S. taxpayer funds to re-build foreign mosques.IT WAS OBAMA who wrote that in the event of a conflict -"I...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.