Muslims - should they be unveiled

1. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

   Perhaps God wants us all to live in peace

   replyreport
2. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

   Is there anti-muslim feeling in your part of the world?

   replyreport
3. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

   Europe appears to be catching the anti-muslim virus as more countries are now focusing on traditional clothes worn by Muslims - is it all about security

   replyreport
4. 65

   TheSituationposted 14 years ago

   It is their country to do with as they will.  How can we be upset at countries for restricting the wearing of things like this but be ok with Muslim countries who REQUIRE them?

   replyreport
5. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

   thesituation - indeed it is their country - but then so is Iraq and Afghanistan - where do we draw the line

   replyreport
   1. 65

      TheSituationposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Last time I checked if Iraq wants to pass a law requiring women to cover their faces they can do so, they are now a  democracy thanks to the US and Coalition forces.

      replyreport
6. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

   Peace to all men

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Wow! You are really beating this dead horse. Why is that?

      replyreport
      1. 71

         myownworldposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I agree Irish... time to stop unveiling this thread!

         replyreport
      2. 67

         Greek Oneposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Just so mean...
         
         

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Guess the horse is beyond caring.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               Greek Oneposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Beating a dead horse should NOT be confused with either:
               a) Choking a chicken, or
               b) Spanking a monkey.
               
               Incidentally, the last of these two are illegal in Saudi Arabia

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  myownworldposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  add:
                  c) flogging women - which by the way is soo legal!

                  replyreport
         2. 71

            myownworldposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, that is EXACTLY what Taliban do to women who don't veil themselves in public! You're spot on!

            replyreport
7. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

   The debate continues on 'main' land Europe about the possibility of a wider ban on such out ward displys of religion that may hinder security

   replyreport
8. 0

   WizardOfOzposted 14 years ago

   I fill my car late at night and I am required to take my baseball cap off before entering the fuel station to pay.
   
   In other news, a robbery was committed by a man wearing a burqa.
   
   And, a local water park was forced to pay $15 K for discrimination after an Islamic family complained about health and safety regulations.
   
   Remove the head scarf.  Its got nothing to do with Islam, it is a cultural practice.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      ... why the hell do you have to take off your baseball cap?
      
      If it's governmentally mandated, it's tyranny.
      
      If it's done by the company, then you could always choose to shop elsewhere.

      replyreport
9. 60

   theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

   Perhaps all religions should be allowed to wear what they like on a Sunday

   replyreport
10. 60

    deepthinker76posted 14 years ago

    I think this one is tough. But ultimately freedom of religion is one of the foundations of America ...so ...I guess one should respect their religious beliefs.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Ah - too lazy to read anything huh? Figures.

       replyreport
11. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Freedom of choice - or is that not the way

    replyreport
12. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Correct Rajab - well said

    replyreport
13. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Peace among the nations

    replyreport
14. 78

    Polly Cposted 14 years ago

    This must be one of the longest topics ever.....hasn't a conclusion been reached yet?

    replyreport
15. 61

    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years ago

    Before unveiling the muslims, why not insulate the knees, thighs and half out breasts of western women?
    
    If one does not want to show their faces or any body parts to others, it is their privilege. But showing parts to others are not privileges. But utter indecency.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       WizardOfOzposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Totally.  I am sick and tired of bare knees!?
       
       What?  And now.. Faces!?  Utter filth.

       replyreport
       1. 57

          Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I was watching this movie the other night and oh baby you shoulda seen the knees on this chick! There musta been half a dozen full frontal knee shots. It was so hot!
          
          
          In other news, medical researchers are making progress on the painful condition known as 'Half Out Breasts.'

          replyreport
          1. 0

             WizardOfOzposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             So lewd.

             replyreport
    2. 61

       Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       While I agree with the argument that Sivagna is making - that there is no absolute definition of decency - I disagree with the idea of banning skankily dressed women.
       
       All that needs to be done is for people to realize that burkas don't actually pose a threat to anyone whatsoever.

       replyreport
16. 0

    WizardOfOzposted 14 years ago

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8667330.stm
    
    The headline, 'Australia burka armed robbery sparks ban debate'

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       of course it "sparks ban debate".  Muslim ideology is a threat to the government - religion and state are the same thing.
       
       When a black person robs a store, do we talk about banning blacks? no
       
       When a white person robs a store, do we talk about banning blacks? no
       
       When anyone anywhere robs anything using a ski-mask, do we talk about banning ski-masks? NO
       
       the ENTIRE debate is ONLY being had simply because of the threat that the state sees with a new religion coming into it's so called "sovereign territory".
       
       AKA - it's a power clash between tyrannical groups.

       replyreport
17. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Yes

    replyreport
18. 0

    The stallionposted 14 years ago

    Well, to be honest, I don't really know where the concept of abaya(gown)and covering the face came from! I mean Islam just says that muslim women should cover their heads! And, well in the modern world can't really excel in her career and stuff while covering her face!
        And due to all the terrorism news, all the news about suicide bomb attacks by individuals covering his/her face(yes, there have been incidents when men did it too), people covering their faces seem all the more suspicious, so I guess the ban is only natural!
        So I guess that covering the face is another one of the imam's notion and I dont think it is actually a part of Islam!

    replyreport
19. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Religious Freedom

    replyreport
20. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    The French President has said today that he is happy that this law was up held

    replyreport
    1. 61

       VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       A good government should never harm the sentiments of even one of their subjects, until and unless they engage in harming others' sentiments.

       replyreport
       1. 57

          Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          A "good" government doesn't have "subjects."

          replyreport
21. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    The lower house in France has approved the ban this week

    replyreport
    1. 69

       alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Well - the French government has always had a racist slant, recently the Vichy which ran most of France when its army collapsed in the face of Hitler's troops because it's officers were conservative to the point of fascism and ran away rather than fight = and De Gaulle was well known for his attitude to the 'colonials', along with his political opportunism.  Just maybe the resto f Europe will see this law for the racist attack it is and not only refuse to pass such laws but also condemn France for its racist stance.

       replyreport
       1. 57

          Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Again, what "race" are you talking about?
          
          
          And it seems you have a very flexible definition of "recent."

          replyreport
          1. 69

             alternate poetposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Racism is not confined to any one race - it is a generic term, but you would have realized this before you posted just for the sake of posting I guess.
             
             Recent in a historical context, maybe too hard to explain to you, everyone else will know which is enough.

             replyreport
             1. 57

                Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Racism refers to matters of race. Perhaps you were thinking of 'bigotry.'

                replyreport
          2. 61

             Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I'm going to have to go with "Alternate poet" on this one. Racism doesn't just mean "race", although, surely, it did at one point. The same way that Hitler's holocaust against the Jewish religion (and others) is easily considered racist, any major attack on any other religion must also be considered racist.
             
             This also brings up, to a small degree, the idea that state and religion are very interconnected. The state helps define what one's race is, and so does religion. Racism, "religion-ism", and all that stuff is really just tyranny.

             replyreport
             1. 57

                Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Main Entry: rac·ism
                Pronunciation: \ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
                Function: noun
                Date: 1933
                1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
                2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

                replyreport
                1. 61

                   Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   so, sab, you deny that the actions of Hitler against the Jewish faith were an act of Racism?
                   
                   .. or are you demanding that Jewish people be a new race?
                   
                   Should Christians then be a new race? What about scientologists?

                   replyreport
                   1. 57

                      Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      They were an act of genocide. Religions are not races, so again you are thinking of bigotry and intolerance rather than racism.

                      replyreport
                      1. 61

                         Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                         I'm flabbergasted to see the word genocide used to distinguish race from religion from race
                         
                         The definitions agree with you I just can't believe a word with the root of "gene" could be stripped of it's biological necessity !
                         
                         If a word with a biological necessity can be changed to remove such a meaning, them I must insist that the word racism CAN be used to refer to religious intolerance.
                         
                         But you have made your point!

                         replyreport
22. 61

    Evan G Rogersposted 14 years ago

    I'm surprised to see so many people demanding that they should be unveiled! Many people are saying things like "in their muslim countries, it's ok, but not here in our non-muslim country"...
    
    Really?... So by that logic, it WOULD be ok for the muslims to be veiled if they had a mass-migration to the US -- then the US would be a "muslim country"... the argument clearly makes no sense.
    
    ...I'm beginning to think that the real issue is that christians are just afraid of minorities broadcasting their faith...
    
    The logical argument is: "If they really want to do that to themselves, and they don't interfere with anyone else's rights, they should be allowed".
    
    So, yes, they should be allowed to wear those ... burkas? is that what they're called?...
    
    I see numerous female muslims wearing the full-complete-body-covering-clothing thing at my UNIVERSITY of all places. I think to myself - why would any educated woman wear such a symbol of female subordination?! Then I think to myself "oh well, if they want to!"... ...
    
    ...  ...and then the problem goes away. The problem isn't the burkas, it's YOUR reaction to them.

    replyreport
23. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Peace to all men

    replyreport
24. 72

    tonymac04posted 14 years ago

    Peace to all people!  guess women could use some peace also! LOL!

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Kimberly Bunchposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       ...Yes and respect! I'm sure the majority of those women given the choice wouldn't be veiled in excess like some of them are with full body coverings. It is absurd to torture women in that way in modern times. One thing comes to mind is it is dangerous and can get very hot under that sheet.
       
       Have the majority of these women been brainwashed to believe God wants them hiding behind a sheet?
       
       I seen a lady with only a rectangle opening that was screened for her eyes to see out of and she was driving in Bellevue, Washington State(near the city of Seattle). It is also dangerous!! She had a child in the back seat!
       
       How easy is it to drive wearing one of those screened sheets like that? It should be illegal to wear in public for other peoples' safety, at least!

       replyreport
       1. 61

          Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          While I agree that it is Lunacy that some women think covering their whole face and body, I must also insist that it is their choice!
          
          If they wish to believe in a god that demands that they treat themselves poorly, then it's their choice
          
          But is it any more ludicrous to cover ones face and body than to not eat pork, or to demand that abstinence only is the way to control behavior, or to demand that some guy with a funny hat is above justice when it comes to running a global crime syndicate, or to believe that once you die you,ll live forever being able to do whatever you want?
          
          All religions (and states for that matter) make idiotic rules that are best to be ignored.

          replyreport
25. 53

    NoAmnestyposted 14 years ago

    Yes. I remember the case of a Muslim woman who wanted a drivers license but did not want to remove her veil for the picture. The purpose of a drivers license picture is for identification. The police or other interested parties look at you, look at the picture and make a determination whether you are who you say you are. How can that happen if you are wearing a veil when you are photographed? If they want to do anything that requires photo ID then they need to remove the veil. Don't remove the veil, don't drive. It also follows that if they are stopped for a violation they need to remove the veil so that officers can identify them. Also, when boarding an airplane they should remove the veil so that it can be determined if they are the person on the drivers license or passport. This is just common sense...something we in the US seem to be quite short of these days.

    replyreport
26. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    This trend appeasr to be spreading to other European countries - some say it is simply anti-muslim

    replyreport
    1. 57

       Sab Ohposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Well, Europe does have a history of unfortunate religious intolerance...

       replyreport
       1. 61

          Evan G Rogersposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Hahahaha. Well said Sab!

          replyreport
27. 69

    SparklingJewelposted 14 years ago

    I haven't read all the posts to this thread, but it probably has not been said that the whole issue needs to be understood from it's mystical origin...and the perversion therefrom.
    
    when one can comprehend the beginning, they can see where things have gone astray...
    
    the whole allegory of the fall of man and the Adam and Eve,, Garden of Eden story has been grossly misunderstood...that's what needs to be looked at.
    
    tradition and culture need to be brought into the 21st century into the light of the New Day... yes, this will take some spiritual work for humanity to sort it out...
    
    but today's burqua is a sign of the times, of trying to sort it out for some, and for others its just a continuation of inequality for women and weakness in men
    
    
    
    as far as should they be forced to unveil...no, it should be their choice, should they choose to make it.
    but as long as death is a deterent, as in some places where a woman's death or exile in some form, is the cultural answer, we won't see them choosing to do so.
    
    the answer will be different and uniquely decided upon everywhere

    replyreport
28. 62

    ru blogposted 14 years ago

    The few people that feel oppressed by the unveiling are overlooked in order to provide safety for the many.  It is a dangerous thing in today's world to allow people to walk around with masks on, unfortunate as that may be.  This is a classic utilitarian law, the greatest good for the greatest many prevails as it almost always should.
    
    You can make some people happy some time, but you can't make all the people happy all the time.

    replyreport
29. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    let there be love among the nations

    replyreport
30. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Other countries are preparing to follow France on this issue

    replyreport
31. 61

    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 14 years ago

    At last, France has enacted the law today (18-7-2010), bannning burqas of Muslim women.
    
    All muslim nations should follow suit and enact laws forbidding half nakedness of western women. They should be ordered to wear decent dresses, like that of their own men, who wear a honourable coat-suit.

    replyreport
32. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Spain's parliament will debate a proposal this week to bar the burka in public, joining other European countries considering similar moves on the grounds that such garments are degrading to women

    replyreport
    1. 59

       SomewayOuttaHereposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       no additional comment from me....just droppin' by to say 'good morning Irish!'

       replyreport
33. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    somewayouttahere - good to hear from you - hope you are doing well

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Damn - you are determined to get as much mileage out of this dead horse as possible. I mean - you keep on dragging this up every time it gets left for a day or so.
       
       Why?

       replyreport
34. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Mark it is a current issue here in Europe and I just want to know what other people think - another country banned the Burka yesterday

    replyreport
35. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Syria has banned face-covering Islamic veils from the country’s universities.
    The surprise move comes as similar moves in Europe – including controversial calls in Britain for a ban on burkas – have sparked cries of discrimination against Muslims.
    
    
    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldne … z0uFRfB9ks

    replyreport
36. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    I guess that this topic has a long way to go - is it just about security or is it really about discrimination

    replyreport
37. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    This ban appears to be expanding rapidly across Europe

    replyreport
38. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Britain is now considering a similar ban - is it racism or security

    replyreport
39. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Will the Muslim world and Christian world ever be at peace

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Most likely, when Islam and Christianity are abolished.

       replyreport
40. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    hear that

    replyreport
41. 60

    worldgrandeurposted 14 years ago

    Listen, it's about security only since terrorists can hide in this garment and cover there faces (it happened before). I read also that Niqab in Islam is not necessary, so some fanatic or jealous muslims force there wives to wear the face cover. So, religion has nothing to do with this as well as descrimination... Syria and other countries have the right to protect themselves from terrorism behind this Niqab or face cover.

    replyreport
42. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    love your neighbour

    replyreport
43. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    many countries now preparing to ban Burka

    replyreport
44. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Individual freedom is being undermined - or is it

    replyreport
45. 61

    Evan G Rogersposted 14 years ago

    I'm impressed that it's been almost a month of this forum, and it's still in the top 3 almost every day.
    
    Muslims shouldn't be unveiled by threat of government, that would be tyranny.
    
    Nuff said.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       That would be because Irish here keeps bumping it up to the top.

       replyreport
46. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Good discussion should never end - that in itself would defeat the purpose of the discussion

    replyreport
47. 61

    Beelzedadposted 14 years ago

    Well, I guess it's not okay to ban bhurkas in a "republic" but it seems okay to ban music in a "sacred regime" of another republic:
    
    "Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said today that music is "not compatible" with the values of the Islamic republic, and should not be practised or taught in the country.
    
    In some of the most extreme comments by a senior regime figure since the 1979 revolution, Khamenei said: "Although music is halal, promoting and teaching it is not compatible with the highest values of the sacred regime of the Islamic Republic."
    
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/au … usic-islam

    replyreport
48. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Mark - I do not

    replyreport
49. 60

    theirishobserver.posted 14 years ago

    Let there be freedom

    replyreport
50. 69

    alternate poetposted 14 years ago

    Hey Irish - are you bumping burkha's
    
    Here in China where going without a bra, or showing too much cleavage, is so looked down upon it could be considered immoral - I see many, if not most, western girls going as far as possible to expose themselves.  Luckily this supposedly 'repressive' regime ignores this, possibly because it supports the general idea that foreigners have little in the way of moral values and have disgusting habits.

    replyreport
    1. 73

       earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Is this justification for the Chinese having such a disgusting racist attitudes towards westerners travelling in their country?
       
       If we used terms like they do to describe tourist, and charged double for guests in our country that would be seen as what it is .... racism. China has plenty of it. I understand enough Mandarin to know this is true.

       replyreport