The Burka. Should wearing it be banned?

wes

RosslareChap wrote: »

Maybe care to explain why ALL women ( of all religions and no religion ) are forced to wear a hijab in Iran?, and in many Muslim countries. Is having a womens hair showing really harming anyone?. Likewise a bit of lower legs showing from a normal knee length skirt?. Maybe when Muslim countries start respecting the rights of non-Muslim women to wear non-Muslim dress, maybe then we can respect the rights of Muslim women to wear what they want, which we have been doing for a long time, with still no change in Muslim countries.

What other countries do is neither here nor there, and quite frankly irrelevant to laws in this country.

If Iran does dodgy crap, then we really shouldn't choose to emulate them. I always find this a silly position. Well Iran does.... so we can now be just as intolerant as they are. Personally, I don't want to descend to there level, but apparently many here do for some odd reason.

Also, there many Muslim majority countries. For instance you can get Alchohol and don't have to wear a Hijab in Turkey. So picking a single example to justify you whatabouterry, also assumes Muslims are a single undifferentiating entity, which is untrue.

Laminations

wes wrote: »

We do condone drug use. Its called Alchohol, and contributes to a great deal of violence and road deaths. So using your logic we should then ban. I don't think you would get very far .

Again I said legislate, not ban. Alcohol consumption IS restricted to certain places, if you think this isn''t the case try knacker drinking in a bank or walk around the streets swigging a bottle of gin. Using my logic we'd contain the argument to face covering, where suggesting restrictions doesn't automaticaaly generalise to other forms of clothing or behaviour.

wes

Laminations wrote: »

Again I said legislate, not ban. Alcohol consumption IS restricted to certain places, if you think this isn''t the case try knacker drinking in a bank or walk around the streets swigging a bottle of gin. Using my logic we'd contain the argument to face covering, where suggesting restrictions doesn't automaticaaly generalise to other forms of clothing or behaviour.

Fair enough, I misunderstood what you said then.

irishconvert

anymore wrote: »

Ok this thread is about burqas.

If your arguements on the subject are so threadbare that you feel the need to expand it to include niqab, thats ok, it doesnt detract from the arguements about the burqa - on the contrary it reinforces the reason for seeking to ban it.

The niqab is the face veil covering. That is what we are discussing, yes?

Laminations

irishconvert wrote: »

The niqab is the face veil covering. That is what we are discussing, yes?

I thought so yes. Think anymore might have meant hijab, if thats the case, I agree with him. The head scarf is isselevant to this argument IMO

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

anymore

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I am afraid you are very mistaken if you think the burning of women was only done by the Inquisition.

And again you are quite a mistake in looking at the burqa issue in isolation ; it is but a symptom of a repressive and exploitative attitude to women, whether it is state mandated or the state and or its officials simply look the other way does not alter the effect.
I notice you are very reluctant to engage with the reality that even in liberal UK, the most awful abuse of young Muslim women who have tried to exercise their free will has occurred - so much easier to deal with this on a theoretical basis, isn't it ?

Speaking of free expression, do you think all those so eager to allow free expression as regards the wearing of the burqa would be so eager to allow free expression as in e.g cartoons or pictures of their important religious figures ? They didn't seem so happy about Sal-man Rushdie right to artistic expression, did they ?

anymore

Laminations wrote: »

I thought so yes. Think anymore might have meant hijab, if thats the case, I agree with him. The head scarf is isselevant to this argument IMO

Thanks for correction ,

sparkling sea

Irish women have fought extremely hard to achieve some semblence of gender equality - I would question the motives and the gender of any person who would easily give away this relatively new found equality.

Our traditions have changed to benefit all in our society, perhaps we should be fighting to uphold these benefits as opposed to fighting to uphold traditions that are blatantly sexist.

anymore

dvpower wrote: »

I think he's suggesting that Muslim women are not allowed to talk to non Muslims (y'know, pick an extreme interpretation of an aspect of a religion and then assume that all adherents are extremists).

Mind you, I did hear an interview on Newstalk the other weekend where a Scottish Muslim when asked if she had casual conversations with people on the street, said she didn't and wondered why anyone would want to have a conversation with anyone outside of their family. Weird.

No I clearly wasnt suggesting that.
What do you think the chances are the average irish .male would be in a position to approach a burqa wearing woman to have a casual conversation or that they would be made to feel an attempt to strike up such a conversation would be welcome ? It is fair to suggest that a muslim woman wearing a burqa is from the very conservative wing of the faith and the purpose of the quote was just to give an indicator of the type of thinking in that quarter.
Perhaps there is a lack of awareness that there are non - muslim people who would occassionally look at some of the Muslim and other religious channels, however briefly, on satellite channels.

anymore

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Sorry for multi posts !

If we have moved that far, then why was the abusrd Defamation Act passed into law last year ?
And I presume you know that Catholic hospitals reserve the right to refuse medical treatment that is not in keeping with thier ' catholic ethos' ?

I am afraid superstition still rules the roost in many of our institutions !

sparkling sea

Many commentators on this thread seem to have difficult staying with the specific issue - should the burka be banned.

But I suppose if it will never directly affect you then its easy to get blind sided by other issues, and this begs the question of should men ever even have a say in this matter to begin with. the answer is obiviously NO

anymore

Below is an interesting article on the burqa from the Huffington Post:
It is worth reading in its entirety

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/caryl-rivers/ban-the-burka-you-bet_b_230136.html

" The burka is a symbol of the power of the "Male Gaze." Imagine if all the males disappeared from the planet in an instant, would women keep wrapping themselves up in heavy clothing that covered everything but their eyes? Of course not. Women are neither naturally stupid nor masochistic. The burka is a symbol of the male power to compel women to behave in ways that speak of men's right to own female bodies and to restrict female action. It's in the long line of dreary cultural artifacts that include foot binding, chastity belts, female circumcision, honor killings, concubinage, and the sex trade "

irishconvert

anymore wrote: »

No I clearly wasnt suggesting that.
What do you think the chances are the average irish .male would be in a position to approach a burqa wearing woman to have a casual conversation or that they would be made to feel an attempt to strike up such a conversation would be welcome ? It is fair to suggest that a muslim woman wearing a burqa is from the very conservative wing of the faith and the purpose of the quote was just to give an indicator of the type of thinking in that quarter.
Perhaps there is a lack of awareness that there are non - muslim people who would occassionally look at some of the Muslim and other religious channels, however briefly, on satellite channels.

Here are a few interviews:

Interview with a woman about why she wears burqa:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSy2jNHSG9Q

A girl who wants to wear it but her parents don't allow it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjR_vZaztcs

CNN Interview with two French women who wear Burqa:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkh3WB5Htwg

anymore

For obivous reasons we dont have any interviews with the hundreds of young muslim women murdered each year in the name of religion.

[I]An honor killing or honour killing (see spelling differences, also called a customary killing) is the murder of a family or clan member by one or more fellow family members, where the murderers (and potentially the wider community) believe the victim to have brought dishonor upon the family, clan, or community. This perceived dishonor is normally the result of (a) utilizing dress codes unacceptable to the family (b) wanting out of an arranged marriage or choosing to marry by own choice or (c) engaging in certain sexual acts. These killings result from the perception that defense of honor justifies killing a person whose behavior dishonors their clan or family.

The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) estimates that the annual worldwide total of honor-killing victims may be as high as 5,000.[1][/I]

ChocolateSauce

And this relates to banning the Burka how?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Elenxor

the burka should be banned...it would look awful on you....sorry...could,nt resist it!!!!!

sparkling sea

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

And this relates to banning the Burka how?

Rejecting Islam is punishable by death in many countries including, in practice, western countries, refusing to uphold that traditions have resulted in hounour killings. This punishment acts as a severe warning to women.

A burka is not something Muslim women choose to wear but something they wear because they're afraid of the consequences of not wearing it.

Also some people have suggested that banning the burka is a violation of a womens right to wear it however I would suggest that banning the burqa would be a violation of individual liberties only in a world where Muslim women are truly free from other Muslims.

ChocolateSauce

sparkling sea wrote: »

Rejecting Islam is punishable by death in many countries including, in practice, western countries, refusing to uphold that traditions have resulted in hounour killings. This punishment acts as a severe warning to women.

A burka is not something Muslim women choose to wear but something they wear because they're afraid of the consequences of not wearing it.

.

I would tend to agree with that, but it still doesn't give a government the right to dictate certain things to its citizens. The solution isn't to ban the Burka, as this will just trap those women who are being forced to wear it in the home.

For women who are forced to wear it, they should report their men to the police (whom I believe should be arrested for slavery); for women who are not forced to wear it, they should be allowed to.

How exactly one goes about proving x y and z is another matter entirely...

sparkling sea

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I would tend to agree with that, but it still doesn't give a government the right to dictate certain things to its citizens. The solution isn't to ban the Burka, as this will just trap those women who are being forced to wear it in the home.

Why doesn't it justify a government banning the burka ? Why should the development of gender equality and the breaking with traditions that are based on sexism and inequality come second in Western society - specifically in Ireland.

Why should a minority of womens right to wear a burka supercede the right to liberty for all women. Please don't come back with old chestnut that the burka is not a manifestation of male supremacy in countries were it is accepted as the norm because any degree of investigation will easily establish that it is. Why should we allow or accept this symbol in our society and ignore the right of other women and men to throw off the shackles of any such manifestation.

ChocolateSauce

sparkling sea wrote: »

Why doesn't it justify a government banning the burka ?

Because though they will perhaps be liberating some women, they will be bringing in oppressive legislation which is discriminatory based on religion. This goes against the values of a free liberal democracy.

Why should the development of gender equality and the breaking with traditions that are based on sexism and inequality come second in Western society - specifically in Ireland.

So passing a law which tells women (but not men) that they cannot wear something is supposed to be pro-equality? There are better ways to do this, and the most blindingly obvious to me is to attack Islam itself- it is intrinsically, ineradicably, systemically sexist to its core, and mandates sexual apartheid where one sex is de facto (but not actually de jure) inferior to the other. Of course it shouldn't be governments that do this either, but instead of attacking western freedom you should attack the root cause of this- belief that god wants women to dress modestly.

Why should a minority of womens right to wear a burka supercede the right to liberty for all women.

Eh? Women are free -> free to choose the Burka ->the burka is oppressive and takes their freedom -> we should help their freedom by forcing them not to wear it -> once their right to choose is removed, women are free.

Please don't come back with old chestnut that the burka is not a manifestation of male supremacy in countries were it is accepted as the norm because any degree of investigation will easily establish that it is. Why should we allow or accept this symbol in our society and ignore the right of other women and men to throw off the shackles of any such manifestation.

I've never said anything of the sort. I think it is a symbol of slavery, it is an abomination, it is a hideous stain on the already brutal tapestry of humanity, it will be remembered in the future as one of vilest things one group of people has ever done to another.

But in a free society, I must tolerate it. Conservative Muslims see my way of life as probably being worse (mine specifically ) , but in a free country they must tolerate it. That is why liberal democracy is universal set of values which should spread (peacefully) to every corner of the globe and sweep the theocracys, the Monarchies, the illiberal democracies, the dictatorships and the anarchys from history. Under Saudi or Iranian law, I'd probably be worthy of many many death sentences.

We can only keep the moral high ground (and we have it, without question) if we keep our freedoms, if we allow freedom of expression. Taking away freedom to defend freedom is just going to leave us with less freedom.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GuanYin

sparkling sea wrote: »

Irish women have fought extremely hard to achieve some semblence of gender equality - I would question the motives and the gender of any person who would easily give away this relatively new found equality.

Our traditions have changed to benefit all in our society, perhaps we should be fighting to uphold these benefits as opposed to fighting to uphold traditions that are blatantly sexist.

Isn't equality the freedom to choose whatever path you want? Your entire argument is centered around depriving other cultures of their equality of religious expression.

I'm still waiting to hear why you feel your values are more important than another womans values and why any other woman should be forced to live her life by your values if she doesn't want to.

If you believe women should be forced to do certain things because of your beliefs, how are you any different from any religious organization who does likewise?

@ donegalfella - I'll reply to you soon, busy, busy, work work, etc etc

anymore

Freedom of expression

None of our national papers would have a problem in publishing a cartoon/caricature of the Pope, despite this being a mainly catholic country and most of us tended to be amused by the Ian Paisley's jokes about the Popes red socks. How many of these papers would print a cartoon about the Prophet Mohammed and if they did what would the reaction be from those of the islamic faith ? Would they respect peoples right freedom of expression ? Or would we see the same reaction as followed after the Danish cartoons ?
And the people who are so anxious to protect freedom of expression as regards the burqa on this thread, would you be as anxious to protect the freedom of expression to produce cartoons of the Pope, Mohammed etc ?

Laminations

GuanYin wrote: »

Isn't equality the freedom to choose whatever path you want?

So choose drinking on the street, choose smoking a joint on the street, choose shooting heroin into your arms on the street, choose any other form of self-harm. None of these things are condoned by society, they are recognised as harmful and are therefore legislated against

GuanYin wrote: »

Your entire argument is centered around depriving other cultures of their equality of religious expression.

All habitual face covering for men and women, how is that discriminatory? I dont think you are allowed carry lightsabers (or swords) around the streets, this isnt discriminatory against Jedis, it just conincides with something they may do. The religion can be expressed though other garb and through other behaviour so its hyperbole to say 'depriving other cultures of their equality of religious expression'.

GuanYin wrote: »

I'm still waiting to hear why you feel your values are more important than another womans values and why any other woman should be forced to live her life by your values if she doesn't want to.

Societal values are more important than individual dissenting values. Same way we dont allow neo nazis preach their hate even though we hold freedom of speech dear.

GuanYin wrote: »

If you believe women should be forced to do certain things because of your beliefs, how are you any different from any religious organization who does likewise?

Their 'beliefs' are based on sensible facts, on research about the effects of face covering and gender equality. Religious beliefs should always play second fiddle in a secular society unless the belief has a reasonable foundation.

Laminations

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Because though they will perhaps be liberating some women, they will be bringing in oppressive legislation which is discriminatory based on religion. This goes against the values of a free liberal democracy.

Are the drug legislation or drink laws oppresive? Should we just allow people self harm on the streets, its their body, their choice, how is that affecting others in society?? Would a free liberal society be full of public drunks legally shooting up and self harming??

This is based more on the religion bringing the issue to the fore as face covering never happened habitually before and therefore never needed legislation. It is as discriminatory as introducing legislation to stop people lying down on pavements licking the ground if a religion emerged which proposed such behaviour. I'd be against such legislation until I researched its effects. After researching the effects of habitual face covering in public, I'm against it

wes

anymore wrote: »

None of our national papers would have a problem in publishing a cartoon/caricature of the Pope, despite this being a mainly catholic country and most of us tended to be amused by the Ian Paisley's jokes about the Popes red socks. How many of these papers would print a cartoon about the Prophet Mohammed and if they did what would the reaction be from those of the islamic faith ? Would they respect peoples right freedom of expression ? Or would we see the same reaction as followed after the Danish cartoons ?

Some Irish papers did re-print those Danish cartoons. There were some peaceful protests about them, and thats it. So your point is moot.

anymore wrote: »

And the people who are so anxious to protect freedom of expression as regards the burqa on this thread, would you be as anxious to protect the freedom of expression to produce cartoons of the Pope, Mohammed etc ?

I fail to see the relevance to the current topic tbh.

Laminations

GuanYin, after you suggested I had an issue with Islam, I never got your reply to the following:

Laminations wrote: »

Sorry whats my issue with hijabs? Whats my issue with djpbarrys mother in law? Whats my issue with islam in general? I dont care what any holy book says, the overwhelming majority of muslims are peaceful. I'm not gonna trade tit for tat like yourself and DF 'laughing' at each others rituals. I will agree that out of all religions, islam takes criticism least well. If you disagree try setting up a muslim equivalent of 'count me out'. I have an issue with habitual face covering in certain areas. I cant argue on the issue of beliefs of whether it brings one closer to god, there is no evidence either way. There is evidence of the detrimental effects of face covering for trust, cooperation and communication.

anymore

wes wrote: »

Some Irish papers did re-print those Danish cartoons. There were some peaceful protests about them, and thats it. So your point is moot.



I fail to see the relevance to the current topic tbh.

I am quite sure you do see the relevance :)
To borrow Al Gores words or at least rehash them, it is an inconvenient truth that supporting freedom of expression as regards wearing of the burqa should logically require support the freedom of expression to produce drawings/ cartoons or even to produce satirical pices on religions or their founders.

You are right to say my point re irish papers and the danish cartoons is moot - I do want it debated !