The Burka. Should wearing it be banned?

wes

anymore wrote: »

Since this thread began, the little research I have done has reinforced the initial feelings I had about this issue. I have to say, I wasn't really aware of the extent of the killings and brutality that was being carried on in the name of so called 'honour'.
In my opinion these people don't even understand the meaning of honour and certainly don't understand what it is to be civilised. Killing your own daughter or sister or niece is so repulsive and unnatural that the notion these people believe in a God is insanity !

And this has what to do with Burqa's? Can you at least try and relate it to the topic of the thread? You can start a thread about Honour killings if you want, but so far I have yet to see the relevance to the current topic.

This has gotten rather pointless imho, you are consistently refusing to show us how Burqa cause honour killings or what ever connection your trying to establish between the 2, or how a ban would stop them and you are constantly stating the same thing over and over again, all the while refusing to address anything others have said on the thread. I wil have to agree with other posts have said about, you are engaged in a straw man argument, and have been for quite a while.

anymore

abouttobebanned wrote: »

wow...this is a long thread.

Has anyone mentioned the subject of Vitamin D deficiency?

Yes it was mentioned briefly but not dealt with comprehensively so i will post the following :

Multiple scientific studies easily accessed on the internet show that possibly 90% of Muslim women who wear burkas and veils (usually by religious decree and against their will) suffer from severe vitamin D deficiency which in some cases can be severe and debilitating, not only to these women, but also their unborn children who suffer from a wide range of ills and physical deformities at birth because of vitamin D deficiency.

These deficiencies increase as these women age, leading to severe osteoporosis/osteomalacia (severe thinning and weakness of the bones) and a long list of negative health effects including cancer, heart disease, high blood pressure etc. (the list is long).....most of these women have no idea that their ailments are caused by vitamin D deficiency and that it's caused by covering their bodies as ordered by religious clerics who believe that women should cover their bodies to be modest and that this is a holy decree by God...this is why when you see photographs of women in many Muslim countries/tribal areas they are wearing what looks like a sheet over their entire bodies and their head.

When the human body is deprived of sunlight it can no longer easily produce vitamin D (or process calcium which is needed for bone maintenance etc.) without heavy vitamin D supplementation which most Muslim women have no access to and cannot afford.

Muslim women who refuse to cover their bodies are often subject to arrest and imprisonment, beatings and worse.....does this sound like a decree from God?.....I think the answer is pretty clear.

If this is a decree by God than God must hate women and children and like afflicting them with sickness, pain and physical deformity

.

I believe it is regarded as bad form by some to dwell too much on the negative health effects from practices such as wearing the burqa or some will dismiss them by suggesting that the practice is voluntary and dont people die from smoking, drinking etc, anyway ?

wes

anymore wrote: »

Re Kurdish muslim murders of daughters and sisters, the reason I specifiacally referred to Turkey was in relation to a comment made by Wes. Why do you refer to the ongoing murder of Muslim girls as ' the straw man ..' ?

The comment I made, was about how the Hijab and Burqa was not forced on Women in Turkey. Your reply had nothing to do with the point I made, and went off on a complete tangent.

anymore wrote: »

As for being illegal, murder by definition is illegal - the vitcims are still dead though. No the murder of young muslim girls in european countries is more relevant because it shows that it is not just related to the culture of particuluar regions in third world countries or due to ignorance arising from lack of education or from not knowing any better.

Ok, so basically you are going to refuse to discuss the topic at hand, and you aren't even trying to relate what your talking about to the topic being discussed at this point.

anymore wrote: »

Perhaps you or Wes or irishconvert can tell me why this kind of murder even goes on in countries like UK and france ? And amongst what other religous groups does this kind of killing happen in Uk ?

Well, as your own link stated it happens amongst Muslims, and to a lesser extent Hindu's and Sikhs. Now how exactly will banning the Burqa have any effect whatsoever on the Hindu and Sikh communities then?

Its interesting how many holes there are in your argument, and that is just using the source you provide.

So once again, how will banning the Burqa stop honour killings in the Muslim Community? How will such a ban stop honour killings in the Sikh and Hindu communities?

anymore

wes wrote: »

And this has what to do with Burqa's? Can you at least try and relate it to the topic of the thread? You can start a thread about Honour killings if you want, but so far I have yet to see the relevance to the current topic.

This has gotten rather pointless imho, you are consistently refusing to show us how Burqa cause honour killings or what ever connection your trying to establish between the 2, or how a ban would stop them and you are constantly stating the same thing over and over again, all the while refusing to address anything others have said on the thread. I wil have to agree with other posts have said about, you are engaged in a straw man argument, and have been for quite a while.

Wes, I am not attached to any religion, so I can at least try to claim some element of detachement in this discussion, can you ?
You simply want to focus on as narrow a view of this topic as is possible because that favours your own perspective. If you cant or wont see the co-relation between the burqa and issues such as honour killings and frocible marriages, what can i say ?
Most of the ' straw man' objectors seemed first to convey the impression that these honour murders are are carried out in Turkey etc. but the reality they are also carried out in Uk, france etc and in the sections of the Muslim community which is most supportive of burqa wearing. This is a reality which you seem to want to avoid dealing with. Just as you seem eager to avoid exploring the origins of burqa wearing. Ok, that is your choice, but i also am allowed to make choices !

anymore

Wes and Mike, on the one hand I am slightly amused that in the theoritical case that wearing the burqa was banned in some country, that some muslim women would stay at home !
However if that was the case, dont you think that it might be time to call in the psychologists ?

P.s Sinn fein used to use the tactic of trying to keep interviews to very narrow confined subjects; innocent victims - very regretable but as we were saying .....

Zombrex

anymore wrote: »

The deabte on banning the burka alone has raised the awareness of the murders and honour killings associated with conservative islam

No it hasn't. Debate on honour killings has raised awareness of honour killings.

Dragging the Burka into the equation just makes the West look like hypocrites who are ignorant and intolerant of Islamic culture and why want to make Muslims act like them (which this thread is unfortunately confirming).

Honour killing isn't even something to do with Islam, it is a tribal tradition in Persia (Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan) that predates Islam by hundreds of years and is carried out by Christians and Hindus in the region as well.

It is extremely rare in Asian Muslim countries such as Indonesia.

If you told a Malaysian Muslim woman that you want to stop her wearing her burka in order to protect her from honour killings she would look at you as if you had 2 heads.

Decreeing that all Muslim women must not wear their traditional religious head gear because some are beaten by their parents or siblings is frankly ridiculous.

anymore wrote: »

How about helping to end the 'extremism'.

I am. Your views are a form of extremism.

What exactly do you think we should do with a woman you refuses to adhere to the ban? Fine her? Imprison her? Give her a good beating?

Any of that sounding familiar?

MikeC101

anymore wrote: »

Wes and Mike, on the one hand I am slightly amused that in the theoritical case that wearing the burqa was banned in some country, that some muslim women would stay at home !
However if that was the case, dont you think that it might be time to call in the psychologists ?

Are you serious? On the one hand, you agree that some women are forced to wear the veil, on the other, you find the idea that the same women would be forced to stay at home if wearing the burqa is made illegal to be amusing?

If their family has such control over them that they will wear the burqa outside the home, you don't think it has enough control over them to prevent them leaving the house?

anymore wrote: »

P.s Sinn fein used to use the tactic of trying to keep interviews to very narrow confined subjects; innocent victims - very regretable but as we were saying .....

Red herring. Par for the course, it seems.

Edit: To clarify, you're associating people trying to keep the debate relevant, ie calling you on continual links to honour killings when you're unable to link to the burka as a causal factor in honour killings, with a Sinn Fein strategy. Again an attempt to smear people by association.

anymore

MikeC101 wrote: »

Are you serious? On the one hand, you agree that some women are forced to wear the veil, on the other, you find the idea that the same women would be forced to stay at home if wearing the burqa is made illegal to be amusing?

If their family has such control over them that they will wear the burqa outside the home, you don't think it has enough control over them to prevent them leaving the house?



Red herring. Par for the course, it seems.

Edit: To clarify, you're associating people trying to keep the debate relevant, ie calling you on continual links to honour killings that you're unable to link as a causal factor in honour killings, with a Sinn Fein strategy. Again an attempt to smear people by association.

Mikie you are right to chastise me for being light hearted in my comments ! Because this is all about compulsion and the potential consequences that might follow from refusual to follow orders or for dishonouring the family ... it is always about the family isnt it, never about the individual or the neagtive health effects referred to in a recent post.

So again lets clarify the origins of burqa wearing. If it is not religous, then so be it. Is it from a mixture of religion and culture or is it purely culture ?
The need to source its origins would seem to be very important given that it has such an effect on the individual wearing it ?

MikeC101

anymore wrote: »

Mikie you are right to chastise me for being light hearted in my comments ! Because this is all about compulsion and the potential consequences that might follow from refusual to follow orders or for dishonouring the family ... it is always about the family isnt it, never about the individual or the neagtive health effects referred to in a recent post.

I couldn't care less about the family, or notions of honour, or society really. My foremost concern is for the individual. I hate the notion of someone being forced to wear a burqa against their will - but I think giving the state the right to mandate what we wear (beyond the bare minimum) won't help.

I can see how a case could be made for a law that banned all forms of face covering in public, but it would be practically unenforceable (motorcycle helmets, scarves pulled up over your face etc..), but not one that only bans the burka.

sparkling sea

Its impossible to say with any degree of certainty what the outcome of a ban will be.

In 2004, the French passed legislation banning conspicuous religious symbols in state schools, these sybmols included headscarfs, Sikh turbans, large Christian crucifixes and Jewish skull caps. Even though there were wide spread protests to begin with, the law is adhered and its doesn't appear to have affected anyone negatively.

The same arguements that are being put forward against banning the burqa in this thread were put forward against banning conspicuous religious symbols in France - fortuntely they didn't come to pass.

We will have to wait and see what the outcome is of the partial ban the French are likely to impose is

The connection between and burqa and honour killings - they both make women non existent in society - one literally and the other practically.

wes

anymore wrote: »

Wes, I am not attached to any religion, so I can at least try to claim some element of detachement in this discussion, can you ?

A Burqa ban wouldn't affectt in the slightest. It wouldn't even affect anyone I know. I don't like the Burqa personally, I think its silly and have already stated this earlier, but this thread isn't about whether i am detached or not. So how about we stick to the topic and stop trying to make the thread about other people posting in it, or about a different topic altogether.

anymore wrote: »

You simply want to focus on as narrow a view of this topic as is possible because that favours your own perspective. If you cant or wont see the co-relation between the burqa and issues such as honour killings and frocible marriages, what can i say ?

Oh please. You are dragging the thread off topic, and refusing to answer any question raised to you.

Once again, forced marriages and honours killings, happen in the Hindu and Sikh communities as well. So, in those cases there is no correlations between them and the Burqa. I have already shown that there is no correlation. So, seeing as you will ignore anything that disproves you notions, and will continue with your ridiculous straw man, there isn't a whole lot I can say, now is there?

anymore wrote: »

Most of the ' straw man' objectors seemed first to convey the impression that these honour murders are are carried out in Turkey etc. but the reality they are also carried out in Uk, france etc and in the sections of the Muslim community which is most supportive of burqa wearing.

Here we go again. You replied to my example about Turkey, where Women aren't forced to wear the Hijab or Burqa. Also, btw Turkey bans the Hijab and Burqa in government buildings, universities and hospitals. and they still have honours killings. Go figure, looks like a Burqa ban doesn't have a whole lot of effect.

Again, you ignore that honours killings happen in other communities other than Muslims, even though your own link said as much. So how exactly does the Burqa have anything to do with them, then? I know you won't answer, as thats the MO you seem to be going for.

anymore wrote: »

This is a reality which you seem to want to avoid dealing with. Just as you seem eager to avoid exploring the origins of burqa wearing. Ok, that is your choice, but i also am allowed to make choices !

I have no clue about the origins about the Burqa, and I honestly don't see the relevance to the topic.

You have yet to establish any kind of relevance for your straw man and continually refuse to answer questions.

wes

anymore wrote: »

P.s Sinn fein used to use the tactic of trying to keep interviews to very narrow confined subjects; innocent victims - very regretable but as we were saying .....

Won't be replying to you anymore. Can't be bothered with someone trying to smear me and all the ridiculous straw man, and constant refusal to address point raised.

You have repeatedly refused to answere simple direct questions and instead try to make things about the other poster, as opposed to answering the questions.

sparkling sea

MikeC101 wrote: »

Really, I'm not sure I understand why you keep bringing the straw man of Kurdish honour killings (which is an illegal act anyway) into this.

It could be because you are putting forward the straw man Bedouin women example.

Very much a case of do as I say not as I do. Is this burqa discussion and the powers it allows men to have consuming you

wes

sparkling sea wrote: »

The connection between and burqa and honour killings - they both make women non existent in society - one literally and the other practically.

So, in Hindu and Sikh communities, where they don't have the Burqa, whats the connection exactly? How will a Burqa ban prevent Honour killings in those communities?

Seems to me that the connection you speak of is spurious to say the least, considering other communities that don't have the Burqa also engage in honour killings. Seems to me the straw man is falling apart.

MikeC101

sparkling sea wrote: »

It could be because you are putting forward the straw man Bedouin women example.

I was pointing out that of women who wear the burqa, some of them say they are in favour of it.

sparkling sea wrote: »

Very much a case of do as I say not as I do.

Except, not. Because it was different - it's in direct response to the assertion that no woman could possibly want to wear a burka. The other was posting links to honour killings with no attempt made at showing how, or if, there is any causal relationship.

sparkling sea wrote: »

Is this burqa discussion and the powers it allows men to have consuming you

FFS - can you even attempt to discuss this without personal smears and attacks?

In case you're under the impression that I'm a Muslim, I'm not.

wes

sparkling sea wrote: »

It could be because you are putting forward the straw man Bedouin women example.

So the opinion of Women wearing a Burqa in a thread about banning the Burqa is a straw man? That is very clearly a ridiculous assertion.

Of course, maybe you would rather ignore the opinions of other Women, when they don't agree with you.

sparkling sea

wes wrote: »

That is very clearly a ridiculous assertion.

Of course, maybe you would rather ignore the opinions of other Women, when they don't agree with you.

Thats probably it.

sparkling sea

MikeC101 wrote: »

In case you're under the impression that I'm a Muslim, I'm not.

No it takes me quite some time to form opinions on people.

wes

sparkling sea wrote: »

Thats probably it.

Well, considering that you posted Womens opinion on the Burqa who had a negative opinion on it, and then suddendly call someone else posting a different opinion on the Burqa from some other Women, a straw man, seems like the only conclusion I could come up with.

Of course, I could be very wrong here. So why do you think it was a straw man then? Especially, as you posted something similar yourself, albeit where the opinion was negative towards the Burqa.

sparkling sea

Any chance either of you will address the French legislation and the fact that the preceived problems didn't materialise ?

wes

sparkling sea wrote: »

Any chance either of you will address the French legislation and the fact that the preceived problems didn't materialise ?

Sure.

Banning all religous imagery in schools, is different to banning one Religous symbol from 1 Religion. Also, the Burqa ban seems like it won't be limited to just government buildings, and will be more draconian.

So, the situations are not analogous, and I have no idea what arguments were used about the school ban, and I sure as hell didn't use any of the ones I used here.

Also, I have no doubt a Burqa ban will be respected, but I have yet to see a shred of proof that it will improve anything for the Women involved.

The French school ban of Religous symbols, don't seem to have fixed any of the issue it set out to fix either, and at the very least I have yet to see any evidence regarding that.

sparkling sea

They have modified it - Nobody, in places open to the public or on streets, may wear an outfit or an accessory whose effect it is to hide the face.

A few exceptions would be made such as for carnivals - odd.

It will make an iteresting test case.

sparkling sea

wes wrote: »

The French school ban of Religous symbols, don't seem to have fixed any of the issue it set out to fix either, and at the very least I have yet to see any evidence regarding that.

If you can point me to any academic research in this area I would be very interested. Only credible information though.

sparkling sea

MikeC101 wrote: »

FFS - can you even attempt to discuss this without personal smears and attacks?

Sorry I missed this - yes I can, but I don't know if I would enjoy it as much.

wes

sparkling sea wrote: »

They have modified it - Nobody, in places open to the public or on streets, may wear an outfit or an accessory whose effect it is to hide the face.

A few exceptions would be made such as for carnivals - odd.

It will make an iteresting test case.

Modification of the text means nothing, the ban was created specifically for the Burqa.

wes

sparkling sea wrote: »

If you can point me to any academic research in this area I would be very interested. Only credible information though.

There is no academic reasearch avaliable. However, I haven't seen France intergration problems go away either, and I think the whole Burqa debate shows that clearly the French think there is still a problem.

Sand

@wes

So, in Hindu and Sikh communities, where they don't have the Burqa, whats the connection exactly? How will a Burqa ban prevent Honour killings in those communities?

Seems to me that the connection you speak of is spurious to say the least, considering other communities that don't have the Burqa also engage in honour killings. Seems to me the straw man is falling apart.

The shared problem might be best described as a patriarchal, male dominated cultures.

Whats the connection with the Burqa? Well, its a symbol of the division of women into good, modest women under the thumbs of their male relatives and bad, immodest women who shamelessly dishonour themselves and their families. Good old fashioned patriarchal, male dominated cultural ideas. Its a symbol of a harsh, nomadic cultures view of women and their place spread around the world by religious fervour.

A state concerned with the equality of its citizens (representitive of most citizens demands of equality) cant do a lot about patriarchal, male dominated cultures apart from ensuring that such cultures are open to ideas about womens rights. The burqa is clearly designed to prevent women interacting with the rest of society, to keep them safely under (male) control.

Some of its victims have stockholm syndrome, they view themselves as proud and independant, so clearly they have chosen to wander around in a tarpaulin on the hottest summers day - theres no way they could have been influenced to do so as that would conflict with their proud independant view of themselves. Right? The best form of slavery is where you convince the slaves that theyre actually free.

Once a person hits 18, let them do what they want. They reached adulthood, and if they want to go round dressed in a bin bag or a clown suit - fine if theyre happy. Its weird, but I can handle it. Much like I can handle people wanting to be a priest or nun.

My only concern is the rights of children who are pressured to wear such getup on the flimsy basis that if they dont they are somehow bad, immoral or not a good team player.

Thats damaging for them as people, and for wider society. Id heartily support a ban on children wearing the burqa (if they want to wear a scarf or whatever, then fine) in any facility the state has a remit over (obviously, any total ban would be unworkable and OTT). If the price of such was a ban on all religious symbols, not a problem, but that would need to be part of a larger secularisation project for the Irish state. Which would be a good thing imo.

Mind you, my fears on the burka being a tool of female oppression could be allayed if I could see evidence that men were wearing the burka too to demonstrate their own modesty. Its certainly possible afterall - it really could be anybody under those things. Out of curiousity Wes, do you wear the burqa to demonstrate your modesty?

sparkling sea

wes wrote: »

There is no academic reasearch avaliable. However, I haven't seen France intergration problems go away either, and I think the whole Burqa debate shows that clearly the French think there is still a problem.

If anyone can point me to academic research I would appreciate it.

I would say the whole Burqa debate suggests the French think there is a problem with the Burqa or similiar tools of oppression. I don't think it clearly shows anything although it may suggest something

sparkling sea

wes wrote: »

Modification of the text means nothing, the ban was created specifically for the Burqa.

It does mean it won't be a draconian as some people feared.

Zombrex

sparkling sea wrote: »

The connection between and burqa and honour killings - they both make women non existent in society - one literally and the other practically.

A very common scenario for honour killings is that the daughter of the family begins a relationship with a non-Muslim, or simply a Muslim not approved by the family.

The father or son then feels to compelled to kill the daugther to erase the shame that they believe her behavior has brought to the family.

Please explain how a Burka ban does anything to prevent that scenario or one like it?

All a Burka ban does is tell Muslim women that instead of their parents telling them what they can and cannot wear the State is now going to tell them what they can and cannot wear.

The out come of this is that it enshrines in law the concept that Muslim women do not have the right to decide themselves what they wear.

It does nothing for honor killing except validate the principle behind them, that women are too delicate or silly or irresponsible to be left to make up their own mind about themselves and must be controlled.