[kirklancaster]

Denmark's controversial Burqa and Niquab ban become Law from today.


Denmark has become the latest European country to ban the Islamic burqa and niqab by outlawing the wearing of face veils in public.

A majority of lawmakers voted in favour of the ban as Muslim women wearing conservative religious clothing looked on.

The law was proposed by the centre-right government which argued face veils were contrary to Danish values - but it insists the ban doesn't target religious groups.

First-time offenders of the so-called burqa ban - which goes into effect on August 1 - will be fined 1,000 Danish crowns (about £115).

The fine increases to 10,000 crowns (£11,500) after a fourth violation.



Human rights group Amnesty International called the ban "a discriminatory violation of women's rights".

An earlier proposal that allowed prison sentences as punishment had been previously removed.

The Danish People’s Party failed in its attempt this week to amend the legislation to include prison sentences for offenders.

Other European countries or individual regions have full or partial bans.



In the Netherlands, face veils are banned in some public places, including schools, hospitals and public transport. A similar law is in effect in the German state of Bavaria.

The Swiss canton of Tessin has outlawed the religious clothing entirely in public.

Danish lawmakers voted 75-30 on Thursday to pass the legislation proposed by the country's three-party centre-right coalition -

The Liberal, Conservative and Danish People’s parties all voted in favour of the law, along with the opposition Social Democrats except for one lone MP, Mette Gjerskov, The Local reported.

An additional 74 members of parliament abstained from the vote.


.................................................. ....

What is YOUR opinion on this?

[Maru]

To some degree, I don't know how to react. I have maybe seen one person my whole life with a Burqa? Might have been a family in DC.

I do find it a bit ironic that these supposedly "accepting" countries pass laws such as this, but I think in doing so on the justification of defending women's rights probably means these women are more likely to stay in the home.... so in a way, the law further restricts their freedoms?

Though honestly, I'm glad to see some cultures in general willing to draw a line somewhere. Like where is the point something becomes too extreme to allow to integrate in our culture where we no longer avert our eyes. Some group interests may not share society's own best interests. We can help integrate the more moderate crowd, sure, but only in so far that we don't give so much we give up the whole...

The US is strange in this way that because of our overall geography and scale being so large, we can have crazy sects like the polygamist cult FLDS create entire towns in the middle of no where.. but because of the geography they present no real issue as far as affecting our overall culture... at least until they used "single" mothers to register for govt welfare... then that changed the game and the states interfered. They're still there though... but with more defections and even more isolated than before as they try to keep their numbers.

[Niamh.]

Yeah similar to Maru really, I really do feel these clothes are sexist and oppressive (evethough alot of Muslim women "want" to wear them, do they really or is it brainwashing etc) however is forcing them not to wear them a bit hypocritical too? That's the argument for womens rights however it's about more than that too, it's about security aswell

[Oliver_W]

I'm on the fence. On the one hand, it could be argued that stopping women from wearing something is no different to forcing them to wear it.

But on the other, I don't think people in general should be covering their faces in public, so why should muslims be any different? Also, the way islam currently manifests itself in the world is pretty cacky, and it shouldn't be given an inch when it comes to legislature.

[bitontheslide]

I have a problem with uniforms like this when they can be used for sinister means, however, its always going to be an issue in countries that tolerate religious freedom. How can you promote religious freedom and remove religious rights without criticising the religion

[arista]

Yes Denmark a small free nation
has the Right,

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Maru

To some degree, I don't know how to react. I have maybe seen one person my whole life with a Burqa? Might have been a family in DC.

I do find it a bit ironic that these supposedly "accepting" countries pass laws such as this, but I think in doing so on the justification of defending women's rights probably means these women are more likely to stay in the home.... so in a way, the law further restricts their freedoms?

Though honestly, I'm glad to see some cultures in general willing to draw a line somewhere. Like where is the point something becomes too extreme to allow to integrate in our culture where we no longer avert our eyes. Some group interests may not share society's own best interests. We can help integrate the more moderate crowd, sure, but only in so far that we don't give so much we give up the whole...

The US is strange in this way that because of our overall geography and scale being so large, we can have crazy sects like the polygamist cult FLDS create entire towns in the middle of no where.. but because of the geography they present no real issue as far as affecting our overall culture... at least until they used "single" mothers to register for govt welfare... then that changed the game and the states interfered. They're still there though... but with more defections and even more isolated than before as they try to keep their numbers.

gosh!

[Vicky.]

I used to be all for these bans. Then I did think that basically, this is the reverse of men forcing women to wear them. Its forcing women NOT to wear them. I would think that the amount of women who are made to wear them far outnumber those who want to, however it is two sides of the same coin.

I think my more recent opinion on it is that of curse they should be banned anywhere where motorbike helmets and such were banned (places where security/facial recognition is important) but ultimately, a blanket ban does not really sit right with me I don't think.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I used to be all for these bans. Then I did think that basically, this is the reverse of men forcing women to wear them. Its forcing women NOT to wear them. I would think that the amount of women who are made to wear them far outnumber those who want to, however it is two sides of the same coin.

I think my more recent opinion on it is that of curse they should be banned anywhere where motorbike helmets and such were banned (places where security/facial recognition is important) but ultimately, a blanket ban does not really sit right with me I don't think.

I do think for security reasons they should be banned in schools also (the ones that fully hide the face)

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Cherie

gosh!

It's not that surprising, most muslims in the USA are middle class, hard working, and professional; as well as being pretty Westernised.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I used to be all for these bans. Then I did think that basically, this is the reverse of men forcing women to wear them. Its forcing women NOT to wear them. I would think that the amount of women who are made to wear them far outnumber those who want to, however it is two sides of the same coin.

I think my more recent opinion on it is that of curse they should be banned anywhere where motorbike helmets and such were banned (places where security/facial recognition is important) but ultimately, a blanket ban does not really sit right with me I don't think.

...yeah this for me as well, Vicky...it’s two sides of the same coin to instil an overall ban, rather than just a ban in specific places and situations etc where security rules all else..yes it is wrong to suppress females with face coverings in any culture/religion when a male doesn’t adopt the same face covering in that culture/religion...but there are many females who adopt cultural/religious garments out of choice and that has to have freedom as well otherwise it is just another form of suppression....we can’t fix what is felt to be a problem by doing the exact same thing...

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Denmark's controversial Burqa and Niquab ban become Law from today.


Denmark has become the latest European country to ban the Islamic burqa and niqab by outlawing the wearing of face veils in public.

A majority of lawmakers voted in favour of the ban as Muslim women wearing conservative religious clothing looked on.

The law was proposed by the centre-right government which argued face veils were contrary to Danish values - but it insists the ban doesn't target religious groups.

First-time offenders of the so-called burqa ban - which goes into effect on August 1 - will be fined 1,000 Danish crowns (about £115).

The fine increases to 10,000 crowns (£11,500) after a fourth violation.



Human rights group Amnesty International called the ban "a discriminatory violation of women's rights".

An earlier proposal that allowed prison sentences as punishment had been previously removed.

The Danish People’s Party failed in its attempt this week to amend the legislation to include prison sentences for offenders.

Other European countries or individual regions have full or partial bans.



In the Netherlands, face veils are banned in some public places, including schools, hospitals and public transport. A similar law is in effect in the German state of Bavaria.

The Swiss canton of Tessin has outlawed the religious clothing entirely in public.

Danish lawmakers voted 75-30 on Thursday to pass the legislation proposed by the country's three-party centre-right coalition -

The Liberal, Conservative and Danish People’s parties all voted in favour of the law, along with the opposition Social Democrats except for one lone MP, Mette Gjerskov, The Local reported.

An additional 74 members of parliament abstained from the vote.


.................................................. ....

What is YOUR opinion on this?

Good for Denmark I say,

[kirklancaster]

The ban is correct in my opinion.

The wearing of the Burqa and Niqab is the invention of devious 'MAN' and has nothing to do with Allah, and NOWHERE in the Quran does it say that women's faces or heads should be covered.

There is one SOLITARY passage in the Quran that the misogynistic and misguided Muslim male uses to justify their continued oppression of Muslim women and that is:

"You who Believe, do not enter the prophet's apartments for a meal unless you are given permission to do so; do not linger until [a meal] is ready. When you are invited, go in; then, when you have taken your meal, leave. Do not stay on and talk, for that would offend the prophet, though he would shrink from asking you to leave. Allah does not shrink from the truth. When you ask his wives for something, do so from behind a barrier: that is purer for your hearts and theirs. It is not right for you to offend Allah's messenger, just as you should never marry his wives after him: that would be grievous in Allah's eyes. Allah has full knowledge of all things, whether you reveal them or not." (Qur'an 33:53-54)

The word' barrier' is the key but not only does 'barrier' NOT refer to clothing, it is actually the MALE follower who is being addressed in this passage from the Quran so even if their interpretation WAS correct - which it is not - then it should be THEM who was wearing the burqa and niqab and NOT female believers.

The actual word for 'barrier' in the above passage is 'Hijab' and throughout the Quran, wherever the word 'hijab' is used, it is clear that it does not mean any physical barrier such as a veil or other face/head covering:

"When you recite the Qur'an, We place an invisible barrier between you and those who do not believe in the Hereafter." (Qur'an 17:45)

And he said, "Truly do I love the love of good, with a view to the glory of my Lord,"- until the sun was hidden in the barrier of night. (Qur'an 38:32)

And, when referring to Mary, the mother of Christ:

"Mention in the Book the story of Mary. She withdrew from her family to a place in the east and took a barrier from them." (Qur'an 19:17)

So, even where it is defensively claimed that Muslim women WANT and CHOOSE to wear the Niqab or Burqa - even by some Muslim women themselves - it is not REALLY a desire or choice borne of FREE WILL but more the predictable result of centuries of 'brainwashing' and 'conditioning' of generations of Muslim females by deceptive males who wish to perpetuate their misogynistic superiority and control over inferior women.

If anything then, this 'ban' is not any form of suppression, it is the exact opposite, because it is helping to right a historical wrong IMPOSED upon Muslim women by generations of male oppressors, and as one who believes that many of the Muslim women who claim to want to wear Niqabs and Burqas are stating so out of FEAR and INTIMIDATION, then this ban is also giving them a way out of their dilemma of suffering in silent obedience.

Perhaps the one verse in the Quran that contains the word 'barrier' which all those Muslim deceivers of the female faithful should familiarise themselves with is this;

"And they say: Our hearts are protected from what you call us to, and in our ears, there is a deafness, and between us and you there is a barrier. So do what you wish, and we will do what we wish." (Qur'an 41:5)

Or in other words;

Do not misinterpret and misrepresent the words of God to further your own misogynistic and oppressive agendas.

[Toy Soldier]

When you are invited, go in; then, when you have taken your meal, leave. Do not stay on and talk, for that would offend the prophet, though he would shrink from asking you to leave.

Me at work tbh.

[Northern Monkey]

Good move.Our safety is more important than a superstitious tradition that has little to no origin in religion anyway.Just a load of jealous Arab blokes who don’t want their wives ogled by anyone else.I’d say the reason many of them don’t trust their wives is because they were forced into marrying them in the first place.
Western countries need to show that we don’t cover our women up in robes before we let them out the house,Infact our women don’t need permission to go down the supermarket because they are free.
If you wanna walk around in public buildings dressed like a postbox then go and live in one of those lovely Arab nations,see how free you are there and see if it’s worth it.

I would ban face coverings from banks,airports,schools,post offices,shopping centres or basically any public buildings.

[bitontheslide]

So should this ban be extended to nuns? I think it should

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

So should this ban be extended to nuns? I think it should

Never seen a nun who covers her full face though.Only the hair.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Never seen a nun who covers her full face though.Only the hair.

A lot cover most of their face and head which is usually required for recognition

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Me at work tbh.

Do not stay on and talk, for that would offend the prophet, though he would shrink from asking you to leave.


...me when posting/getting involved in threads and topics on TiBB tbh...

[MTVN]

Even if nuns and other religious women don't cover their whole face, the clothing that they do wear is still influenced by the same idea of modesty. No one ever says that a religious person who covers their hair or their body is 'forced' to do so but the minute that clothing extends to a full face covering it becomes hugely oppressive?

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Even if nuns and other religious women don't cover their whole face, the clothing that they do wear is still influenced by the same idea of modesty. No one ever says that a religious person who covers their hair or their body is 'forced' to do so but the minute that clothing extends to a full face covering it becomes hugely oppressive?

..it’s also oppressive to judge women when they’re more scantily dressed for anything that may happen to them which often happens in society as well...it’s really up to an individual woman to decide on modest garments or any otherwise garments...which is why an overall ban doesn’t sit right with me...but there are occasions of security and faces being revealed which a ban might apply to...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Even if nuns and other religious women don't cover their whole face, the clothing that they do wear is still influenced by the same idea of modesty. No one ever says that a religious person who covers their hair or their body is 'forced' to do so but the minute that clothing extends to a full face covering it becomes hugely oppressive?

I think all the stuff is oppressive and sexist

[AnnieK]

I don't think any person should be forced to wear / not to wear anything. If countries do keep banning these items of clothing though I worry more for the women - will they become effectively trapped in their own homes as they cannot be seen without them so they will be forced to be captives in their own homes and lose what little freedom they are allowed now?

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I think all the stuff is oppressive and sexist

But if the women themselves don't feel oppressed then is it the place of anyone else to tell them that they are? I can understand the security concerns but otherwise people should be free to wear what they want or live how they please as long as they're not harming anyone else

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

But if the women themselves don't feel oppressed then is it the place of anyone else to tell them that they are? I can understand the security concerns but otherwise people should be free to wear what they want or live how they please as long as they're not harming anyone else

I'm not telling them anything if you read my first comment in the thread I do however feel like Burqas and other religious attire is as a result of brainwashing women into thinking they want to wear them. I never said they should be forced to stop though (unless its a security issue)