[Vicky.]

Should be banned anyway, everywhere, for security reasons.

Or banned when ENTERING somewhere with cctv. Like balaclavas and motorbike helmets are.

But we cant say 'oh I/the camera needs to see your face' now can we

[arista]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Should be banned anyway, everywhere, for security reasons.

Or banned when ENTERING somewhere with cctv. Like balaclavas and motorbike helmets are.

But we cant say 'oh I/the camera needs to see your face' now can we

Yes that could happen after any major attack in the UK.

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Sorry but I think that's patronising as hell, not all muslims are like what you read in the newspapers or watch on the TV and it annoys me when people think that. It's a stereotype based on the minority rather then a majority.



Again it's patronising to assume that all muslim women are downtrodden and meek, It reminds me of a friend I had in college that wore a version of the Burkha at times It wasn't quite the letterbox version but it was close and she chewed my ear off once for even suggesting that she was victimised into wearing it.

I'm not denying it doesn't happen though but to ban it is a blanket solution to a specific problem and in the long run it won't help the victims as they'll still be abused, they'll just have more freeing clothes to suffer in. Banning a big piece of fabric won't do achieve anything if you want to stop the violence. You've got to tackle the problem at it's core and individually.

I assume nothing of the sort. I KNOW they're physically weaker, and I SUSPECT they are neither downtrodden, nor meek, but frightened. They have no rights to their children or an income.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

What about a British Muslim woman who feels the burkha is an important part of her religion, why should she be denied the freedom to do so because some people are hung-up on the possible symbolism of it?

It's not always been the case that it has symbolised oppression either, back in the 19th centure it became a way of rejecting and resisting British colonialism, and asserting themselves and their religion

Well, If a British person lives in a Muslim country they have to live by their rules without question so I say tough luck to her tbh, if it's that important to her then she could always move to a Muslim country.

[joeysteele]

Well I am sorry but I am glad some Countries are banning it now,in these days of terrorism etc, I think 'all' citizens and people and children everywhere should be able to see very clearly who they are with in buildings, shops/stores and sharing the streets and all public places with.
With no exceptions whatsoever.

[Zippy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well, If a British person lives in a Muslim country they have to live by their rules without question so I say tough luck to her tbh, if it's that important to her then she could always move to a Muslim country.

exactly

westerners have to adjust what they wear to suit muslim countries. But they can wear what they want even if it demeans an entire gender and influences our children in a backwards and negative way?

young girls in this country deserve better role models than a woman covered up head to toe. That represents oppresion and stone age mentality.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well, If a British person lives in a Muslim country they have to live by their rules without question so I say tough luck to her tbh, if it's that important to her then she could always move to a Muslim country.

I like the fact that we're more tolerant than most Islamic countries though, and that we dont impose our own beliefs onto every single citizen of our country

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I like the fact that we're more tolerant than most Islamic countries though, and that we dont impose our own beliefs onto every single citizen of our country

well, besides the fact the I believe it's oppressive towards women, as others have pointed out, from a security point of view as well it makes sense.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

I assume nothing of the sort. I KNOW they're physically weaker, and I SUSPECT they are neither downtrodden, nor meek, but frightened. They have no rights to their children or an income.

I don't even need to point out how wrong this post is. Your whole argument is just a bunch of assumptions based on a minority of Muslims.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

Of course it should be banned. Apparently it's unacceptable to offend an entire religion - but perfectly fine to oppress an entire gender.

Originally Posted by Zippy

I think they are a symbol of oppression. Totally sexist and send out a disgusting message that shouldnt be tolerated in this country.

What are our children learning from seeing women dressed like this? Take your backwards culture back to your own backwards country.

Originally Posted by Zippy

It's not about clothing. This garments sole purpose is to hide women away. Its offensive and demeaning to the female race.

Its not even a religious requirement. Even if it were I'd still be opposed.

And its damn creepy speaking to just a pair of eyes through a slit. Men wouldnt be allowed to go round in balaclavas. Certainly not in shops, airports etc.

Originally Posted by happyland

I'm not a feminist by the furthest stretch of the imagination but personally I believe the Burka symbolises oppression of women. I understand that their religion demands modesty, but to cover up every part of their body including their hair and head is just ridiculous in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I see the Burka as a symbol of oppression, and to be quite honest I applaud Germany and France for banning it. It's backward and demeaning to women, If they don't like it then don't go to those countries.

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Should be banned anyway, everywhere, for security reasons.

Or banned when ENTERING somewhere with cctv. Like balaclavas and motorbike helmets are.

But we cant say 'oh I/the camera needs to see your face' now can we

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Well I am sorry but I am glad some Countries are banning it now,in these days of terrorism etc, I think 'all' citizens and people and children everywhere should be able to see very clearly who they are with in buildings, shops/stores and sharing the streets and all public places with.
With no exceptions whatsoever.

Yeah, I agree ..... the burka is an anachronistic, repressive and potentially lethal form of female clothing ..... ban it and burn it .....

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I don't even need to point out how wrong this post is. Your whole argument is just a bunch of assumptions based on a minority of Muslims.

The same minority who FORCE their women to cover up; which is the minority we are discussing, no?

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I like the fact that we're more tolerant than most Islamic countries though, and that we dont impose our own beliefs onto every single citizen of our country

Approving of oppression is not tolerance.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You've missed the point completely. He was essentially saying that if it's the woman's choice to wear a Burkha then by banning it you're stripping her of the liberty to wear what she wants. Not that the Burkha represents liberation, just that it's their choice to wear it or not.

The point is that this is a western country and as a woman it offends ME to have to daily encounter this vile visual symbol of female subjugation, and I know for a fact that I am not alone in feeling that way. My rights to NOT be offended should be taken into consideration as much as the rights of the women who supposedly "choose" to wear the burka. I am highly sceptical as to the fact that ALL women who wear the burka do so out of choice - I suspect it is often coercion by their male relatives.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I see the Burka as a symbol of oppression, and to be quite honest I applaud Germany and France for banning it. It's backward and demeaning to women, If they don't like it then don't go to those countries.

Unfortunately its not the whole of Germany, only the state of Hesse.


Wonder if they will also fine brides wearing veils on the way to get married.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Unfortunately its not the whole of Germany, only the state of Hesse.


Wonder if they will also fine brides wearing veils on the way to get married.

Don't be silly

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Don't be silly

Oh you mean its okay for christian, jewish hindi etc women to wear veils for traditional, religious and cultural reasons but not for muslim women to do the same?

[Chuck]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Unfortunately its not the whole of Germany, only the state of Hesse.


Wonder if they will also fine brides wearing veils on the way to get married.

The state of Hessel is runned by Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by chuck.pass

The state of Hessel is runned by Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats.

Yeah so I read, should be quite amusing if a muslim runs with this to the ECHR on "religious" grounds and challenges the bans on it, especially if the court backed the right to wear and declared the ban illegal.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Nuns habits next on the list?

At least nuns have the excuse of their habits, (which incidentally do NOT cover their faces) actually being a religious requirement UNLIKE the burka which is simply a MALE requirement to subjugate females and enforce OWNERSHIP of and AUTHORITY over their women. Unfortunately that sort of mindset is a couple of centuries out of date and has no place in this country. Let's just bring back chastity belts as well shall we? And how about chaperones for unmarried women, compulsory male guarantors if women want to take out credit or buy a house etc etc?

Women have had to fight long and hard for equality and the burka represents a massive backward step. The main objection is not the fact it is a head to toe coverup, it is the fact that the FACE is concealed. This is not only a huge security risk but also promotes separation from the rest of the community and hinders integration.

Irrespective of cultural/religious arguments, There is NEVER any reason at all to allow people to move amongst us with total anonymity in this day and age of heightened terror alerts. No doubt if people chose to walk about stark naked or copulate in public we'd have the usual suspects telling us it's their choice and we have no right to object.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Oh you mean its okay for christian, jewish hindi etc women to wear veils for traditional, religious and cultural reasons but not for muslim women to do the same?

Now you're being deliberately disingenuous - of course veils are worn at such ceremonies, but they are NOT worn 24/7 as you well know. To walk around in Britain today totally unidentifiable is unacceptable, and unfortunately the muslim community are doing themselves no favours when they insist on us respecting their culture and then don't have the decency and consideration to respect ours. I am particularly outraged at the two muslim councillors, ironically from the Respect Party, who refused to honour Matt Croucher who won the George Cross. Such bloody hypocrisy.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by angus58

At least nuns have the excuse of their habits, (which incidentally do NOT cover their faces) actually being a religious requirement UNLIKE the burka which is simply a MALE requirement to subjugate females and enforce OWNERSHIP of and AUTHORITY over their women. Unfortunately that sort of mindset is a couple of centuries out of date and has no place in this country. Let's just bring back chastity belts as well shall we? And how about chaperones for unmarried women, compulsory male guarantors if women want to take out credit or buy a house etc etc?

Women have had to fight long and hard for equality and the burka represents a massive backward step. The main objection is not the fact it is a head to toe coverup, it is the fact that the FACE is concealed. This is not only a huge security risk but also promotes separation from the rest of the community and hinders integration.

Irrespective of cultural/religious arguments, There is NEVER any reason at all to allow people to move amongst us with total anonymity in this day and age of heightened terror alerts. No doubt if people chose to walk about stark naked or copulate in public we'd have the usual suspects telling us it's their choice and we have no right to object.

You forgot they contribute to a predisposition for hypovitaminosis D, which can lead to rickets or osteoporosis and may increase the risk of seizures in infants born to affected mothers

[Angus]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Yeah so I read, should be quite amusing if a muslim runs with this to the ECHR on "religious" grounds and challenges the bans on it, especially if the court backed the right to wear and declared the ban illegal.

No danger of that happening seeing as how the wearing of the Burka is NOT a religious requirement - and I defy anyone on this forum to find such a dictat in the Qu'ran.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by angus58

Now you're being deliberately disingenuous - of course veils are worn at such ceremonies, but they are NOT worn 24/7 as you well know. .

Fully agree with the mutual respect part of your post, however the burqa isnt worn 24/7 either, its only worn when the female is in a location when males other than her husband/family may see her.

Also the requirement is removed if she is on pilgrimage. (Ihram)

The point I was making unless the ban is enforced reference bridal veils etc, it could be seen by the buffoons of ECHR as being discriminatory on religious/cultural grounds

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Fully agree with the mutual respect part of your post, however the burqa isnt worn 24/7 either, its only worn when the female is in a location when males other than her husband/family may see her.

Also the requirement is removed if she is on pilgrimage. (Ihram)

The point I was making unless the ban is enforced reference bridal veils etc, it could be seen by the buffoons of ECHR as being discriminatory on religious/cultural grounds

Well that says it all, really, doesn't it?

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by angus58

No danger of that happening seeing as how the wearing of the Burka is NOT a religious requirement - and I defy anyone on this forum to find such a dictat in the Qu'ran.

Its a question of interpretation,

"And say to the faithful women to lower their gazes, and to guard their private parts, and not to display their beauty except what is apparent of it, and to extend their headcoverings (khimars) to cover their bosoms (jaybs), and not to display their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband's fathers, or their sons, or their husband's sons, or their brothers, or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their womenfolk, or what their right hands rule (slaves), or the followers from the men who do not feel sexual desire, or the small children to whom the nakedness of women is not apparent, and not to strike their feet (on the ground) so as to make known what they hide of their adornments. And turn in repentance to Allah together, O you the faithful, in order that you are successful"

Qur'an Sura Nur Chapter: The Light. Verse 31

Thanks to Wikipedia

A fatwa, written by Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid on his Saudi Arabian website Islam QA, states:

The correct view as indicated by the evidence is that the woman’s face is ‘awrah which must be covered. It is the most tempting part of her body, because what people look at most is the face, so the face is the greatest ‘awrah of a woman

Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid is a quite well respected Islamic jurist albeit not very moderate in his beliefs.