French to enforce Burka ban from Monday
10 April 2011, 06:55 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
French to enforce Burka ban from Monday
Are we allowed to talk about this?
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/0...an-protesters/
I was watching Sky just a while ago and it had two people voicing either side of the argument. I was quite surprised at the unfriendliness of the debate...it was like the Burka advocate woman did not want a debate.
On the face of it it seems clear cut - freedom to wear what you like should not be infringed by the state.
But I find it fascinating how the advocates of the Burka seemed to have learned the language of human rights, freedom etc, whilst wanting to wear a symbol of female subjugation....an object of oppression!
I've heard a lot of reason why the Burka should not be banned, but what about the virtue of wearing it? I've not heard much of an argument there.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/0...an-protesters/
I was watching Sky just a while ago and it had two people voicing either side of the argument. I was quite surprised at the unfriendliness of the debate...it was like the Burka advocate woman did not want a debate.
On the face of it it seems clear cut - freedom to wear what you like should not be infringed by the state.
But I find it fascinating how the advocates of the Burka seemed to have learned the language of human rights, freedom etc, whilst wanting to wear a symbol of female subjugation....an object of oppression!
I've heard a lot of reason why the Burka should not be banned, but what about the virtue of wearing it? I've not heard much of an argument there.
10 April 2011, 07:18 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From experience i find i am discriminated against if i go into my bank/filling station, etc wearing a Motrax i-neck which is a tube of material that converts into a balaclava, bandana, neck tube amongst other things, which i do when i use my quad to go into town. I wear it a lot because i can adjust it to suit the weather.
I am told i cannot wear it because it obscures my face for identification and security reasons.
I fail to see how a Bhurka is any different, it obscures the persons facial features in the same way, neither are compulsory just a choice to be made by the individual so why are bhurka's permitted if i cannot wear what i choose.
Double standards and that's what really gets me.
I am told i cannot wear it because it obscures my face for identification and security reasons.
I fail to see how a Bhurka is any different, it obscures the persons facial features in the same way, neither are compulsory just a choice to be made by the individual so why are bhurka's permitted if i cannot wear what i choose.
Double standards and that's what really gets me.
Last edited by The Zohan; 10 April 2011 at 07:29 PM.
10 April 2011, 08:35 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: South Bucks
Posts: 3,213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 April 2011, 08:59 PM
#6
I dont really get the Burka thing, I dont remember seeing many/any until the last few years, there were Muslims around when I was a kid and I can ever remember seeing any ladies dressed like that, is it perhaps some kind of attitude change due to the increased criticism and prejudice towards Islam or that I didnt notice ?
Was in Brighton yesterday and there were quite a few Muslim families out and a few were in the full get up, it does look bloody awful and cannot be at all comfortable when in the sun like that, but if they want to wear it then so be it, cant see the point of objecting except in situations where the face needs to be seen like airports then I am sorry but based on recent events, security is more important than religious observance.
Was in Brighton yesterday and there were quite a few Muslim families out and a few were in the full get up, it does look bloody awful and cannot be at all comfortable when in the sun like that, but if they want to wear it then so be it, cant see the point of objecting except in situations where the face needs to be seen like airports then I am sorry but based on recent events, security is more important than religious observance.
10 April 2011, 09:09 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont really get the Burka thing, I dont remember seeing many/any until the last few years, there were Muslims around when I was a kid and I can ever remember seeing any ladies dressed like that, is it perhaps some kind of attitude change due to the increased criticism and prejudice towards Islam or that I didnt notice ?
Was in Brighton yesterday and there were quite a few Muslim families out and a few were in the full get up, it does look bloody awful and cannot be at all comfortable when in the sun like that, but if they want to wear it then so be it, cant see the point of objecting except in situations where the face needs to be seen like airports then I am sorry but based on recent events, security is more important than religious observance.
Was in Brighton yesterday and there were quite a few Muslim families out and a few were in the full get up, it does look bloody awful and cannot be at all comfortable when in the sun like that, but if they want to wear it then so be it, cant see the point of objecting except in situations where the face needs to be seen like airports then I am sorry but based on recent events, security is more important than religious observance.
You may as what is the reason?
Last edited by tony de wonderful; 10 April 2011 at 09:10 PM.
Trending Topics
10 April 2011, 09:29 PM
#8
SN Fairy Godmother
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not really a fan of these type of threads, sorry TDW, but I have to admit, I do find the Burka an offensive garment. I don't like it at all. I think it's creepy.
I've said before, it's like a load of grim reapers following you.
As Paul has also said, there is a right carry on if a motor biker walks into the bank with his helmet on, yet these wimmins walk in and not a word is said. Why?
I think it is truly a ghastly get up
I've said before, it's like a load of grim reapers following you.
As Paul has also said, there is a right carry on if a motor biker walks into the bank with his helmet on, yet these wimmins walk in and not a word is said. Why?
I think it is truly a ghastly get up
10 April 2011, 10:38 PM
#10
From experience i find i am discriminated against if i go into my bank/filling station, etc wearing a Motrax i-neck which is a tube of material that converts into a balaclava, bandana, neck tube amongst other things, which i do when i use my quad to go into town. I wear it a lot because i can adjust it to suit the weather.
I am told i cannot wear it because it obscures my face for identification and security reasons.
I fail to see how a Bhurka is any different, it obscures the persons facial features in the same way, neither are compulsory just a choice to be made by the individual so why are bhurka's permitted if i cannot wear what i choose.
Double standards and that's what really gets me.
I am told i cannot wear it because it obscures my face for identification and security reasons.
I fail to see how a Bhurka is any different, it obscures the persons facial features in the same way, neither are compulsory just a choice to be made by the individual so why are bhurka's permitted if i cannot wear what i choose.
Double standards and that's what really gets me.
10 April 2011, 10:47 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home
Posts: 3,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 April 2011, 11:10 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was in Brighton yesterday and there were quite a few Muslim families out and a few were in the full get up, it does look bloody awful and cannot be at all comfortable when in the sun like that, but if they want to wear it then so be it, cant see the point of objecting except in situations where the face needs to be seen like airports then I am sorry but based on recent events, security is more important than religious observance.
I wouldn't, although I kind of agree with the libertarian idea that they should be able to; how do you square that dissonance is the question though.
I'm guessing most middle class liberals would secretly agree with me 'cos you don't see many of 'em living in Bradford!
10 April 2011, 11:53 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Swansea
Posts: 4,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Polar bears have a fair trek then!!
I personally don`t agree with anyone overly religious, Christian Muslim or what ever, but dressing according to a book written about ***** shouldn`t be allowed.
I personally don`t agree with anyone overly religious, Christian Muslim or what ever, but dressing according to a book written about ***** shouldn`t be allowed.
Last edited by Jimbob; 10 April 2011 at 11:59 PM.
11 April 2011, 06:54 AM
#17
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Romford
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its just an extention of the ever more tightening infringments on our collective human rights....Remember them ? ... our ancestors fought for them , ask Adolph
11 April 2011, 07:27 AM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
How would you feel if you had a conversation with someone wearing one and all you can see is a pair of eyes staring at you but more importantly I can't imagine for one minute you can hear them talk clearly having their mouth covered? Just plain rude/bad manners all in the name of religion.
In my opinion if your religious beliefs involve breaking a country's laws which you refuse to abide by then you should be living in a country that has that religion central to its culture. Religion is not an excuse to break the law.
I think they all look bloody stupid like a load of mini darth vaders walking about.
In my opinion if your religious beliefs involve breaking a country's laws which you refuse to abide by then you should be living in a country that has that religion central to its culture. Religion is not an excuse to break the law.
I think they all look bloody stupid like a load of mini darth vaders walking about.
11 April 2011, 10:50 AM
#21
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: There on the stair
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, let's go through this in stages
Why is the burka used?
What religious significance does it have?
Is it required by the religion?
Does it alienate people?
Does it pose a security issue? (i.e. identification)
Does it intimidate people?
I'm reminded of a member of BA staff who was not allowed to wear a visible crucifix to work and went through years of appeals.
My personal opinion is that I don't like them. I'm not opposed to them, but I don't like them. They (IMO) turn people into objects, the lack of feature recognition makes me uncomfortable and I think it places an unnecessary barrier between the wearer and the public.
Blanket (ahem) ban? Not sure if this is the right approach. Required to show your face when asked to by an authorised individual? A better solution
(authorised would be Police / person required to confirm identity like a Bank teller)
Oh, and the right to refuse to serve someone if they refuse to comply with a polite request.
Why is the burka used?
What religious significance does it have?
Is it required by the religion?
Does it alienate people?
Does it pose a security issue? (i.e. identification)
Does it intimidate people?
I'm reminded of a member of BA staff who was not allowed to wear a visible crucifix to work and went through years of appeals.
My personal opinion is that I don't like them. I'm not opposed to them, but I don't like them. They (IMO) turn people into objects, the lack of feature recognition makes me uncomfortable and I think it places an unnecessary barrier between the wearer and the public.
Blanket (ahem) ban? Not sure if this is the right approach. Required to show your face when asked to by an authorised individual? A better solution
(authorised would be Police / person required to confirm identity like a Bank teller)
Oh, and the right to refuse to serve someone if they refuse to comply with a polite request.
11 April 2011, 11:01 AM
#22
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My personal opinion is that I don't like them. I'm not opposed to them, but I don't like them. They (IMO) turn people into objects, the lack of feature recognition makes me uncomfortable and I think it places an unnecessary barrier between the wearer and the public.
Somehow this oppression has been internalised by some modern muslim women who think the Burka is a virtue (religiously) to wear!! Even as a symbol of empowerment and 'choice'! The irony!
11 April 2011, 11:06 AM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are we allowed to talk about this?
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/0...an-protesters/
I was watching Sky just a while ago and it had two people voicing either side of the argument. I was quite surprised at the unfriendliness of the debate...it was like the Burka advocate woman did not want a debate.
On the face of it it seems clear cut - freedom to wear what you like should not be infringed by the state.
But I find it fascinating how the advocates of the Burka seemed to have learned the language of human rights, freedom etc, whilst wanting to wear a symbol of female subjugation....an object of oppression!
I've heard a lot of reason why the Burka should not be banned, but what about the virtue of wearing it? I've not heard much of an argument there.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/0...an-protesters/
I was watching Sky just a while ago and it had two people voicing either side of the argument. I was quite surprised at the unfriendliness of the debate...it was like the Burka advocate woman did not want a debate.
On the face of it it seems clear cut - freedom to wear what you like should not be infringed by the state.
But I find it fascinating how the advocates of the Burka seemed to have learned the language of human rights, freedom etc, whilst wanting to wear a symbol of female subjugation....an object of oppression!
I've heard a lot of reason why the Burka should not be banned, but what about the virtue of wearing it? I've not heard much of an argument there.
Les
11 April 2011, 12:15 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does it work in an office environment? I have never seen a bhurka in the offices I've worked in but somebody on here must have been to office based sit down meetings with somebody wearing one? I nearly said 'face to face' but obviously that would be impossible.
I wonder how company politics/HR would deal with meeting attendees who insisted on facing the opposite direction to anybody wearing a bhurka on the basis that 'I can't see their face so I'm levelling the field'?
I wonder how company politics/HR would deal with meeting attendees who insisted on facing the opposite direction to anybody wearing a bhurka on the basis that 'I can't see their face so I'm levelling the field'?
11 April 2011, 01:15 PM
#26
And the first prosecution? Although it's not clear from that if she was or was not wearing a veil
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13031397
My personal view is that's something I don't like. I have no problem with the scarves (hijab?) which show the face, but a veil creates a barrier that in turn creates a divided society.
I particularly like...
"Anyone caught breaking the law will be liable to a fine of 150 euros (£133, $217) and a citizenship course"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13031397
My personal view is that's something I don't like. I have no problem with the scarves (hijab?) which show the face, but a veil creates a barrier that in turn creates a divided society.
I particularly like...
"Anyone caught breaking the law will be liable to a fine of 150 euros (£133, $217) and a citizenship course"
11 April 2011, 01:31 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does it work in an office environment? I have never seen a bhurka in the offices I've worked in but somebody on here must have been to office based sit down meetings with somebody wearing one? I nearly said 'face to face' but obviously that would be impossible.
I wonder how company politics/HR would deal with meeting attendees who insisted on facing the opposite direction to anybody wearing a bhurka on the basis that 'I can't see their face so I'm levelling the field'?
I wonder how company politics/HR would deal with meeting attendees who insisted on facing the opposite direction to anybody wearing a bhurka on the basis that 'I can't see their face so I'm levelling the field'?
11 April 2011, 01:46 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So much for an individual's rights.
Does a woman wearing a burkha really bother you all that much? It really should be up to them and the only caveat is they should be prepared to remove it for identity purposes.
Aside from that live and let live.
Does a woman wearing a burkha really bother you all that much? It really should be up to them and the only caveat is they should be prepared to remove it for identity purposes.
Aside from that live and let live.
11 April 2011, 01:53 PM
#29
i think the underlying point here is how do you know its a woman . could easily be a man of womanly statue , as per the case at a airport where the man wanted for questioning about a murder managed to dissapere back to pakistan . good on the french at long last they have done something which required ***** lets hope cameron follows
11 April 2011, 02:08 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How come the same people now espousing rights and freedom were vilifying say the Danish Cartoons not so long ago??