Burqa 'not welcome' in France: Sarkozy

[muse]

Are they really dictating our "religion" to us?? SO, Burqa is Islam is it??? All these other Muslims must have missed that part BTW Nuns wear a "habit" and not a "gown"

 

[third eye]

they should ban the nuns to wear there gowns too
but most of all it shows how weak v muslims r that d french n other non-muslims are dictating our religion to us.
shame on us

The Habit worn by nuns does not cover the face.

 

[Al-zakir]

I am disappointed by this response. One should not be afraid of disputing practices among Muslims which one sincerely believes is not a command by Allah and may have its origin in tribal customs. I am a Muslim for countless generations and proud of it. I

I am sorry to hear that. Why are you disappointed by my comment? Have I said anything out of norm or am I illogical to my opinion?

I am neither pro nor anti Burqa however I do know a significant sector of Muslim women does wear Burqa as a Hijab so I am willing to give them do respect. It also true that Burqa as a hijab has not been discredited by ulema-e-din.

I disagree with a practice considered Islamic when I find no clear cut command against it and supported by conflicting Hadith written 100 years later, I have a right to dispute it. For example only reference I came across ‘Purdah’ which is in Sura Azhab (trench) which is:

Quote

59. O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks all over their bodies . That will be better, that they should be known so as not to be annoyed. And Allâh is Ever Oft ¬Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Unquote

Shuttlecock burqa, norm in the rural and tribal Pakistan is like a prison, and in my opinion oppressive. If a women desires to wear it of her own free will, it is her choice. I am not for women going around wearing miniskirts, but the woman who insists on wearing burqa, she can always chose to live where it is allowed, why France?

There are many practices prevailing in Islamic societies/countries which have nothing to do with Islam (such as ban on women driving in Saudi Arabia) but to do with the interpretation of a single person.

Another such case is the punishment for adultery in Sura Al Noor which clearly states it is100 lashes, whereas many Ulemas insist that it is stoning by death, supported by a single incident where our holy Prophet (PBUH) reportedly thus decided. There is no ambiguity in the orders of Allah but one cannot completely rule out possibility of misreporting in case of Hadith, thus why should I be afraid of criticising Hudood laws?

I do not disagree with your informative findings.

 

[Durran3]

Shuttlecock burqa, norm in the rural and tribal Pakistan is like a prison, and in my opinion oppressive. If a women desires to wear it of her own free will, it is her choice. I am not for women going around wearing miniskirts, but the woman who insists on wearing burqa, she can always chose to live where it is allowed, why France?

I don't think any women on Gods green planet would choose to wear a Burqa for any given reason. If she is religous there are other many respectable ways of covering yourself like Hijab etc. The Burqa as you stated is opperssive and shouldn't be allowed period.. Just because i want to do drugs doesn't mean that it should be made legal or that i should freely be able to consume it same goes for firearms as well.

Now you might ask drugs and Burqa is a bad example but no, both are harmful to human beings, one being physically and the other socially and mentally. Look at my previous post as to why the Burqa needs to be banned... Its not a religous reason its a political/ideological reason. It poses a security threat, its downright horrible for your health (lack of Vitamen D from sunlight, as well as demolishing your self esteem and willpower) on top of that its a symbol of oppression which goes against western ideals (infact i would go as far as say its downright universally inhumane to treat your women like that).

One of the other respectable posters said that the only reason women are forced to wear a Burqa is because men abuse women and thus force their women to wear them. That is very true but in a place like France women have ample tools at their disposal to help them. They can easily report domestic violence against them to proper authorities and go to proper social service groups who are more than willing to help them.

they should ban the nuns to wear there gowns too
but most of all it shows how weak v muslims r that d french n other non-muslims are dictating our religion to us.
shame on us

What an ignorant thing to say. Nuns are very different than a woman wearing a Burqa. No one is saying here to ban a Hijab or proper clothing for a woman to cover herself.. There is a BIG difference between the two..

BURQA




HIJAB

NUN

--- LEARN TO DIFFERENIATE BETWEEN THEM

Nuns are free to choose what to wear, Muslim women are free to choose to a wear a hijab or anything to cover themselves..
No WOMAN in her RIGHT mind would choose to wear a Burqa no one...There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between covering your self religously and covering yourself because you are being FORCED

 

[rubyjackass]

How is a woman freely choosing to wear a Burqa or Hijab or a Sikh choosing to wear a turban in any way equivalent to choosing slavery?

No, the argument you are making is that a majority can restrain the liberties of a minority at its whim just because it disagrees with them.

Burqa and the others are from whole different leagues.
I suppose, atleast in India, you don't automatically loose your Sikhness if you dont wear a turban.

There is a minority who wants to do whatever they want. The decision is in the interest of people of the nation, a good one in my view. Even muslims dont accept Burqa as universal rule.

 

[Durran3]

The decision is in the interest of people of the nation, a good one in my view.

Exactly.. some decisions that are made by the general population are stupid and the government needs to take control and look into it for the geater good. Its a governments duty to responsibly look after its citizens while still respecting their private/personal space. Just because carrying Firearms goes against your civil liberties doesn't mean that it should be made legal or just because a woman should be free to get involved in prostitution doesn't mean it should be made legal.

There are certain things that people want to do or would like to do but are harmful, so its the government responsibility to try to stop them. It doesn't mean your civil liberties are being stripped away its just called Responsible governance for the greater well being of your citizens. Now i am all for freedoms, freedom of expression, freedom of choice, i am a staunch liberal when it comes to social progression and conservative when it comes to economics but there are things that are bad and hold no rational reason.

Although I do believe in educating the masses about the downside of all the risks involved before you pass any law, its just common sense. If you think banning Burqa is infringing upon your civil liberties than you can't stop another person from walking fully nude in the middle of the city either. Both are extremes and both are offensive to everyone around them

 

[gambit]

NUN

--- LEARN TO DIFFERENIATE BETWEEN THEM

Nuns are free to choose what to wear, Muslim women are free to choose to a wear a hijab or anything to cover themselves..
No WOMAN in her RIGHT mind would choose to wear a Burqa no one...There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between covering your self religously and covering yourself because you are being FORCED

That would be post-Vatican II when nuns are allowed to dress just like other women, albeit in more conservative appearance, skirts should not be above knees, no plunging neckline, etc...

 

[khanz]

This is not really a big deal burqa is not really compulsary in islam anyway they can wear other islamic clothing like chadors or hijabs if they want to be modest so their rights aren't being denied very few muslim women wear it anyway.

 

[gambit]

This is not really a big deal burqa is not really compulsary in islam anyway...

If a man says it is compulsory, then it is compulsory. Please note the operative word here is 'man', not 'woman'.

...they can wear other islamic clothing like chadors or hijabs if they want to be modest so their rights aren't being denied very few muslim women wear it anyway.

When I was in Turkey, we flew F-111Es out of Incirlik for a couple weeks for the benefits of the Turkish AF, I found out how socially divided Adana really is. There was a wide boulevard that divide Adana into two distinct parts: Old and New. The 'new' Adana is where we hit on French speaking Turkish girls wearing miniskirts and who would have looked as if they belong to any European capital city. The 'old' Adana is where I saw burqa-ed women. Both types of women were comfortable, at least in my eyes, with each other.

That is the way it should be. Any pressure to wear the burqua, the chador or the hijab, should come from within. From one's own deep conviction, not from legally empowered gangsters going around beating up women just because their ankles are showing. I am talking about the 'moral' police of Saudi Arabia, of which I saw plenty enough. They are thugs, nothing more. As I pointed out about post-Vatican II nuns, if any nuns chose to wear Wicked Weasels bikinis, no state can deny her the right to wear them, but the Vatican, supposedly God's representative on Earth, would have choice words for her. But a rebuke, a condemnation, or even an excommunication is the most the Vatican could do to any Catholic. She would still be able to continue life as if nothing ever happened. That is the real freedom.

 

[DarkStar]

Still that's fine.If Pork and Alcohol is not allowed in Muslim Countries then i am sure France has every right to ban Burqa or Muslim countries should allow their Christian and other religion population to eat Pork and Drink Alcohol freely.

Apart from Saudi Arabia, foreigners and non Muslims are able to get alcohol in almost any country imaginable, and that too legally (and many westerners have been known to brew their own lager/beer in Saudi, with the authorities knowingly averting their eyes, since the expats' activities do nto harm the locals). Even in our very own Islamic fortress, Pakistan, shows leniency in this regard to non Muslims.

As for pork, there is no real market for it in Pakistan. But in other muslim countries, like Morocco, Turkey (i'm giving these two as examples because i know of them) do sell pig's meat in the supermarkets.

Even in Pakistan, I don't think there is any law preventing a christian from eating pork. I guess some christian boar hunters may even eat them, just as boar hunters in Turkey do.

The fifth Republic is supposed to be a non denominational, non religious, secular country. In this regard, muslims have as much right to live and practice their religion there, as the christians, jews and sikhs of that country. Denying them this right, due to some misconceptions about christians' status in muslim countries is unfair, undemocratic and plain wrong. Especially since most of France's muslims have been born there for three to four generations, and have nowhere else to be thrown to...not to mention the thousands of 'white' french converts.

Maybe Europe could do us a favour, and give us a seperate homeland for Western European muslims, like they did for the jews in Palestine...then when the inevitable Anti Islamic pogroms do arise, we'll have somewhere to run to.

 

[DarkStar]

This is not really a big deal burqa is not really compulsary in islam anyway they can wear other islamic clothing like chadors or hijabs if they want to be modest so their rights aren't being denied very few muslim women wear it anyway.

I think most of us do know families, where women seriously, honestly, and piously believe that it is a manfiestation of their piety that they wear a niqab, or burqa...(not necessarily the Afghani 'Shuttle coc' Burqa which looks rather odd). These women would wear it, even if their husbands, fathers were to oppose them...They probably would have some choice words for any such suggestions.

Such women, girls, do have the right to believe that in their opinion, they should wear this Burqa/niqab, and they do have the right to believe that it is a part of their religious attire.

Now whether we disagree about the validity of the claim for the burqa/niqab's status in Islamic law, that is not the issue.

For all we need to know, the alien God from teh planet zorb told them to wear the burqa....It is still their right to believe and practice what they believe...as long as they are not harming others...

Democracy and freedom of speech is fine, until it starts to econmpass muslim activities...then they all become jolly old fascists.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Ban the burqa? Or ban such bans?

Neither France nor Iran should dictate religious garb.

By the Monitor's Editorial Board

from the June 25, 2009 edition

It may be hard for an American to fathom – this idea that government would dictate a religious dress code.

That goes too far in so many ways. It violates the separation of church and state. It suppresses religious freedom. And in a broader sense, it squelches identity – for isn't fashion (religious or not) a means of self-expression?

The American view has its sympathizers in other countries, but also its strenuous opponents. In France, for example, President Nicolas Sarkozy this week endorsed the idea of a ban on the burqa. This is the conservative Islamic head-to-toe covering with mesh or a slit at the face that is worn by some Muslim women in public. (In the Persian Gulf states it's known as a niqab.)

Mr. Sarkozy called the burqa "subservience," not religious garb. "In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity." A parliamentary panel will study whether a ban is warranted.

In Iran, the Islamic government takes just the opposite view. Women must be mostly covered – hair, neck, and loose-fitting clothes on the body – as a sign of religious morality. A "spring thaw" from 1997 to 2005 under a reformist president allowed a liberal interpretation of the dress code, but the current president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, revved up the morality police to once again enforce it.

Still, many women in Iran have chafed against the cover mandate – as they have against many other restrictions on women. They came out in full force to protest the June 12 reelection of Mr. Ahmadinejad, widely seen as fraudulent.

In France, Muslims – even moderate ones – are also unhappy with Mr. Sarkozy's antiburqa stance. They say it threatens religious freedom.

The fact that certain publics in both countries are not happy with dictates on religious dress – dictates that have opposite aims – says quite simply that government has no business deciding what adults should wear.

And it indicates that perhaps those who would make "covering" decisions for others are perhaps using this issue to cover their own fears.

In Iran, it must certainly be the fear that allowing the choice not to cover will corrupt religious practice – and by extension, Iran's theocracy will fall. The first fear is groundless. Look at Pakistan. It has no religious police, yet it has no shortage of devout Muslims. Iran's second fear is not so groundless. Again, look at Pakistan. The Taliban, in areas it controls, has tried to enforce conservative dress and dictate lifestyle. Now the people reject them.

Might not French politicians – for Sarkozy is hardly alone in his views – be fearful of Muslim-otherness and its influence on French society? France has the largest Muslim population in Europe and has failed at integrating this group. In 2004, France banned head scarves along with other "ostentatious" religious symbols of dress in public schools. It was paraded as an example of French secularism, of equal treatment for all – but in reality it primarily affected Muslims.

A ban on burqas would not even pertain to a public institution – only being out in public. Focusing on an issue that admittedly affects a minority of Muslims in France (only about 100,000 women wear burqas out of a total Muslim population of about 5 million) is a clever way for a politician to play to an anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant mood and distract from a painful recession.

Other European leaders have refused to be cowed by the anti-Muslim backlash. Britain sees no need to ban the burqa or the head scarf. Its democracy, its "equality" is not in danger for lack of laws on religious dress. Meanwhile, Belgians recently bucked the anti-Muslim mood by electing a politician who wears a head scarf in Parliament.

The fears in France and Iran can't be swept under a rug, but neither can they be papered over with a ban. Banning something as individually sensitive as religious garb leaves the "banees" feeling repressed – look at Turkey (unhappiness over a constitutional ban on the head scarf in public institutions) or at Saudi Arabia (unhappiness over women's restrictive dress and other rules).

When President Obama visited Normandy earlier this month, he was asked about his views on the French ban on head scarves. He reiterated what he had said in his speech in Cairo, that "in the United States our basic attitude is that we're not going to tell people what to wear."

Such an attitude could go a long way in healing this issue.

Ban the burqa? Or ban such bans? | csmonitor.com

 

[TruthSeeker]

In the US the only controversy is over driver's license and passport photos. A very few Muslim women, who are fully veiled, have challenged the requirement that they have a "picture ID" photo on their driver's license. So far, US Courts have upheld the right of State and the Federal governments to require a face photo on certain identification documents. However, some Muslims continue to challenge this requirement for driver's licenses in lawsuits against various States. I think there is a case in Florida still winding its way through legal procedures.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I agree with your assessment that the fundamental problem lies in the physical and mental suffering of women at the hands of men but that in itself is a personal/private matter where its hard for the government to get involved unless and until the woman herself goes to the correct authorities and reports of domestic violence. Both Effective laws and social assistance programs are readily available in European, North American or any other developed countries for that matter.

But if effective laws and programs are available and there is widespread awareness about them, then issues related to 'coercion into wearing the Burka' should be minimal.

Yes you can ban the Burqa as it has no place in any civilized society. This has nothing to do with Freedom of expression or women continuing to suffer physically and mentally. If women are being forced to wear a Burqa in a place like France she has ample tools at her disposal to take action against the person who is abusing her.

Your first statement is subjective - someone could argue that a woman wearing a mini-skirt has 'no place in civilized society' (in fact they do). So how is the latter assertion less valid than yours?

Reasons for Banning

1) It Poses a Security risk. Anyone might lurk under those shrouds be it male or female, muslim or non-muslim.

Why do you care about the identity of someone 'lurking' under the shroud? What does it matter if it is a man, woman or transsexual? If you are concerned about security at public places, then female officers can easily be used in a private booth to search the individual. In fact even non-burqa clad men and women may prefer a private search.

If i remember Yasin Omer the person responsible for the Train bombings in london tried to escape in a Burqa, even the Maulana in the Red Mosque in Islamabad tried running in it.

And the Maulana of the Red Mosqu was caught because of effective policing and precautions by female police officers, despite the fact that there were hundreds of Burqa clad women leaving at around the same time as Mullah Ji was attempting to make his escape.

2) Complete lack of sunlight is horrible for your body in general as you severly lack Vitamen D

So is drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes and some would say eating meat!

3) The Burqa itself 'Symbollically' represents clear cut oppression. Just like the Nazi Swatsticka is banned in some places so is the Burqa. Its true that its more of a political/ideological thing rather than being a religous one.

That again is opinion - the Burqa has not been used as a symbol of regime that committed genocide against women or any other ethnic or religious group, so how you can equate it to the Swastika of the Nazis is beyond me.

The Burqa in general goes against the Ideals of Western Philosophy in general so why wear it in their countries? If you've been born in Wesetern countries chances are your never going to wear a Burqa anyways as you've been brought up in a fairly secular environment no matter how conservative you are .Its as simple as that.. The only people who will cry and demand a Burqa's are hard line religous people or new comers into the country who are going through a culture shock.

Is freedom to practice ones religious beliefs not a 'Western ideal'? Is everyone in the West supposed to act like homogeneous drones, or is there room for diversity of faith, culture and ideas?

Banning an individual from exercising their faith as they interpret it is something against 'Western ideals' as I understand them from US society at least. By that standard forcing someone to wear the Burqa is just as bad as forcing someone to not wear the Burqa, if they choose so.

Why is Alcohol banned in Muslim countries, isn't that infringing upon our civil rights as well albeit due to religous reasons ?? Simply because It goes against Muslim ideals just like the Burqa goes against theirs.... When in Rome do what the Romans do.. its as simple as that... No one is telling you to sacrifice your culture or your religion but you need to respect theirs as well and the Burqa is not reprsentative of any civilized society

People keep raising this 'Muslim country' canard - Muslims are not a nation. You cannot pick examples from Muslim countries or examples of Muslims and then hold every single Muslim accountable for that, regardless of what their citizenship is. The issue is France's laws and French Muslims - these people have nothing to do with Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or Turkey and their laws.

If there is a discussion on laws infringing upon civil liberties in Pakistan, I would be happy to engage with you on that particular subject.

 

[Keysersoze]

I don't know where to start. I would like to say in previous thread " Pride Parade in Toronto Sick!!" It seem to me, these bunch are a big crockroaches who are supporting against burqas, terrorrisms, extremisms, zionists, wars, but okay everything with homosexuality. It is shame, crockroaches are not making sense and defending themselves by pointing fingers on God (which is not true). Some of you are still 'college level students' and not fully understood the history of God's purposes.

Why some people are being harsh or hateful on Burqa instead homosexuality? I expect, we should HARSH PROTESTS against pride parades. I just posted for expecting good normally comments but very odd.

Is this forum are speaking for every persons' right? It is not FAIR!

Moderators, are you hypocrisy yourself? I request you to resign of this forum. Screw it up!

You are a moron. You think this is a place where you can spout bile against people and it will be ignored. Leave Canada immediately and go somewhere where they share you views. You were cut some slack with your previous threads however you have used up your good will.....