Burka ban

Rev Hellfire · 29-04-2010 8:32pm #1

It seems that the Belgian parliament has become the first (of hopefully many) the burka, with France to follow we can only hope our own government will now have the nerve to do what's right and follow suit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8652861.stm

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 29-04-2010 8:40pm

I'm religious and support the ban

too right, muslims should be free to live as we choose for them and no more!

Stercus Accidit · 29-04-2010 8:41pm

I'm religious and support the ban

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

too right, muslims should be free to live as we choose for them and no more!

I agree, the moral qualms of a society shouldn't be imposed by law.

Its a slippery slope.

Rev Hellfire · 29-04-2010 8:46pm

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I agree, the moral qualms of a society shouldn't be imposed by law.

Its a slippery slope.

This is more about normalising Muslims into European society.
I suggest you try going shopping with a paper bag on your head and see how you fair.
All societies impose their morals through their laws, but perhaps you feel religions should have a special place and be held above such concerns.

Permabear · 29-04-2010 8:59pm

This post has been deleted.

Rev Hellfire · 29-04-2010 9:13pm

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Then you have an issue, but one in which society has the final say.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Absolutely, you try walking down Grafton Street starker.

Society has decided that such behaviour is unacceptable and the government which reflects the will of society has legislated accordingly. For some reason people seem to believe that democratic governments are distinct from the society they govern and that ohh noze its religion you can't interfere with that.

Zillah · 29-04-2010 9:32pm

I have to admit that despite my normally ultra-liberal views there's a part of me that takes a token of solace from the increasing xenophobia in Europe. I like Europe, I like its culture, and one of the worst case scenarios I can envisage is European culture being overwhelmed by Islamic values. Sharia law is abhorrent to me, the more intolerant Europeans are to Islamic traditions the less likely it is to take root.

Of course another part of me lashes out and says that governments mandating particular varieties of clothes being forbidden is a tragic miscarraige of democratic values and I would fight with fervour to prevent such a thing. I'm torn. While hijab is without a doubt used by some men to oppress women, there is an argument to be made for women wanting it. Hijab basically refers to the concept of modesty. It is the desire to keep oneself reserved from the world and the view of others, and while I personally would like everyone to wear as little as possible (:D) I have to concede that wanting to obscure one's own face and body in public is a perfectly valid and understandable opinion, and I don't like the idea of legally forbidding someone from expressing that.

There are also two crucial practical issues at stake here: There is a security concern in terms of people obscuring their identity in public. Try walking into a bank with a motorcycle helmet on, or that halloween mask you love, and you'll see how we already restrict such things. The other one is the fact that hijab is important enough to some people that some muslim women are literally going to be house bound. Choosing to disobey the dictates of God in terms of their own clothing is not a very realistic prospect. Of course, when considering the security issue...has there been a spate of unsolved crimes perpetrated by Muslim women wearing Burkas in mainland Europe recently that I'm unaware of?

I remain confused on this issue and shall have to think about it. Someone else express strong opinions for once and I'll see if you can convince me.

Permabear · 29-04-2010 9:34pm

This post has been deleted.

Zillah · 29-04-2010 9:40pm

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You're both basically standing on a house of cards here. Let's break it down to the core issue:

You concede that democratically elected governments are entitled to create laws by which to regulate behaviour in society? My freedom to swing my fist ends at the point where your nose begins. No society is free, there's restrictions for all sorts of things. The only issues to be discussed are the reasons for and against particular laws, and what their potential consequences are. If we can discuss that then I think we can deal with the issue, there's no point making broad statements about freedom and tyranny here.

Permabear · 29-04-2010 9:47pm

This post has been deleted.

Zillah · 29-04-2010 9:55pm

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You're just being pedantic now. Allow me to rephrase:
Do you concede that democratic governments are entitled to create laws by to regulate behaviour in society to protect people's core liberties?

Here's some thoughts:
- One liberty we enjoy is to not be the victims of terrorism. If burkhas can be shown to be a security threat then by banning them we are protecting that liberty.
- Another liberty is the freedom to show your face. If there are men using a hijab culture to control and oppress women then surely banning the burka is protecting their freedoms?

So where does my freedom to choose my own clothing end?

According to those in favour of this law, at the point where you obscure your identity.

Permabear · 29-04-2010 10:14pm

This post has been deleted.

johnny_ultimate · 29-04-2010 10:28pm

Not particularly sure how I feel about this either. It depends which way you look at it, but it is a complicated argument. On one hand, surely people have the right to express themselves, especially with something like clothing. I'd be irked if I suddenly couldn't wear jeans. OK, no religious connotation there, admittedly. I by no means agree with the moral reasoning behind covering faces, but is a culture that exists, and is it right to ban it? It is one of those arguments where I honestly can't decide what I think is right - once I think of a point, a counterpoint springs up too :pac:

I definitely disagree with the concept of a burka, and yeah I can see it causing problems in wider society. Violence wise, I'm sure the vast majority of people would leave a woman wearing a burka alone, even if they don't agree with it. But some thug could see it as an incentive for violence, and is that person any better than a fundamentalist terrorist?

I don't know, it is a complex discussion, and while I'm sure this sort of blanket ban makes people more comfortable, are there certain rights being denied here?

Darlughda · 29-04-2010 10:38pm

I find women wearing burkas offensive to me as a women for everything that the burka represents, and how it flies in the face of all of the progressive moves made in western society since the 1950's and the achievements of the women's movement since the early days of the suffragettes.

The arguments made by women who adopt the burka are bollix, imo, its religious brainwashing and a whole pile of moral claptrap that has convinced some people that they have modesty that needs to be preserved, otherwise lecherous men just won't be able to stop themselves.

Zillah · 29-04-2010 10:40pm

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But you accept that you're not allowed to walk around naked, or wearing a T-Shirt depicting graphic rape?

You seem to be disregarding the entire concept of things being deemed "unacceptable", whereas every law in existence is based on things we deem unacceptable, from murder to theft and drug abuse.

If men are forcing women to wear this garment, that's an entirely different concern, and one that should be addressed as an issue of domestic abuse. Of course women should have the freedom to show their faces.

You don't honestly think that a culture where women are bullied into subservience is penetrable in terms of the law, do you? Honest question on practicality. Do you think that the law can do anything for women under overwhelming social pressure to conform to hijab beyond banning the burka itself?

So why is it being described as a "burka ban," then? Is it not equally a "gorilla suit ban," a "hoodie ban," and a "Halloween mask ban"?

Presumably because there is no one for whom wearing a gorilla suit is a way of life. Personally if I were creating such a law I'd phrase it in more general terms about people obscuring their identities in public.

Bear in mind I'm not saying I disagree with you, I'm just going to test any and all strong opinions in this thread to see how they hold up.

Flamed Diving · 29-04-2010 10:42pm

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Only around 30 women wear this kind of veil in Belgium, out of a Muslim population of around half a million.

LOL!

So specific!

Zillah · 29-04-2010 10:44pm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Only around 30 women wear this kind of veil in Belgium, out of a Muslim population of around half a million.

LOL!

So specific!

The legislative equivalent of a predator drone.

Flamed Diving · 29-04-2010 10:45pm

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Is that the title of the legislation, or is it a name, conjured by the media?

kiffer · 29-04-2010 10:46pm

I'm religious and support the ban

The law should be something like "because every person has a right to a public identity*, no person should force** another to cover or hide their face in public..."
or something like that but wrapped up in legalspeak. And obviously it needs some extra waffle to create loop holes so the legal profession can make complex money generating cases out of it...

*Do we?
** force could be expanded upon of course... And how do you prove it? Did she choose it or did her father force her?

PDN · 29-04-2010 11:06pm

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Society has decided that such behaviour is unacceptable and the government which reflects the will of society has legislated accordingly. For some reason people seem to believe that democratic governments are distinct from the society they govern and that ohh noze its religion you can't interfere with that.

So if a society decides that atheism or homosexuality is unacceptable, and if the government which reflects the will of society has legislated accordingly, is that OK with you?

I personally find the burkas to be rather unnerving - but the whole point of a secular democratic society is that we tolerate stuff we don't agree with, not that we just tolerate the stuff we like anyway.

Flamed Diving · 29-04-2010 11:11pm

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

PDN wrote: »

So if a society decides that atheism or homosexuality is unacceptable, and if the government which reflects the will of society has legislated accordingly, is that OK with you?

I personally find the burkas to be rather unnerving - but the whole point of a secular democratic society is that we tolerate stuff we don't agree with, not that we just tolerate the stuff we like anyway.

I nearly there with you, but if people wish to wear cloaking devices than they do pose a difficulty to a society which depends on facial recognition. Not just for security reasons, but also cultural. Furthermore, if you can justify somebody disguising their entire figure because it is their personal preference, then you cannot justify denying peoples right to do the complete opposite. Fair is fair.

--amadeus-- · 29-04-2010 11:12pm

This is sooooo complex an area.

Like others I am quite conflicted about it, but the only thing that I am pretty sure about is that exceptions on other laws or rules should not be made for religious items.

So if as a non-religious male I'm not allowed to wear a balaclava into a bank, even in teh depths of winter why should someone be allowed to wear a burka? Likewise I have an issue with muslim medics refusing to follow hand wash procedures aimed at controlling infection for "modesty" reasons. And yes I think it's wrong for nurses to wear crosses if they are prevented from wearing other jewellery.

But walking down teh street? I don't really think it's any of our business, to be honest.

kiffer · 29-04-2010 11:19pm

I'm religious and support the ban

People should be allowed to wear what they like, but should not be able to force people to wear identity hiding clothes... I was going to say should not be able to force people to wear clothes but that would stop schools and various jobs having uniforms... And
adding an exception for uniforms would allow schools to have them as a uniform... The question is are any of those 30 women being forced and if so is such forcing covered under existing law?

Zillah · 29-04-2010 11:31pm

kiffer wrote: »

The question is are any of those 30 women being forced and if so is such forcing covered under existing law?

Its kind of circular. In theory there could be some sort of coercion charges to be laid there if someone is being dominated into living their life in a fashion they disagree with...but if such an individual is oppressed enough to wear the Burka then the concept of telling the police or testifying in court would be entirely alien to them. This is ignoring the fact that prosecuting for applying social pressures to conform to certain clothing standards is absurdly difficult and nebulous.

Hence the law that just came in: If you want to stop the burka being used as a tool of oppression then just ban the burka.

MikeC101 · 29-04-2010 11:35pm

I'm religious and support the ban

Zillah wrote: »

Its kind of circular. In theory there could be some sort of coercion charges to be laid there if someone is being dominated into living their life in a fashion they disagree with...but if such an individual is oppressed enough to wear the Burka then the concept of telling the police or testifying in court would be entirely alien to them. This is ignoring the fact that prosecuting for applying social pressures to conform to certain clothing standards is absurdly difficult and nebulous.

Hence the law that just came in: If you want to stop the burka being used as a tool of oppression then just ban the burka.

My take on this is that if the individual is oppressed to the extent that they will wear a burka against their will, and are afraid of getting help from the authorities, then a ban on wearing a burka will result in them being forced to remain in their home at all times. It won't help with the problem, just keep it out of sight.

PDN · 29-04-2010 11:38pm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I nearly there with you, but if people wish to wear cloaking devices than they do pose a difficulty to a society which depends on facial recognition. Not just for security reasons, but also cultural. Furthermore, if you can justify somebody disguising their entire figure because it is their personal preference, then you cannot justify denying peoples right to do the complete opposite. Fair is fair.

The cultural thing cuts no ice with me. We should have the freedom to be totally anti-cultural or counter-cultural if we wish (providing we harm no-one else). Anyway, people already wear sunglasses & hoodies that impede facial recognition.

As for security, the answer is simple. You ban the burka from situations where it poses a security risk. You already see notices displayed that forbid anyone entering a bank while wearing a motorcycle helmet. In the same way it would be reasonable to insist that anyone wearing a burka does not enter a bank, or board a plane etc.

MikeC101 · 29-04-2010 11:44pm

I'm religious and support the ban

PDN wrote: »

You ban the burka from situations where it poses a security risk. You already see notices displayed that forbid anyone entering a bank while wearing a motorcycle helmet. In the same way it would be reasonable to insist that anyone wearing a burka does not enter a bank, or board a plane etc.

Somewhat oddly, I was watching a video on youtube by a motorcyclist where he'd just been told by a security guard in Tesco (UK) that he wouldn't be allowed to enter without removing his helmet (which was a flip up model, and he had the front raised - so it basically shows all of the front of your face), and when he pointed out that a Muslim woman in hijab had just walked in in front of him, the security guard said "That's different, that's a religious thing."

Similarly Sikhs don't have to wear helmets on motorcycles, though everyone else is legally obliged to. (Again, in the UK) I think Sikhs are exempt from hard hat requirements on building sites too.

Zillah · 29-04-2010 11:45pm

MikeC101 wrote: »

My take on this is that if the individual is oppressed to the extent that they will wear a burka against their will, and are afraid of getting help from the authorities, then a ban on wearing a burka will result in them being forced to remain in their home at all times. It won't help with the problem, just keep it out of sight.

Which I commented on in my first post. It is a concern, and I'm still not sure where I stand on this issue. However, I can imagine that even the most conservative Muslim man, living in a Western country that bans the burka, must eventually soften his position. Sheer practicality demands that he's going to get sick of doing the shopping for his wife and daughters, that he's tired of posting letters for them etc.

If you read into the hypocrisy evident in the pro-life movement you'll see that even people with deeply help religious beliefs will allow exceptions when it has a direct and tangible effect on their lives. (I've read tons of anecdotes about campaigners showing up with their daughters for abortions because their child is a special case etc and all the waffle and rationalisations that come with that)

robindch · 29-04-2010 11:53pm

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Zillah wrote: »

has there been a spate of unsolved crimes perpetrated by Muslim women wearing Burkas in mainland Europe recently that I'm unaware of?

They're not quite unsolved -- rather the opposite really, since some of them made suicide videos -- but amongst many other attacks, Chechen Black Widows took part in the high-profile Nord-Ost hostage crisis which lead to the deaths of well over 100 civilians, as well as the wholly indescribable evil of Beslan, which lead to the deaths of something like two or three times that number of people, mostly women and children. The wiki link lists many more instances, though all of them are confined to Russia rather than mainland Europe.

It's been a couple of years since I last took an internal flight in Russia, but I recall from somewhere that there is a strictly enforced ban on burkas on such flights, and the Russian rumour mill certainly abounds with stories of passengers refusing to board planes if anybody vaguely islamic-looking is flying.

Zillah wrote: »

There are also two crucial practical issues at stake here: [...]

You have missed completely the underlying political dimension to this ongoing saga -- the security and other considerations are trivial in comparison.

The burka debate is all about the assertion of political authority, or in simpler terms, who runs the country. On the one hand, people in Europe are pretty free to wear whatever they want once it doesn't frighten the horses. On the other hand, islamic and other religious leaders have used this freedom to force their client populations, using the usual range of subtle and unsubtle manipulative tactics, to wear exactly what the leaders want. In this way, the freedom to wear something paradoxically (and cleverly) becomes a means to subvert the freedom.

And it's not only the islamics who are doing it. In the USA, the weird Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and their polygamist prophet-leader Warren Jeffs (who "married" a prepubescent girl) also assert strict dress codes, with the same aim in mind of enforcing political control. Though unlike Belgium, and no doubt bearing in mind how close Utah came to having its own civil war over the issue during the early years of the Mormon movement, the USA has not moved to ban such dress codes, or even to enforce its existing ban on polygamy.

Anyhow, when basic freedoms are being denied, it's the unpleasant job of the State to step in an reassert the freedom by banning the class of clothes which religious leaders use to deny the freedom.

Zillah wrote: »

I remain confused on this issue and shall have to think about it. Someone else express strong opinions for once and I'll see if you can convince me.

Be confused no longer. This is a serious political issue regarding the origin and nature of political power and the freedoms that we enjoy in these relatively enlightened times. If the western governments cave in on it, then the unelected, self-serving religious leaders will have won the debate and will no doubt select more freedoms to deny their client populations, and no doubt, others too.

Good on the Belgians, I say.

MikeC101 · 29-04-2010 11:59pm

I'm religious and support the ban

Zillah wrote: »

Which I commented on in my first post. It is a concern, and I'm still not sure where I stand on this issue. However, I can imagine that even the most conservative Muslim man, living in a Western country that bans the burka, must eventually soften his position. Sheer practicality demands that he's going to get sick of doing the shopping for his wife and daughters, that he's tired of posting letters for them etc.

A very valid point! It's amazing how firmly held beliefs can fall by the wayside when they become inconvenient.

I'm conflicted on this too. Much as I hate the notion of the state dictating clothing choices to individuals, it already does to a certain extent (though it's generally only in the area of dictating how little clothing can be worn in public), I could almost be swayed to see it as a necessary evil.

Zillah wrote: »

If you read into the hypocrisy evident in the pro-life movement you'll see that even people with deeply help religious beliefs will allow exceptions when it has a direct and tangible effect on their lives. (I've read tons of anecdotes about campaigners showing up with their daughters for abortions because their child is a special case etc and all the waffle and rationalisations that come with that)

I'm completely unsurprised by this - hypocrisy has always been a virtue of the "holier than thou" types who would dictate morals to others.

Darlughda · 30-04-2010 12:03am

I think that the burka thing is a feminist issue that should be tackled by the women who hold comfortable well paid jobs as women's studies professors/lecturers and academics.

Burka ban

Belgium's burka ban -- brilliant or barmy? 1343 votes

Comments