Burka ban

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

How do you know they aren't choosing to wear it?

the argument appears to be 'because no-one can choose to wear it; the very act of wearing it implies they are brainwashed'.

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You're assuming these women are being forced into wearing the Burhka. How do you know they aren't choosing to wear it?

He is also assuming the people who claim to support the ban for those reasons are being sincere.

pH wrote: »

But do they have the right to be masked everywhere? In banks? Teaching our children, working as doctors in our hospitals? As a police officer? As a judge? It seems to be a cop out to say well the burka's fine and should be allowed, just not here, and here oh and here ...

Not a cop out at all. It's perfectly feasible to ban the burka in all of those situations, just like a doctor would not be allowed to wear a motor bike helmet.

What about nakedness?

I would lean towards allowing nakedness, with a few exceptions.

robindch

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

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'm implying nothing of the kind and you know it.

I'm not sure if you're fully understanding what's underneath this debate. People certainly should be allowed to dress as they want. However, this freedom has been subverted by religious supremacists in order to express their own anti-social, totalitarian ideas.

You can't have it both ways -- one must either support the ban, thus freeing the women to wear what they want (except the marker which signals their submission to somebody else's totalitarianism), or one, by default, supports the right of the religious supremacists to force women to wear the burqa.

The levels of oppression here are not equal and it is unrealistic to pretend that they are.

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

I would like to see a law that says something along the lines of
"you may not impose a dress code on any spouse or family member".

I would be in favour of a law which would encourage Muslim women to give up the burka (without banning it outright), while giving them the power to sue their husbands.

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

or one, by default, supports the right of the religious supremacists to force women to wear the burqa.

it's some leap of logic to say that if you don't ban something, you by default support it.

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

Yep. I too, believe in grey areas.

mcclain!

condra wrote: »

Let's face it. The main reason most people want a burka ban is because they hate muslims and want to oppress or get rid of them. I would respect them more if they admitted it.

Why is nobody proposing a ban on Jewish beards, Seek hair, or Hindu Bindi?

Well said.

I think one of the main reasons that Muslims are subject to most of the discrimation in so far as religious/cultural identities and symbols (aside from maybe france where all religious symbols are banned in public schools) is because of the "us versus them" mentality which has developed over the last twenty years in the west. Which, with several VERY noticeable exceptions aside is massively unfounded.

The great irony is that many of those who would call themselves religious and are supporting the ban, have failed to realise how piously religious a majority of muslim people are- perhaps leaving them jealous of how "morality in the west", for want of a better word, has ceased to be in the mainstream.

robindch

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

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's some leap of logic to say that if you don't ban something, you by default support it.

In this case, if one is going to take sides on this debate, then either it'll be to support women's rights, or to support the rights of religious supremacists to oppress women.

Your call.

.

irishconvert

robindch wrote: »

In this case, if one is going to take sides on this debate, then either it'll be to support women's rights, or to support the rights of religious supremacists to oppress women.

Your call.

.

I support the right of the woman to wear whatever she wants, including a burqa if she wants to.

Dades

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

No, in my opinion any objections being raised are purely on the grounds that people are afraid of other cultures and different ways of living that they don't understand or don't conform to their ideas of what's normal.

I've already alluded to the fact that I have no love for the Muslim faith and the culture that comes with it. I've no issue with saying that I'd prefer it didn't proliferate in Ireland. The same way I wish catholic culture would fade into the past, too (or at least fall back into the churches and out of our schools).

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

In this case, if one is going to take sides on this debate, then either it'll be to support women's rights, or to support the rights of religious supremacists to oppress women.

Your call.

if only life was so simple.

robindch

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

magicbastarder wrote: »

if only life was so simple.

Life is complicated, but in this case, it's fairly straightforward

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

In this case, if one is going to take sides on this debate, then either it'll be to support women's rights, or to support the rights of religious supremacists to oppress women.
.

or one could choose to suggest an alternative policy
or one could choose not to give a damn either way
or one could argue that the proposed legislation is too simplistic.

Your logic is like asking somebody, "do you support a ban on abortion or are you a baby killing scumbag?"
There ARE grey areas.

There are alternatives to an outright burka ban, just like there are grey areas in peoples opinions about the burka.

__

mcclain! wrote: »

The great irony is that many of those who would call themselves religious and are supporting the ban, have failed to realise how piously religious a majority of muslim people are...

I think it is also ironic that Christians don't seem to realise that by supporting the ban they are supporting a precedent which could logically lead to their own religious rights being infringed upon.

Sort of cherry picking the bits of secularism that suit them, just like they cherry pick the bits of science that benefit them.

It makes sense that some atheists would be against all religion, but Christians supporting the burka ban citing the rights of women?
Then let's allow female priests while we're at it.

When is someone in this thread going stand up and have the guts to admit they hate muslims?
I've much more time for outspoken racists than those racists who hide behind a veil of human rights or pseudo secularism.

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

In this case, if one is going to take sides on this debate, then either it'll be to support women's rights, or to support the rights of religious supremacists to oppress women.

fair enough, if you're going to resort to 'when did you stop beating your wife?' style tactics, i'll leave it at i support womens' rights.
the right for women to be able to decide for themselves, individually.

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

irishconvert wrote: »

I support the right of the woman to wear whatever she wants, including a burqa if she wants to.

Could I naturally assume then that if a woman does not want to wear a burka, she should have the right to do so?
And should be able to sue her husband should he force her to wear one?

And if so, should Westerners be allowed to wear whatever they like when they visit Muslim countries?

As a muslim, do you support all womens rights? Do you support all human rights?

robindch

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

magicbastarder wrote: »

the right for women to be able to decide for themselves, individually.

Hmm... You're happy for "women to be able to decide for themselves", but as far as I recall, you don't actually think that women have much choice in this matter, since most are subtly or non-subtly coerced into wearing it.

It's certainly an even-handed position -- supporting the right of women not to have a basic right -- but it does leave the faint scent of confusion lingering in the air.

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

oh, i would expect that a significant proportion are coerced into wearing it. i don't know exactly what proportion, so i'm not going to make any guesses about it.

but it doesn't affect my stance, because i don't believe a diktat is the solution. it's just another case of a more powerful entity stepping in and deciding what's best, and also is tackling the result and not the cause of the issue in the first place, and placing the onus on the victim rather than the perpetrator.

you don't dissuade bank robbers by punishing the banks when they're robbed.

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

Dades wrote: »

I've already alluded to the fact that I have no love for the Muslim faith and the culture that comes with it. I've no issue with saying that I'd prefer it didn't proliferate in Ireland. The same way I wish catholic culture would fade into the past, too (or at least fall back into the churches and out of our schools).

Respect for speaking your mind.

I too have no love for the muslim faith or culture, but as long as Ireland is letting people of other nationalities and faiths to settle in the country, I still think they should be allowed reasonable freedom to practice their faiths.

Peoples religions are often deeply important to them. I would like to see Ireland free from Christianity, but only by peaceful, ethical means, such as raising awareness and promoting education, not by forbidding Catholics to wear crosses around their necks.

robindch

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

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's just another case of a more powerful entity stepping in and deciding what's best, and also is tackling the result and not the cause of the issue in the first place

If your issue is one of control, then you don't believe that the state should step in, say, to stop kids dying because their parents believe that praying is an acceptable substitute for medical attention?

magicbastarder wrote: »

you don't dissuade bank robbers by punishing the banks when they're robbed.

Yes, you do:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0728/anpost.html

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

If your issue is one of control, then you don't believe that the state should step in, say, to stop kids dying because their parents believe that praying is an acceptable substitute for medical attention?

in this example, we would not be banning the death of the child (which would be the analogy with the burka ban), but banning the parents from withholding medical assistance.

plus, we treat childrens' choices as different to adults' choices. the example above is adding a complication to the debate.

robindch

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

magicbastarder wrote: »

the example above is adding a complication to the debate.

Not really. Your original reply was that the state should not intervene. I'm pointing out, by extreme example, that you already support the right of the state to intervene.

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

If a woman made a complaint about being forced to wear a burka, I think most people would support their right to NOT wear it.

Actually as far as I know, by law, women already do have the right to NOT wear burkas in this country.

If the issue really is womens rights, perhaps we should be encouraging Muslim women to stand up for themselves more. I would rather see Muslim progression internally, than external oppression against Muslims.

irishconvert

condra wrote: »

Could I naturally assume then that if a woman does not want to wear a burka, she should have the right to do so?
And should be able to sue her husband should he force her to wear one?

Of course she should not have to wear one if she doesn't want to. There is no requirement in Islam to wear one. Personally I hate the burqa. But if a woman thinks she is pleasing God by wearing one then let her do so. I just hope her family explain to her that it is not a requirement.

condra wrote: »

And if so, should Westerners be allowed to wear whatever they like when they visit Muslim countries?

Are you suggesting we set our standards based on the standards of Muslim countries?

condra wrote: »

As a muslim, do you support all womens rights? Do you support all human rights?

They are very generic questions.

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

irishconvert wrote: »

They are very generic questions.

Questions which you made no effort to answer.

I'll try one more time.

1]
Should a Muslim woman be able to sue her husband if he forces her to wear a burka?

2]
Should Westerners be allowed to wear whatever they like when they visit Muslim countries?

3]
As a muslim, do you support all womens rights? Do you support all human rights?

robindch

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

condra wrote: »

If the issue really is womens rights, perhaps we should be encouraging Muslim women to stand up for themselves more. I would rather see Muslim progression internally, than external oppression against Muslims.

I fully agree. However, experience from other countries where islam is commonplace, together with the express instructions of many islamic religious leaders to the effect that women are basically men's chattels, both suggest that this liberation is unlikely to happen any time soon. It's especially unlikely to happen while the power and influence of islam grows, as it is doing in many countries at this time.

In that case, I don't think the state has any option but to intervene, unpleasant, dictatorial, arrogant and playing-into-the-far-right as doing so is.

irishconvert

condra wrote: »

Questions which you made no effort to answer.

I'll try one more time.

1]
Should a Muslim woman be able to sue her husband if he forces her to wear a burka?

2]
Should Westerners be allowed to wear whatever they like when they visit Muslim countries?

3]
As a muslim, do you support all womens rights? Do you support all human rights?

Ok, I'll try one more time also.

1) Yes (I don't think you can sue someone for an offense like that, but she should be able to have him charged)

2) No

3) What women's rights are you referring to? What human rights are you referring to?

condra

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

It's especially unlikely to happen while the power and influence of islam grows, as it is doing in many countries at this time.

Are you talking about Malmo?

I would be lying if I said I didn't find the situation in Malmo very unsettling.

magicbastarder

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

Not really. Your original reply was that the state should not intervene. I'm pointing out, by extreme example, that you already support the right of the state to intervene.

and there are two characteristics of your example which place it into a different league; one being that the result is death, which anyone sane agrees is a bad thing (euthanasia issues apart), whereas wearing a burka is not of itself a moral hazard.
second, a child is (by law) not considered to be ultimately qualified to make decisions about his or her health, but an adult is considered to be entitled to make their own considered decision about their own life.

goingpostal

I'm religious and support the ban

If women are allowed to walk around in public with a burka on concealing their face, I demand that all the burka-apologists defend my right to walk into the bank tomorrow with a motorcycle helmet over my face.

Nemi

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

People certainly should be allowed to dress as they want. However, this freedom has been subverted by religious supremacists in order to express their own anti-social, totalitarian ideas.

I don't think you've quite addressed how compulsion is a problem in certain countries, but not here. You're tending to use the situation in Saudi as a baseball bat to hammer an unnecessary ban into Ireland.

How can Islamic "religious supremacists" hope to subvert Irish society by compelling women to wear a burka?

robindch wrote: »

If your issue is one of control, then you don't believe that the state should step in, say, to stop kids dying because their parents believe that praying is an acceptable substitute for medical attention?

For my part, it most certainly would be acceptable for the State to step in to prevent an immediate death. However, it would be unacceptable for the State to force parents to vaccinate their children, as that's simply interfering with people's liberty to too great an extent.

In the same way, it would be perfectly acceptable for the State to prohibit human sacrifice. But there's no reason for the State to stop people wearing funny clothes.

And all the time the elephant in the room is the fact that infant boys have actually died on Irish soil as a result of circumcision. Yet here we are banging on about the burka, as if it mattered a jot to anyone actually subject to Irish law.

goingpostal wrote: »

I demand that all the burka-apologists defend my right to walk into the bank tomorrow with a motorcycle helmet over my face.

Yawn.