French ban the burqa

jc_eire

Just want to see what others think of this...the French along with Belgium recently, have banned the wearing of the burqa with fines imposed for those who breach the law, even for husbands who force their wives to wear them.

Should we follow suit, or is this unfair, should they be entitled to wear them if that is what is required by their faith?

Irish Times article

mikemac

I'm curious to know how they get through airport security.
Do they go into side rooms to be checked if they won't unveil in front of everyone else? I had to remove my shoes but they won't remove their veil? I wouldn't think so or at least hope not

Genuine question and it does have security implications.

Edit, to answer the OP, you follow the customs of your country.
Like if I go to the Middle East and alcohol is banned I won't start moaning over it. Do as the locals do

Nodin

jc_eire wrote: »

Just want to see what others think of this...the French along with Belgium recently, have banned the wearing of the burqa with fines imposed for those who breache the law, even for husbands who force their wives to wear them.

Should we follow suit, or is this unfair, should they be entitled to wear them if that is what is required by their faith?

Irish Times article

Just to point out, it still has to pass their upper parliament, and is apparently considerd 'constitutionally unsound', so it may not stand a legal challenge.

Zascar

Absolutely. When in Rome etc. We have to abide by special rules when we go overseas, they should have to do the same

AckwelFoley

Durka Burka Sarkozy's Jihad

Abrasax

Here we go again.

Calling all the Usual Suspects.

AckwelFoley

As soon as a French page 3 model is alowed to swan down the middle of Irans capital wearing a low cut top and a mini without getting stoned to death, then i think the french can lift their ban

Raedwald

I read an article about this a couple of weeks ago and it said that less then 10,000 muslim women in France wear burqa's and that it is potentially against french constitutional law. I think it also said that the government was simply responding to the national mood on the issue and that it was not strictly necessary.

Having said that, i'm not acutally sure how I stand on the issue.

orourkeda

Now they should ban De Burca

orourkeda

snyper wrote: »

Durka Burka Sarkozy's Jihad

f*ck yeah

Nodin

snyper wrote: »

As soon as a French page 3 model is alowed to swan down the middle of Irans capital wearing a low cut top and a mini without getting stoned to death, then i think the french can lift their ban

So we make our treatment of all muslims contingent on the behaviour in a theocracy run by a conservative branch of a minority sect of Islam....

By jaysus thats good thinkin.

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

So we make our treatment of all muslims contingent on the behaviour in a theocracy run by a conservative branch of a minority sect of Islam....

By jaysus thats good thinkin.

Its illegal to do it in Dubai I believe. (The scantily clad bit)

sdanseo

I agree with it, I have nothing against muslims but I think if women should have to wear headscarves when they go to arab nations then the opposite should be in effect here. It's antisocial in our culture, just as not wearing them is antisocial in muslim culture.

In any case the way the muslim religion treats women is ridiculous in the modern age. Fine if they want to impose their laws in their own countries, but it shouldn't be passed on to more progressive nations.

tony1kenobi

I think this ban should be for a trial period...we don't know what's under them yet.....they might look like utter pigsh*t.

ejmaztec

snyper wrote: »

As soon as a French page 3 model is alowed to swan down the middle of Irans capital wearing a low cut top and a mini without getting stoned to death, then i think the french can lift their ban

They are heading in the right direction, after banning the mullet.

Roomic Cube

sdonn wrote: »

I agree with it, I have nothing against muslims but I think if women should have to wear headscarves when they go to arab nations then the opposite should be in effect here. It's antisocial in our culture, just as not wearing them is antisocial in muslim culture.

In any case the way the muslim religion treats women is ridiculous in the modern age. Fine if they want to impose their laws in their own countries, but it shouldn't be passed on to more progressive nations.

i agree with this, wasnt sure how to word it without sounding like a racist or something

orourkeda

Nodin wrote: »

So we make our treatment of all muslims contingent on the behaviour in a theocracy run by a conservative branch of a minority sect of Islam....

By jaysus thats good thinkin.

By allah mohammed

Nodin

sdonn wrote: »

I agree with it, I have nothing against muslims but I think if women should have to wear headscarves when they go to arab nations then the opposite should be in effect here. It's antisocial in our culture, just as not wearing them is antisocial in muslim culture.

Thus we show our Western liberal tolerance doesn't tolerate that sort of thing, which will doubtless increase tolerance world wide.

up for anything

It's a bit tit-for-tattish to suggest banning the burqa because we are required to wear long sleeves, etc. in their countries.

What is antisocial about wearing one? In fact, after some of the posts on AH concerning the looks and figures of Irish women, I would have thought it should be positively encouraged.

Kiwi_knock

Ultimately it will fail under constitutional review regardless of what people think of it

tricky D

Tyranny of the Majority.

Oh wait, AH, screw fines, let's stone 'em.

AckwelFoley

Nodin wrote: »

So we make our treatment of all muslims contingent on the behaviour in a theocracy run by a conservative branch of a minority sect of Islam....

By jaysus thats good thinkin.

Its by the same Islamic law that the women need to wear a burka

Dudess

No I don't think we should. It doesn't make sense - "It's terrible, they're FORCED to wear it... so let's FORCE them not to". At least here, a woman has the choice not to wear it, but if she'd rather wear it (and yes, it's forced on her, it represses women, but you can't just turn off being culturally conditioned for aeons like a light-switch).

As for "We have to abide by their customs so they should abide by ours" - yes, to a point. I mean, if a muslim person objects to a woman here wearing skimpy clothing or a person eating meat/drinking alcohol, well they're just gonna have to suck it up and they don't have a right to force their views on people here doing any of the above, but a muslim person or a sikh wearing a particular type of clothing doesn't impinge on others' lives.

Any customs that cause grievous harm to a person though, e.g. genital mutilation, should of course be banned here, but the wearing of a burqa, no matter how distasteful to many (me included) is not doing the same kind of damage. And the draconian clampdown on western ways in some Arabic countries - well I don't see a need for us to take a similar line. This is a democracy after all.

Nodin

snyper wrote: »

Its by the same Islamic law that the women need to wear a burka

Yeah, I mean we have to pick one place to pick on, so details shouldn't hold us up. They're all the bloody same anyway, sure.

AckwelFoley

Dudess wrote: »

Any customs that cause grievous harm to a person though, e.g. genital mutilation, should of course be banned here, but the wearing of a burqa, no matter how distasteful to many (me included) is not doing the same kind of damage. And the draconian clampdown on western ways in some Arabic countries - well I don't see a need for us to take a similar line. This is a democracy after all.

So by your theory, as long as the custom doesnt involve physical degradation its ok?

Treating women like dogs is fine.

Cool.

Call me Mustafa notherwife

I think as time goes on I'm more and more against a ban. I started off fairly uncertain but all in all I think this would do more harm than good. There are oppressed women no doubt who won't be allowed out of the house, and there are also women who convert and choose to wear it of their own free will who can't now...

Biggins

snyper wrote: »

So by your theory, as long as the custom doesnt involve physical degradation its ok?

Treating women like dogs is fine.

Cool.

Call me Mustafa notherwife

Hello Mustafa, will you be changing you pic under your name to one wearing a burka? :pac:

AckwelFoley

Nodin wrote: »

Yeah, I mean we have to pick one place to pick on, so details shouldn't hold us up. They're all the bloody same anyway, sure.

Sorry Nodin, you've actually lost me in the sarcasam

Dudess

snyper wrote: »

So by your theory, as long as the custom doesnt involve physical degradation its ok?

Treating women like dogs is fine.

Cool.

That's obviously not what I said ffs Snyper...

AckwelFoley

Biggins wrote: »

Hello Mustafa, will you be changing you pic under your name to one wearing a burka? :pac:

Kermit is male.

He no need a burka..

unless hes a transvestite frog..

in anycase tranny frogs are rather hated on...

Biggins

snyper wrote: »

Kermit is male.

He no need a burka..

unless hes a transvestite frog..

in anycase tranny frogs are rather hated on...

:pac:

...well each to their own, kermit might like it!

jam_mac_jam

snyper wrote: »

As soon as a French page 3 model is alowed to swan down the middle of Irans capital wearing a low cut top and a mini without getting stoned to death, then i think the french can lift their ban

So the French should have the same legal standards as Iran, ok strange logic for a European country.

squod

The 'when in Rome' principle applies IMO.

jam_mac_jam

snyper wrote: »

So by your theory, as long as the custom doesnt involve physical degradation its ok?

Treating women like dogs is fine.

Cool.

Call me Mustafa notherwife

Dogs dont wear veils I dont think. People should be able to wear what they like.

Minstrel27

I think it should be banned. I don't think anyone should have the right to hide themselves when walking out on the streets.

jam_mac_jam

I dont give a ****e what you wear, a burka a balaklava (however you spell it), tatoos, silly clown hats, helmets, I really dont care and I dont understand why anyone else would either. We dont like in Iran or Saudi Arabia so stop comparing, we live in Europe where you are meant to have the freedom to express yourself. Liberte, égalité, fraternité, not much Liberte there.

wylo

Good decision by Sarkozy.I dont care for religion,I just think they look stupid and are anti social.

Dudess

Something deserves to be banned by the state because it looks stupid and is anti social? That could apply to a lot of things besides the burqa...

Minstrel27 wrote: »

I don't think anyone should have the right to hide themselves when walking out on the streets.

Why not?

vard

I think they were entirely right to do so, and I applaud this new law.

however, I believe it should be extended beyond the Muslim faith and should be altered to disallow all sorts of religious garment adorned in public view.

let's not beat around the bush though, the burqa - to most - represents the oppressive ideals which Islam holds against women.

In some mosques in the UK preachers teach "if she doesn't wear her head-scarf we hit her"

wylo

Dudess wrote: »

Why not?

your not allowed walk into a bank with a helmet on, should you be allowed walk in with a burka on?

Security aside, its nice to see what someone looks like when your talking to them (besides the internet of course)

Dudess

vard wrote: »

however, I believe it should be extended beyond the Muslim faith and should be altered to disallow all sorts of religious garment adorned in public view.

Like rosary beads on a little old Irish lady?

wylo

Dudess wrote: »

Something deserves to be banned by the state because it looks stupid and is anti social? That could apply to a lot of things besides the burqa...

I agree but give some examples of something that is antisocial?

The Waltzing Consumer

wylo wrote: »

I agree but give some examples of something that is antisocial?

I am guessing the obvious example would be scumbags wearing their hoods up

Dudess

wylo wrote: »

I agree but give some examples of something that is antisocial?

Open to interpretation I guess - some might see purple hair as anti-social.

The Waltzing Consumer

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I dont give a ****e what you wear, a burka a balaklava (however you spell it), tatoos, silly clown hats, helmets, I really dont care and I dont understand why anyone else would either. We dont like in Iran or Saudi Arabia so stop comparing, we live in Europe where you are meant to have the freedom to express yourself. Liberte, égalité, fraternité, not much Liberte there.

A bit over the top? :rolleyes:

jam_mac_jam

vard wrote: »

I think they were entirely right to do so, and I applaud this new law.

however, I believe it should be extended beyond the Muslim faith and should be altered to disallow all sorts of religious garment adorned in public view.

let's not beat around the bush though, the burqa - to most - represents the oppressive ideals which Islam holds against women.

In some mosques in the UK preachers teach "if she doesn't wear her head-scarf we hit her"

and some christians kill abortion doctors, so what?

jam_mac_jam

wylo wrote: »

your not allowed walk into a bank with a helmet on, should you be allowed walk in with a burka on?

Security aside, its nice to see what someone looks like when your talking to them (besides the internet of course)

yes but its not just banks is it, if it was then there would be some reason.

Minstrel27

Dudess wrote: »

Why not?

Security issues mainly. Should a woman wearing a burqa for example be allowed to enter any premises where motorcycle helmets are banned?

wylo

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

I am guessing the obvious example would be scumbags wearing their hoods up

you can see their faces, but anyway there has been talk of banning that in the UK so it wouldnt the best example.
Also I would be along the same viewpoint regarding that issue just I wouldnt feel as strongly about it because you can see their faces.

The Waltzing Consumer

wylo wrote: »

you can see their faces, but anyway there has been talk of banning that in the UK so it wouldnt the best example.
Also I would be along the same viewpoint regarding that issue just I wouldnt feel as strongly about it because you can see their faces.

Well, when you look at all the news about the Twelfth up North, all the skangers had hoods up and covering their faces so they could not be identified.

jam_mac_jam

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

A bit over the top? :rolleyes:

Not at all, I might hate it but I would not like the government having the right to stop your freedom to express your self or wear what you like. And I would guess that it is this in the French consitution that may stop it.