remove that niqab or leave!

Hitchens

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2799981/woman-thrown-paris-opera-cast-refused-perform-unless-removed-muslim-veil.html

Fair play to the cast of the opera and the security people for upholding the law.

Hopefully, we would do the same here!

Allez France!

0byme75341jo28

Ewww, Daily Mail.

Tokyo

Ridiculous law to begin with.

that's mental
jesus, she's not harming anyone

So much for "no it's to protect them really"

Yellowblackbird

Vivvy la difference

conorh91

I don't really object to someone wearing the niqab at the opera. Perhaps she'd like to nod-off, while attempting to look cultured.

Although I do object to the niqab in the street, and in the workplace. Part of living in society means living together, and not going around with a rag over your face, asking to be taken seriously.

Herb Powell

Hitchens wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2799981/woman-thrown-paris-opera-cast-refused-perform-unless-removed-muslim-veil.html

Fair play to the cast of the opera and the security people for upholding the law.

Hopefully, we would do the same here!

Allez France!

Do what exactly? Uphold ridiculous laws like our blasphemy one?

Brave defenders of French culture :rolleyes:

kneemos

Can't see what difference it make,particularly to the bloody cast!

123balltv

I went to Saudi Arabia once I was told to cover my hair by a man fair
enough they have strict dresscodes.

France have their dresscodes be free show your skin live life

123balltv

123balltv wrote: »

I went to Saudi Arabia once I was told to cover my hair by a man fair
enough they have strict dresscodes.

France have their dresscodes be free show your skin live life

It's not really "being free" to show your skin if you're being forced to do it

kingchess

She is a fine looking woman in fairness.

conorh91

bluewolf wrote: »

It's not really "being free" to show your skin if you're being forced to do it

That's what I say too, every time I go into the bank with a motorcycle helmet on.

human rites!!!

Nodin

Hitchens wrote: »

Fair play to the cast of the opera and the security people for upholding the law.

Hopefully, we would do the same here!

Allez France!

Yes, because upholding the law is what you have a boner for, not getting one over on the muslims.

Nino Brown

They're dead right, walk into an opera in a Muslim country wearing an mini skirt and see what happens.

Nodin

Nino Brown wrote: »

They're dead right, walk into an opera in a Muslim country wearing an mini skirt and see what happens.

And away we go with the silly statements. How many times will it be regurgitated this thread? 10, 20. 30, 40?

Tokyo

Nino Brown wrote: »

They're dead right, walk into an opera in a Muslim country wearing an mini skirt and see what happens.

I'd imagine I'd get quite a few questions and funny looks, being a 6' hairy red-faced Irishman and all...

padd b1975

kneemos wrote: »

Can't see what difference it make,particularly to the bloody cast!

Typical luvvie hysterics this.

0byme75341jo28

Nino Brown wrote: »

They're dead right, walk into an opera in a Muslim country wearing an mini skirt and see what happens.

This is probably the most stupid argument I've ever heard.

Nino Brown

mike_ie wrote: »

I'd imagine I'd get quite a few questions and funny looks, being a 6' hairy red-faced Irishman and all...

You'd get more than that, a man wearing a skirt in those countries would probably be locked up.

Nodin

Amelie Acidic Sheet wrote: »

This is probably the most stupid argument I've ever heard.

You'll be sick of hearing it by the end of this poxy thread.

Frank Lee Midere

Nodin wrote: »

And away we go with the silly statements. How many times will it be regurgitated this thread? 10, 20. 30, 40?

It's reasonable. Different cultures have different rules. Ireland has moved from Catholicism to the quasi religiousity of American politically correctness. France has long had a distrust of religion and has banned religious symbolism and attire for generations. To the "modern" Irish mind American secularism ( ban religion from public buildings ) is obvious - to the French mind the French system( ban it from public buildings and any public display) is equally obvious. The Saudis ban non-Islamic religiosity.

pablo128

Amelie Acidic Sheet wrote: »

This is probably the most stupid argument I've ever heard.

Really? A workmates sister was over in an Arab country for some competition, and had a female shopkeeper spit at her just because she had a tattoo on her wrist.

The shopkeeper did ask first if it was real though.

seamus

conorh91 wrote: »

That's what I say too, every time I go into the bank with a motorcycle helmet on.

Pretty disingenuous, the woman was at an opera, not going into the bank.

This is one that's always difficult to reconcile. The niqab is undoubtedly a symbol of a culture of misogyny and oppression. And on one hand, there is every right to work towards an end where this culture is eradicated and with it the symbols of that oppression.

At the same time, if someone chooses to wear it, are they really being oppressed? But on top of that you could equally argue that choosing to wear it tacitly supports the oppressive mindset/culture/religion which demands it, and so someone who chooses to wear it should be made to feel ashamed of themselves for doing so and voluntarily supporting such misogyny and oppression.

Nino Brown

Amelie Acidic Sheet wrote: »

This is probably the most stupid argument I've ever heard.

Do you have a counter argument? or is it just stupid because you say so?

kneemos

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

It's reasonable. Different cultures have different rules. Ireland has moved from Catholicism to the quasi religiousity of American politically correctness. France has long had a distrust of religion and has banned religious symbolism and attire for generations. To the "modern" Irish mind American secularism ( ban religion from public buildings ) is obvious - to the French mind the French system( ban it from public buildings and any public display) is equally obvious. The Saudis ban non-Islamic religiosity.

The Saudis do what the Saudis do,the thread is about the French.

Tokyo

Nino Brown wrote: »

Do you have a counter argument? or is it just stupid because you say so?

It's a silly argument because the reason behind the ban as argued by France that 'it encouraged citizens to "live together".' Tell me how it encourages people to live together if you are effectively making people housebound or booting them out of public events because they don't want to abandon their beliefs?

0byme75341jo28

Nino Brown wrote: »

Do you have a counter argument? or is it just stupid because you say so?

Why should we change the law here just because we'd be treated in a certain way if we visited a Middle Eastern country? We don't do that for anything else, so why should the niqab issue be any different?

When in Rome (Paris) do as the Romans(Parisians) do.
The French have clearly decided that "multiculturalism" had gone too far and was degrading French culture and lifestyle, that they decided to enact laws to preserve it.

conorh91

seamus wrote: »

Pretty disingenuous, the woman was at an opera, not going into the bank.

Still, I'm pretty sure that if she went in wearing a balaclava, or a motorcycle helmet, she'd be asked to remove it. I know that's what I'd expect for myself, entering a darkened room. Wouldn't everyone?

conorh91 wrote: »

That's what I say too, every time I go into the bank with a motorcycle helmet on.

human rites!!!

Given that it is the only art-form with a tendency to criticize Islam, I doubt most Islamic societies appreciate opera.

But that's unlikely to be the main source of Islamic scholars' objection to opera. They really put 1950s Catholic Bishops in the ha'penny place. Get a load of this, which I'm sure applies to operas, as well as foreign movies and soaps.

http://islamqa.info/en/125535
125535: Ruling on watching Arabic and foreign movies and soaps, and the ruling on listening to music

What is seen in soap operas, movies and plays of the blatant and wanton display of women (tabarruj), and their soft voices, enticing walks, dancing and singing – all of these are things that are forbidden in the religion of Allaah, and they are among the easiest means that enable [Satan] to enter and settle in the heart of the viewer, when he can take the reins and direct the person and his physical faculties in ways that incur the wrath of the Lord, may He be exalted.

[…]

No one should dispute the bad effects that these soap operas and movies have on societies in general, and on young men and women in particular. An actor may charm a married woman so that she becomes infatuated with him, and she destroys her family by her actions. And young men may become infatuated with beautiful actresses and for that reason they forego halaal marriage in pursuit of haraam pleasure....

From the above it may be known that the ruling on listening to music, and watching movies and soap operas, which are shown on public and private channels, is that it is undoubtedly haraam to broadcast them and it is haraam [forbidden] to watch them or listen to them.

We ask Allaah to set the Muslims’ affairs straight.

And Allaah knows best.

okayy…

kneemos

kneemos wrote: »

The Saudis do what the Saudis do,the thread is about the French.

The French have the same rights to impose such laws as the Saudis, in this regard.

My name is URL

Nino Brown wrote: »

They're dead right, walk into an opera in a Muslim country wearing an mini skirt and see what happens.

So because those countries impose dress rules on their people, we in the west should do the same? That'll learn 'em!

Is there any logic behind that or is it just out of spite?

UCDVet

My name is URL wrote: »

So because those countries impose dress rules on their people, we in the west should do the same? That'll learn 'em!

Is there any logic behind that or is it just out of spite?

I think you've captured the logic behind it.

woodoo

I'm sure she knew the law but decided it didn't matter. I have no sympathy for her.

jahalpin

I agree with the cast in their decision not to perform until the woman complied with the law.

I believe that France is right to have this law and it would be nice if certain other far Western Europe countries adopted similar laws to prevent the serious divisions that have occurred due to excessive immigration from backwards-thinking middle eastern countries

The whole point of making the women dress in this way is to emphasise that they are their husbands property. It is seriously offensive to women and shows that, in the eyes of their culture, women do not deserve the same rights as men

It shows serious disrespect for the culture and tradition of the host country to dress in this way

In times of heightened security, it poses a serious security risk due to the fact that it would be very difficult to identify people dressed in this way

Timberrrrrrrr

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

It's reasonable. Different cultures have different rules. Ireland has moved from Catholicism to the quasi religiousity of American politically correctness. France has long had a distrust of religion and has banned religious symbolism and attire for generations. To the "modern" Irish mind American secularism ( ban religion from public buildings ) is obvious - to the French mind the French system( ban it from public buildings and any public display) is equally obvious. The Saudis ban non-Islamic religiosity.

Could i wear a crucifix or a St Christopher around my neck in France?

jahalpin

jahalpin wrote: »

It is seriously offensive to women and shows that women should not have the right to free thought

So they should have the right to free thought by letting you do their thinking and deciding for them on how they should dress yea?

My name is URL

jahalpin wrote: »

It is seriously offensive to women and shows that women should not have the right to free thought

..he said, without a single hint of irony :rolleyes:

Nino Brown

My name is URL wrote: »

So because those countries impose dress rules on their people, we in the west should do the same? That'll learn 'em!

Is there any logic behind that or is it just out of spite?

In western cultures, hiding ones face is a usually a sign that they are trying to hide their identity, and that they have something to hide. It makes people suspicious and uncomfortable. And for that reason, it is the law in France that they shouldn't be worn
I don't agree with Muslim beliefs, or laws, but I think they have the right to dictate their own laws, and I should abide by them while in those countries. So I never have and never will visit one.

crockholm

Whether you Think the law is foolish or not is moot,this is French law and somebody broke the law,action was taken.

pablo128

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Could i wear a crucifix or a St Christopher around my neck in France?

Sure, why not. You are not allowed to cover your face with a crucifix though, or a St christopher medal, or a niqab or anything else.

0byme75341jo28

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Could i wear a crucifix or a St Christopher around my neck in France?

I don't think you can, all religious symbols are banned in public life in France as far as I know.

Tokyo

Amelie Acidic Sheet wrote: »

I don't think you can, all religious symbols are banned in public life in France as far as I know.

In schools I think, but not in public. And only conspicuous symbols.

Timberrrrrrrr

pablo128 wrote: »

Sure, why not. You are not allowed to cover your face with a crucifix though, or a St christopher medal, or a niqab or anything else.

Because Frank said

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

It's reasonable. Different cultures have different rules. Ireland has moved from Catholicism to the quasi religiousity of American politically correctness. France has long had a distrust of religion and has banned religious symbolism and attire for generations. To the "modern" Irish mind American secularism ( ban religion from public buildings ) is obvious - to the French mind the French system( ban it from public buildings and any public display) is equally obvious. The Saudis ban non-Islamic religiosity.

So if it is ok for me to walk around with a crucifix, St Christopher, star of David on show then it's not about banning religious symbolism it becomes about banning Islamic religious symbolism.

I know a medallion around the neck does not cover the face but they ban ALL religious symbolism then in reality (imo) these are just laws that only affect Muslim women.

UCDVet

Most of the people I know who would support her right to wearing whatever she wants, are also the same people who would say that young men wearing skimasks and carrying cans of spray paint should be arrested.

I just find that interesting.

My name is URL

Nino Brown wrote: »

In western cultures, hiding ones face is a usually a sign that they are trying to hide their identity, and that they have something to hide. It makes people suspicious and uncomfortable. And for that reason, it is the law in France that they shouldn't be worn
I don't agree with Muslim beliefs, or laws, but I think they have the right to dictate there own laws, and I should abide by them while in those countries. So I never have and never will visit one.

Feeling suspicious of someone who has their face covered isn't a societal or cultural thing in any way, shape or form, it's purely a individual and in this case illogical reaction.

I've lived in various cities, have regularly seen women dress like that and have never felt suspicions, or that they were up to no good, and I'd wager that most people wouldn't; even if they idealistically disagree with the wearing of such clothing. People use that as an argument against it, but it's usually just used to veil or hide their own prejudices.

conorh91

bluewolf wrote: »

So they should have the right to free thought by letting you do their thinking and deciding for them on how they should dress yea?

Should there not be a law against, say, public nudity/ obscene exhibitionism?

What about a man who curiously insists on standing outside his front door, butt naked, during the school-run?

We all admit that being naked is natural.

But reasonable people of ordinary sensitivity accept that doing so, in public, does not meet the social norms of this society.

Similarly, many reasonable people of ordinary sensitivity are of the opinion that covering one's face in public does not meet the social norms of this society.

If I was to walk into a French Opera house wearing a balaclava, I expect that I'd receive the same treatment.

jahalpin

My name is URL wrote: »

..he said, without a single hint of irony :rolleyes:

It is highly unlikely that anyone would choose to dress in this way, if they had total free will

My original posting may have been misinterpreted by certain people

I believe that everyone should be treated equally, that they should get the same opportunities regardless of their gender or skin colour etc.

Nino Brown

My name is URL wrote: »

Feeling suspicious of someone who has their face covered isn't a societal or cultural thing in any way, shape or form, it's purely a individual and in this case illogical reaction.

I disagree, if you walk around a town center in almost any western country wearing a balaclava, it will make people uncomfortable, in fact so uncomfortable I wouldn't be surprised if you were approached by police to ask why you were wearing it.

Timberrrrrrrr

jahalpin wrote: »

It is highly unlikely that anyone would choose to dress in this way, if they had total free will

My original posting may have been misinterpreted by certain people

I believe that everyone should be treated equally, that they should get the same opportunities regardless of their gender or skin colour etc.

Maybe you should meet some Muslim people and ask them.

Laois6556

Ah some religious stuff can cause all sorts of conundrums. In France they say to 'remove your niqab'. In Ireland priests used to say 'remove your trousers'. What wacky adventure will religion get up to next?