Burka ban

recedite · 07-12-2016 01:59PM

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

Anyone would think Merkel has a general election coming up soon.
There's nothing like the thought of facing the electorate (or should I say "the populists") to concentrate minds. As Obama said to her recently "Democracy is hard work".

silverharp · 09-12-2016 04:50PM

sort a burka related, right decision I guess

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/08/muslim-girls-must-take-swimming-lessons-alongside-boys-german/

Muslim girls must take swimming lessons alongside boys, German court rules

Muslim girls must take part in swimming lessons alongside boys, Germany’s highest court has ruled, just days after Angela Merkel called for a partial burka ban.

The country’s constitutional court ruled that Muslim schoolgirls must take part in mixed swimming lessons together with boys.

If girls object on religious grounds, they can wear burkinis, the court said.

The case was brought by an 11-year-old Muslim girl of Moroccan descent living in Frankfurt, after she was given an “unsatisfactory” grade because she refused to take part in school swimming lessons.

The girl, who cannot be named under child protection laws, argued she was entitled to refuse to take part in the lessons on religious grounds.

But the court ruled that schools have a duty to encourage “social behaviour” and are entitled the make the lessons compulsory, and that mixed swimming lessons are “not a serious impairment of religious freedom”.

silverharp · 10-01-2017 05:14PM

Swiss case this time

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38569428

Swiss Muslim girls must learn to swim with boys, court rules

Switzerland has won a case at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) obliging Muslim parents to send their children to mixed swimming lessons.

It said authorities were justified in giving precedence to enforcing "the full school curriculum" and the children's "successful integration" into society.

The ECHR acknowledged that religious freedom was being interfered with.

But judges said it did not amount to a violation.

The case was brought by two Swiss nationals, of Turkish origin, who refused to send their teenage daughters to the compulsory mixed lessons in the city of Basel.

Education officials, however, said that exemptions were available only for girls who had reached the age of puberty - which the girls had not reached at the time.

In 2010, after a long-running dispute, the parents were ordered to pay a combined fine of 1,400 Swiss Francs ($1,380, £1,136) "for acting in breach of their parental duty".

They argued that such treatment was a violation of article nine of the European Convention on Human Rights, which covers the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
In a statement, the ECHR said the refusal to exempt the girls had interfered with the right to freedom of religion.

But it also said the law involved was designed to "protect foreign pupils from any form of social exclusion" and Switzerland was free to design its education system according to its own needs and traditions.

Schools, it said, played an important role in social integration, and exemptions from some lessons are "justified only in very exceptional circumstances".

10-01-2017 09:16PM

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

silverharp wrote: »

Swiss case this time

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38569428

This is great news, I'm glad that the importance of integration for children has been recognised as being more important than the beliefs of parents!

silverharp · 12-01-2017 03:29PM

yey, an actual burqa story

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/morocco-bans-burqa-security-fears-bandit-a7520156.html

Morocco bans burqa over security concerns

Shopkeepers must get rid of their stock of Islamic veils within 48 hours

Moroccan authorities did not officially announce the ban Getty

Morocco has banned burqas from being made or sold because of security concerns, the country's media has reported.

Although the government did not issue a formal announcement of the move, reports have emerged of burqa producers and retailers being issued written warnings telling them to stop making and selling the garments.

The ban is understood to apply only to full-face covering burqas. The majority of Muslim women in the country wear headscarves without the veil, or niqab.

"We have taken the step of completely banning the import, manufacture and marketing of this garment in all the cities and towns of the kingdom," the Moroccan Le360 news site quoted a senior interior ministry official as saying.

The site speculated the move seemed to be motivated by security concerns, "since bandits have repeatedly used this garment to perpetrate their crimes".

A picture has been circulated online of a notice sent by a representative of the Interior Ministry to shopkeepers, who have been told their burqa stock will be confiscated if they fail to get rid of their burqa stock or convert it within 48 hours, it will be confiscated Morocco World News reports.

recedite · 13-01-2017 05:33PM

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

Interesting to see in that article that (at least some) public opinion in Morocco supports the ban on the grounds that it is "alien to their culture". The Burqa seems to be something that originated in some very backward and misogynistic culture in the general region of Afghanistan. It is not a garment that indicates strong Islamic "devotion" for all Muslims, even though westerners often see it that way.

A couple of years ago I thought of Tunisia as being the most "European tourist friendly" of the North African countries, but Morocco is going up in my estimation as fast as Tunisia is going down.

robindch · 31-01-2017 11:38AM

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

Austria:

http://www.dw.com/en/austria-to-ban-full-face-veil-in-public-spaces-says-kern/a-37342087

DW wrote:

Austrian Chancellor Christian Kern on Monday announced a program aimed at fending off the challenge of the far-right, including banning the niqab, a conservative form of Muslim attire. "The full-face veil will be banned in public spaces," Kern said after Austrian ministers approved the new policy program.

He added that he wanted to avoid "giving 600,000 Muslims in Austria the feeling that they are not part of our society." The 35-page program said the governing coalition believes in an "open society that is also based on open communication," which the "full-body veils in public spaces stand against."

The conservative Deputy Chancellor Reinhold Mitterlehner said the coalition agreed to "work faster and more clearly." "It is now up to us to do what governing parties do, namely implement the program," Mitterlehner said. The new government program comes at a time when the anti-Islamization Freedom Party (FPO) has witnessed a surge in support, resulting in their presidential candidate nearly winning the election in December.

The government's proposals included a general ban on civil servants wearing religious symbols and curbing job access for foreign laborers, especially those from eastern European nations, and requiring that 30 percent of a company's supervisory board members be female.

Harika · 31-01-2017 11:52AM

I'm religious and support the ban

robindch wrote: »

Austria:

http://www.dw.com/en/austria-to-ban-full-face-veil-in-public-spaces-says-kern/a-37342087

It should be added that Executive officers and judges will be also committed to represent globally open and religious neutral. There is a big discussion still going on if crosses should be shown in public places like schools or court rooms.

robindch · 14-03-2017 11:33AM

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

The European Court of Justice has ruled that European employers are permitted to ban the "visible wearing of any political, philosophical or religious sign", including headscarves and presumably, burkas:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39264845

The judgement is currently only available in French.

Hippo · 14-03-2017 12:44PM

It's actually quite a nuanced (or ambiguous) judgment - scarves may be banned by employers, for employees in customer-facing situations, but at the same time customers can't insist on it. It's far from being a straightforward workplace headscarf ban.

cnocbui · 14-03-2017 12:45PM

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

Good on them. Excellent decision.

recedite · 15-03-2017 10:52AM

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

Hippo wrote: »

It's far from being a straightforward workplace headscarf ban.

Its not a blanket (:)) ban at all. But it gives employers the option to impose a ban without being taken to the ECHR, which is an extremely significant development. The only caveat is that they would have to ban all religious gear equally, across the board, which would include a ban on the wearing of crosses etc..
Or, they could opt for no ban at all. The employer now has a choice.

Hippo · 15-03-2017 11:52AM

recedite wrote: »

Its not a blanket (:)) ban at all. But it gives employers the option to impose a ban without being taken to the ECHR, which is an extremely significant development. The only caveat is that they would have to ban all religious gear equally, across the board, which would include a ban on the wearing of crosses etc..
Or, they could opt for no ban at all. The employer now has a choice.

A ban on wearing of any religious symbols by employees is in conflict with ECHR caselaw and could get interesting, legally speaking. In practical terms it may prove trickier to impose such a ban unchallenged than it looks. We'll see!

cnocbui · 15-03-2017 12:05PM

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

In a fight between the ECJ and the ECHR, the former will win.

recedite · 15-03-2017 12:15PM

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

Hippo wrote: »

A ban on wearing of any religious symbols by employees is in conflict with ECHR caselaw ..

Well there have been a lot of different individual cases with varying results. One of the benefits of this decision by ECJ is to tidy that up a bit.

I think however that any employer wanting to introduce such a ban would still have to show that the job required interacting with clients and/or the public in a politically and religiously neutral way. Somebody working in a back-office type environment away from the clients could still argue that a headscarf ban was "indirect discrimination". The EJ has issued this press release on the subject.

recedite · 15-03-2017 12:33PM

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

cnocbui wrote: »

In a fight between the ECJ and the ECHR, the former will win.

I think probably the ECJ would win, as the ECHR has no teeth.

AFAIK the main difference is that the ECJ is an official EU institution, therefore members states must comply.

Whereas the the ECHR is something that countries have voluntarily signed up for, and "promised" to enforce the case law by implementing it within their own national legal systems. But we have seen examples, such as in the O'Keeffe case, when the state declined to implement the principles established by the ECHR. Logically, this case should have ended religious discrimination in the admissions policies of publicly funded Irish schools

This case has the potential to ensure that children and their parents in Ireland enjoy their Convention rights in the Irish education system. Irish children and their parents are entitled to a remedy establishing any liability of the State for their failure to protect Convention rights.
The human rights guaranteed under the European Convention are not worth the paper they are written on if we do not have an effective remedy to vindicate them and to hold the state responsible for their failure to protect them.

http://atheist.ie/2015/07/council-europe-okeeffe-judgment/

alias no.9 · 15-03-2017 12:51PM

I'm not sure I give a damn what another person wears but at a nearby supermarket I sometimes see a lady arrive wearing what I think is a Burka, not all that up to date on the nomenclature of Islamic head dress, the full head thing with a rectangular opening for the eyes.

The thing that amuses me just a little bit is that she arrives by herself in a car, i.e. driving and unchaperoned by a man. It seems to be a very à la carte adherence to the culture from which the wearing of the Burka originates. Looks to me like the slippery slope to secularism.

looksee · 15-03-2017 05:09PM

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

alias no.9 wrote: »

I'm not sure I give a damn what another person wears but at a nearby supermarket I sometimes see a lady arrive wearing what I think is a Burka, not all that up to date on the nomenclature of Islamic head dress, the full head thing with a rectangular opening for the eyes.

The thing that amuses me just a little bit is that she arrives by herself in a car, i.e. driving and unchaperoned by a man. It seems to be a very à la carte adherence to the culture from which the wearing of the Burka originates. Looks to me like the slippery slope to secularism.

In fairness, the driving ban is Saudi Arabia, whereas the full coverage garment is worn in a number of countries.

I agree though that I do not care what people wear with the exception of the full face cover, which is anti social and contrary to western culture of it being polite for people to see your face when you are communicating.

In fact although I have limited hearing loss, I find it much easier to 'hear' what people are saying when I can see their lips.

smacl · 15-03-2017 06:32PM

I'm religious and support the ban

looksee wrote: »

I agree though that I do not care what people wear with the exception of the full face cover, which is anti social and contrary to western culture of it being polite for people to see your face when you are communicating.

Very much the same, certainly head scarves were very commonly worn in Ireland up until quite recently which is very similar to the hijab. That said, there are quite a number of Muslim kids in the school my daughter goes to and she's mentioned it to me on a few occasions that some of the Muslim girls are royally píssed off that they are more constrained than the other girls and boys as well as just the Muslim boys. They have my sympathy.

cnocbui · 15-03-2017 08:44PM

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

smacl wrote: »

Very much the same, certainly head scarves were very commonly worn in Ireland up until quite recently which is very similar to the hijab. That said, there are quite a number of Muslim kids in the school my daughter goes to and she's mentioned it to me on a few occasions that some of the Muslim girls are royally píssed off that they are more constrained than the other girls and boys as well as just the Muslim boys. They have my sympathy.

What happened to women in Ireland who didn't wear a scarf? Oh that's right, their hair got damp.

It's not even remotely similar to a hijab.

BlaasForRafa · 16-03-2017 03:44AM

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

cnocbui wrote: »

What happened to women in Ireland who didn't wear a scarf? Oh that's right, their hair got damp.

It's not even remotely similar to a hijab.

Aye, I'd say after the development of jackets with hoods and cheap umbrellas the instances of irish women wearing headscarves went way down.

smacl · 16-03-2017 07:43AM

I'm religious and support the ban

cnocbui wrote: »

What happened to women in Ireland who didn't wear a scarf? Oh that's right, their hair got damp.

It's not even remotely similar to a hijab.

Right. One's wearing a scarf on the head, the other's wearing a scarf on the head. Not even remotely similar :rolleyes:

Peregrinus · 16-03-2017 09:05AM

alias no.9 wrote: »

I'm not sure I give a damn what another person wears but at a nearby supermarket I sometimes see a lady arrive wearing what I think is a Burka, not all that up to date on the nomenclature of Islamic head dress, the full head thing with a rectangular opening for the eyes.

That's a niqab. A burqa would be have a mesh or gauze over the eyes.

Bet you're glad you asked!

alias no.9 wrote: »

The thing that amuses me just a little bit is that she arrives by herself in a car, i.e. driving and unchaperoned by a man. It seems to be a very à la carte adherence to the culture from which the wearing of the Burka originates. Looks to me like the slippery slope to secularism.

No, not at all. Islam is diverse (don't mention this to the Daily Mail) and views both about what's appropriate modest dress and whether it's appropriate for women to drive, or go out in public unaccompanied, vary widely. As it happens, in Saudi Arabia they're required by law to cover their hair and expected/encouraged to cover their faces, and they're forbidden to drive, but this particular combination is unique to Saudi Arabia; it's not normative for Islam as a whole, and there's nothing inconsistent in someone wearing a niqab but driving a car.

cnocbui · 16-03-2017 09:50AM

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

smacl wrote: »

Right. One's wearing a scarf on the head, the other's wearing a scarf on the head. Not even remotely similar :rolleyes:

The form of the object, is similar but the reasons for their use are entirely different. My mother used to wear scarves on occasion, but it was to keep her hair in place, salt spray out of it or for fashion. She didn't wear it because of the dictates of a medieval patriarchy and she faced no prospect of censure or opprobrium if and when she removed it in public, or if she never wore one at all.

It's like saying a necklace is the same as a chain padlocked around a slaves neck.

silverharp · 16-03-2017 10:29AM

smacl wrote: »

Right. One's wearing a scarf on the head, the other's wearing a scarf on the head. Not even remotely similar :rolleyes:

my impression growing up was that it was a weather and wind thing. to be remotely comparable youd want to be showing me dance hall photos from the 30's-50's with all the girls wearing them. :pac:

smacl · 16-03-2017 10:43AM

I'm religious and support the ban

silverharp wrote: »

my impression growing up was that it was a weather and wind thing. to be remotely comparable youd want to be showing me dance hall photos from the 30's-50's with all the girls wearing them. :pac:

To be fair, scarves were never an indoor thing. Quite a few chequered ones later on in sympathy with Palestine from memory. I was more a days of disco lad than dance halls so can't help you much beyond that.

Peregrinus · 17-03-2017 02:29AM

smacl wrote: »

To be fair, scarves were never an indoor thing.

For the record, niqabs and the like are also not an indoor thing. You wear them out, but not so much in the home.

Samaris · 17-03-2017 09:43AM

I'm religious and support the ban

cnocbui wrote: »

The form of the object, is similar but the reasons for their use are entirely different. My mother used to wear scarves on occasion, but it was to keep her hair in place, salt spray out of it or for fashion. She didn't wear it because of the dictates of a medieval patriarchy and she faced no prospect of censure or opprobrium if and when she removed it in public, or if she never wore one at all.

It's like saying a necklace is the same as a chain padlocked around a slaves neck.

But it is comparable only in cases where the hijab (headscarf) is used as a symbol of slavery or being second-class. For those that wear it because they like it and it's part of their identity (and that they wish to be modest accordance with their own beliefs), it's no such thing, and is far more like being instructed to remove your top because it is customary to do so even though locals are perfectly well allowed to wear a top if they want so long as they don't say it's for a religious reason. At that stage, it seems it's getting a bit too interfering and mostly to keep the loudly terrified of Islam content. (If you cannot identify a Muslim woman at first sight, is she really there?)

I'm pretty fine with the headscarf. I don't see it a religious/cultural reason for wearing it being much different from a cultural/practical reason as long as it's up to the person wearing it and not it being under duress.

The burqa and niqab are a rather different story in western societies as - like others have already said - it is part of our culture to be able to see the face of someone speaking to us and we get a lot of context from facial expressions and body language, both of which are hard to read through a curtain. They also do seem a hell of a lot more restrictive and a lot more isolating.

recedite · 17-03-2017 10:49AM

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

Peregrinus wrote: »

For the record, niqabs and the like are also not an indoor thing. You wear them out, but not so much in the home.

That's nothing to do with the home being indoors. A shopping mall is indoors, an office is indoors. These are the kind of places where people assert their identity. And that's what its all about.

Peregrinus · 17-03-2017 10:58AM

recedite wrote: »

That's nothing to do with the home being indoors. A shopping mall is indoors, an office is indoors. These are the kind of places where people assert their identity. And that's what its all about.

Yes, but when scarves were all the go in Ireland people wore them in shops, etc.

I honestly don't see the difference between a hijab - which doesn't cover the face - and a conventional headscarf, and anybody who didn't object to scarves but now objects to hijabs will have to work hard to convince me that he's not a bigot.

I get that a niqab or a burqa, which covers the face, is a different matter, and I understand why it makes people uncomfortable. It makes me uncomfortable. But I'm a grown-up; my discomfort is first and foremost my responsibility, and I don't get to impose it on others. I don't see that I have a right to require you to dress in a way that makes me feel comfortable.

And if I assume without actually asking you that the reason you wear the niqab is because you have no choice in the matter, and my response to my own assumption is to call for a law that tells you how you must dress and imposed penalties if you will not comply - well, I expect to be derided by all sane and rational people for my unwarranted assumption and for proposing the wholly contradictory "solution" of withdrawing your choice in the matter. That would quite clearly be a case of me oppressing others and depriving them of choice so that I won't have to feel uncomfortable.

Burka ban

Comments