Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Burka ban

1…5859616364…138

Comments

  • #1802
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    MrPudding wrote: »
    I find the freewill aspect of this to be the interesting side of this argument.

    Marks appears to have a similar view of this to me, one which you apparently do not share. If you are girl that is brought up from birth to believe that you are a second class citizen; that there is a god watching you and the god wants you to cover up and if you don't you will probably burn in hell; that if you don't cover up you will be raped and these ideas are drilled into you by the people you trust for years and years tell me, how can your decision to wear the burka be one that was freely made?

    Of course they don't have to wear it, they can do whatever they want, it's just that they are being told to wear it by people they have been brought up to obey, if they don't wear it they will displease a god they have been brought up to fear and run the risk of being raped. Yeah, that will be a free choice all right.

    MrP

    We don't, however know how many that applies to in the West. Secondly, if we took out cultural influence and declared it to be "brainwashing" then essentially all clothing would be classed as being "coerced" in that sense.

    There is also the fact that trying to remove it from people tends to create a backlash, and make it more important to the wearer to cling on to the thing, for a multitude of reasons.


  • #1803
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    We don't, however know how many that applies to in the West. Secondly, if we took out cultural influence and declared it to be "brainwashing" then essentially all clothing would be classed as being "coerced" in that sense.
    Perhaps we don't, but how many women do you think, realistically, would decide to dress themselves in a bag and become second class citizens without some kind of pressure? This is something that it would likely prove difficult, if not impossible, to gather reliable figure for, but let me ask you a direct question which I hope you will answer. Do you think that where a person has been told since birth that; they must wear a garment because the god they genuinely believe in wants them to or he will be angry; men, who they have been raised to obey tell them they must wear it and they have been told they will probably be raped if they don't wear it that they are capable of freely choosing to wear it or not?

    All clothing classed as "coerced"? As in society demands we must wear clothes? Fair enough I think… Or where you going for the old "women think they have to wear short skirts" line of coercion? Either way, I don't really agree with you. What a person can or cannot wear is dictated to them all the time. When I pull up in a filling station to fill my bike many of them won't release the pump until I take my helmet off. I can't walk around my local supermarket naked. The organisers at Ascot would not let me in the other day unless I was wearing a suit and tie, the women had to wear a dress and a hat. Is that coercion? Perhaps is it, but even if it is it is very different to being coerced into wearing a burka. Mark has suggested to you a number of times that you should read up a little on the reasons for the burka and what it actually means. Your posts, particularly this one where you try to say all clothing is as a result of brainwashing or coercion would seem to imply that you have still not bothered. Seriously, spend a bit of time reading about it and you might understand our position a little better.
    Nodin wrote: »
    There is also the fact that trying to remove it from people tends to create a backlash, and make it more important to the wearer to cling on to the thing, for a multitude of reasons.
    People not liking a law is generally not a good reason for not introducing it. Remember the whining when the right for a learner driver to drive unaccompanied was removed? What about when smoking was banned in pubs? Few laws are ever enacted that don't annoy someone.

    I understand the difficulties that this ban brings, but that does not mean it should not happen. If a government believes that the burka is bad for women and bad for society then they have an obligation to ban it and if they don't it amounts to a dereliction of their duty. It is up to those that want to practice to continue to show that there is good reason for the burka and to show that it is not damaging. Simply stating that it is your religious right to subjugate 50% of the population is not a valid rebuttal and it is not, nor should it be, a valid justification for it. That said, many Islamics believe that it is not a religious requirement anyway. I think a John Rawls quote would be appropriate here:
    John Rawls wrote:
    Reasonable comprehensive doctrines, religious or non-religious, may be introduced in public political discussion at any time provided that in due course proper political reasons – and not reasons given solely by comprehensive doctrines – are presented that are sufficient to support whatever the comprehensive doctrines are said to support.
    Those on the banning side have provided proper political reasons, not reasons solely based on "comprehensive doctrines", something the pro-burka camp have singularly failed to do. Appeals to a religious right are not, in my opinion, sufficient justification for subjugation.

    MrP


  • #1804
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,827 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    Not really, I wouldn't take anyones word for it.

    Who's asking you to take their word for anything? I've asked you from the start to read up on the damn thing yourself.
    Nodin wrote: »
    You've presented no studies to back your claim at all. Your word is not good enough unless backed by some evidence. I've already clarified what constitutes "evidence" and what would normally be expected.

    Why exactly would I need a study to show the burka does the exact opposite of what it claims to do? Your continued avoidance of actually reading up on the burka just shows how lost you are in this argument. You cannot point to a single religious/cultural justification for the burka that isn't immediately self contradictory, hence you keep pointing to personal stories as people have never been brainwashed into doing something thats bad for them (see every religion, cult or fast food advertisement in history)
    Nodin wrote: »
    You keep evading the ones involving choice and defiance, however, because they don't suit your argument.

    I haven't evaded them, I've explained them as brainwashing/indoctrination. Never heard of Battered person syndrome? Look what is says about the symptomology in that link:
    (a) re-experiencing the battering as if it were reoccurring even when it is not, (b) attempts to avoid the psychological impact of battering by avoiding activities, people, and emotions, (c) hyperarousal or hypervigilance, (d) disrupted interpersonal relationships, (e) body image distortion or other somatic concerns, and (f) sexuality and intimacy issues.

    Additionally, repeated cycles of violence and reconciliation can result in the following beliefs and attitudes:
    The abused believes that the violence was his or her fault.
    The abused has an inability to place the responsibility for the violence elsewhere.
    The abused fears for his/her life and/or the lives of his/her children (if present).
    The abused has an irrational belief that the abuser is omnipresent and omniscient.
    Replace battered/violence for oppression and is there any difference between a battered wife and a burka'd wife?


  • #1805
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Who's asking you to take their word for anything? I've asked you from the start to read up on the damn thing yourself.?

    I have. I think you've selected what you want from the various ideologies and put your own spin on it.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Why exactly would I need a study to show the burka does the exact opposite of what it claims to do.?

    Because your reasoning alone is insufficient.


  • #1806
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    MrPudding wrote: »
    Perhaps we don't, but how many women do you think, realistically, would decide to dress themselves in a bag and become second class citizens without ..............our position a little better.

    You seem to be drawing a parallel between partial bans and total. I don't see the relevance.
    MrPudding wrote: »
    People not liking a law is generally not a good reason for not introducing it. Remember the whining when the right for a learner driver to drive unaccompanied was removed? What about when smoking was banned in pubs? Few laws are ever enacted that don't annoy someone.
    .

    You'd note that I stated
    There is also the fact that trying to remove it from people tends to create a backlash, and make it more important to the wearer to cling on to the thing, for a multitude of reasons.

    Thats a bit more than people "not liking a law". Its people reacting in a specific way to a law by doing exactly what the law prescribes. Enacting a ban glamourises the burka, makes it dearer to the wearer and creates yet more wariness of giving it up. Thats hardly the desired effect.

    MrPudding wrote: »
    If a government believes that the burka is bad for women and bad for society then they have an obligation to ban it and if they don't it amounts to a dereliction of their duty. It is up to those that want to practice to continue to show that there is good reason for the burka and to show that it is not damaging. .

    I'd rather trust to the slow creep of westernisation that govermental intervention, for reasons stated above. And given the tiny percentage who wear it in France and the not uncoincidental rise of the far right, the good of the female population would hardly seem to be at the forefront of their minds.
    MrPudding wrote: »
    Simply stating that it is your religious right to subjugate 50% of the population is not a valid rebuttal and it is not, nor should it be, a valid justification for it. .

    It would be nice to have a discussion where one was hung for what one has said, rather than what one has not.


  • Advertisement
  • #1807
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,827 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    I have. I think you've selected what you want from the various ideologies and put your own spin on it.

    If you have, then why cant you point to anywhere in the justifications that doesn't run afoul of self contradictory oppression?
    Nodin wrote: »
    Because your reasoning alone is insufficient.

    Why not? My reasoning is that the burka and its justifications are inherently contradictory (and I have explained that reasoning). This means that the women wanting it must have been raised or educated in such a way as to be incapable of seeing its massive misogynistic contradictions i.e. they have been indoctrinated. This would not be a problem to me if the burka was a personal item of clothing, but its not. By its very justifications it is political, hence in countries ruled by those who themselves want it, the wearing of it is enforced on all women.

    You may disagree with my reasoning, but you need to explain exactly where the hole is, not just declare the general presence of one.


  • #1808
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    MrPudding wrote: »
    Perhaps we don't, but how many women do you think, realistically, would decide to dress themselves in a bag and become second class citizens without some kind of pressure?
    How many non-islamic women choose to dress themselves in a burka, walk two steps behind their husband, refuse to leave home without a male "guardian", refuse to learn how to drive a car etc, etc.

    In countries which don't enforce this behaviour, the number is zero, so I think it's safe to conclude that given a genuinely free choice, no woman would. Hence the choice is not freely made.


  • #1809
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    robindch wrote: »
    How many non-islamic women choose to dress themselves in a burka, walk two steps behind their husband, refuse to leave home without a male "guardian", refuse to learn how to drive a car etc, etc.

    In countries which don't enforce this behaviour, the number is zero, so I think it's safe to conclude that given a genuinely free choice, no woman would. Hence the choice is not freely made.
    This is where I am coming from, but I do think there are a very, very small number of exceptions. I am fairly sure there are late converts in the western world that wear it. Now, I would again question quite how much choice there is, but it may be something that requires further thought...

    One of the professors at my Uni in very interested in the veil/burka etc, I will ask her if she can any articles or thoughts that would be easily accessible and useful.

    MrP


  • #1810
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    If you have, then why cant you point to anywhere in the justifications that doesn't run afoul of self contradictory oppression?


    Why not? My reasoning is that the burka and its justifications are inherently contradictory (and I have explained that reasoning). This means that the women wanting it must have been raised or educated in such a way as to be incapable of seeing its massive misogynistic contradictions i.e. they have been indoctrinated. This would not be a problem to me if the burka was a personal item of clothing, but its not. By its very justifications it is political, hence in countries ruled by those who themselves want it, the wearing of it is enforced on all women.

    You may disagree with my reasoning, but you need to explain exactly where the hole is, not just declare the general presence of one.

    Given the level of sophistry involed it would be impossible. If I was to present 1,000 womens testimony stating that they freely wore the burka of their own choosing, you'd declare "brainwashing".

    And we're talking about the "West", by the way.


  • #1811
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    Given the level of sophistry involed it would be impossible. If I was to present 1,000 womens testimony stating that they freely wore the burka of their own choosing, you'd declare "brainwashing".

    And we're talking about the "West", by the way.
    I suppose this comes down to the question you have been asked a couple of times but are yet to answer, let's try again shall we?
    MrPudding wrote: »
    ...but let me ask you a direct question which I hope you will answer. Do you think that where a person has been told since birth that; they must wear a garment because the god they genuinely believe in wants them to or he will be angry; men, who they have been raised to obey tell them they must wear it and they have been told they will probably be raped if they don't wear it that they are capable of freely choosing to wear it or not?

    MrP


  • Advertisement
  • #1812
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,827 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    Given the level of sophistry involed it would be impossible. If I was to present 1,000 womens testimony stating that they freely wore the burka of their own choosing, you'd declare "brainwashing".

    So the fact that you can't explain where I am wrong somehow means I am more wrong?
    Nodin wrote: »
    And we're talking about the "West", by the way.

    So?


  • #1813
    Improbable
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭Improbable


    I'm religious and support the ban
    I lived in Bahrain for 8 years. I've asked my parents who have had this debate before with local people there. Apparently, in most cases, the reason they wore it was because that's the way they were brought up. They grew up with their mothers wearing them and their aunts wearing them and their sisters wearing them and all the women they would see out and about wearing them. It was just the done thing.

    I've also talked to my own friends from Bahrain and some of them have mothers who wear/wore them and some have mothers who didn't. In most cases, the response was that because of the large influx of foreigners into Bahrain compared to their parents time at the same age, the pressure to wear them in order to conform or fit in is greatly reduced. In every case, they said that given the choice, they would not wear them.


  • #1814
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Do you think that where a person has been told since birth that; they must wear a garment because the god they genuinely believe in wants them to or he will be angry; men, who they have been raised to obey tell them they must wear it and they have been told they will probably be raped if they don't wear it that they are capable of freely choosing to wear it or not?

    There are Islamic scholars that argue for various interpretations of the burqa, such as arguing it only applied to Mohammed's wives amongst other interpretations, so there's undeniable freedom of interpretation within the ideology of Islam, you can choose to follow that interpretation of scriptures or not to (as many do). People can choose to accept or reject that interpretation & remain within Islam. That alone is sufficient to invalidate the claims in this thread, you just can't deny that one can personally choose to believe whatever interpretation they want to, assuming they want to remain a muslim. Some women may be uneducated (purposefully or not) & not know the freedom of choice in front of them but the sad fact of reality is that it's up to them to educate themselves (assuming they don't know already & are just forced into wearing it like the claim being made implies).

    The smart & logically consistent thing to do in scenario's like this is to try to educate them about their options. It's always better than becoming worse than your enemy by employing the kind of fascistic methodology that contradicts the original claims. That's as far as I see you being able to go, any further & you contradict your own argument (assuming you see the contradiction in employing dictatorial methods in the name of freedom of expression, which I am afraid is lost on most people in this thread).

    However the question itself is loaded, you know it's seen as a mandatorial aspect of their religion (within that one of many interpretations they employ) so again accepting the premises of the question we see that the free choice question instantly reverts back to the freedom to leave their religion. So there's another undeniable aspect of freedom of choice to this argument. Again this invalidates the claims in this thread, unless - & this is the only response I see to this with regard to your freedom of choice argument - you mention apostasy, which makes the burqa a triviality in generalizing the conversation & amounts to an argument for banning one particular interpretation (amongst the many, some of which reject the burqa) of Islam by hiding behind the burqa, when in fact your argument has really become an argument for banning all of Islam to those for whom some omnipotent clairvoyant claims "chose" Islam not of their own volition (though not any other religion for some reason). I could go much further with this if this is where you want to take it, though remember how invalidates the burqa is in the grand scheme of this conversation, & how theoretical (to the point of being divorced from reality) it has become.

    To sum up, the only inkling of respectability in the arguments I see you guys putting forward lies in the possibility that uneducated women are wearing the burqa because they aren't aware of those interpretations of Islam that reject the burqa. If you all really care so much then the only answer is education unless you want to employ fascistic methodology in the service of the greater good, the greater good...


  • #1815
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    sponsoredwalk wrote: »
    If you all really care so much then the only answer is education unless you want to employ fascistic methodology in the service of the greater good, the greater good...
    How do you propose to do that when it seems that many islamic men do not want "their" women to be educated?


  • #1816
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    MrPudding wrote: »
    I suppose this comes down to the question you have been asked a couple of times but are yet to answer, let's try again shall we?

    I think thats a simplistic argument. It seems to be more a case of unspoken tradition than hellfire and brimstone lectures. From what I can gather going out without the hair covered or without a face covering is thought of in the same light as going out topless its "not the done thing".


  • #1817
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    So the fact that you can't explain where I am wrong somehow means I am more wrong??

    No, you've constructed an argument whereby you class every answer that shows you're wrong as one that proves you right. Where I say "this person has chosen", you'll jump in regardless and say "brainwashed", which removes any possibility that I can show you to be wrong.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    So?

    We're talking about legislation affecting people in the West.


  • #1818
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Rev Hellfire wrote: »
    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

    absolutely. Ban, ban, ban. Except for halloween. How does these women get into airports?


  • #1819
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    robindch wrote: »
    How do you propose to do that when it seems that many islamic men do not want "their" women to be educated?

    Maybe these atheist billboard people, or the people in this thread, could buy billboards in majority Muslim cities packed with information, or in newspapers, or stage propaganda campaign's aimed at raising awareness etc... etc... Short of imposing North Korea standards on the Muslim world or the patriarchal husbands covering the eyes of their niqab's I find it hard not to think such propaganda wouldn't trickle down (would the fact that they are being bombarded with propaganda by atheists in an attempt to skew their worldview constitute freedom of choice though? Hmm... Might nullify the entire argument :().


  • #1820
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,827 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote:
    It seems to be more a case of unspoken tradition than hellfire and brimstone lectures. From what I can gather going out without the hair covered or without a face covering is thought of in the same light as going out topless its "not the done thing".

    You need to do more gathering. You can cover your hair without covering your face, they are based on very different interpretations of Hijab. Women who commonly wear headscarfs or hijab would be unhappy to wear the burka and vice-versa. Also, the wearing of the burka is not done in isolation from the other religious/cultural beliefs associated with it - eg the value of woman in society being half of that of a man, women not being allowed to be the presence of non-related men unsupervised etc. The people who wear the burka are not like lapsed catholics who wear a cross, barely cognitive of what it represents, the burka is merely a outward physical projection of the oppressive influence they are under.
    Nodin wrote: »
    No, you've constructed an argument whereby you class every answer that shows you're wrong as one that proves you right. Where I say "this person has chosen", you'll jump in regardless and say "brainwashed", which removes any possibility that I can show you to be wrong

    I dont class them as proving me right, I class them as brainwashed. Its very simple if you want to debunk that, just show how someone could even remotely rationally reach the conclusion that they should wear the burka. If there is a rational reason to wear the burka then it would be possible for someone to wear it un-coerced.
    Nodin wrote: »
    We're talking about legislation affecting people in the West.

    Then why did you bring up the reactions of people in Iran to a previous ban?


  • #1821
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    You need to do more gathering. You can cover your hair without covering your face,(.....) cross, barely cognitive of what it represents, the burka is merely a outward physical projection of the oppressive influence they are under.

    Yes, I read your newsletter previously, thanks.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I dont class them as proving me right, I class them as brainwashed. Its very simple if you want to debunk that, just show how someone could even remotely rationally reach the conclusion that they should wear the burka. If there is a rational reason to wear the burka then it would be possible for someone to wear it un-coerced.

    If I brought examples of testimonies of 1000 women, you'd discount them all. You've made up your mind based on your reasoning and will accept no counter-argument. I've as much chance of talking round a wahabi fundamentalist.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Then why did you bring up the reactions of people in Iran to a previous ban?

    As an example of people holding onto something and a ban backfiring.


  • Advertisement
  • #1822
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I dont class them as proving me right, I class them as brainwashed. Its very simple if you want to debunk that, just show how someone could even remotely rationally reach the conclusion that they should wear the burka. If there is a rational reason to wear the burka then it would be possible for someone to wear it un-coerced.

    Did you read my post? It directly answers this question - there is freedom within the ideology to choose whether or not to wear the burqa, it amounts to a specific interpretation of scripture that people can choose to believe or not. Right there is a not-so-remote illustration of how someone could rationally reach the conclusion to wear the burqa. Furthermore people can choose not to wear it based on a different interpretation of scripture (notice how every claim is easily backable by evidence, something I'd provide if it all wasn't so trivially obvious), indeed why do you think some organizations, such as the Muslim Canadian Congress, can argue against the burqa? Unless people are uneducated about their freedom of choices of interpretation with regard to this issue the question of coercion has nothing to do with the burqa, & notice how your entire argument then reverts to one that goes any deeper only by means of education, not fascistic trash you're so scarily eager to impose on others... Possibly one of the vague images you're arguing from is the idea of state coercion to wear the burqa in Saudi Arabia etc... (this is the only thing I can think of to try to make sense of your motivation with regard to actual reality & not illusions & misinformation) but that is an entirely separate discussion about state coercion & not the burqa. In other words your entire argument is just uneducated totalitarian nonsense, & it's fantastic to see such an argument mixed with (indeed fueled by) dogmatic assertions that evidence is irrelevant, best example I've seen on this forum ever...


  • #1823
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Improbable wrote: »
    In every case, they said that given the choice, they would not wear them.
    That's my experience of the region too (see previous posts in this thread).

    Perhaps posters who are against banning the burka might comment on the observation that women who wear the burka appear uniformly (ha!) not to want to wear it?


  • #1824
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    robindch wrote: »
    That's my experience of the region too (see previous posts in this thread).

    Perhaps posters who are against banning the burka might comment on the observation that women who wear the burka appear uniformly (ha!) not to want to wear it?


    ....in the West? We don't know that. I linked to an article earlier where a French woman willingly wore it.


  • #1825
    Rev Hellfire
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,346 ✭✭✭Rev Hellfire


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    I linked to an article earlier where a French woman willingly wore it.
    One swallow doesn't make a summer.


  • #1826
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Rev Hellfire wrote: »
    One swallow doesn't make a summer.

    Well theres apparently only about 1,000 swallows. Sooner or later, somebody might bother to do some research on the subject so we know more than we do now.


  • #1827
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,827 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    Yes, I read your newsletter previously, thanks.

    :confused:
    Nodin wrote: »
    If I brought examples of testimonies of 1000 women, you'd discount them all. You've made up your mind based on your reasoning and will accept no counter-argument. I've as much chance of talking round a wahabi fundamentalist.

    How many Irish women get married in churches or baptise their kids despite not knowing 95% of Catholic teaching, and not believing 95% of what they know? How can someone who (presumably) lives in Ireland be so opposed to the idea that people can be brainwashed in large numbers?
    Nodin wrote: »
    As an example of people holding onto something and a ban backfiring.

    Then why can't I have examples of countries which enforce the ban?


  • #1828
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,827 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    sponsoredwalk wrote: »
    Did you read my post? It directly answers this question - there is freedom within the ideology to choose whether or not to wear the burqa, it amounts to a specific interpretation of scripture that people can choose to believe or not. Right there is a not-so-remote illustration of how someone could rationally reach the conclusion to wear the burqa. Furthermore people can choose not to wear it based on a different interpretation of scripture (notice how every claim is easily backable by evidence, something I'd provide if it all wasn't so trivially obvious), indeed why do you think some organizations, such as the Muslim Canadian Congress, can argue against the burqa? Unless people are uneducated about their freedom of choices of interpretation with regard to this issue the question of coercion has nothing to do with the burqa, & notice how your entire argument then reverts to one that goes any deeper only by means of education, not fascistic trash you're so scarily eager to impose on others... Possibly one of the vague images you're arguing from is the idea of state coercion to wear the burqa in Saudi Arabia etc... (this is the only thing I can think of to try to make sense of your motivation with regard to actual reality & not illusions & misinformation) but that is an entirely separate discussion about state coercion & not the burqa. In other words your entire argument is just uneducated totalitarian nonsense, & it's fantastic to see such an argument mixed with (indeed fueled by) dogmatic assertions that evidence is irrelevant, best example I've seen on this forum ever...

    You post does not answer mine. It shows that there are interpretations, of Hijab, in Islam which leave people free to not wear the burka, yes, but it does not show that there is any freedom in the interpretations of Hijab which do promote the burka. The burka ban is not an effort to stop people practising Islam, its an effort to stop people being oppressed by all the additional ideologies that (always) accompany the belief that the burka must be worn. That interpretation is oppressive, damaging and, most importantly, political.


  • #1829
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    :confused:
    ..............

    Then why can't I have examples of countries which enforce the ban?


    ????


  • #1830
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    they think they are saving face by banning the burka things have gone wrong for too long to just simply ban the burka it wont solve the wider issue ..


  • Advertisement
  • #1831
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,827 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Nodin wrote: »
    ????

    You originally said "And we're talking about the "West", by the way" in answer to me bringing up muslim countries. If you can bring up muslim countries then I can bring up muslim countries.

    Anything to say about the rest of my post, particularly the bit you changed to full stops?


Advertisement