-
Posts
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3325285.stm
From 2004 but still relevant in my opinion.
The legal status of the headscarf in schools remained unclear for many years, but a parliamentary vote in February 2004 finally decided the matter.
Backed by French President Jacques Chirac, ministers approved a law that will come into effect in September, banning all obvious religious symbols from schools – including headscarves, Christian crosses and Jewish skullcaps.
This applies to all religions, yet it’s only fundamentalist Muslims that are aggrieved, not the Christians, not the Jews…
@kent f OBE wrote:
Burkah wearing muslim women are not priests of their mosques. Nor have I heard of any cases of Nuns fleeing the country and using their Habit as a disguise, or strapping explosives to themselves under their Habits, to blow up planes full of innocent people.
And I thought we established wearing the Burkah is not a religious thing therefore comparisons cannot be made against Nuns and Monks as such.Quite simply, the burkha is a garment that fullfils the instructions of Islamic dress code for the muslimah, the veil, as i have already pointed out is not compulsory and indeed is a personal choice.The reasons given for the banning of religious symbols be they clothes or anything else is just plainy outrageous. What message can we gather from this, we see now, young children dressed as their mothers with make up, jewellry, provocative clothing etc….This is a just another sign of the double standards of western powers…
If there is any evidence that it is only funamentalist muslims that are aggrieved, can you prove that here?The burka exceeds the instructions of Islamic dress.
The reasons for banning conspicuous displays of religion are far from outrageous if you take time to study and understand French history and its roots. No more outrageous than expecting women to cover their whole bodies as a sign of submissiveness. If you don’t like it, don’t live in the country, just as I wouldn’t choose to live in a country where women were expected to play a more traditional muslim-type role in society and cover their bodies regardless of their religion.
And there you go, once again demanding evidence when you’re never prepared to give it yourself. Can you give evidence that anyone other than fundamentalist Mulsims are aggrieved? Where are the Jews bemoaning the fact that they’re not allowed to wear skullcaps? Where are the christians bemoaning the fact that they’re not allowed to wear crosses and crucifixes? and so on.
How does the burkha exceed ?
Any law that subdues freedom of expression is outrageous, the fact it happens to denote a persons faith is even more outrageous, what is the overall objective of these laws, to seperate religion from the state ? In this country, when called upon to give evidence in a court of law, we are invited to swear by almighty God…… absolute hypocrissy and a further move to remove civil liberties and freedoms.
I dont claim that there is any other group being aggrieved, you on the other hand state it is only the muslim fundamentalis that is aggrieved, without any qualification..
Is this what you term a demand ?????
can you prove that here?
It looks like a plain request to me !!!!!!!
@gazlan wrote:
How does the burkha exceed ?
I think you’ve already answered that here:
@gazlan wrote:
Firstly, to my knowledge, there are no writings in the Islamic Book stating that women are compelled to wear such garments, it is therefore a personal choice and subject to personal interpretation.
and here:
@gazlan wrote:
As far as i am aware, the Islamic instruction is that women must dress with modesty and lower their gaze. The Burkha is a loose fitting garment that prevents the outline of the female body being shown as per instruction, it does not include covering the head and face.
There is no requirement in the Koran for a female to conceal her whole body, which is what a burka does, therefore it exceeds the instructions of Islamic dress.
@gazlan wrote:
Any law that subdues freedom of expression is outrageous, the fact it happens to denote a persons faith is even more outrageous, what is the overall objective of these laws, to seperate religion from the state ?
Yes, the overall objective of these laws in France is to maintain the separation of religion from the state, something that has worked well for them from the 18th century. As for subduing the freedom of expression, isn’t that exactly what several Arab states do when they require women to cover their arms and legs at all times? Where’s the freedom of expression there?
@gazlan wrote:
In this country, when called upon to give evidence in a court of law, we are invited to swear by almighty God…… absolute hypocrissy and a further move to remove civil liberties and freedoms
In this country, yes we’re invited to swear by almighty God, but there is provision for those that don’t believe in God or are not of the Christian faith. We’re not a secular country, and we’re talking about France banning the burka, not the UK.
@gazlan wrote:
I dont claim that there is any other group being aggrieved, you on the other hand state it is only the muslim fundamentalis that is aggrieved, without any qualification..
Well since that’s a request and not a demand, I’ll decline but I’ll do it directly rather than waflling around avoiding the question :wink:
Oh Dear…. well….
The burkha was designed to conceal a woman’s beautiful body… enchanting eyes and her flawless skin… to avoid idiotic men gawking in adoration… leading to a thought.. leading to an erection<–Don't deny!!!! ..as The Male morphs into a Barbaric cave man who is fixated on his next mating partner…. "hey sexy"…"baby" etc ew and ew… Thus supporting the "Lower your Gaze" concept…
In non Islamic countries such as France… I really feel on a personal level that a burkha would attract unnecessary attention …since the Islamic woman has been chosen to represent her religion via “The Hijab or Veil” …then….that should suffice and a ninja suit in 2010 is not necessary .
Muslim women will argue liberation from Male Domination….. I kind of agree to a degree… Man in 1700’s introduced hairstyles.. wigs etc.. by the 1800 we had MAN once again invent the bloody curling iron which with no thanks has left me with burn marks :shock:
In the 1900s Williams was inspired by his sisters trick to achieve fuller lashes (Vaseline and Charcoal) and created mascara… “maybe she’s born with it.. maybe its maybelline”.. ahh it’s definitely maybelline!!! But not me… I’m born with it :D :wink:
Looking into the history of Fashion and Cosmetics…. It is a FACT that this slavery put upon women to have a certain look… style… etc… all have been created and or influenced by the Male specie. We are conditioned.. no denying that the women today compete and attempt to achieve that Cover girl look.. when in actual reasoning.. it doesn’t exist!! Women wearing this covering are in my eyes liberated from the scrutiny of fashion and “The Look”…. they have past the material world and are truly living within we have no other option but to judge their character and not their lush boobies
:shock: :- “Maybe If I act like… That…. That guy will call me… back… I don’t wanna be a stupid girl” :wink:Wearing a burka does not liberate them from the dictates of fashion at all.
Muslim women will still spend money on smart clothes, hairstyles and so on even though they’re covered up. Why?
Well firstly they still want to keep the man in their life happy, and they don’t wear the burka when at home.
But secondly, to impress other women. I had a friend who was a Muslim, when I first met her she wore western dress, then over time (for reasons I won’t go into here) her dress became more and more conservative until she finally adopted the Hijab. One of our group said to her that it must save her a fortune on clothes and hairdressing and she burst into laughter before explaining that when she went to the mosque, the women removed their burkas and hijabs once away from the men and that was where the competition really started, on who could look the most glamourous underneath whilst looking drab and shapeless to the outside world.
We may say we’re dressing to impress men, and there is an element of that, but generally we are dressing to impress other women, whatever our religion or ethnic background.
There is no requirement in the Koran for a female to conceal her whole body, which is what a burka does, therefore it exceeds the instructions of Islamic dress.
“O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the wives of the believers that they shall LENGTHEN their garments. Thus, they will be recognized and avoid being insulted. God is Forgiver, Most Merciful.”
It is a requirement to cover themselves that they wear clothing, the burkha is a loose fitting full length garment which conceals the outline of the body…
While it is true that, the covering of the face and head is not at all mentioned in the holy book, i repeat , it is purely personal interpretation and choice for the wearing of this garment. The banning of this garment is, a direct assault upon people to express their personal submission to their God, this ban therefore is a direct assault against freedom of expression.
whatever the muslimah does or does not do when in the company of females, has nothing to do with the wearing of the burkha either at home, in the mosque or anywhere else. The principle here is the freedom to express faith and freedom to wear clothes of choice.
I have mentioned before that people will mis-interpret their own doctrines, the forcing of women to wear such garments is a flaw in itslef, the main reason women wear such garments is to show submission to their God, forcing a women to do that shows that the women must therefore not be prepared to submit to God in the first place with this method, Thus removing free will, which i believe is forbidden.In this country, yes we’re invited to swear by almighty God, but there is provision for those that don’t believe in God or are not of the Christian faith. We’re not a secular country, and we’re talking about France banning the burka, not the UK.
As for subduing the freedom of expression, isn’t that exactly what several Arab states do when they require women to cover their arms and legs at all times? Where’s the freedom of expression there?
Well since that’s a request and not a demand, I’ll decline
And why would you decline ?
I have a cold :( I cant think and cant be bothered… but.. in my fogginess..
This is exactly what I mean…. A woman now either submits to today’s idea of normalcy or she will be labelled “shapeless” ..”oppressed”…”Drab” blah blah….this idea has been formulated and planted firmly (with the power of media etc) …. its embedded in us.. Take this Sexy look/Style and display it for all to see and you are fine.. acceptable.. beautiful..But cover it up then you are unacceptable… Does the word modest even exist any more?
I am not just talking burkha.. I am talking modest women…
Those women you speak of competing and comparing clothing etc.. in a place of worship… LOL Nice!! Clearly intentions of prayer aye? … #-o :wink:Women who choose to dress modestly outdoors are in fact liberating themselves by saying No to revealing her temple..her body… And you are right.. we even want to impress women and seek their acceptance… that is another issue… the division in women now. :o
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!