The Burqa ban in Holland ...

Fatum

19 Nov 06, 01:41

Was getting my daily dose of the BBC when this article caught my eye

Dutch debates Ban on Burqas

added more links for more context:

The Veil Across Europe

Muslims Must Feel British - Jack Straw

Ban Would Increase Muslim Support for the veil

I'm not going to post the whole article here, but it's covers the recent debate in Holland, traditionally one of the most liberal countries in the world, on the ban on burqas and some other forms of "ultra-orthrodox "(?) female Islamic uniforms ....

there is a whole series of links on the side about the debate across Europe on the subject too ...

many european politicians feel that burqas are a hindrance to inter-personal communications, and a strong personal symbol of exclusion, a statement that you want to be excluded from the wider society, and a step backwards towards intergration ...

this debate comes at a time when Europe is reeling from a wave of terrorism linked to radical Islam, the madrid bombings, the london bombings, the Van Gogh murder, and raised many questions about national identity belonging to a society versus the larger call of religion for some

there's also an interesting bit on the different style of coverings that muslim women wears across the world ....

so what do you guys think ? ...

does a person's freedom (of dressing in this case), supersedes the larger ideal of societal integration ? ... what are the consequences of having a group make themselves immiscible from the rest of society ? ... or this is just all discrimination crouched in nicer language ? ..

Hogzilla

19 Nov 06, 02:01

Frankly speaking har, I think they just don't need the face scarf then ok liao.

In order to know whether the other party is lying when we are talking to them, we must first see their facial expression, not saying that all people lie lah, if Miss A pose as Miss B, and you can see their face because they have the scarf on, wouldn't it cause a lot more confusion?

So I think they need to improvise the Burqa instead of banning it as a whole.

Meat Pao

19 Nov 06, 04:22

I think it's hard to say.

oxford mushroom

19 Nov 06, 07:03

When will people learn? Banning the burqa is the quickest way to persuade Muslim women to consider putting it on, just to make a point.

If God had not told Adam and Eve not to eat of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they probably would have ignored it. Prohibition of any kind constitutes the greatest temptation to defy it.

scabstermooch

19 Nov 06, 07:52

This is probably a backlash to the gruesome murder of a controversial filmmaker about 1 year back.

I think the ban is quite extreme and perhaps a ban in schools and a ban on their use in banks would have been a more measureed approach. Still, its their country and I can certainly understand the depth of their anger towards these people.

In any case, wearing the burqua is arguably more cultural (or fashion depending on how you look at it) than religious. I bet that will not stop any number of muslim fundies from foaming at their mouth and jumping up and down protesting western decadence.

"Death to the Dutch!" "Slay those who insult our fashion!"

oxford mushroom

19 Nov 06, 16:12

It's true. I wouldn't like to see our Muslim women putting on the burqa along Orchard Road but for non-Muslims to ban it will only create a victim mentality and arouse hostile sentiments.

It would have been far better for the Dutch to highlight the fact that hundreds of thousands of perfectly respectable Muslim women from Turkey to Singapore do not wear the burqa.

Meat Pao

19 Nov 06, 16:36

It can be said that religious rights, and personal freedom, are violated.

It is a violation of human rights.

countdracula

19 Nov 06, 17:50

Originally posted by Meat Pao:
It can be said that religious rights, and personal freedom, are violated.

It is a violation of human rights.

you cannot apply such rights without conditions....else you'll have no end of deviants, cults and terrorists who will claim the same thing....

Meat Pao

19 Nov 06, 20:30

They are not cults or terrorists.

They are simply following their religious custom.

In other places like Iran or Afganistan, they wear such clothes.

But in Holland now cannot anymore.

Supposedly Europe is the land of enlightenment, human rights, freedom.

But that contradicts.

In Holland now there is no religious custom freedom, clothing freedom, personal choice freedom, when someone is not allowed to wear Burqa in public.

Because, simple, it has nothing to do with integration. It has to do with selective integration, specifically of Muslims.

I doubt they have similar rulings for Sikhs or for Jews or any other religious groups wearing their religious garb in public.

Correct?

scabstermooch

19 Nov 06, 20:38

Sikhs and Jews do not dress up like ninjas on a daily basis.

scabstermooch

19 Nov 06, 20:42

I would like to highlight this:

Other forms of face coverings, such as veils, and crash helmets with visors that obscure the face, would also be covered by a ban.

googoomuck

19 Nov 06, 21:45

The private regions of a woman are the bre4sts, the pubic region and the backsides.
One religion consider the woman from head to toes is one huge vagina !
Man has already gone to the moon and back and some men still worry about how to cover a woman's toes.

Atobe

19 Nov 06, 22:19

Imposing the 'burqa' on Muslim women is merely another one of those archaic practises from a 'male dominated' society.

Has it anything to do with religion - in this case Islam ?

If those who are prepared to pull up their roots and migrate into another country, but will not accept the cultural and societal norms and values of the adopted country, then these migrants will be better off returning to their origin.

Why impose themselves on the goodwill and hospitality of the adpoted host country ?

These guys are merely asserting their political rights - not religious or cultural or communal - and pushing the perimeters and limits of acceptance to gain ground for themselves and their cause.

These migrants are no better then 'FIFTH COLUMNIST' - burrowing themselves into a society, living as moles, and undermining the societal values of the host countries.

Should we be surprised that even Caucasians - in places such as England - have abandoned their own faith and adopted this religion that is totally foreign and seen to be mystical ?

Some have even begun to speak radically and even condemning familiar cultural, societal, religious and political values that have been established traditions of their own community for thousands of years.

It is ironical that the bastion of the Christian Anglican faith is now seeing masses of Muslims - from all ethnic and racial origins - praying in the streets of old industrial English, Welsh and Scottish towns and cities, and all facing in the direction of Mecca.

The 'FIFTH COLUMNISTS' have succeeded in changing the British landscapes in nibble bites over the last fifty years.

In another fifty years, the Royal Family may have to ascend its throne subject to the acquiesence from the growing numbers of its Muslim citizens

Holland and France have set the tone in reclaiming its heritage, by instituting and insisting laws that enforce their own communal, cultural, religious, and political values.

If the Muslim migrants are unhappy with these laws, they should rightfully pack up and return to their place of origin.

scabstermooch

19 Nov 06, 22:37

Originally posted by googoomuck:
...
One religion consider the woman from head to toes is one huge vagina !
Man has already gone to the moon and back and some men still worry about how to cover a woman's toes.

Assuming you are talking about islam, and in the context of the thread you almost certainly are, I have tio disagree.

From what little I know, I think the Koran only says that women are to dress modestly. Perhaps more qualified persons could enlghten us.

Meat Pao

20 Nov 06, 01:00

No, ok, we can go there and discuss about the religious customs and stuff and whether they are suitable in todays world, etc like that, but thats not the angle Im going for. The angle Im approaching is that, by banning a religious custom, it is violating a very basic right, and that is religious freedom. We can say religious freedom, and/ or personal choice freedom, so on.

I know someone will say Burqa is very covering, not like Sikhs with a little thing on the head, or maybe some Jews who wear special hats for example. But that is not the point. That is weak argument. It is not the main idea behind why it is banned.

For instance, why is Burqa not banned in Iran or Afganistan, but banned in Holland?

Wearing Burqa is a custom and tradition, a religious tradition of these people, and when they are in Iran or Afganistan they can wear it, but when they go to Holland they cannot wear it, because Holland politicians want integration, meaning they should discard and leave their religious custom. And this is the point where integration is sacrificing or being put above one very basic right, religious freedom. They are saying you can go and live here in Holland but you must not be who you are, you must discard your belief and religious custom.

Other than this we can also say it is a cultural subjugation or forced integration, because they are forced to abandon their cultural identity, customs, and religious teaching. They are told to dilute their cultural identity and 'integrate'.

Again this can only happen because they are Muslims, not Jews or Hindus whatever. It is also not a coincidence that it happen in Holland.

To me I just feel that they as a nation have some tough decision making to take, and this is probably not the best decision, from my view as a third party observer, but maybe since I dont live there, they have their own decision-making for their society and this is what they have decided and I have respect for that. I just feel abit sorry for the Muslims there because I think they will feel abit opressed and targeted/ offended.

Meat Pao

20 Nov 06, 01:03

I can think of a very good analogy.

Chinese Indonesians were told to 'integrate' and not allowed to celebrate openly Chinese New Year in public (used to).

And stuff like that.

But I think this one in Holland abit tougher for them (Muslims), because it is not only cultural but also religious, so double whammy for them.

Meat Pao

20 Nov 06, 01:39

I want to talk abit more about this, because it's interesting.

I think, if you think about women who used to wear Burqa in Holland, but now cannot anymore, how would they feel?

I can imagine probably they are in a dilemma now. If they wear Burqa that means they are very observant. Now they are told to be less observant. Cannot go outside with Burqa.

I feel it's like asking an observant Hindu to eat beef in public, outside his home, or a vegetarian (for religious reason) to eat meat outside his home, and so on.

Or like asking a Buddhist monk not to shave his head.

How can..??? It is very hard for them to do that.

Also since they are women, we can go abit different angle and say this is gender oppression, because women are being told what to wear and what not to wear, ironically by banning Burqa. By banning Burqa they make women not able to make her own choice and decision making, in the very personal domain like clothing, ironically precisely the same attacks other people have on these veils as being oppresive to women.

Ok, what is also interesting to me is that it happen in Holland, one of the most free country in the world where people can buy cocaine and homosexuals can marry. Isnt it interesting they should bother about 'integration' and want to regulate clothing in public. Do you know why??? I dont think this will happen if we are not living in the present condition of Islam-Western chasms and their own trauma with their domestic events.

Atobe

20 Nov 06, 01:56

If the Muslim Men must insist the 'burqa' to be worn by the Muslim women, and will go against the values, traditions, and customs of the host country - then it maybe better for the Muslim Men to return to the Land of the Burqa from where they originally come from.

The Chinese who have migrated to Indonesia have no choice but to follow the customs and traditions of Indonesia, and were expected to immerse themselves to be part of the Indonesian landscape.

The Chinese in Thailand have similarly immersed themselves into Thai culture, value system, traditions, and social practices.

Those non-Middle Eastern economic migrants who have gone to work in the predominantly Muslim countries - such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, and Yemen - are all expected to respect and subject themselves to the customs, traditions, culture, social values, and political practices of these countries.

Are these economic migrants allowed to impose their own religious practices, cultural and social values onto the Middle East host countries, and demand special privileges and recognition ?

Similarly, why should the host countries in Europe, UK and the USA allow the radical and dogmatic Muslim Men imposed their values systems onto the host countries, and create social discord amongst the host societies ?

Should we not expect the Muslim migrant to subject themselves to the values of the host countries, in the same manner that the predominantly Muslim countries expect their guests to respect their cultural, social, religious and political dictates ?

Meat Pao

20 Nov 06, 02:15

Originally posted by Atobe:

If the Muslim Men must insist the 'burqa' to be worn by the Muslim women, and will go against the values, traditions, and customs of the host country - then it maybe better for the Muslim Men to return to the Land of the Burqa from where they originally come from.

The Chinese who have migrated to Indonesia have no choice but to follow the customs and traditions of Indonesia, and were expected to immerse themselves to be part of the Indonesian landscape.

The Chinese in Thailand have similarly immersed themselves into Thai culture, value system, traditions, and social practices.

Those non-Middle Eastern economic migrants who have gone to work in the predominantly Muslim countries - such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, and Yemen - are all expected to respect and subject themselves to the customs, traditions, culture, social values, and political practices of these countries.

Are these economic migrants allowed to impose their own religious practices, cultural and social values onto the Middle East host countries, and demand special privileges and recognition ?

It must have been quite a difficult decision to make in countries with different cultural groups.

For instance the approach here in South East Asia is different in several countries.

In Malaysia and Singapore, minorities are allowed to carry out their traditions quite openly, while Thailand and Indonesia want to have 'integration' meaning certain minorities should adopt the cultural practice of the majority and dilute their own.

Now Indonesia abit different, because they think it's a kind of racism or discrimination, so now minority Chinese Indonesians can celebrate CNY openly.

I dont know the exact society condition of Holland, and Im sure Holland politicians have thought about it very carefully. It must have been a difficult decision and a controversial debate, and they have made the decision to fit their society the best, but still I feel abit sorry for the Muslims, they are kind of caught in a bad situation.

fymk

20 Nov 06, 04:36

I say it is a goddamn good rule too!

If they don't like it , they should go back to where they come from . Either integrate together with the locals or get out . When in rome, DO AS THE ROMANS DO.

In Australia , the reason for the cronulla riots was not due to racism - men of middle eastern appearance calling the white girls in bikini names and sexually harassing them because "they are not modestly dressed" , so the white guys decide to jump into the fray either out of self righteousness or to defend the dignity of their women . I remember this rape case involving some men of pakistani origin had one of the rapists say that the white girl was inviting them to rape because she was not "modest" in his culture. Since when was culture an excuse to freaking rape a woman. How about honor killings in Europe? Yeah yeah those might be the minority and in their culture ...so should we allow honor killings as well?

The hijab is fine with me but the burka - no . It covers the person's face too much. On the practical side , how do you even check the identity of the person you are talking to? Get the male relative to verify? NOW that is an excellent form of taking power from a woman.

We can talk human rights this and that - but if they chose to come to a country - they accept the local norms as the right of others AND accept that women are EQUALS regardless of whether it's their own or the locals BEFORE expecting others to accept their culture.

Fatum

20 Nov 06, 04:46

Well, from what I understand, during the boom years of the 60s to the 70s, countries like Germany, France, and some of the nordic countries, let in large numbers of "economic migrants" from Turkey and other parts of the near east to make up for labour shortages in these countries ....

They were actually actively encouraged NOT to integrate, NOT learn the local languages, and to keep to their own customs and religious practises, out of the understanding that these migrants would return to their home countries sooner or later, thus from a humanitarian stand-point, having those migrants retain as much of their own traditions as possible would lessen the "reverse culture shock" of returning back to their homelands ...

so now this has come back to bite Europe in the arse ...

fymk

20 Nov 06, 05:09

Originally posted by Fatum:
Well, from what I understand, during the boom years of the 60s to the 70s, countries like Germany, France, and some of the nordic countries, let in large numbers of "economic migrants" from Turkey and other parts of the near east to make up for labour shortages in these countries ....

They were actually actively encouraged NOT to integrate, NOT learn the local languages, and to keep to their own customs and religious practises, out of the understanding that these migrants would return to their home countries sooner or later, thus from a humanitarian stand-point, having those migrants retain as much of their own traditions as possible would lessen the "reverse culture shock" of returning back to their homelands ...

so now this has come back to bite Europe in the arse ...

As far as I know, turks are basically friendly people . They are quite tolerant as a community - a friend of my friend is also my friend kinda of attitude- their women wear hijabs and that is fine . I have friends who are of turkish origin and they do try to integrate together with the rest of the populance.

BadzMaro

20 Nov 06, 08:24

Originally posted by Meat Pao:
It can be said that religious rights, and personal freedom, are violated.

It is a violation of human rights.

tell it to the non-muslims that are being prosecuted at muslim countries.. i wonder where is democracy n all that good stuff. Notice how all these things happen at democratic countries n so on~ they bitch about human rights , violation of religion. How about the non-muslims ?

googoomuck

20 Nov 06, 12:02

Originally posted by scabstermooch:
Assuming you are talking about islam, and in the context of the thread you almost certainly are, I have tio disagree.

From what little I know, I think the Koran only says that women are to dress modestly. Perhaps more qualified persons could enlghten us.

If burqa is not specifically mentioned in the Quran, than banning the wearing of burqa in public is not Islam bashing.
ItÂ’s about secuirty and integration issues. The burqa is bad for integration and communication.
The burqa can also be misused by criminals and sloths.
Criminals avoiding capture would dress up in a burqa the way many Saddam HusseinÂ’s conspirators tried to escape arrest in Iraq.
The city of Utrecht has cut some welfare benefits to unemployed women who insist on wearing burqas to job interviews. The city claimed the women were using the burqa to avoid working, since they knew they would not be hired.

LazerLordz

20 Nov 06, 12:03

Originally posted by Meat Pao:
Ok, what is also interesting to me is that it happen in Holland, one of the most free country in the world where people can buy cocaine and homosexuals can marry. Isnt it interesting they should bother about 'integration' and want to regulate clothing in public. Do you know why??? I dont think this will happen if we are not living in the present condition of Islam-Western chasms and their own trauma with their domestic events.

It is this concept of freedom in Holland that is under threat from radical Islam.

And they feel that by enforced integration, it will remove their propensity to move around in their own circles by forcing them to move out and interact with others.