-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
France Court rejects anti-islamic burkina ban
- Thread starter Servant_of_the_One1
- Start date
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Do you agree that it's just as wrong to deny women the choice to not wear hijab/burka/etc. as it is to deny women the choice to wear hijab/burka/etc?
Both a ban and mandate take away from a woman's freedom when it comes to her own choices.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Just as a ban on topless sunbathing would take away a woman's freedom to choose to do so, a situation now enforced on about 99% (my guess) of all public beaches in the USA.
.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
But the sight of boobies causes severe psychological damage.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Still hanging onto the old line the girls you dated laid on you I see. Take my word for it, it doesn't. In fact, the sight of bare boobies can be very stimulating.
.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I do hope you realize that my comment was in jest.
Skwim
Veteran Member
They think it's defending secularism. But what it's really doing is something else given that even non-Muslim women with sun-sensitive skin are forbidden from wearing garments that would allow them to enjoy the beach. Further it's the opposite side of this coin: men are arguing about what women are allowed to wear or not wear:
To use the same analogy, it would be OK with you to have "cover up" beaches in France to match nude beaches elsewhere? That would be a reasonable position to take.
But you do have a valid question about where government should get involved in dictating people's personal choices. I think most people don't look appealing nude, I know I sure don't. But outside of situations where there is a valid reason why someone's face needs to be visible such as driver's licenses, I would take a pretty libertarian view when it comes to dress codes.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Actually, there are quite a few French beaches where nudity and toplessness is not allowed, which is just fine with me.
.
Pastek
Sunni muslim
This story is not finished they will discuss about this for months and eventually vote for a law. That's what Manuel Valls said (as he wants to bannish the burkini)
There's elections very soon (in 2017) plus anyway there's always a debate concerning muslims each year ...
So basically :
-it's ok for nudists to have private beachs
-it's not ok for some people (i won't say "muslims" because not only muslims want to hide their body) to have private beachs because of religious(or others) reasons
-it's ok for some rich peoples to have some private beach (aka the saudi king last year in the french rivera)
By the way this problem is not new also some jewish people asked for private swimming pool scheedules (for women) and i think it was already complicated for them.
Also foreigns tourists can be in bikini in many muslims countries : Turkey, Morrocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Senegal, Malaysia, Dubai etc ... but when some women want to hide their parts they say "we are not allowed in your countries" which of course is false ... except if you go in Iran or KSA but who goes their for the holidays ? The majority go in the countries are mentionned so this is pure hypocrisy.
There's elections very soon (in 2017) plus anyway there's always a debate concerning muslims each year ...
So basically :
-it's ok for nudists to have private beachs
-it's not ok for some people (i won't say "muslims" because not only muslims want to hide their body) to have private beachs because of religious(or others) reasons
-it's ok for some rich peoples to have some private beach (aka the saudi king last year in the french rivera)
By the way this problem is not new also some jewish people asked for private swimming pool scheedules (for women) and i think it was already complicated for them.
Also foreigns tourists can be in bikini in many muslims countries : Turkey, Morrocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Senegal, Malaysia, Dubai etc ... but when some women want to hide their parts they say "we are not allowed in your countries" which of course is false ... except if you go in Iran or KSA but who goes their for the holidays ? The majority go in the countries are mentionned so this is pure hypocrisy.
I heard in news that they reject the law that made by court yesterday.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Pastek
Sunni muslim
They still want to debate and some mayors don't want to obey.
"Qu’importe les «libertés fondamentales», qu’importe la décision du Conseil d’Etat, plusieurs maires auteurs d’arrêtés «anti-burkini», dont ceux de Nice, Fréjus et Sisco ont annoncé qu’ils continueraient à verbaliser tant que leur texte n’est pas directement suspendu."
"Aussitôt la décision connue, Eric Ciotti et Guillaume Larrivé, deux fervents sarkozystes, annoncent qu’ils déposeront à la rentrée parlementaire une proposition de loi, dans la droite ligne de leur candidat à la primaire qui, dès jeudi soir, exigeait qu’on interdise le burkini «sur tout le territoire de la République»."
"Valls a attendu le début de soirée pour déclarer que cette «décision n’épuise pas le débat ouvert à la société»"
http://www.liberation.fr/france/2016/08/26/les-anti-burkini-rhabilles-par-le-conseil-d-etat_1474934
You maybe don't know but Sarkozy is back and he already said many things concerning the future laws concerning immigrations (of course targetting muslims) and a law against the veil in university, private companies etc
Also you may have heard about the governement who voted a law against the will of french people some months ago using the "49.3" .
Article 49.3, called "commitment of responsibility", allows the government to put through a bill without a vote under the cover of a rejection of the vote of no confidence which the opposition must put forward for form, with little hope of success.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_49_of_the_French_Constitution
You know even if it's unsucceful they may do it just for winning the elections.
Economic problems, ISIS, unemployment, etc., etc., and somehow lawmakers make a big issue out of what women wear on the beach and this law attracts attention in many countries worldwide.
The level of ridiculousness lawmakers and the media can reach is incredible. I think the photo of the woman being forced to strip by the police definitely guarantees media coverage, though, but that incident resulted from the law to begin with.
The level of ridiculousness lawmakers and the media can reach is incredible. I think the photo of the woman being forced to strip by the police definitely guarantees media coverage, though, but that incident resulted from the law to begin with.
Having reflected on the matter for a bit, I have concluded that there is likely no painless solution to be had.
Apparently Islam is not really compatible with the personal freedoms that a modern, enlightened society needs. Far from deserving special privilege out of claims of religious belief, it has put its own status as a legitimate religion into question.
If religion is defined by adherence to belief in God, a scripture and/or a prophet, I guess Islam is indeed a religion - but I think it is very much a destructive mistake to use such a definition and no one should ever do that.
If a religion is instead defined, as I think it should be, by its ability to bring security, harmony, morality, solidarity and virtue in general to the people who learn it, as I personally think it should be, then Islam is a deeply diseased religion, if it is a religion at all.
At some point it lost its way, possibly beyond repair, in a similar but apparently more serious way to that of a significant segment of Christianity. It became too attached to superstition and not nearly daring enough to develop and maintain a modicum of functional religious wisdom. It may easily have been a birth disease, since it seems to have ever been so attached to scripture. As its ability to succesfully interact with "outsiders" degenerated, it took ever increasing refuge in appeals for mutual support among brothers of faith and convinced itself that it had no choice but to muscle over the ways of others "for the defense of their traditions".
At this point, the situation in France does not IMO involve any kind of religious considerations whatsoever, for either part. It is not even a matter of "imposing" or "mishandling" secularism. Instead, it is a matter of calling the Muslims in France to consider whether they understand and want to respect the social expectations of a society that never wanted and shall never want nor allow itself to become Muslim.
Because ultimately that is the necessary parameter to keep. France, and as a matter of fact any and all communities, must do their utmost to state and accept the need to explicitly reject Islamic expectations. Not because they are "religious" - I don't think they are - and not even because they are theistic and even theocentric (although that sure did not help any), but rather because its political consequences are anathema to a democratic, representative society.
To put it another way, I don't think there is any real issue of whether France knows or needs to learn to respect Islamic communities. It is rather the other way around. The question to ask is whether Islamic communities can and will allow themselves to learn to truly respect and integrate with democratic communities. The follow-up question is what they will do if they do not want to integrate, and how much of a direct conflict can be avoided.
Muslims can hardly expect others to peacefully accept continued, unrelenting pressure to submit to their authoritarian, undemocratic, theocentric ways. If they truly feel the need to press the issue to the point where others can only choose between submission and outright rejection, then they better expect rejection, ugly as it will be.
Apparently Islam is not really compatible with the personal freedoms that a modern, enlightened society needs. Far from deserving special privilege out of claims of religious belief, it has put its own status as a legitimate religion into question.
If religion is defined by adherence to belief in God, a scripture and/or a prophet, I guess Islam is indeed a religion - but I think it is very much a destructive mistake to use such a definition and no one should ever do that.
If a religion is instead defined, as I think it should be, by its ability to bring security, harmony, morality, solidarity and virtue in general to the people who learn it, as I personally think it should be, then Islam is a deeply diseased religion, if it is a religion at all.
At some point it lost its way, possibly beyond repair, in a similar but apparently more serious way to that of a significant segment of Christianity. It became too attached to superstition and not nearly daring enough to develop and maintain a modicum of functional religious wisdom. It may easily have been a birth disease, since it seems to have ever been so attached to scripture. As its ability to succesfully interact with "outsiders" degenerated, it took ever increasing refuge in appeals for mutual support among brothers of faith and convinced itself that it had no choice but to muscle over the ways of others "for the defense of their traditions".
At this point, the situation in France does not IMO involve any kind of religious considerations whatsoever, for either part. It is not even a matter of "imposing" or "mishandling" secularism. Instead, it is a matter of calling the Muslims in France to consider whether they understand and want to respect the social expectations of a society that never wanted and shall never want nor allow itself to become Muslim.
Because ultimately that is the necessary parameter to keep. France, and as a matter of fact any and all communities, must do their utmost to state and accept the need to explicitly reject Islamic expectations. Not because they are "religious" - I don't think they are - and not even because they are theistic and even theocentric (although that sure did not help any), but rather because its political consequences are anathema to a democratic, representative society.
To put it another way, I don't think there is any real issue of whether France knows or needs to learn to respect Islamic communities. It is rather the other way around. The question to ask is whether Islamic communities can and will allow themselves to learn to truly respect and integrate with democratic communities. The follow-up question is what they will do if they do not want to integrate, and how much of a direct conflict can be avoided.
Muslims can hardly expect others to peacefully accept continued, unrelenting pressure to submit to their authoritarian, undemocratic, theocentric ways. If they truly feel the need to press the issue to the point where others can only choose between submission and outright rejection, then they better expect rejection, ugly as it will be.
Speak for yourself!
I think you may be overgeneralizing a bit, Luis. Muslim women's dress in some regions, eastern Europe, for example, is often indistinguishable from that of the christian community, and fifty years ago Muslim women in western dress were a common sight on the streets of Baghdad, Kabul and Tehran.
I think the current wave of fundamentalism sweeping the middle East is largely a reaction to western imperialism and exploitation, fanned by demagogues trying to gain from the situation.