Now Belgium bans burqa in public places

[Abu Rashid]

Darkness,

I would have had each of the five soldiers lined up and shot execution style. It sickens me that some of them are free, after what they have done.

You have a conscience, many do not.

The fact that some were brought to some semblance of justice is a peculiarity. Throughout most of the conflict in Iraq, it's become quite apparent the command chain was well aware of, and perhaps even directing, a lot of the abuse of Iraqi civilians. Abu Ghraib alone will probably fuel hatred and a retaliatory mentality in generations of Muslims for decades to come. In my estimation, the U.S has really caused a lot of bad blood here, that is going to haunt it for a long time.

Yet still people like Smoke continue to peddle the anti-Islamic nonsense about Muslims being evil violent terrorists.

 

[Abu Rashid]

Darkendless,

But why target innocent people, thats my issue.

In retaliation. The West target civilians, so some angry Muslims target them back.

and don't claim they don't target civilians, there's many many documented cases of Western soldiers targeting civilians, they even have a neat little term coined for it, called "Collateral damage".

So you can justify violence? Nice. Diplomacy goes a lot way.

The violence was not the issue though, the issue was who it was directed against no? I cannot justify that, as I said, I oppose it, but I can see what's led to it. If you cannot, then you are not sincerely interested in seeing the cycle end.

I find it amusing how you removed the last sentence of this paragraph where i recognised the death we cause everytwhere we go.

It was in stark contrast to the rest of your post, so I felt like it was not really what you were trying to convey, and so I did not address it.

Be careful how you speak of a suicide bomber. Its almost as if you're glorifying his actions.

Only by someone who wants to make something out of nothing. There's no glorifying at all, war is horrific and there's little glory in it's violent details. But claiming that one side indiscriminately bombing civilians is "civilised" because it's done from afar by the press of the button, instead of up close by your own presence is just ludicrous. And I need to point that out to you, as you obviously seemed to be under the delusion that indiscriminately bombing civilians from the sky is somehow not targeting civilians.

These wars are beyond my understanding as well.

Well someone is profiting from them. And they are the people you should be directing your anger at.

Its all well and good to immigrate, but to immigrate and then whinge, whine, complain about a country with better oppurtunities is a pretty poor excuse.

One of the few things I'll actually agree with you on. However, I would like to point out that the vast majority of Muslims here do not whine about the country, any more than an Italian or Greek immigrant, or even an Aussie would. If you're an immigrant are you prohibited from whining or something? Must you be born here to whine?

and given a lot of muslims are in fact immigrants

A lot of Muslims are born here. either Aussie converts like myself, or 2nd. or 3rd. etc generation. Are you aware for instance that Muslims have been here since the earliest days of white settlement? (and actually prior to it) And that in fact Muslims were instrumental in exploring and building the early infrastructure of Australia? That's why for instance the cross-country railway is called the "Ghan" (After the Afghan and other Muslim explorers and workers who built it). Muslims have been part of Australia since the earliest of days, and your claim they're mostly just immigrants who have no rights here to express themselves is contemptible!

There's probably Muslims in Australia whose families have been here longer than yours or mine.

 

[Smoke]

Yet still people like Smoke continue to peddle the anti-Islamic nonsense about Muslims being evil violent terrorists.

I never said that "Muslims" are terrorists, as if all Muslims are terrorists or support terrorists. I pointed out that Westerners are conscious of the fact of Muslim terrorism and that that awareness colors how they view a woman in a burqa or niqab. That's simply the way it is.

You proceeded to excuse the terrorists, associating your religion with terrorism in a far more emphatic way than I did.

But I don't know why I'm bothering with you. You have continually presumed to tell me what I know, to tell me what I think, and now to misrepresent what I said. I've had enough of it. Your obvious contempt is fully reciprocated.

 

[darkendless]

Darkendless,

One of the few things I'll actually agree with you on. However, I would like to point out that the vast majority of Muslims here do not whine about the country, any more than an Italian or Greek immigrant, or even an Aussie would. If you're an immigrant are you prohibited from whining or something? Must you be born here to whine?
.

Pretty much. People who come here are in no position to ask for change. It is a Privilege to live here. If they have issues they should perhaps have chosen their relocation a little better?

Generally speaking, the Aussies whine because of other people whining about the country

 

[Abu Rashid]

Pretty much.

How many generations must one be here to acquire the right to whine?

People who come here are in no position to ask for change.

Australia is a democracy, it is built on the principle that if the people (citizens, regardless of their birthplace or ethnicity) want change, they shall by given an opportunity to enact it. I wasn't aware Australia had become a white-supremacist dictatorship where only Anglos were permitted to ask for change.

Or is that only for change you yourself agree with? Sorry I missed that part.

It is a Privilege to live here.

Most migrants would rather goto the U.S or Europe or Canada, not Australia. It's usually the 2nd. or 3rd. or later choice on their list. And likewise we need them, as we have a big shortage of skills, and of people in general. If not for the fortune we've had with mineral resources, we'd be a backwater by now, strugglng to keep up with other economies of the world. So I don't know that you should be throwing the "P" word around so freely. It's not a pretty sight to see a people with an over-inflated opinion of themselves, especially not when it's my own people.

If they have issues they should perhaps have chosen their relocation a little better?

Most migrants choose a country for it's prospects, not for other reasons. Nobody will ever be 100% in agreeance with the situation in any country, and in Australia they have the opportunity to better it. Your inclination towards denying certain sectors of the society that right is troubling.

Generally speaking, the Aussies whine because of other people whining about the country

Yes it does tend to be the less-educated sectors of society who do the most whining.

 

[Darkness]

Darkness,

You have a conscience, many do not.

The fact that some were brought to some semblance of justice is a peculiarity. Throughout most of the conflict in Iraq, it's become quite apparent the command chain was well aware of, and perhaps even directing, a lot of the abuse of Iraqi civilians. Abu Ghraib alone will probably fuel hatred and a retaliatory mentality in generations of Muslims for decades to come. In my estimation, the U.S has really caused a lot of bad blood here, that is going to haunt it for a long time.

I think when it comes to the U.S. Military, too many Americans equate patriotism with blind obidience. Yes, I do believe in supporting our soldiers overseas, but I also think that certain issues are non-negotiable. We need a policy of no tolerance for the wanton slaughter of human life. Just because someone is Iraqi or Afghan does not make their lives less meaningful than Americans. I understand the pressures that American soldiers face, especially when insurgent tactics put civilians in harm's way. Soldiers are scared. I get that. But I also know, that if I was an American soldier, I would never forgive myself if I killed an innocent Iraqi girl, whose father did not stop at a checkpoint.

I do believe the US and UK militaries are taking much better precautions to avoid killing civilians. However, I believe President Obama's decision to rely on Predator Drones leds to unnessisary loss of human life. I get that military commanders are trying to save the lives of their soldiers, but as a humanist, I cannot value a soldier's life above that of a civilian's. I believe that we owe the Iraqis and Afghans a stable political and social system before we leave. We destroyed their countries, now we owe it to them. If I was just interested in American security, I would see all American forces removed from the Middle-East. It pains me when President Obama only talks about American interest in the Middle-East. What about all the lives of the people living there? Don't they mean anything? We have made progress as far as girls are now getting educations, where that would not have been possible. If I had to do it all over again, I do not think I could. The utilitarian gains would not outway the utilitarian costs.

 

[Caladan]

Caladan,

You're really not capable are you? Nowhere did I equate anything. My point the whole time has been that nudity is subjective, and the Western concept of nudity involving the breasts is just as misogynistic compared to the PNG concept as if the Islamic concept is compared to the Western concept. Nowhere in there is there any equating.

Of course you are doing a comparison, and a weak comparison at that! you are comparing the standards of nudity of native people in Oceania to the dressing standards of Europe, its a desperate attempt to dress an extremely relative comparison on the Burqa/Niqab issue. further more this argument is rendered even more weak when we take into account that there is a world of difference between Western women who would visit native people in Oceania and not live with them and to Muslims who are starting their life in Europe and import practices which are obviously at odds with European society.

Red herring, nowhere did I state they did.

Rubbish. in order to counter my argument you brought up the Jewish resistance in Palestine! it was another extremely weak point, and yet another weak argument you are now trying to pull.

No, but you are justifying blind hatred of Muslims. You are justifying the concept that if some members of a people do something wrong, then xenohpobic hatemongers who end up hating them all are completely justified, and the entire people are responsible for that blind hatred.

Nonsense. nowhere am I justifying hatred of Muslims, all you've done in this thread is demonize long standing members of this forum, like me and smoke, members you know nothing about. all we are doing is taking part in an ongoing debate of currenet events and you can scream Islamophobia all you like, or you can start addressing my arguments without pulling your arguments while trying to save face. its tragic that you accuse other members of igniting hatred about All Muslims, while you obviously have cataloged all Israelis the same, and while you tell Israeli born members that they should leave their nation! you cant think clearly when people bring up immigration problems in the West. your double standards and lack of ability to stay on topic instead of targeting the members is well noted.

You brought an article which clearly confused Muslims with immigrants. I don't care how reputable it is, it was sloppy journalism, and you cannot excuse yourself for relying upon it, based on that reputation.

However if you think the fact I'm not even bothering to engage you on it anymore is some kind of victory, then go ahead and claim it. Hollow victories are about all you're going to get here.

What an interesting notion. so all the ongoing political, media, and public debates in Europe and other parts of the world about immigration problems, about lack of integration and about the social strife by certain elements is some kind of pipe dream that we pulled into this thread out of thin air?
its also sad that you consider this debate a contest where members need to strike points.

In societies where it's worn by everyone it's quite normal, just as I must accept that in societies where exposing breasts is the norm, it's quite normal, I may not agree with it, but I accept it's normal for them. You just can't seem to get over the fact that each society is different. Learn to live with it. Especially if you wanna make a home for yourself amongst Middle Easterners.

In other words, you say that women who are visiting societies who walk around in the nude they should meet these standards? fine and good, I know many women who WOULD meet these standards, if that is your logic, than so should Muslmis meet the dressing standards of the west. as for me in the middle east, I have already a home here it was in existence even before I was born, thank you very much. yet again your vile double standards are showing, if you have a problem with my home in the middle east, come and do something about it, its not like others haven't tried before you, yet we are still here.

Also what do you say about the trend amongst some Orthodox women in returning to the veil? Grotesque and misogynistic is it?

how women are you talking about 3,10? and why wouldnt I think its mysogynstic, do yourself a favor and stop being ridiculous.

That's purely a function of your disgust at things that are not part of your cultural norms.
Not a very enlightened response if you ask me, but one apparently tainted with blind hatreds, which would explain why you're defending the validity of such hatred in others.

Wrong. its my valid opinion about misogyny. im more than willing to accpet plenty of the cultural norms of others.
Its sad that you consider criticism to be blind hatred, this a sign of a poor ability to whithstand other opinions and criticism. you would offer a better debate if you would drop your demonization of other members and addressed their opinions properly.

Yep lap it up, 'nother hollow one.

Not a victory, but the simple fact that your weak argument can't survive the test of logic.

 

[Darkness]

I just want to ask a very simple question, and if you do not mind, I would like a very simple answer. Why in the Islamic middle-east, where it is mandatory for women to have their faces covered outside the home, is it not required for men to also cover their faces? We all know the answer, but I want to get Muslim's take on it.

 

[Darkness]

Of course you are doing a comparison, and a weak comparison at that! you are comparing the standards of nudity of native people in Oceania to the dressing standards of Europe, its a desperate attempt to dress an extremely relative comparison on the Burqa/Niqab issue. further more this argument is rendered even more weak when we take into account that there is a world of difference between Western women who would visit native people in Oceania and not live with them and to Muslims who are starting their life in Europe and import practices which are obviously at odds with European society.

Rubbish. in order to counter my argument you brought up the Jewish resistance in Palestine! it was another extremely weak point, and yet another weak argument you are now trying to pull.

Nonsense. nowhere am I justifying hatred of Muslims, all you've done in this thread is demonize long standing members of this forum, like me and smoke, members you know nothing about. all we are doing is taking part in an ongoing debate of currenet events and you can scream Islamophobia all you like, or you can start addressing my arguments without pulling your arguments while trying to save face. its tragic that you accuse other members of igniting hatred about All Muslims, while you obviously have cataloged all Israelis the same, and while you tell Israeli born members that they should leave their nation! you cant think clearly when people bring up immigration problems in the West. your double standards and lack of ability to stay on topic instead of targeting the members is well noted.


What an interesting notion. so all the ongoing political, media, and public debates in Europe and other parts of the world about immigration problems, about lack of integration and about the social strife by certain elements is some kind of pipe dream that we pulled into this thread out of thin air?
its also sad that you consider this debate a contest where members need to strike points.

In other words, you say that women who are visiting societies who walk around in the nude they should meet these standards? fine and good, I know many women who WOULD meet these standards, if that is your logic, than so should Muslmis meet the dressing standards of the west. as for me in the middle east, I have already a home here it was in existence even before I was born, thank you very much. yet again your vile double standards are showing, if you have a problem with my home in the middle east, come and do something about it, its not like others haven't tried before you, yet we are still here.
how women are you talking about 3,10? and why wouldnt I think its mysogynstic, do yourself a favor and stop being ridiculous.


Wrong. its my valid opinion about misogyny. im more than willing to accpet plenty of the cultural norms of others.
Its sad that you consider criticism to be blind hatred, this a sign of a poor ability to whithstand other opinions and criticism. you would offer a better debate if you would drop your demonization of other members and addressed their opinions properly.


Not a victory, but the simple fact that your weak argument can't survive the test of logic.

Caladan, if the issue of the Burka was the only issue in this wide world, I do not think people would have a problem with it. However, global violence and oppression against women and girls is a major problem. If people realised how many women die from childbirth in third-world coutries die, due to a lack of concern about the health of women, they would be outraged. So many girls are not fed world-wide, because the parents favour boys over girls and thus give all the nutrition to the son. Girls are commonly not given an education because of the conservative, regressive belief that a woman's place is in the home. The burka just reinforces this misogynistic belief system.

 

[Caladan]

Caladan, if the issue of the Burka was the only issue in this wide world, I do not think people would have a problem with it. However, global violence and oppression against women and girls is a major problem. If people realised how many women die from childbirth in third-world coutries die, due to a lack of concern about the health of women, they would be outraged. So many girls are not fed world-wide, because the parents favour boys over girls and thus give all the nutrition to the son. Girls are commonly not given an education because of the conservative, regressive belief that a woman's place is in the home. The burka just reinforces this misogynistic belief system.

You are absolutely right Darkness. and despite the arguments I make about the Burqa or the Niqab in Europe, in Israel where I live we do not ban any Muslim article of cloth or minarets, so its fascinating for me as an Israeli to see Europeans, who have been criticizing Israel for years go into lengths Israel never even considered.
you raise an important point in many middle eastern nations women have been compromised in all walks of life, from education, to infrastructure, to politics, to basic human rights. and despite all the drawbacks of middle eastern nations in that regard, Israel has set a new standard for Arab women rights, where Arab women can find a better education, can drive, could vote before many middle eastern nations even considered the idea of women voting.

 

[Abu Rashid]

Why in the Islamic middle-east, where it is mandatory for women to have their faces covered outside the home

Actually I don't think it's mandatory in any country in the Middle East. Which country is it mandatory in?

is it not required for men to also cover their faces? We all know the answer, but I want to get Muslim's take on it.

Public decency laws in most countries of the world differ between the sexes. I think it's generally related to the differences in anatomy. The woman's anatomy is generally considered more enticing, and so women have always had to cover more.

 

[SisterKatherina]

Hello. I am a Muslim woman in the United States......... I do not wear a burqa, or cover my hair - however I still do dress very modestly for a young woman "living in the US in this era....."
Although I chose not to cover to that extent , I still very much respect any other Muslim woman who decides to do so - it is her own choice! In our religion (just in any other), modesty is a very important trait we are taught..... and some take it more extreme then other.
I see a range of Muslim women's dress codes from ones who wear a burqa to ones who wear bikinis and short shorts~ it is all a matter of what one is comfortable with and feels is appropriate!!!!
As Sadjah said in his comment above........... "Western freedom is hypocrisy." People are FORCING Muslims to dress more modern by banning their clothing to be "free!!!" (In any sentence where you have the word FORCE and BAN- that is already a contridiction to freedom!!!!)

 

[zenzero]

Friend SisterKatherina,

(In any sentence where you have the word FORCE and BAN- that is already a contridiction to freedom!!!!)

Who has banned?
Society!
who made society?
You and me!
Why do we [society] have laws?
for the good of every member of the society!
do you call every law as forcing?
If no, why and if yes, why are you a member of the American Society?

Love & rgds

 

[Darkness]

Actually I don't think it's mandatory in any country in the Middle East. Which country is it mandatory in?

The Taliban require (required) women to have their faces covered. I believe the Saudi Arabian government forces its women to wear the hajib, but I am unsure about whether or not a facial covering is mandatory. But it is not only a matter of officials rules by the government, but abusive husbands and conservative societies that enforce their own rules.

Public decency laws in most countries of the world differ between the sexes. I think it's generally related to the differences in anatomy. The woman's anatomy is generally considered more enticing, and so women have always had to cover more.

How is a woman's face different anatomy?

 

[Abu Rashid]

The Taliban require (required) women to have their faces covered.

The Talibaan are no longer in power, and Afghanistan is not really usually considered part of the Middle East.

I believe the Saudi Arabian government forces its women to wear the hajib

Hijab is not covering of the face.

but I am unsure about whether or not a facial covering is mandatory.

As am I, but I know when I went there for Hajj, my wife did not have to wear Niqab.

but abusive husbands and conservative societies that enforce their own rules.

Can you provide any kind of evidence for this? other than the usual anecdotal claims? In my 12 years as a Muslim, I've never once come across such a phenomena, and I've spent a fair bit of time in the Middle East, as well as being quite engaged with my own Muslim community at home in Australia, yet never heard any inkling of such a concept. In fact as I've mentioned before, I've only ever come across cases of families trying to discourage their female members from wearing niqab. It's actually the complete opposite of what we're led to believe by the dishonest media that we have. In Australia it's not uncommon to see a young Muslim girl covering her hair accompanying her uncovered Muslim mother. The idea that there's some kind of force from male family members seems completely unfounded to me.

This is just something bandied around in the media and by anti-Islamic think-tanks, to muddy the waters a little more.

There may well be the odd case that occurs, just as I'm sure in the Bible belt in the U.S or in some other conservative Christian regions of the world, parents try to prevent their daughters exposing parts of their body that they consider immodest. This is something you'll find amongst any normal moral modest believing people who haven't abandoned half their religion, but it's hardly the picture we hear about in the media.

How is a woman's face different anatomy?

According to Islam, a woman's hair and face are considered to be one of their "charms" which should be covered. How are breasts different? Other than being slightly largely (although not in all cases). The simple fact is women's level of covering has always been different in all societies, the fact it is in Islamic society is really not as unfathomable as you seem to be asserting.

 

[Darkness]

Hijab is not covering of the face.

I know. I never said that it was.

As am I, but I know when I went there for Hajj, my wife did not have to wear Niqab.

Can you provide any kind of evidence for this? other than the usual anecdotal claims? In my 12 years as a Muslim, I've never once come across such a phenomena, and I've spent a fair bit of time in the Middle East, as well as being quite engaged with my own Muslim community at home in Australia, yet never heard any inkling of such a concept. In fact as I've mentioned before, I've only ever come across cases of families trying to discourage their female members from wearing niqab. It's actually the complete opposite of what we're led to believe by the dishonest media that we have. In Australia it's not uncommon to see a young Muslim girl covering her hair accompanying her uncovered Muslim mother. The idea that there's some kind of force from male family members seems completely unfounded to me.

The situation is slowing improving but there are still many problems in Conservative societies such as Saudi Arabia. A story: Saudi Minister Rebukes Religious Police. Just the mere fact that there is a religious police force is ridiculous.

According to Islam, a woman's hair and face are considered to be one of their "charms" which should be covered. How are breasts different? Other than being slightly largely (although not in all cases). The simple fact is women's level of covering has always been different in all societies, the fact it is in Islamic society is really not as unfathomable as you seem to be asserting.

What if a man grows his hair long and flowing?

 

[Abu Rashid]

Btw, there was an interesting interview with Saudi journalist Sabria Jawhar on Australian channel SBS last night. She normally wears niqab (even though she lives in London, and has no male relatives threatening her with violence if she doesn't) but she uncovered her face for her interview. She speaks about the reasons why banning niqab is ridiculous and completely contradicts the claim it's to "liberate women".

 

[zenzero]

Friend Abu Rashid,

Btw, there was an interesting interview with Saudi journalist Sabria Jawhar on Australian channel SBS last night. She normally wears niqab (even though she lives in London, and has no male relatives threatening her with violence if she doesn't) but she uncovered her face for her interview. She speaks about the reasons why banning niqab is ridiculous and completely contradicts the claim it's to "liberate women".

Suggest that you start a fashion trend and start wearing the veil yourself as it will liberate you as it does women and slowly the whole world population will be liberated wearing *ABU VEILS* available on SALES every street corner of the globe, and waving placards with the words *LIBERATION*!. *We are LIBERATED*.

Love & rgds

 

[.lava]

According to Islam, a woman's hair and face are considered to be one of their "charms" which should be covered. How are breasts different? Other than being slightly largely (although not in all cases). The simple fact is women's level of covering has always been different in all societies, the fact it is in Islamic society is really not as unfathomable as you seem to be asserting.

wrong information. not according to Islam, according to some men face of women should be covered. it is something added to religion in time by men. commanding something else as command of God while it is not is slandering God

.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

All sovereign societies have the right to set the laws by which their citizens live.

In a democracy those laws reflect "the social will" of the society and are freely made.

In a theocracy those laws are set by those in authority of the religious community, in accordance with their belief system. This may or may not conform to the views of the majority of the population.

In most western countries there is separation of state and religion.
In such states, where a religious interest conflicts with that of the state, the state prevails.

Some European countries have banned face veils.
Some Eastern countries have restrictive laws on female activities.
In general Western countries have embraced equality and have remove all the laws, that apply only to women.

The law on face veils applies equally to men.