The muslim burka bann??

Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 8:36 pm

It is a sad issue that the subconscious image of burka is as I posted. However go to Malaysia and the girls are fine. They are just as us, some fat some thin some pretty some not. They are muslim and wear a head scarf. It covers their head ears and is under the chin. Respect to the religion is done and their features are clear and they are easy to recognise. I never get confused as to who is jane or susan as only eyes are visible. Malay people have one of the largest Muslim groups on the planet and are among the freindliest of people i know. So my point is back to the crash helmet burka style. Be visible to respect the need for security but wear a head scarf to show respect for your belliefs. Sadly the laws are lame either way. I remember my mother had to wear a head scarf going to the church on Sundays..... UK 1964...... Roman Catholic and I believe protestant held the same view but not sure without looking that one up.

Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 1:21 am

cbilljones wrote:

killa1986 wrote:

and the exact same thing could be said about Christianity and the men who follow their own translation of the "good book".

Not a good comparison, as the "good book" teaches women are property of their man. Both islam and christianity are extremely immoral. Religion/faith is mankinds most despicable trait, and it lets people justify pretty much anything: rape, murder, incest - all a.ok as far as the bible or koran are concerned.

But i dont think they should ban the burka

well it depends on how you translate these holy texts. there are men who exploit words to their own advantage, and religion as a whole cannot be blamed for their shortcomings. they will exploit good words to sound like wife beatings and incest are good things and get away with it, but you have to understand that is not what these holy texts mean. there is a difference in it. some take the translations too literally, not taking the metaphorical into consideration. remember religion was created by men and women whose intentions were good, but along the way there have been those who took their good intentions and manipulated it to their own advantage.

Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 9:07 am

killa1986 wrote:

remember religion was created by men and women whose intentions were good,

Almost right - religion - at least the abrahamic ones were created by men, not women.

Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 12:53 pm

well you are right johnno23, the Malaysians are the nicest bunch of people i know, and same goes for their Singaporean neighbors down below.

as for the headscarves worn by Christian women this wikipedia link can explain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_headcovering

Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 2:00 am

The ban is for taking the citizen oath only. If you can't show you're face there, then you need not apply to be a citizen.

Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2011 3:46 am

for some women whose lives have been persecution and mandatory coveralls, the transition can be hard from strict regime to democratic country. give someone time and sure enough they might be able to show their faces.

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:59 pm

I'm from Canada also, and I agree 100% with the ban. The burqua is an extremist garment, and to prove it, there's no mention of it in the coran. Even Imams over here are against it and are urging the Canadian goverment to get though on Islamic extremism brought from abroad. There was an 'honour killing' that happened here, and it turned the true Islamic community in an uproar demanding the full extent of justice to be handed down to those ones involved, but that's not the issue here.

The issue is that if we let the extremist do what they want, then our country will end up like theirs. So obide by our laws, or get the hell back where you come from. The UK is having problems with those extremist Neanderthals, but are starting to fight back slowly, and over here we don't want it to get to that point and we have the support of the real Islamic community

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:33 pm

gtpost you make valid points but a problem exists within the laws for many euro countries.
In Turkey the usage of the full burka and black robes was actually banned back in the 60's. Go to Istanbul or other turkish cities and you will find people dressed and as open and modern as any western society.
Now go to europe and see the rules for asylum. Political or religious oppression. The problem in my mind is twofold.
Some women wish to wear the full gear as it meets their religious concept. They are persecuted and therefore the right to wear their form of dress is respected by law in europe. Now this opens a door to a group that use the dress code as a manner in which to utilize such dress to escape their circumstances and hope to gain access to another country for a better life.
This is a simplistic point and does not even consider the fact that some may force their women to wear such dress as a form of repression.
The reasons for wishing this type of dress to be limited or eradicated are often quite clear with regards to security and the fact that such dress code can be misused by the criminal and fanatical elements of a society. Sadly which ever way one looks or chooses their will always be those that suffer or need to compromise. I still regard the attitude of the Moslem communities of Malaysia and indonesia to be among the most realistic approach. I feel that often the way in which a new law is proposed is also in need of address. I wish to see the usage of a full burka removed but have no issues with a compromise as used in other countries. As I stated in a previous post women of the Moslem community in Malasia have their faces exposed but the issues of religion and covering of the head are respected.

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:43 pm

i know its probably been posted before lots but i believe if you want to go to a country you live by there law irregardless of safety or religion. if you dont like it dont go there simples Laughing

i would do exactly the same, yes there has to be individuality but on the flip side has to be rules. otherwise country's will end up down the pan. i believe this has already happened in here Shocked

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 8:02 pm

afn09 wrote:

i know its probably been posted before lots but i believe if you want to go to a country you live by there law irregardless of safety or religion. if you dont like it dont go there simples Laughing

i would do exactly the same, yes there has to be individuality but on the flip side has to be rules. otherwise country's will end up down the pan. i believe this has already happened in here Shocked

Your point for an individual as myself is true and correct. But I wish to make a simple point. An english missionary goes to some african nation and preaches the bible. After many years possibly a generation or two there is a following of christians that due to an internal political or tribal uprising have decided the christians must now renounce their faith or be put to death. Does the UK or any other Christian country then say bad luck or allow such people asylum due to religious persecution??
I do not defend the burka as my views are quite clear and presented in previous posts.
I merely pose a point of view that the outright ban is for some as extreme as the reasons that require that the burka be reviewed and discussed. In France some are being jailed and fined for wearing the burka which is almost as extreme as the elements of society that misuse the burka for their own agenda.
I suppose there will never be an easy answer as we in the west so often even if we do not believe in a god do believe that it is a persons right to have the freedom to accept a religion of their choice if they so desire.

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 8:25 pm

i just think that one if not the biggest cause for war is religion. something has to control it because to many different people disagree or are offended by another religion, and when that spills over into other countries its serious. i dont profess to be highly informed or clued up about politics or religion, its just how i see it. having said that the rules and laws are there in most countries and it prevents nothing Confused

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 9:08 pm

Agreed, no other name has caused more conflict than the name of god.

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:09 am

afn09 wrote:

i just think that one if not the biggest cause for war is religion. something has to control it because to many different people disagree or are offended by another religion, and when that spills over into other countries its serious. i dont profess to be highly informed or clued up about politics or religion, its just how i see it. having said that the rules and laws are there in most countries and it prevents nothing Confused

heheheh, don't go there brother. that's opening a new can of worms and this is the wrong thread for that. if you'd like to open a new thread discussing [AND ONLY DISCUSSING] religion and war, you can.

for my mother's point of view who i have asked [being a Bahraini] she is for the ban of the burka. i was shocked.. well, not shocked, but a little surprised by her answer.

RAV3R wrote:

But i've seen Muslim women going into banks with there burka's on... Could easily be a bloke under there & rob the bank!!! I know it seems stupid lol, but it could be eh...

well, it seems my mother is on your side about that *sigh*

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:45 am

Hm... I voted for the "free country" option and it appears we're in the minority, so I'm offering up my own two cents:

We all may not view this prohibition as oppression because to us, it's common sense. We're asserting our nation's values, and the equality of genders is an especially important one. As has been argued many times, the burka is a cultural piece of clothing rather than a religious one. The sentiment among those who are in favour of the prohibition tends to be that the loss of this item will allow those women to be more free within their new society, and will come to appreciate Canadian values.

Not only do I think that this will not work, but it will achieve the exact opposite results. When we address an issue through prohibition, we aren't solving anything - just pushing it underground. Those women who chose to wear the burka of their own volition will feel as though their rights have been restricted, and they'd be correct. A few people here have posted that Saudi Arabia and other Islamic nations won't allow freedom of choice, but the whole point is that we're supposed to be better than that.

If a woman was forced to wear a burka, then the problem is that she is being oppressed within her household or by her community. If burkas are banned, whose to say that she will suddenly be allowed freedom? Isn't it more likely that the authority figure will imprison her in her home instead?

If a woman chose to wear a burka, then how does the prohibition change her views? She may still think that it is the responsibility of the woman to be "modest," or that women are considered as "lesser equals" to men. Now, on top of this, she will feel as though her religion is being attacked. Since she obviously already closely identifies with her religion, she'll behave as anyone will behave when they feel that an intrinsic part of their nature is being oppressed: they'll defend it even more vigorously. We won't be creating more open-minded Canadians, we'll be creating highly religious people with a resentment towards the country that ostracized them. That's never a good thing.

I guess the TL;DR version of this is that the banning of the burka is an attempt to cure a symptom rather than the disease. We need education, not prohibition.

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:16 am

^Tut.. Some simple, honest, logical points... (+1) Smile