French approve ban on burqas...

The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: Sadly I would like for people to dress as they want to, but the problem with the burka is that is perfect for concealing a terrorist and his/her weapons.  Are there not a sufficient number of countries that will allow or even require you to wear one if you're a woman? I'm pretty sure terrorists would prefer trench coats, not something that greatly restricts peripheral vision. It greatly restricts everything... yet men force it on women... And we're supposed to defend their right to do so... Go figure.

Padraic wrote: You are not going to solve the women's rights issue in the Muslim world with this law.  You simply won't.

Do you imagine that anyone in France thought that by issuing a law concerning what happens in France they will help with women's rights in the Muslim world?

Padraic wrote: But there will be women, strange as it may seem to us non-Muslims, who are now forbidden to wear (their choice) the garments that are part of their heritage and culture - as much as that culture may be abhorrent to the average Westerner.

As far as I know, various veils and scarves have ancient tradition, but burquas hiding entire (female) body from forehead to toes is relatively new invention, perhaps a century old; and motivated more politically than religiously. I think woman in Kabul would welcome such a ban, including a few other ones, such is not being aloud to sing in public.

Such sinister laws are NOT imposed because of certain religion. They're monstrously skewed from good origins - Nietzsche's philosophical concept of ubermensch led to Nazism, Marx's idea that 'workers should controls productions'  led to socialism.

One of the Abrahamic religions - the Islam - is basically similar to many (dare I say all?) human religions - a belief in God, the idea of Love, a moral codex that is basically teaching not to steal, to respect the elderly, be a honest man. Let us not forget the Muslim word paved the way for some tremendous human achievements, such are math, astronomy and medicine; as well as great works of art and literature - while Europe was in the dark middle ages.

That being said, sacred texts could be interpreted in many ways  - varying from humane, tolerant, love-nurturing, to those oppressing Universal Declaration of Human Rights; just take a look in how many different ways Christianity could interpret The Bible.

I've read the Qur'an (I have three copies at home) and if anyone think something is inherently wrong in it as as set of moral codices , well, that's just plain wrong. It's interesting it acknowledges Jesus as a prophet (Muslim prophet of course - Allah simply means God, so a human being who believes in God following a certain codex is Muslim, no mystification here), also it states Muslims and followers of other religions should have respectful conversations and debates. I'm not a Muslim, so I take various chapters with a grain of salt - this book was written centuries ago, just like the Bible, so some things such are stoning homosexuals to death should be looked from the historical perspective.

My two cents.

BTW why is Firefox's spell check underlining "women's" when I write "women's rights"? Does Firefox also think that women should not have a genitive, meaning that women can't own anything? Now that's oppressive 

@Pat: sorry, I actually thought you meant that. Maybe I'm not very bright, I've been told that before.  Well, I don't know how much will this law will "solve", but it will send the few fundamentalists a strong signal. But really, this issue isn't major at all in France. People here are quite relaxed, and the integration policy has worked in general. Other countries have much bigger problems with the Muslim communities, like UK or Netherlands. If I remember well, Theo Van Gogh, Vincent Van Gogh last descendant, was killed on the street by cutting his throat exactly because he produced a critical documentary about women's right in the Dutch Muslim community. I don't see that possible in France... But if the situation would be similar to that, I think the measures taken would be different, according to the context.

clarke2001 wrote: As far as I know, various veils and scarves have ancient tradition, but burquas hiding entire (female) body from forehead to toes is relatively new invention, perhaps a century old; and motivated more politically than religiously. I think woman in Kabul would welcome such a ban, including a few other ones, such is not being aloud to sing in public. Such sinister laws are NOT imposed because of certain religion. They're monstrously skewed from good origins - Nietzsche's philosophical concept of ubermensch led to Nazism, Marx's idea that 'workers should controls productions'  led to socialism. One of the Abrahamic religions - the Islam - is basically similar to many (dare I say all?) human religions - a belief in God, the idea of Love, a moral codex that is basically teaching not to steal, to respect the elderly, be a honest man. Let us not forget the Muslim word paved the way for some tremendous human achievements, such are math, astronomy and medicine; as well as great works of art and literature - while Europe was in the dark middle ages. That being said, sacred texts could be interpreted in many ways  - varying from humane, tolerant, love-nurturing, to those oppressing Universal Declaration of Human Rights; just take a look in how many different ways Christianity could interpret The Bible. I've read the Qur'an (I have three copies at home) and if anyone think something is inherently wrong in it as as set of moral codices , well, that's just plain wrong. It's interesting it acknowledges Jesus as a prophet (Muslim prophet of course - Allah simply means God, so a human being who believes in God following a certain codex is Muslim, no mystification here), also it states Muslims and followers of other religions should have respectful conversations and debates. I'm not a Muslim, so I take various chapters with a grain of salt - this book was written centuries ago, just like the Bible, so some things such are stoning homosexuals to death should be looked from the historical perspective. My two cents.

Perfectly agreed, excellent and necessary points! I wanted to say RE Mike's video that I agree with the guy except for the moment when he blames it on Islam. He should blame it on the people and on the society who created this culture of women oppression.

^ I don't agree with that, should we also renounced at the laws concerning theft, fraud, assault, etc. just because society manages to educate most kids into thinking those are bad things?


Edited by harmonium.ro - July 14 2010 at 13:13

Padraic wrote: harmonium.ro wrote: ^ I don't agree with that, should we also renounced at the laws concerning theft, fraud, assault, etc. just because society manages to educate most kids into thinking those are bad things? No, and if you can't see the difference between theft and wearing a garment, I'm at a loss.

One time my wife wore this one outfit, and she totally stole my heart.  

As you can see, they are quite related. 

Vibrationbaby wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: What he said. HA HA HA. Walking around looking like Darth Vader Who is this guy?

His name is Pat Condell, and if you look for him on YouTube you'll find some more drastic stuff. Suffice it to say that if you're religious and easily offended, steer clear.

BTW: As an American you might want to watch his video on the planned mega mosque near Ground Zero.

Ultimately, I'll stop caring, as I don't live in France and am not a Muslim woman.

Edited by Padraic - July 14 2010 at 13:22