France bans the Burka


Status
Not open for further replies.
Sometimes law doesn't have a place when it comes to personal choice and freedom. For me these kind of decisions are made with the muslim community in mind. By targeting the Burka wearing groups (ie the more extreme elements) you are pushing them away/radicalising them rather than rooting out and addressing the real issues.

What next, ban nuns's headdresses?

the face is used for ID more than any other part of the body

nuns dont cover their faces as you well know

the bolded bit shows as much about your prejudice as the percieved prejudice you feel the french government have.

if the english community in spain all wanted to wear balaclavas for example, and teh spanish goverment said 'we dont mind the sunday roasts, boozing and football shirts, but masks mean we cant identify you on cctv etc so we are banning them'

would you be sympathetic to brits rioting in the costas? its their personal choice and freedom after all
 
the face is used for ID more than any other part of the body

nuns dont cover their faces as you well know

the bolded bit shows as much about your prejudice as the percieved prejudice you feel the french government have.

if the english community in spain all wanted to wear balaclavas for example, and teh spanish goverment said 'we dont mind the sunday roasts, boozing and football shirts, but masks mean we cant identify you on cctv etc so we are banning them'

would you be sympathetic to brits rioting in the costas? its their personal choice and freedom after all

There's a world of difference between freedom of choice as encouraged by relativism ("everything is OK and right, within reason") and freedom of choice pertaining to historical and cultural tradition.
 
the face is used for ID more than any other part of the body

nuns dont cover their faces as you well know

the bolded bit shows as much about your prejudice as the percieved prejudice you feel the french government have.

if the english community in spain all wanted to wear balaclavas for example, and teh spanish goverment said 'we dont mind the sunday roasts, boozing and football shirts, but masks mean we cant identify you on cctv etc so we are banning them'

would you be sympathetic to brits rioting in the costas? its their personal choice and freedom after all

You're using a hypothetical situation involving masses of people rioting as a comparison to a relatively small number of women who are possibly forced to wear repressive headdress?
 
You're using a hypothetical situation involving masses of people rioting as a comparison to a relatively small number of women who are possibly forced to wear repressive headdress?


but... in that example you would take the side of the spanish goverment because it is a sensible move.

There's a world of difference between freedom of choice as encouraged by relativism ("everything is OK and right, within reason") and freedom of choice pertaining to historical and cultural tradition.

thats not what he said though - he said freedom of choice

if we are talking about cultural tradition then i think we are on dodgy ground there as well
 
but... in that example you would take the side of the spanish goverment because it is a sensible move.

Not really as its an absolutely ridiculous hypothetical situation. For a start, why are they rioting? Perhaps they have good reason to.
 
but... in that example you would take the side of the spanish goverment because it is a sensible move.

Straw man argument. You're completely ignoring cultural tradition in this. An equivalent to your argument, in terms of the complexity involved, would be more along the lines of-

The British government decide the best way to keep their security watertight is to devise a new language to be spoken on the mainland, so that noone outside of the UK can understand it, and all citizens of the UK have to learn it too. British people are free to speak British when outside of the UK, but within the UK itself they have to keep to this new secure language. It is proven that this makes the UK more secure.

Would you back the government then?
 
but... in that example you would take the side of the spanish goverment because it is a sensible move.



thats not what he said though - he said freedom of choice

if we are talking about cultural tradition then i think we are on dodgy ground there as well

The problem is, do these women have freedom of choice to begin with anyway? Probably not. Its probably a male enforced, cultural tradition (an archaic one at that). Don't get me wrong, I think the burka is an awful physical embodiment of repression. The point I'm making is, it may now become a symbol of personal freedom, by the simple fact that it has been banned.

No they did not, facts need to be established before posting

Fair enough, hadn't followed the particular story through to its end. Bad assertion from me. Apologies.
 
As has been mentioned numerous times on this thread the French have banned the covering of the face in public. If we did the same, and enforced it, maybe some of the arseholes who join in on any demo just to cause havoc and smash up property could be properly identified.
This was off the BBC website just before last Christmas.
The government has rejected a call to ban masks and other face coverings at protests in the wake of violent student fee demonstrations in London.
Home Office Minister Lord Wallace said there was already legislation banning protesters from covering their face to conceal their identity.But he told peers it should be up to police to decide when the law is used.
He said it would not be practical to have "snatch squads" of officers arresting masked demonstrators.
Police in some parts of the country have removed face masks from protesters at demonstrations by the English Defence League but the tactic has not so far been used at student tuition fee demonstrations.
 
Last edited:
The problem is, do these women have freedom of choice to begin with anyway? Probably not. Its probably a male enforced, cultural tradition (an archaic one at that). Don't get me wrong, I think the burka is an awful physical embodiment of repression. The point I'm making is, it may now become a symbol of personal freedom, by the simple fact that it has been banned.

It's not always a garment of repression. For many Muslim women, it's a symbol of their devotion to their religion, and to their husband. Bit like the tradition of the wedding ring to symbolise a form of ownership.

Here's a good account from a Muslim Parisian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/france-burqa-law-kenza-drider
 
It's not always a garment of repression. For many Muslim women, it's a symbol of their devotion to their religion, and to their husband. Bit like the tradition of the wedding ring to symbolise a form of ownership.

Here's a good account from a Muslim Parisian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/france-burqa-law-kenza-drider

Excellent piece that, which pretty much sums up my view. I would add that I don't think ALL women are forced to wear the burqa, as summed up in the article, but I'm sure a sizeable number either are by oppressive family members, the weight of cultural/religious tradition or their husbands. Either way, I find all religion, and expressions of it archaic, but if people choose to do it then it ultimately is their choice to do so. The state has no place deciding whether someone can or can't dress in one way or another. As usual, just as Labour did here, they are punishing/marginalising a group of people based on something a small minority of a small group could potentially do.
 
Excellent piece that, which pretty much sums up my view. I would add that I don't think ALL women are forced to wear the burqa, as summed up in the article, but I'm sure a sizeable number either are by oppressive family members, the weight of cultural/religious tradition or their husbands. Either way, I find all religion, and expressions of it archaic, but if people choose to do it then it ultimately is their choice to do so. The state has no place deciding whether someone can or can't dress in one way or another. As usual, just as Labour did here, they are punishing/marginalising a group of people based on something a small minority of a small group could potentially do.

Brilliantly put
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top