Belgian Burkha ban for only 30 women?

[alexa]

Not my fault that the facts are contrary to the OP

I think that the general belief is that it is against Muslim women wearing Nijabs or burkas and that the additional people have only been brought in to make it appear less prejudicial

The Belgian Bill outlaws any clothing that partly or fully covers the face and worn in public. Anyone flouting the rule could face a fine of up to €25 and, in theory, up to seven days in prison, though legislators say it is highly unlikely that would be ever be imposed. Builders, nurses or other professionals who might need to cover their faces have been exempted from the Bill.

Belgium passes Europe's first ban on wearing burka in public - Europe, World - The Independent

Really a bit of a waste of time because everyone except bank robbers who were committing a crime anyway and Muslim women wearing face coverings will still be allowed to wear their face coverings. They will have their acceptable reasons.

It's just being a bit sneaky pretending it is for all people and by that it is revealing that it knows that what it is doing is discriminatory.

 

[alexa]

The evidence is there. As i said, its hard to extract.

Paul

You know that Belgium Muslim men or UK Muslim men beat their women up more than non Muslim Belgium or UK men? We do need some evidence for this.

 

[spud_meister]

No, not at all.

Why are you conflating the wearing of Burkhas with all of Islam?

i'm not, people are saying that women wear the burqas because their husbands would beat them if they didn't, and that the burqa is an islamic practice, so you would then expect that the rates of wife beatings would be higher amongst the muslim populations of western countries due to this, and i'm simply asking for evidence

 

[Gardener]

i'm not, people are saying that women wear the burqas because their husbands would beat them if they didn't, and that the burqa is an islamic practice, so you would then expect that the rates of wife beatings would be higher amongst the muslim populations of western countries due to this, and i'm simply asking for evidence

The issue isn't one of wife beatings within all of Islam. It is of wife beatings within the subset of those who engage in the practice of wearing the burkha.

I have already explained to you why gathering statistics on the issue is all but impossible.

 

[spud_meister]

The issue isn't one of wife beatings within all of Islam. It is of wife beatings within the subset of those who engage in the practice of wearing the burkha.

I have already explained to you why gathering statistics on the issue is all but impossible.

so if its impossible to know, why the assumption that its true?

 

[rivrrat]

There are far more idiotic laws out there.. look at Arizona

I only hope more states enact AZ's newest law.

At least this one makes a bit sense and hopefully will free some women from slavery.

The law doesn't address battered women in the slightest. So no, it makes no sense whatsoever.

Like I said, it's like banning sex to try and prevent rape.

 

[alexa]

While on my search to discover if Burka covered UK women suffered more violence I came upon this which I think is a fair perspective.

.... Should we ban the Burka? So far my answer is… no. There’s no such thing as the fashion police and nor should there be. Politicians should stay out of women’s wardrobes. They should no more legislate against women covering up than they should demand they wander round naked. If we start interfering with people’s right to dress how they choose we’d all have to wear the latest fashion dictated by Vogue magazine…that prospect makes me shudder right down to my bone marrow. Besides, if we ban it we can pretend the issue has gone away, it won’t. If we ban it, every religion should be de-robed. If we ban it, we are in danger of further victimising a section of the community who are already so unfairly treated it’s tantamount to bullying. You simply cannot fight oppression by oppressing people. And finally, if we ban it, we ultimately forget we live in a democratic society where Muslim women’s voices deserve to be heard too, who are we to decide for them?

However (and it’s a huge great big however) we should be aware that the burka could be used to dominate and manipulate some women into a subservient role. We all have a duty to protect women from domination and oppression of any sort. We should be vigilant, we should talk, and we should try our best to empower our sisters no matter what their colour or creed, but we can’t do this by patronising Muslim women and treating them like they don’t have an intellect just because they have a faith! If you ban the burka, you send a message that the majority of Muslim women can’t think for themselves, this is just plain insulting and unjustifiably wrong.

Should Britain ban the burka? A Woman Up North

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Has nothing to do with culture whatsoever. Has to do with freedom to wear a ****ing veil if one wants. Ditto with removing one's organs or marrying whomever one wants to.

Quite

If a women (or man for that matter) wants to wear a burka or veil they should be able to. If they dont they shold and do have the right not to. If the problem is that they are being forced to wear one by their husbands, they have the right (and really the responsibility) to report that use of force to the authorities. This law is going to remove the right of a woman to choose to wear a burkha if she wants to. She already has the right not to wear one.

 

[bub]

Arguments of the walloon socialists:

- Wearing a burqa is not a symbol of religious freedom, it is one of the most notorious expressions of the submission of women.
1) The respect of the women's rights is fundamental in our society: banning the burqa is asserting the equality and freedom of women
2) In a society, everyone should live together, and uncovering your face is the first step to promote that
3) There are also security concerns about people whose face is covered (and indeed there have always been laws forbidding to cover your face with masks)

arguments of the flemish extreme-right:

- Islamist fundamentalism is not welcome anymore, and this ban is the first step to stop the islamisation of our society

arguments of the walloon liberals:

- this ban project is not a ban on the burqa itself, it bans anything that covers your face and makes your identification impossible
- but it's not only for security concerns, we also take into account the "sociability" aspects. Living together (I don't really know how to translate it, he means "not staying isolated") is essential and we have to prevent that some groups remain isolated.
- Our society is based on mutual respect and equality of rights, and wearing a burqa is fundamentally in contradiction with these values

arguments of the flemish christian-catholics

- we don't call the freedom of religion into question, but religious convictions have to come within the scope of certain values and the law
- Burqa has become the symbol of intolerance towards our society and of inequality of women. We could not understand that we condemn such practices in Afghanistan while tolerating them in our country.

arguments of the ecologists

- we support diversity and plurality in our society, we support the freedom to wear veils and we consider that freedom of religion is fundamental. Banning the burqa is not in contradiction with these values.
- the burqa goes to far, since it prevents the integration of women, it excludes them from any social contact and it is contrary to their fundamental rights. The burqa is a wall that prevents any communication.
- there are also security concerns: unidentifiable people can not be allowed in public places

arguments of the walloon christian-democrats:


- several hundreds of women are wandering with burqas. They are more and more numerous and that shocks the population, since it is in total contradiction with the fundamental principle of our society that says that communication between members of our society implies that their faces are uncovered. Someone who covers his face isolates itself from the rest of the society. It is an unacceptable deshumanization and that calls into question the equality of men and women. Furthermore, these women do not have any identity anymore. All of this is contrary to the European Charter of Human Rights.

- wearing a burqa is not something religious. It is something that comes from machist and violent pre-islamic societies, and that has been picked up by the most fundamentalist trends of Islam. Furthermore, this is rarely something that is isolated: it is often accompanied with other abuses of human rights.


argument of the president of the chamber and of the flemish liberals


- the sanctions are minimal, as we want a dissuasive effect only.
- we do not want to stigmatize Islam, and that is why the word "burqa" is not mentioned in the law. And by the way, we are the only European country that subsidises immams.
- freedom of religion can not be invoked when we're talking about the dignity of humans.


arguments of the flemish populists:

- we don't dare to call a cat a cat: this ban is about the burqa, which is a textile jail, a shroud of freedom.
- burqa has nothing to do with religion, it has been re-introduced in Saudi Arabia in 1910, and it existed 600 years before the creation of Islam.
- on the contrary, it is a provocation, a sign of refusal to integrate in our society
- a poll shows that 3/4 of the women who wear a burqa are forced to do so

 

[Tashah]

and i could say that everyone is a closet zoophiliac, but are too ashamed to admit it, but the evidence is there, just hard to extract.

One problem here is that police/hospital statistics in the West are not collected in a manner to perform a statistical analysis. Such an analysis would require that religious affiliation be denoted.

Because it is a taboo subject in the Middle East, hospitals and police rarely if ever attribute female punishments and suicides to gender inequality. Her Majesty Queen Noor of Jordan has acknowledged the gender/honor problems and has become an advocate for modifying certain laws and customs.

In a rare peek, Human Rights Watch was able to do a limited study on gender violence in Palestine in 2006. The preamble...

A Question of Security
Violence against Palestinian Women and Girls

NOVEMBER 6, 2006
This 101-page report, based on field research conducted in the West Bank and Gaza in November 2005 and early 2006, documents dozens of cases of violence ranging from spousal and child abuse to rape, incest and murders committed under the guise of family “honor.” There is increasing recognition of the problem, and some PA officials have indicated their support for a more vigorous government response, but the PA has taken little action to prevent these abuses. As a result, violence against women and girls is often unreported, and even when it is, it usually goes unpunished.

The entire HRW report can be accessed here

 

[gunner]

You know that Belgium Muslim men or UK Muslim men beat their women up more than non Muslim Belgium or UK men? We do need some evidence for this.

I dont know the percentages, but i agree we need the evidence

Paul

 

[alexa]

I dont know the percentages, but i agree we need the evidence

Paul

I think sometimes when people speak of the burka it brings up ideas of Afghanistan where women have been dreadfully treated.

Then in the UK we had Islam4UK where their wives wore burka's. Now whether they chose or not I do not know but I do presume they did because they could easily have got out.

I have seen several women on tv saying it is their choice and I don't believe I have the right to take that away. My thoughts are much like that above quote I gave.

In the meantime we can look after women who may have their wishes interfered with by things like this

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/fl701_leaflet_.pdf

In the UK and I dare say in Belgium, but certainly in the UK the people who are most likely to be at risk are new immigrants who have not yet found out how to use our services.

I hope we don't follow down this route which seems to be gripping Europe. Apparently between 50-70% of Europeans are in favour of this. I pray we stay a liberal society.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

I disagree both. Banning the burkha is an important first step in dismantling everyone else's personal liberty and choice.

Chooice of what? Hiding in public? Perhaps we should also allow the wearing of balaclava and big coats in banks?

Common sense dictates that there are regulations against some things. Burka and Niqab should not be legal in public.

I totally understand that SOME muslim women may be forced to wear such garments however there are far more harmful elements of muslim culture which are far more important to address.

Niqab and Burka has nothing to do with Muslims, no more than pedophelia has to do with Catholics. No where in their works does it ever mention that women have to hide in hideous clothing of some specification. And I have read the Koran, so I can affirm that it doesnt mention that.

SOME may yes have to wear a burkha but how many more Muslim women face beatings or abuse at home whether they wear a burkha or not? A ban on the burkha is more about our personal discomfort with it than pretending it is about protecting a woman who may get beaten at home whether she wears a burkha or not.

Thats a criminal issue and should be treated as such, just as any act of violence.

I started out originally by saying that there were other ways to deal with the issue and I still believe that. There are Muslim women self help groups here in the Northern part of the UK, these are for women who have been beaten or raped within the family home and now need refuge. I strongly feel offering support networks for such women would be a greater step than banning personal items of clothing and allow muslim women who do face violence and abuse at home greater protection than a ban on the burkha.

Criminals then, should be imprisoned.

I personally find them really discomforting whenever I pass a woman covered head to toe but we're more likely to produce "burkha martyrs" by banning the item than we would protect muslim women by any ban.
My personal feelings against the burkha aside - there is an important personal liberty question here and we cannot pretend we're really helping any abused woman by preventing her being forced to wear one item of clothing if they continue to face physical abuse within the family home.

Personal liberty to wear a balaclava and big coat in the banks?

It’s not limited strictly to a singular question of personal liberties. If it were only that simple! There is also the question of indigenous cultural/national identity. Liberal Europe vastly underestimated the numbers of Muslims who would emigrate to the continent. Not only that, but most Europeans assumed that emigrants (or at least their prodigy) would assimilate into traditional European culture and embrace national values. This assimilation has not occurred on the scale imagined and hoped for. There is an escalating clash of culture involved.

European parliaments are siding ever increasingly with preserving European (read traditional and white) culture. We see this sway in France (veils), Switzerland (minarets), and now Belgium (burkha's). Sweden and Netherlands have tightened up immigration and asylum laws considerably. Other European governments such as Germany are considering scaling back welfare payments to Muslim men who are married to numerous wives.

There are many different questions and undercurrents involved here. It is becoming ever more apparent that increasing numbers of Europeans are no longer willing to either further bend or irreparably dilute... their respective cultures and raison d'etre.

You are entirely right.

Racism is natural, not matter if we hate the fact that it is, and despise racism. Maintream Europeans cannot stand these intruders, the immigrants, as long as they have a reasonably large part of our population.

Its mainstream in Germany to think of Turkish as "aliens" or "the others" or someone who just do not belong, just like its natural and mainstream in most European countries to think the same way about most immigrants groups that are too large and too far from our own normality.

Personally I fear all this could end in disaster, especially after American fascism and anti-Islamic ideas are being forced onto Europeans.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Has nothing to do with culture whatsoever. Has to do with freedom to wear a ****ing veil if one wants. Ditto with removing one's organs or marrying whomever one wants to.

Should we not create a sane society rather than allow an insane one?

WoW, strawman much? Where did I say that it should be legal to rape? You take 'freedom to wear clothing one wants' and stretch it to 'freedom to rape and beat people up'? I'd love to see the logical connection between the two. Care to enlighten me?

Its not a strawman, you want homosexuality in marriage, then why not pedophilia and necrophilia, animal/human marriage and other despicable "liberties" to do whatever one wants?

You seem to support such ideas that we should nto forbid things, rather allow everything.

No, we should ban behavior that directly harms others.

Do tell me how my wearing a veil on my face directly harms anyone.

Yup, I know. And it's wrong in those cases too.

And how does topless women in public places harm anyone?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Should we not create a sane society rather than allow an insane one?



Its not a strawman, you want homosexuality in marriage, then why not pedophilia and necrophilia, animal/human marriage and other despicable "liberties" to do whatever one wants?

You seem to support such ideas that we should nto forbid things, rather allow everything.



And how does topless women in public places harm anyone?

Toppless women dont do any harm to anyone, except possibly whiplash and a few fenderbenders

 

[alexa]

I am not convinced bub. Many of the things mentioned have been mentioned in this thread but,

arguments of the walloon christian-democrats:


- several hundreds of women are wandering with burqas.

:shock: How many Muslim women live in Belguim? I have been unable to find statistics for the number of women in the UK who wear burka's. I myself have only seen 2 and that was several years ago and in Top Shop. (possibly just a bad hair day)

However on my search I found this article from the Guardian and it does have some proper statistics.

In Denmark 100/200, in France 367 which was updated to 2,000 when the people doing the original research were told that was too few, in Holland around 400 and in Sweden a respectable guess of 100, so how Bub does Belgium have so many?

Who really wears a burka? | Andrew Brown | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

They are more and more numerous and that shocks the population, since it is in total contradiction with the fundamental principle of our society that says that communication between members of our society implies that their faces are uncovered. Someone who covers his face isolates itself from the rest of the society. It is an unacceptable deshumanization and that calls into question the equality of men and women. Furthermore, these women do not have any identity anymore. All of this is contrary to the European Charter of Human Rights.

- wearing a burqa is not something religious. It is something that comes from machist and violent pre-islamic societies, and that has been picked up by the most fundamentalist trends of Islam. Furthermore, this is rarely something that is isolated: it is often accompanied with other abuses of human rights.

In the Danish research which the above links speaks of, half of the women who wore the burka were white converts. Now that may say something but what it is saying is I think something different to what I have been hearing about on this thread.

- a poll shows that 3/4 of the women who wear a burqa are forced to do so

Do you have a copy of this poll bub and information about how it was conducted. It just stretches my imagination that women would feel fine answering a poll saying they were forced to wear their burka but not feel fine about getting help to get out of the situation.

 

[bub]

I am not convinced bub. Many of the things mentioned have been mentioned in this thread but,





:shock: How many Muslim women live in Belguim? I have been unable to find statistics for the number of women in the UK who wear burka's. I myself have only seen 2 and that was several years ago and in Top Shop. (possibly just a bad hair day)

However on my search I found this article from the Guardian and it does have some proper statistics.

In Denmark 100/200, in France 367 which was updated to 2,000 when the people doing the original research were told that was too few, in Holland around 400 and in Sweden a respectable guess of 100, so how Bub does Belgium have so many?

There are 5 millions of Danish people, and there are 200 women wearing a burqa.
There are 10 millions of Belgians, so it's possible that there are 400 or 500 women wearing a burqa.

In the Danish research which the above links speaks of, half of the women who wore the burka were white converts. Now that may say something but what it is saying is I think something different to what I have been hearing about on this thread.

I said earlier that in some rare cases, Belgians convert to Islam, and these ones tend to be very radical. One of them has even commited a suicide bombing in Iraq. As your article says: But the burka debate is not so much about religious obligation, as about the public rejection of the surrounding society, and society's tolerance for that.

Do you have a copy of this poll bub and information about how it was conducted. It just stretches my imagination that women would feel fine answering a poll saying they were forced to wear their burka but not feel fine about getting help to get out of the situation.

I have searched a bit but I could not find it, sorry. But if we take your article, we may assume that
- some women freely choose to wear it as a sign of rejection of our society
- some women are forced to wear it.

I think it's condemnable in both cases.

 

[rivrrat]

Should we not create a sane society rather than allow an insane one?

What's insane about wearing a veil?

Its not a strawman, you want homosexuality in marriage, then why not pedophilia and necrophilia, animal/human marriage and other despicable "liberties" to do whatever one wants?

As long as it's consenting adults who are able to enter into contracts, there's no issue.

You seem to support such ideas that we should nto forbid things, rather allow everything.

Everything that doesn't directly harm anyone, yes.

And how does topless women in public places harm anyone?

It doesn't. Which is why it's an example of another ridiculous, fascist law designed to suppress women's sexuality.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

--snip-- There is an escalating clash of culture involved.

European parliaments are siding ever increasingly with preserving European (read traditional and white) culture. We see this sway in France (veils), Switzerland (minarets), and now Belgium (burkha's). Sweden and Netherlands have tightened up immigration and asylum laws considerably. Other European governments such as Germany are considering scaling back welfare payments to Muslim men who are married to numerous wives.

There are many different questions and undercurrents involved here. It is becoming ever more apparent that increasing numbers of Europeans are no longer willing to either further bend or irreparably dilute... their respective cultures and raison d'etre.

Wouldn't it be more honest for the Belgians or anyone else banning certain aspects of Muslim culture to simply ban Muslims from emigrating to Europe then? A ban on headwear which primarily targets Muslim women when police (on operation), sportsmen (ice hockey goal keepers) Catholic Nuns etc are not touched by the law simply points out that the law is racially motivated.

I think it's a different debate.

We are really shocked by the burqa, it's a kind of mobile jail and that's in total contradiction with our values of equality of men and women. It seems impossible that some women really choose to wear such things --

It's strange then that the new law denies Muslim women the freedom the choice to wear what they wish. I thank you for your honesty in confessing shock at the burkha. As I said in my previous post - I don't like them at all but that's my personal feelings and I don't have the right to dictate what someone else does or wears just because of my own insecurities.

I cant identify you for one. You are a massive security risk where ever you go. Not to mention you are a health risk since I have no way of knowing if you are sick or not, since I cant see your face.

According to the Belgian Institute for Equal Opportunities - there are 215 burkha wearing women in Belgium. Seems they've identified them pretty well. As for France, the French security services say approximately 2000 women wear the burkha in France. Pretty good identification I'd say.

Get back to me when your owner beats you senseless for not wearing one, o.k.?

If we're so sure that muslim men beat and force their women to wear burkhas then we not only identify women who have no freedoms (if the theory is correct) but we also easily identify that their menfolk beat them. Is it not easier to arrest 215 muslim wife beaters than to concoct a racially motivated law taking up important lawmaking time?

No, because the males of Muslim countries refuse access to their women to make a comprehensive analysis. On top of that there is no such thing as "battered womens" homes or sanctuaries. They suffer silently when they dont die in kitchen fires.. oh wait thats the Indians that do that.

For example, in Saudi Arabia the government has a hell of a time getting accurate census figures because women are hidden away and not reported by the male members of the family.

The thread is about Europe. There are women's refuges in Europe and there are muslim women's refuges here in the UK.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Chooice of what? Hiding in public? Perhaps we should also allow the wearing of balaclava and big coats in banks?

Banks are private spaces and can ask customers to dress in whatever way they choose. Customers are equally free not to fraternise particular banks that operate policy they find anathema.

Besides, some muslims prefer muslim banks as their laws forbid them to deal in interest payments.

Common sense dictates that there are regulations against some things. Burka and Niqab should not be legal in public.

Your saying so does not make your argument overwhelming I'm afraid. In a public space, if no other people are harmed then what is the problem?

-- Niqab and Burka has nothing to do with Muslims, no more than pedophelia has to do with Catholics. No where in their works does it ever mention that women have to hide in hideous clothing of some specification. And I have read the Koran, so I can affirm that it doesnt mention that.

Again, this is about our personal discomfort than honestly worrying about whether muslim women are being beaten or oppressed.

-- Personal liberty to wear a balaclava and big coat in the banks? --

When banks become public spaces then you may have an argument. Right now, most banks are private organisations and can have whatever policies they wish - as long as others aren't harmed.

 

[alexa]

There are 5 millions of Danish people, and there are 200 women wearing a burqa.
There are 10 millions of Belgians, so it's possible that there are 400 or 500 women wearing a burqa.

possibly. I thought you had about the same population. The Guardian says the answer was between 100 and 200 so you took the outer limit and added some.

I am thinking it is more likely the first quote for France was the real one so that would have you as having a larger number than the French which has I think around 59,000,000 people

I said earlier that in some rare cases, Belgians convert to Islam, and these ones tend to be very radical. One of them has even commited a suicide bombing in Iraq. As your article says: But the burka debate is not so much about religious obligation, as about the public rejection of the surrounding society, and society's tolerance for that.

and for that Belgium singles out 400 women. The main argument has been that they are forced to do this. That has been central to the argument that Belgium has made that this is ill treatment of women.

I have discovered that a ban on Burkas is not new in Belguim. It used to be a regional thing and now has become a National one.

What makes Belgium believe that fining 400 women is going to change the mentality of anyone.

The best you could hope for is to have it hidden and we all know hidden things are more dangerous.

I have searched a bit but I could not find it, sorry. But if we take your article, we may assume that
- some women freely choose to wear it as a sign of rejection of our society
- some women are forced to wear it.

I think it's condemnable in both cases.

You can assume but that is all it is an assumption.

I don't know enough about Belguim, but here I would say it began as a response to being accused of 9/11. That is a response to racism/islaophobia.

Now many women wear the burka or nijab because they having taken on being a Muslim more after 9/11 believe it has something to do with their religion/spirituality.

Some will also be wearing it as a sign of defiance though I think here in the UK that has to a large extent died down and some may be forced to but again in the UK I believe that would be more likely to be new immigrants.

Edit; Just found this, couldn't resist. It goes with the original number

I'm a Belgian, and this has to be the most retarded law ever proposed,

I've read a study that the total number of woman in Belgium who want (or are forced to) to wear a burka are +/- 25 people....

I live in the 2nd biggest town in Belgium, Antwerp, and there is a huge Muslim community here, but personally I've never ever seen someone wearing a burka in public. That says a lot.

So this is a law(proposal) aimed at a minority of about 25 people... which imho is retarded, then again so are all our politicians, so i'm not suprised.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread557003/pg1

 

[bub]

Wouldn't it be more honest for the Belgians or anyone else banning certain aspects of Muslim culture to simply ban Muslims from emigrating to Europe then? A ban on headwear which primarily targets Muslim women when police (on operation), sportsmen (ice hockey goal keepers) Catholic Nuns etc are not touched by the law simply points out that the law is racially motivated.



It's strange then that the new law denies Muslim women the freedom the choice to wear what they wish. I thank you for your honesty in confessing shock at the burkha. As I said in my previous post - I don't like them at all but that's my personal feelings and I don't have the right to dictate what someone else does or wears just because of my own insecurities.

You should read the arguments given in the Chamber of Representants by all the different parties, instead of assuming that it is a racially motivated law.

 

[bub]

possibly. I thought you had about the same population. The Guardian says the answer was between 100 and 200 so you took the outer limit and added some.

I am thinking it is more likely the first quote for France was the real one so that would have you as having a larger number than the French which has I think around 59,000,000 people




and for that Belgium singles out 400 women. The main argument has been that they are forced to do this. That has been central to the argument that Belgium has made that this is ill treatment of women.

I have discovered that a ban on Burkas is not new in Belguim. It used to be a regional thing and now has become a National one.

What makes Belgium believe that fining 400 women is going to change the mentality of anyone.

The best you could hope for is to have it hidden and we all know hidden things are more dangerous.

You should read the list of arguments that have been given in the Chamber of Representants, they explain why burqas should not be tolerated.

There are 3 main sets of arguments:
- burqa symbolizes the inferiority of women (and in many cases they are forced to wear that)
- burqa prevents any form of communication or integration and isolates them from the rest of the society
- it is dangerous to let people whose face is covered to enter the public space (someone here gave the example of allowing people wearing balaclava in banks)

Edit; Just found this, couldn't resist. It goes with the original number



Belgium moves to ban the burqa, page 1

Well it's someone from an internet forum. If you look at the debate that happened in the Belgian Chamber of Representants, George Dallemagne (great CDH deputee) talks about "quelques centaines de femmes" (a few hundreds). And as I have said above, I lived in the center Brussels during 3 years, until june of last year, and when I was buying some beer at the supermarket I could regularly see women with burqas. Not once, not twice, regularly.

 

[alexa]

You should read the arguments given in the Chamber of Representants by all the different parties, instead of assuming that it is a racially motivated law.

Bub, I've seen enough of your posts to believe that you yourself would not be racially motivated but on reading what the people are saying I do believe it is motivated by Islamohpobia which unfortunately appears to have managed to become inherent in the Belgium Parliament. That is in your house of representatives the arguments have managed to be so ingrained that no one can speak against. To me that is very frightening.

Now when you also take that they will not even mention what they are banning

argument of the president of the chamber and of the flemish liberals



- we do not want to stigmatize Islam, and that is why the word "burqa" is not mentioned in the law.

and then get angry at that

arguments of the flemish populists:

- we don't dare to call a cat a cat: this ban is about the burqa, which is a textile jail, a shroud of freedom.

it isn't good. To me it is very worrying.

 

[bub]

Bub, I've seen enough of your posts to believe that you yourself would not be racially motivated but on reading what the people are saying I do believe it is motivated by Islamohpobia which unfortunately appears to have managed to become inherent in the Belgium Parliament. That is in your house of representatives the arguments have managed to be so ingrained that no one can speak against. To me that is very frightening.

Now when you also take that they will not even mention what they are banning



and then get angry at that



it isn't good. To me it is very worrying.

The first quote is not motivated by islamophobia, on the contrary they don't talk about a specific religion because that would be against the freedom of religion and the equality of all Belgians. The second quote is from a populist party that is in the opposition, it is not the mainstream idea about the ban.

There are many arguments in favour of the ban, maybe that's the reason why 148 deputees out of 150 support the ban. The assumption that 98% of the Belgian politicians, from the extreme-left to the extreme-right, are islamophobic, is simply not defendable.