French MPs vote to ban Islamic full veil in public

[bub]

There's no way in hell something that oppressive and stupid could ever go over here in the states.

Are you talking about the burqa?

 

[rivrrat]

Are you talking about the burqa?

no, I'm talking about removing a woman's freedom to wear it.

 

[rivrrat]

No, it's to protect the well-being of some women who are forced to wear burqas, and to protect our security (everyone should be recognizable while walking in the streets, if your face is covered the security cameras are useless)

Security cameras are only for private businesses or govt buildings. They can impose whatever rules they wish for those who enter their premises. But on the streets? It doesn't matter if I cover my face.

Since burqas prevent integration, yes

No, they do not. Not any more than nun habits or yamikas (sp?)

It is considering them as equal; burqas turn them into lesser beings.

How the hell does a piece of fabric turn someone into a "lesser being"? I put a piece of cotton over my face and I suddenly become a "lesser being"?

The 150€ fine concerns the security reasons (not covering your face in public). The small importance of the fine, compared to the 30,000€ fine for those who force women to wear burqas, shows what is the main priority of the law.

All that was necessary was the fine for threatening violence to someone. Everything else just punishes ALL women who wear burkas, by choice or not.

 

[bub]

no, I'm talking about removing a woman's freedom to wear it.

But you agree that in some cases they are forced to wear it?

 

[bub]

Security cameras are only for private businesses or govt buildings. They can impose whatever rules they wish for those who enter their premises. But on the streets? It doesn't matter if I cover my face.

We disagree

How the hell does a piece of fabric turn someone into a "lesser being"? I put a piece of cotton over my face and I suddenly become a "lesser being"?

It's the same as if they forced women to walk on all fours with a leash. That would just be a leash but that would turn you into a lesser being, too.

All that was necessary was the fine for threatening violence to someone. Everything else just punishes ALL women who wear burkas, by choice or not.

The problem is that we can't tell who is forced and who is not. So it's better to ban it for everyone, because we consider that it's not acceptable at all if someone is forced to wear it.

 

[rivrrat]

But you agree that in some cases they are forced to wear it?

Of course. Women in relationships are forced to wear many different items of clothing all over the world. Some husbands are domineering and through threat of violence force their wives to wear what THEY want them to. This is not exclusive to burquas or muslims by any means.

Should we ban all clothes?

 

[lizzie]

How ironic they should think that. We dont need people like that over here. Hopefully this ban will drive them out to an opressive, violent and authoritarian country in the Middle East since they despise our freedoms so much.

I'm not passing judgement on them, it's just what I have observed. I have a good number of Muslim friends, and we generally avoid the subject of religion altogether. I'm just saying that their religion is much more important to them than western ideas of freedom.

 

[bub]

Of course. Women in relationships are forced to wear many different items of clothing all over the world. Some husbands are domineering and through threat of violence force their wives to wear what THEY want them to. This is not exclusive to burquas or muslims by any means.

Should we ban all clothes?

No, just the burqa, because it is too extreme. Prevents communication with others, and deshumanizes them by hiding their face.

 

[Arcana XV]

No, just the burqa, because it is too extreme. Prevents communication with others, and deshumanizes them by hiding their face.

That's just silly. I've seen men force their girlfriends to dress like hookers. That is just as dehumanizingg to me. It turns then into a piece of meat. It's not the clothes that are to blame, bub. It's the intimidating behavior exhibited by their men that is to blame and we already have laws against that.

 

[rivrrat]

No, just the burqa, because it is too extreme. Prevents communication with others, and deshumanizes them by hiding their face.

If I choose to hide my face, I'm 'dehumanizing' myself? C'mon! Even if you think I am, who the hell are you to tell me that I shouldn't be allowed to?

 

[rivrrat]

It's the same as if they forced women to walk on all fours with a leash. That would just be a leash but that would turn you into a lesser being, too.

No, it would not. There's nothing, NOTHING, short of becoming brain dead that could turn someone into a "lesser being".

The problem is that we can't tell who is forced and who is not. So it's better to ban it for everyone, because we consider that it's not acceptable at all if someone is forced to wear it.

If that's true, so then what was the point of the legislation fining people for forcing someone to wear one? I mean, if you can't tell, then isn't the fine pretty ****ing pointless?

 

[kaya'08]

Of course. Women in relationships are forced to wear many different items of clothing all over the world. Some husbands are domineering and through threat of violence force their wives to wear what THEY want them to. This is not exclusive to burquas or muslims by any means.

Should we ban all clothes?

The difference here is the conflict between our culture and the shiite culture and the fact they threaten our values, when your usual domestic abuse case is normally not fuelled by an ideological movement that could cause the expansion/radicalization of a populace and threaten our values as a whole. Nor do they pose a high terrorist risk to the public. I've already said the Niqab/Burqa is being exploited by extremist religious groups to attack security checkpoints and public areas. Try being a gaurd and searching these women too. They wont have any of it.

 

[kaya'08]

I'm not passing judgement on them, it's just what I have observed. I have a good number of Muslim friends, and we generally avoid the subject of religion altogether. I'm just saying that their religion is much more important to them than western ideas of freedom.

That's because they are not secular and hence why they can never adapt to our ideal's. The same applies for Christians. Ask a priest if he prefers Western freedoms over Christianity. You will likely recieve the same answer. Thankfully Christianity is far more moderate in nature even though it has its own flaws that are exploited by Christian radicals (go to a catholic church).

 

[bub]

That's just silly. I've seen men force their girlfriends to dress like hookers. That is just as dehumanizingg to me. It turns then into a piece of meat. It's not the clothes that are to blame, bub. It's the intimidating behavior exhibited by their men that is to blame and we already have laws against that.

You have a point. However in some places, it is forbidden to enter dressed like a hooker. I was in Venice last week, you can't enter churches and certain museums if you don't have sleeves. I have also been on the lake of Garde, in the old town you also had to dress normally (= not a swimsuit). It's the same in many French cities along the mediterranean coast.

 

[bub]

No, it would not. There's nothing, NOTHING, short of becoming brain dead that could turn someone into a "lesser being".

It's all a question of symbols I think. And people perceive symbols differently, it's a social construction.

When someone wears a crown, an uniform with many medals or a suit, he is symbolically superior. When someone wears a prisoner's clothing or is dressed like a garbage man, he is symbolically inferior.

It's the same with the burqa: most European societies seem to consider that wearing a burqa makes you so inferior that it is not acceptable.

If that's true, so then what was the point of the legislation fining people for forcing someone to wear one? I mean, if you can't tell, then isn't the fine pretty ****ing pointless?

That's because of the second aim of the law, make sure that no one uses a burqa to hide his face while commiting crimes.

 

[kaya'08]

You have a point. However in some places, it is forbidden to enter dressed like a hooker .

Lol you would know

 

[lizzie]

The difference here is the conflict between our culture and the shiite culture and the fact they threaten our values, when your usual domestic abuse case is normally not fuelled by an ideological movement that could cause the expansion/radicalization of a populace and threaten our values as a whole.

What would concern me is when they think they have a right to establish Sharia law within the borders of free societies. I don't care how they live their private lives, but I do care if they want to establish their own legal systems and codes within other cultures.

 

[Ikari]

Two quick facts

1) the law does not only ban the burqa, it forbids people to cover their faces in public. The maximum fine is 150€

Gay. Why can't people cover their face? Oh that's right, you wanted to make a law to go after the burka but leave some wiggle room to state that you weren't just going after the burka. Lame and completely transparent. Who cares if people have their faces covered in public? Not your business. Less you are the Big Brother type, then you'd make it your business. Which is well more dangerous than the stupid face cover in the first place. Jesus, if humans ever start thinking things through, it's going to be a miracle.

2) the law creates a new crime: someone who forces someone else to wear a burqa or threatens/attacks someone because she does not wear one, will get a 30.000€ fine and will spend 1 year in jail. The aim of the law is clearly to protect women.

Lalibre.be - Les députés français votent l'interdiction du voile intégral

So what? You didn't have laws against domestic abuse before? Couldn't use those laws? Had to make something new? These are the lamest excuses ever for persecuting a religion.

 

[alexa]

No, it's to protect the well-being of some women who are forced to wear burqas,

I don't believe this ban has anything to do with the wellbeing of women.

and to protect our security (everyone should be recognizable while walking in the streets, if your face is covered the security cameras are useless)

well sure, 1984 is here in 2010. I walked most of my life on streets with no camera's and hey, I survived and so did everyone else with me there not being filmed.

Since burqas prevent integration, yes

Here I think you are completely wrong. Burkas are worn in the main in the UK for 3 reasons. They are firstly tradition of women who have recently arrived and secondly a response to the ant islam since the aftermath of 9/11. You want to have a go at me because I am Muslim, I am not going to be frightened of you. I will show you and everyone else just how Muslim I am and the third which I think largely stemmed from people wanting to fight back against the Islamophobia and reconnect to their Muslim roots is that some people began to feel that the act of wearing a nijab or burka was a part of their spirituality. It started to have a meaning for them.

I accept that dress code is necessary. I don't think burka's are appropriate at school. In most jobs they also are not appropriate. In this way anyone wanting to be involved in various occupations will need to compromise and wear what is appropriate.

On this level the wearing of burka's has nothing to do with social integration.

Given that I am not stupid enough to think that fining a woman for being oppressed is the reason for this ban, I very much doubt that Muslim people will either. Hence the ban is obviously an anti Muslim ban. As such it does not work towards integration.

In this country we have Muslim women now who are going around new immigrants and telling them women are equal. That sort of thing leads towards integration. Accepting people leads towards integration. Giving people options leads towards integration. Singling them out because of how they express their religious and cultural identity does not.

It is considering them as equal; burqas turn them into lesser beings.

I am sad you think that a woman wearing a burka is a lesser being.

 

[Ikari]

It has nothing to do with religion either since the Niqab and Islam are loosely, if at all, related.
The law clearly forbids anybody from covering there faces which clearly has every intention to address a security issue which has helped criminals and terrorists to evade authorities in the past. The wearing of public viels of that type are also a security issue which could pose a threat to the integrity of the safety of our streets.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Seriously? Wow. It's for our own safety huh? You people are using the safety excuse with terrorists too. What, did you have to go ask George Bush for an excuse as to why you'd do this? It's not a safety issue. How many women in burkas have been blowing up **** in Europe? None? Interesting. I mean, this is one of the dumbest excuses yet. We have to ban it cause if we don't the terrorists will get us. What a load of baloney. This is a few of the more xenophobic places in Europe putting in laws against a religion their people do not like. That's it. There's no safety issue here, the big bad terrorists aren't going to get us, you aren't protecting women, and you aren't be inclusive in your society. That's it. That's reality. The lengths some people go to hide their xenophobia and bigotry.

 

[Ikari]

In regards to this backfiring, i cant see how. They will leave the country at worst.

It's called rioting. You've basically taken a sector of your populace you already oppress and denigrate and now you've made rules specifically aimed at their exercise of religion. You think you're making it better? What backwards world does something like that making it better? You're only going to ostracize and piss them off even more. More exclusion isn't going to solve a problem caused by exclusion.

 

[Ikari]

Viva la France, the ban is a step in the right direction. But they still have a way to go in protecting thier heritage and culture from islamization.

This is at least honest. And mostly the pushing force behind all the burka bans. People spouting that they're helping women are either lying or stupid since they aren't doing that in the least. This is what they want, they do not want to see the burka. They don't like the Muslims or the Islamic faith, they want to make their country hostile towards to it to force them out. Others have said similar things. These rules are rooted only in bigotry and xenophobia, and that's that. Support of them is support for bigotry and xenophobia, not freedom and protecting women. Instead there's a fear somehow that Muslims will "take over" somehow or that they will for some reason have to change their culture. It's still idiotic, but it's better than trying to claim some protector card like you're doing something good and noble. You ain't. Wake up and smell the coffee.

 

[MaggieD]

I don't think burka's are appropriate at school. In most jobs they also are not appropriate. In this way anyone wanting to be involved in various occupations will need to compromise and wear what is appropriate.

In the United States a burka is appropriate wherever one wants to wear it.

There is no doubt in my mind that France passed this law because it doesn't know what to do with their influx of 5,000,000 Muslims. Yikes!! 8% of their population!! That would be the equivalent of 24,000,000 in the U.S. (Right now we have five to eight million...unclear.)

 

[Ikari]

Of course. Women in relationships are forced to wear many different items of clothing all over the world. Some husbands are domineering and through threat of violence force their wives to wear what THEY want them to. This is not exclusive to burquas or muslims by any means.

Should we ban all clothes?

You should ban wedding rings since they are used by men to mark women as taken and thus already owned by another man (BTW, that's where the "giving away of the bride came from, exchange of property)

 

[Ikari]

No, just the burqa, because it is too extreme. Prevents communication with others, and deshumanizes them by hiding their face.

What the **** are you talking about? In a world where people communicate almost completely by IM and text messaging and non-video phones you're really going to say that? Jesus. It doesn't prevent communication, you just don't want to talk to someone wearing a burka. It's not on their end any of the problems come in. Everything including inclusion into the society is on the other side. I would LOVE to see you go live as a Muslim in this hostile European countries for awhile.