France's face-veil ban spurs defiance

[Viet Minh]

After more than a year of controversy, the ban on full face veil in France has just come into effect.


But some women are already vowing to defy the restriction, as Al Jazeera's Tim Friend reports from Paris.



As the far right gains increasing popularity in France, President Nicolas Sarkozy has been accused of trying to win back votes in the run-up to next year's presidential election by deliberately stigmatising Muslims.



But the French government vehemently denies this, and argues that the full veil is a symbol of male oppression.

http://aljazeera.com/video/europe/2011/04/201141101025438907.html

[RGacky3]

But some women are already vowing to defy the restriction, as Al Jazeera's Tim Friend reports from Paris.


Good, to hell with Sarkozy.

[Viet Minh]

This is the most ridiculous law ever! First of all there's absolutely no practical point to it, this won't reduce terrorism, or change women's rights which France, only the Government can make those progressive changes, and not through removing a choice for women for respect their culture.

Second this is a law targetting muslims but if its taken seriosuly then then will have to stop holidaymakers from wearing ski masks and brides from wearing a traditional wedding veil for example.

Lastly what does the burqa actually hide? Can you tell from someone's face if they're a terrorist? Are we going to go back to public wanted posters, and reward money?

None of this makes any sense on any level, and other European nations are actually considering following this trend. Most sickeningly he actually has the gall to suggest he is doing this for women

[RGacky3]

The racism of the french right wing is so blatent, this and roma law, its obvious to everyon that the Union for a popular movement is just a bunch of racists.

[Viet Minh]

The political state of France is worrying just now, interference in Libya and the Ivory Coast, and the right wing gaining in power and influence.

[RGacky3]

Third way politics killed the socialist parties imo, however support for the soft left drops while support for more socialist parties are going up around Europe.

The good thing about france is grass roots movements are WAY stronger than the leftist parites, meaning even if there is a right wing party in power they can't do that much damage to workers rights. Although I am guessing that next year the Socialists are going back in power.

except they don't strike over muslim or roma discrimination.

[Princess Luna]

But the French government vehemently denies this, and argues that the full veil is a symbol of male oppression.
it is a symbol of male oppression and I oppose the ban only because i believe adults have the right to wear any clothing they want, not to protect a sexist religious practice and i do agree with the idea of punishing a man who forces his wife or children to wear one.

[Baseball]

[
QUOTE=RGacky3;2074859]Third way politics killed the socialist parties imo,


The idea of the "veil" is not merely a religious statements (nowhere did Mohammed require the veil) but it was a cultural issue in certain parts of the Moslem world which has evolved into a political issue.

Do you think that such a movement would be more willing, or less willing to embrace the "revolutionary left" or more willing to oppose it?

[RGacky3]

I don't give a shit what they are willing to embrace, no one has a right to ban what people wear.

[PhoenixAsh]

Face veils and body veils are remenants of oppression....hiding women from public for the simple reason they are women and assigning some form of "corrupting" and therefore "evil" influence to women. Its ridiculous that such practices still occur and its
Stupefying that some women adhere to the practice and actually promote it or are active in making other women conform to wearing it.

Banning this form of wear is imo only oppose worthy because of the element of free will and choice. And because it is definately a measure which is implemented to fillify and target muslims specifically.

The argument of womens rights to enforce the ban is completely unbelievable and a pittyfull attempt to mask the fact that there have been nurmerous situations in which unequality has been left unchallenged within the own culture and society itself...

There are numerous laws in place which can be used to protect the women who are oppressed or are confronted with abuse and violence. Yet there is a complete lack of willingness to act on these.

This shows the intent to further womens rights is mere show. There can be no equality in a capitalist society...its acting for the sake of masking this fact.

[danyboy27]

200 womens are wearing this kind of clothing, its not even 0.001% of the fucking population of the whole damn country.

instead of spending all this time and ressources on 0.001% they should focus on financing and creating organisation to help women and children to escape sects and opressive religious organisation instead.

this exercise by the French governement is nothing but racism and xenophobia.

[Gorilla]

it is a symbol of male oppression

It is, and I might support such a ban under other circumstances. But in this context it is clearly piling onto rag-hating anti-immigrant sentiment, racist, and must be opposed.

[RGacky3]

Wait, so your absolutely ok with taking away the freedom to dress yourself, as long as the motivation is'nt race?

[ComradeMan]

According to my Muslim friends there is no obligation to wear a veil or a burqa in Islam. The only obligation is for women to be "modest". Secondly, France has outlawed any religious symbols being ostentated in public unless by a member of the clergy, rabbi or imam etc. I am not sure about French law, but under Italian law no one is allowed to go around in public with their face covered- exceptions are made for practical reasons like motobike helmets etc- which must be removed on demand.

This is a complex issue. On the one hand I see the burqa as a symbol of oppression of women and not an Islamic issue at all- so there's dishonesty on the part of those who wish to make it an Islamic issue yet on the other hand I resent the fact that a government can tell people what they can and cannot wear and yet again on the "third hand" the law must be equal for all. :confused:

[RGacky3]

Its not a complex issue, whether or not the burqa is a symbol of oppression does'nt matter, the state does'nt get to choose what you wear.

[danyboy27]

I am a atheist, i dont believe in god, but who give a flying fuck about some guy wearing a turban, or something ridiculous like a burka. I just want religion out of politics, that the only thing a secular society should focus on.

Religion suck, or at least in my opinion it does, but i dont think playing the opressive bully toward it will make things better.

knowledge and understanding will always be more effective than codes of laws and the nightstick, especially when it come to religion.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Putting to one side, for the moment, the potentially racist motivations behind this ban, it must be said that the law is a blunt instrument and in this case it seems to be the wrong tool for the job - if the idea is to get women to stop covering up their faces because certain male fundamentalists can't keep it in their pants if they show an inch of skin, then something more subtle and roundabout is needed. Like, I dunno, more opportunities for education and employment for female immigrants? Perhaps that would be less counter-productive than penalising the very people this law is supposed to be "liberating".

On a less serious note, am I the only one who thinks women dressed like that look like ninjas? I sometimes imagine the air becoming filled with shuriken...

[ComradeMan]

Its not a complex issue, whether or not the burqa is a symbol of oppression does'nt matter, the state does'nt get to choose what you wear.

It is a complex issue when it is alleged that the women sometimes are coerced into wearing the burqa.

On a slightly different matter do you then support or not support the French law banning the wearing of religious symbols in public?

[danyboy27]

Putting to one side, for the moment, the potentially racist motivations behind this ban, it must be said that the law is a blunt instrument and in this case it seems to be the wrong tool for the job - if the idea is to get women to stop covering up their faces because certain male fundamentalists can't keep it in their pants if they show an inch of skin, then something more subtle and roundabout is needed. Like, I dunno, more opportunities for education and employment for female immigrants? Perhaps that would be less counter-productive than penalising the very people this law is supposed to be "liberating".

On a less serious note, am I the only one who thinks women dressed like that look like ninjas? I sometimes imagine the air becoming filled with shuriken...
Well, Sarkozy is trying to conquer the Lepen electorate in order to have a bigger amount of voter the next election.

[IndependentCitizen]

I hope all women who believe in equality, and liberty should wear a veil, even if they're not Muslim.

[Communist Guy]

It is a complex issue when it is alleged that the women sometimes are coerced into wearing the burqa.

On a slightly different matter do you then support or not support the French law banning the wearing of religious symbols in public?

So if someone forces me to wear gloves maybe we should ban them too?

The fact that some women are forced to wear it is irrelevant. Those who force them should be dealt with but passing a law against the clothe itself is unfair on those women who wear it out of choice.

This is not a complex issue. Everyone should be allowed to wear whatever they want and any law to the contrary is simply unfair.



I hope all women who believe in equality, and liberty should wear a veil, even if they're not Muslim.

That would be a a fantastic protest.

[danyboy27]

It is a complex issue when it is alleged that the women sometimes are coerced into wearing the burqa.

On a slightly different matter do you then support or not support the French law banning the wearing of religious symbols in public?

even if it was 100% true, it still dosnt solve the problem.
It will make it worst by creating even more isolation.

The majority of the muslim in France are against the burqua, if you really want the muslim to stop wearing it, well reach out the moderate and finance them in order to educate and reach those extremists, create aid program in order to help womens to know their right.

Coercion always backfire, always.

[RGacky3]

It is a complex issue when it is alleged that the women sometimes are coerced into wearing the burqa.

On a slightly different matter do you then support or not support the French law banning the wearing of religious symbols in public?

Some women are forced to have sex, does that mean we can ban sex? Some people are forced to do slave work cleaning, should be ban people cleaning?

If women are FORCED to wear the burka, the thing you ban, which is already banned, is the phisical threatening of women, not wearing something.

As for your second point of coarse I'm against that ban, there is no justification for the state telling people what they should wear, religious or not.


Well, Sarkozy is trying to conquer the Lepen electorate in order to have a bigger amount of voter the next election.

I personally think he's not gonna make it.


I hope all women who believe in equality, and liberty should wear a veil, even if they're not Muslim.

Would be awesome, hell I'll wear a veil.

[Dimmu]

I belive that burka and hijab are tools of opression. But on the other hand i am against banning things, it just does not work.

[#FF0000]

People who are saying "oh this is a complex issue oh nooo" need to think of it like this:

Is it a good idea, or a fucking stupid idea, to put women in jail or make them pay a fine for wearing a certain kind of hat?

[Communist Guy]

I belive that burka and hijab are tools of opression. But on the other hand i am against banning things, it just does not work.

In what way are they tools of oppression if women wear them because they want to?

Banning the veil on the grounds that it is oppressive is self defeating. Deciding what women can and can't wear - that is oppressive.

[Dimmu]

In what way are they tools of oppression if women wear them because they want to?

Banning the veil on the grounds that it is oppressive is self defeating. Deciding what women can and can't wear - that is oppressive.

Well.. If you are born into a family where you are since birth indoctrinated that women are filthy because they menstruate and that the "god" will strike you down if you dont obey these laws, then of course you will end up wearing it.

But i agree that it should not be banned.

[danyboy27]

Well.. If you are born into a family where you are since birth indoctrinated that women are filthy because they menstruate and that the "god" will strike you down if you dont obey these laws, then of course you will end up wearing it.

But i agree that it should not be banned.

the only thing allowing such practice to continue is isolation. No matter how hard religion and sect are trying to spoonfeed people with bullshit, if the world surrounding them are making effort to reach out, the old way will not last.

[#FF0000]

Well.. If you are born into a family where you are since birth indoctrinated that women are filthy because they menstruate and that the "god" will strike you down if you dont obey these laws, then of course you will end up wearing it.

But i agree that it should not be banned.

A lot of muslim women wear hijabs jus cuz

[Dimmu]

A lot of muslim women wear hijabs jus cuz


I dont know.. I know few Persian women who never want to wear a hijab or anything else that will cover them just because they are women..

Why would a normal women wear something like that? Just look at Iran where hijab wearing is mandatory and look at how the young Iranians are doing everything to lessen the "effect" of the hijab. But that resulted in them being abused and beaten.

Crackdown in Iran over dress codes (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6596933.stm)



Why would a women want to look like this?
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200604/30/images/IWF2.jpg

[RGacky3]

Why would a women want to look like this?


You realize how douchy and (ignorantly) bigoted that sounds.

[danyboy27]

I dont know.. I know few Persian women who never want to wear a hijab or anything else that will cover them just because they are women..

Why would a normal women wear something like that? Just look at Iran where hijab wearing is mandatory and look at how the young Iranians are doing everything to lessen the "effect" of the hijab. But that resulted in them being abused and beaten.

Crackdown in Iran over dress codes (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6596933.stm)



Why would a women want to look like this?
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200604/30/images/IWF2.jpg

Well, religion man, religion. if you think that the invisible man would like it, you will be filled witjh joy doing somerthing even tho it could be quite unpleasant.

[Dimmu]

You realize how douchy and (ignorantly) bigoted that sounds.


Umm.. Because i do not think that a person should cover every part of the skin on its body just because it was born with a vagina?

[danyboy27]

Umm.. Because i do not think that a person should cover every part of the skin on its body just because it was born with a vagina?

its a track suit man, i see people with that kind of outfit jogging every day.

[ComradeMan]

So if someone forces me to wear gloves maybe we should ban them too?

But no one is forcing you to wear gloves against your own will, they wouldn't cover your face causing problems with existing laws and no one is claiming it to be a religious obligation to wear gloves.

If this were not a complex issue then we would not be debating it.

As usual Gacky flies off the handle with kneejerk reaction and bullshit binary analysis. If you read my comment I did not support the ban, but I do not support the burqa either as it is a tool of oppression of women and has fuck all to do with Islam.

[Dimmu]

its a track suit man, i see people with that kind of outfit jogging every day.


It does not look like a track suite to me.. And even if it was, who the hell plays football in a damn tracksuit? Do you see Muslim men wear that kind of clothing when they decide to kick a ball?

[RGacky3]

Umm.. Because i do not think that a person should cover every part of the skin on its body just because it was born with a vagina?

No, because you say "Why would a women want to look like this?" and "Why would a normal women wear something like that?"

Maybe these women value their religion and tradition. Maybe the majority of them are not being forced to but choose too, and your being a bigoted dick with those statements.


But no one is forcing you to wear gloves against your own will, they wouldn't cover your face causing problems with existing laws and no one is claiming it to be a religious obligation to wear gloves.

If this were not a complex issue then we would not be debating it.

As usual Gacky flies off the handle with kneejerk reaction and bullshit binary analysis. If you read my comment I did not support the ban, but I do not support the burqa either as it is a tool of oppression of women and has fuck all to do with Islam.

What I don't get is how you could support or not support the burqa, I'm not a jew, does that mean I don't support the yamaka? or I do support it? Its none of my buisiness, now if people are forced by threat of physical violence thats something else, and a different issue, but if someone is practicing their religion or tradition, its not anyones place to tell them what to do.

If your against people being forced to wear anything thats obviously something I agree with. but why do you care, what people choose to wear and what religions traditions they choose to follow?

[#FF0000]

But no one is forcing you to wear gloves against your own will, they wouldn't cover your face causing problems with existing laws and no one is claiming it to be a religious obligation to wear gloves.

If this were not a complex issue then we would not be debating it.

As usual Gacky flies off the handle with kneejerk reaction and bullshit binary analysis. If you read my comment I did not support the ban, but I do not support the burqa either as it is a tool of oppression of women and has fuck all to do with Islam.

As much as I love to jump in and hate on Gacky, he's totally right and this is not a complicated issue at all. Not all hijabs are the same. Not all of them cover the face, and there are women who wear them willingly.

And regardless, banning them is ridiculous. You're punishing women for wearing these things, either willingly, or because they were forced to.

It's stupid.

Also: Dimmu, from the Muslim women I've spoken to, I've heard a lot of different responses, which makes sense, because it ought to be a personal choice.

Tbh I don't think hijabs look bad.

[#FF0000]

Dimmu and CM, you two are fucking up bad if you have me siding with Gacky openly.

[danyboy27]

It does not look like a track suite to me.. And even if it was, who the hell plays football in a damn tracksuit? Do you see Muslim men wear that kind of clothing when they decide to kick a ball?

hey i didnt wrote the damn koran, how the hell should i know?

has i said earlier, there are situations, cases where muslim women do religious thing freely, and there are cases where they are subjected to peer pressure.

that pretty much it.

[ComradeMan]

Maybe these women value their religion and tradition. Maybe the majority of them are not being forced to but choose too, and your being a bigoted dick with those statements.

Maybe you don't know what the fuck you are talking about. As someone who has lived in the Islamic world and discussed this issue with Muslim colleagues and friends I can assure you that there is a lot of coercion involved here and that also there is nothing in the Qu'ran that supports this. The burqa is not just an item of clothing it's often also a tool in the oppression of women. It is by no means used throughout the Islamic world either.


What I don't get is how you could support or not support the burqa, I'm not a jew, does that mean I don't support the yamaka? or I do support it? Its none of my buisiness, now if people are forced by threat of physical violence thats something else, and a different issue, but if someone is practicing their religion or tradition, its not anyones place to tell them what to do.

Jewish men are not obliged anywhere, not even in Israel, to wear a kippa though are they?


If your against people being forced to wear anything thats obviously something I agree with....

Exactly.

Like I said, I don't support the governments of the world telling people what they can and cannot wear but at the same time I don't support a religion/tradition coercing women to wear things either- especially when this is based on subjective and spurious interpretations of that religion.

[agnixie]

Well, Sarkozy is trying to conquer the Lepen electorate in order to have a bigger amount of voter the next election.

The Le Pen electorate is growing thanks to Sarkozy being a complete idiot.

Also, the veil is not in the Quran.

[bailey_187]

While i dont agree with this ban (its not the states place to say how people should dress), we shouldnt fall into a position of actually defending the use of the veil. We should criticise it, but tolerate peoples right to wear it if they really want.

[RGacky3]

Maybe you don't know what the fuck you are talking about. As someone who has lived in the Islamic world and discussed this issue with Muslim colleagues and friends I can assure you that there is a lot of coercion involved here and that also there is nothing in the Qu'ran that supports this. The burqa is not just an item of clothing it's often also a tool in the oppression of women. It is by no means used throughout the Islamic world either.


I was talking about the majority of them in France.


Jewish men are not obliged anywhere, not even in Israel, to wear a kippa though are they?


I'm sure some Orthodox Jews require that people wear it ... I'm not saying that they physically threaten them, my point was that being against a piece of clothing or a tradition is stupid, being against that piece of clothing or that tradition being forced is totally rational and is a totally different thing.


Like I said, I don't support the governments of the world telling people what they can and cannot wear but at the same time I don't support a religion/tradition coercing women to wear things either- especially when this is based on subjective and spurious interpretations of that religion.

Absolutely, so ... as I said, its not really complicated.

[IndependentCitizen]

A lot of muslim women wear hijabs jus cuz

A lot of the time, they're very nice! Usually full of colour. My college has a fair amount of Muslims, and the girls who choose to wear the hijab wear it as if it's a fashion item, which goes along with other 'typical girly' clothing. Nothing oppressive about it in my books.

[Dimmu]

Dimmu and CM, you two are fucking up bad if you have me siding with Gacky openly.


:crying:

I dont see whats wrong with my opinion.. If some women want to wear it then fine, i do not want to remove their right to dress how they like. But its in my right to think of this practice as sexist since only women are "encouraged" to wear the veil.

[#FF0000]

I think we can all agree that no one should tell anyone what to wear or what not to wear except in the case of an egregious crime against fashion.

[RGacky3]

But its in my right to think of this practice as sexist since only women are "encouraged" to wear the veil.

Lets say a christian woman decides to wear modest clothes, because in her christian tradition modesty is an important value, is that also sexist? I guess there is an argument to be made that it is, and thats a fine argument, but singling out one faith as the French government has done ... we'll we pretty much all agree.

[Dimmu]

I think we can all agree that no one should tell anyone what to wear or what not to wear except in the case of an egregious crime against fashion.

:thumbup1:

The scary stuff is how many people want the state to "ban" certain things.. At this moment there is a poll at the website of the biggest newspaper in Finland where the questions is Finland should follow the France's footsteps and ban the burka. At the moment around 10k people have voted and 67% of them thinks its a good idea.

[Dimmu]

Lets say a christian woman decides to wear modest clothes, because in her christian tradition modesty is an important value, is that also sexist? I guess there is an argument to be made that it is, and thats a fine argument, but singling out one faith as the French government has done ... we'll we pretty much all agree.

Yes, i do not discriminate between the religions, especially the Abrahamic once.. All of them were created by a bunch of women hating savages.

The problem IMHO lies in that only women are forced to wear certain style of clothing just because they are women. Same thing is when women are not allowed to pray with the men. Its all chauvinism.

[Bardo]

Why would a normal women wear something like that? ....


Why would a women want to look like this?


What does a "normal" woman wear? Is it something like this:

http://roccosrevolution.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/amish03.jpg


Or this:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XL2I6Mgr5UY/TTX3qVGe5DI/AAAAAAAAAvo/PWIu941TTT8/s1600/polygamists.jpg

Or this:

http://quranmysteries.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/nun.jpg

I'm pretty sure nuns and Amish women aren't allowed to run around in tube tops and short shorts.

[Dimmu]

What does a "normal" woman wear? Is it something like this:


I'm pretty sure nuns and Amish women aren't allowed to run around in tube tops and short shorts.

I dont get your point... I do not believe that women should wear some special form of clothing just because they believe that a man in the heaven wants them to dress that way-

Also whats up with some liberal opinions where every religions can be criticized, unless its Islam?

[RGacky3]

Yes, i do not discriminate between the religions, especially the Abrahamic once..

... little bit of irony there :).


The problem IMHO lies in that only women are forced to wear certain style of clothing just because they are women. Same thing is when women are not allowed to pray with the men. Its all chauvinism.

Sure but its their faith and thus their buisiness.

[Dimmu]

little bit of irony there :).How come? All religions are more or less forms of hierarchy and i believe that organized religions should be scrapped.




Sure but its their faith and thus their buisiness.The problem is that "their" faith is being controlled by few men like Imans, Priests or Rabbies. Religion is not democratic, its your typical theocratic form of rule where the exclusive few are allowed to "talk to god". And in Islam, Christianity and Judaism the religion is ruled by men, that is the main reason why all of these religions have different set of rules for women.

[PhoenixAsh]

People who are saying "oh this is a complex issue oh nooo" need to think of it like this:

Is it a good idea, or a fucking stupid idea, to put women in jail or make them pay a fine for wearing a certain kind of hat?

Welll.....that entirely depends on the hat in question. ;) See...complications already. :p




You realize how douchy and (ignorantly) bigoted that sounds.

The "normal" part certainly was a bit on the sketchy side.

But he does have a point. Just because it is supposed to be a choice does not mean that it is not made because of force or threat....it can mean that the forcve or threat has become engrained and is no longer perceived as such.

Remember religious and cultural dictates are rooted in behaviour no matter how oppressive they are. Women here also conform with several forms of oppression and even advocate them...but that does not make them any less oppressive.

There is no defence of religious and cultural habits which are definately meant to seperate women as inferior.


Well, religion man, religion. if you think that the invisible man would like it, you will be filled witjh joy doing somerthing even tho it could be quite unpleasant.

Which is why we need to combat religion. Religfion also states women are the property of teh husband who can decide over her body and mind as he pleases....many women are religious and believe the bible to be absolute truth. Yet I am definately NOT going to defend the attitude or behaviour.



Maybe you don't know what the fuck you are talking about. As someone who has lived in the Islamic world and discussed this issue with Muslim colleagues and friends I can assure you that there is a lot of coercion involved here and that also there is nothing in the Qu'ran that supports this. The burqa is not just an item of clothing it's often also a tool in the oppression of women. It is by no means used throughout the Islamic world either.

Not to mention the fact that it is often enforced through state laws and with corporeal punishment.

However....we do not live in the Ïslamic world....so



Jewish men are not obliged anywhere, not even in Israel, to wear a kippa though are they?

Howeveer...jewish women are in many Synagogues not allowed in the main prayer rooms and need to be separated from men....they also wear veils.



Like I said, I don't support the governments of the world telling people what they can and cannot wear but at the same time I don't support a religion/tradition coercing women to wear things either- especially when this is based on subjective and spurious interpretations of that religion.

agreed

[Dimmu]

The "normal" part certainly was a bit on the sketchy side.



Well, that have to with English not being my first language(its actually my fourth) and my dyslexia. :)

[Bardo]

I dont get your point... I do not believe that women should wear some special form of clothing just because they believe that a man in the heaven wants them to dress that way-

Also whats up with some liberal opinions where every religions can be criticized, unless its Islam?

Frankly it's none of your business what a woman wears because of their religion.

My point was "un-normal" dress is found in every religion, not just Islam. These women are choosing to wear the burka and are continuing to do so in the face of persecution from the government.

Every religion should be criticized including Islam. I don't understand how defending the right to dress ourselves is the same as defending Islam.

[agnixie]

Frankly it's none of your business what a woman wears because of their religion.

My point was "un-normal" dress is found in every religion, not just Islam. These women are choosing to wear the burka and are continuing to do so in the face of persecution from the government.

Every religion should be criticized including Islam. I don't understand how defending the right to dress ourselves is the same as defending Islam.

Behind the otherwise good point, lies a really annoying concern troll. What makes you think they (we, actually) don't criticize all religions? Most of my criticism involves christians because I live in a majority christian country.

[Dimmu]

Frankly it's none of your business what a woman wears because of their religion.

My point was "un-normal" dress is found in every religion, not just Islam. These women are choosing to wear the burka and are continuing to do so in the face of persecution from the government.


I think that we agree with each other.. I wrote earlier that its non of my business to tell anyone how the would dress, but i think the reason why they wear burka is ridiculous.

Also i do not really buy this argument of "choice" when it comes to religious indoctrination. Since birth most of these women are indoctrinated into thinking that they are worse then men, so of course that when they grow up the continue with their religious beliefs, it takes a lot of effort to break away from something that you have been taught during most of your life.

But i once again want to point out that i am against any sort of a ban.

[RGacky3]

The problem is that "their" faith is being controlled by few men like Imans, Priests or Rabbies. Religion is not democratic, its your typical theocratic form of rule where the exclusive few are allowed to "talk to god". And in Islam, Christianity and Judaism the religion is ruled by men, that is the main reason why all of these religions have different set of rules for women.

Sure but as long as people are allowed to leave and protected from reprocussions from that (i.e. not being threatened by people), then theres no problem.

[Bardo]

Behind the otherwise good point, lies a really annoying concern troll. What makes you think they (we, actually) don't criticize all religions? Most of my criticism involves christians because I live in a majority christian country.

Did you even read the post I quoted?



Also i do not really buy this argument of "choice" when it comes to religious indoctrination. Since birth most of these women are indoctrinated into thinking that they are worse then men, so of course that when they grow up the continue with their religious beliefs, it takes a lot of effort to break away from something that you have been taught during most of your life.


But the thing is there is a tiny number of burka wearing women in France. There are many more muslim women than there are burka wearing muslim women. Unlike in countries where the burka is mandatory, they did have a legal choice in France. Until now anyway.

[Dimmu]

Sure but as long as people are allowed to leave and protected from reprocussions from that (i.e. not being threatened by people), then theres no problem.

The issue is not black and white. I mean according to Islam apostasy(leaving Islam) means death. So its certainly not that simple.

I know plenty of "Muslims" who instantly remove their hijab when they exit the home, when i asked why they want to keep the image, they said that their parents would "excommunicate" them if they found out that she drinks alcohol and like to have sex.

[Dimmu]

But the thing is there is a tiny number of burka wearing women in France. There are many more muslim women than there are burka wearing muslim women. Unlike in countries where the burka is mandatory, they did have a legal choice in France. Until now anyway.

I think we can all agree that this ban is nothing more then a populist "show of force". The burka wearing in France is a non-issue from the start.

[agnixie]

The issue is not black and white. I mean according to Islam apostasy(leaving Islam) means death. So its certainly not that simple.

According to every abrahamic religion, taken at face value, apostasy means death.

There's actually a lot of muslims who convert to christianity in western countries (if my data on Scandinavia is accurate) or who give up on religion period (there are even a growing number of atheists in Arabia itself).

[Dimmu]

According to every abrahamic religion, taken at face value, apostasy means death.

There's actually a lot of muslims who convert to christianity in western countries (if my data on Scandinavia is accurate) or who give up on religion period (there are even a growing number of atheists in Arabia itself).

Yes, but we were talking about Islam in this thread, thats why i mentioned it.

As for your second comment i am not sure that i should be happy.. Its not like Christianity is any better, they just exchange one form slavery for an other. .. As for growing number of atheist i hope that it continue to grow!

[agnixie]

Yes, but we were talking about Islam in this thread, thats why i mentioned it.

As for your second comment i am not sure that i should be happy.. Its not like Christianity is any better, they just exchange one form slavery for an other. .. As for growing number of atheist i hope that it continue to grow!

That wasn't a source of happiness, that was merely a description of the facts as they happen.

For the atheist trend, I caught on it at some point to cheer up a friend.

[ComradeMan]

For a start- some people here are forgetting:-

a) that the whole issue of coercion and the burqa is a tool of oppression- it's not free choice and it's not a fashion choice.
b) in continental Europe there are laws against covering your face in public- for everyone
c) France is a secular state and no public displays or religious symbols are allowed for anyone
d) the burqa is not part of Islam nor in the Qu'ran
e) people are confusing headscarves, hijabs, burqas and chadris.

I don't think anyone here is an Islamophobe and I don't think anyone here supports the state picking on one group or telling people what they want to wear- but at the same time surely leftists should not be supporting a tool of oppression of women that is dishonestly portrayed as part of a religious rite- which it is not.

[Viet Minh]

First of all sorry for brining up such a sensitive issue. And as a side note it seems to be having the desired effect, of instigating attacks on Islam and Muslims. :(

It is a complicated issue, there are many levels to it. On the purely 'face value' (pardon the pun) to ban a face covering is stupid, even if the police are concerned about someone they already have the legal right to check who they are (its not the first time the issue of identity cards etc has come up) and its fairly obvious there are different situations in which this can be applied. Eg someone in a ski mask at a protest, is obviously suspicious, someone in a ski mask on a ski slope is not. And of course any 'terrorist' or criminal wearing the burka would merely draw more attention to themselves, so there's not much argument there either.

As a religious right, this does not count imo. Its not actually specified in the Koran and therefore not Islamic law. It is arguably an Islamic tradition however, and cultural rights are equally as important as religious rights. That doesn't extend to rights breaking laws already in existence, for instance 'honour killings' (which I believe are illegal everywhere anyway). To actually create a law specifically aimed at practitioners of one religion makes me very nervous, particularly as I still can't see the necessity of it.

I don't believe the burka (or hijab) is opression of women, there may be circumstances where women are forced to wear it, but I certainly hope there is support available to help women who are abused in any way, banning the burka is no answer. There seems to be an attitude among some muslims that wearing the hijab or burka reduces the chances of rape, almost implying the women themselves are to blame for the way they dress or act. Its not unique to muslims though that backward attitude is prevalent in our supposedly more enlightened, equal western cultures too, the idea of 'she was asking for it'.

On the flipside some women, particularly those who have been in abusive relationships, feel intimidated by men in public, and the way they stare. This is a fairly common experience although its almost 'normalised' by its commonality. To some women I'd imagine wearing the hijab or burka makes them feel safer, or less likely to be judged on their appearance, as is a sad reality of our times. So to deny them this right, for that reason alone, is wrong. And on balance I just can't see any strong enough argument for banning the burka.

[PhoenixAsh]

For a start- some people here are forgetting:-
a) that the whole issue of coercion and the burqa is a tool of oppression- it's not free choice and it's not a fashion choice.

Mostly agree with this...though sometimes the oppression part may have become obfuscated and the behavoiour maybe so ingrained it has become accepted



b) in continental Europe there are laws against covering your face in public- for everyone

well..there I have to add a nuance. In Holland the Burka debate has actually resulted in a ban on face covering.

Though the law has not yet passed the burka debate and the specific reason that you can not implement laws directed at a specific portion of the population meant that, in order to ban a burka, you wouold have to ban any form of clothing or make-up which makes the face unrecognisable or hidden.

This includes motor helmets when not driving, shawls to cover your face at any time (even cold), large sun glasses, ski masks up to and including various sorts of carnaval and halloween attire.

The police are required (when the law has passed) to implement it and fine or arrest you.

I personally believe this is the real intent of the government to allow actions against radical organisations.



c) France is a secular state and no public displays or religious symbols are allowed for anyone
d) the burqa is not part of Islam nor in the Qu'ran

And as such it is not a religious display...so its cultural rooted in religious interpretation.


e) people are confusing headscarves, hijabs, burqas and chadris.

Too true...but it gets confusing. The law in France also bans headscarfs if I am not mistaken.



I don't think anyone here is an Islamophobe and I don't think anyone here supports the state picking on one group or telling people what they want to wear- but at the same time surely leftists should not be supporting a tool of oppression of women that is dishonestly portrayed as part of a religious rite- which it is not.

I think the best option here is to not ban things but instead help people understand the situation they are in and the available choices and portections they have.

Offcourse this is an utopian position. As teh state is capitalist it actually has no interest in genuinely adressing womens rights. The system thrives on the devision of everybody against everybody including men and women and "races" as part of their devide and conquer policy.

[danyboy27]

For a start- some people here are forgetting:-

a) that the whole issue of coercion and the burqa is a tool of oppression- it's not free choice and it's not a fashion choice.
.
not always, Its been said earlier that some people are fanatic about their own religion without being necessarly opressed by another man.



For a start- some people here are forgetting:-
b) in continental Europe there are laws against covering your face in public- .
outlawing face covering is useless to enforce security, people will always find other way to disguise themselves to commit crimes.



c) France is a secular state and no public displays or religious symbols are allowed for anyone
.
More opression! more! burn the fucking churches!



d) the burqa is not part of Islam nor in the Qu'ran

It is in a certain way, but its actually a matter of interpretation of a verse. Or at least, that what a famous sudanese scholar Dr. Hassan Turabi.

[agnixie]

More opression! more! burn the fucking churches!


"Bouffeur de curé" is actually an old insult thrown at the french left :p - it means priest eater.

[RATM-Eubie]

All in all this is just dumb and retarded. Banning your face being covered by a vail?

[Dimmu]

All in all this is just dumb and retarded. Banning your face being covered by a vail?

No to mention that the issue is almost non-existent in France. There are very few burka wearers, this is political.

[Che a chara]

These female criminals will undergo a "secular values citizenship class to remind them of France's secular values" :rolleyes: . Will we also see Catholics/Christians undergoing the same punishment and discrimination for wearing a cross around their neck in public ?. And as far as I'm aware there has been no evidence of muslim women being forced to wear these pieces of garments, therefore actually forcing them not to wear them will result in a minority being oppressed by the male dominated state.

What is it, 0.6% of muslim women actually wear one of these ?

Also, i believe, according to Islamic values, it is seen to be not socially acceptable to stare or look at a women or for a women to stare away at a male. Next when these Muslim woman, without their veil's, fail to look at a shopkeeper in the eye, they will once again be demonised for failing to do that. It'll be an endless cycle of criminalistion of their culture.

Fuck this blatant Islamophobic racism.

[PhoenixAsh]

well the first girl has been fined 150 euro's....one was arrested but on showing her face at the policestation was releaseed without a fine and an other one has been arrested, reprimanded and released.

4-6 milion muslims
2000 wear a face veil.

Ridiculous.

[RGacky3]

The issue is not black and white. I mean according to Islam apostasy(leaving Islam) means death. So its certainly not that simple.

I know plenty of "Muslims" who instantly remove their hijab when they exit the home, when i asked why they want to keep the image, they said that their parents would "excommunicate" them if they found out that she drinks alcohol and like to have sex.

THe latter is nothing you can really deal with, except for wait for civilized culture to take over.

As far as apostasy meaning death, if they mean that as in if people leave the religion they should be killed, well then you protect those who leave the religion and deal with people that try and hurt them.

But that has NOTHING to do with the vail issue. When a rapist is caught you don't ask why he wanted to rape an individual.

[ComradeMan]

I read somewhere that most French muslims- support the ban? :confused: Some Islamic countries in the recent past also moved against the burqa- Tunisia and Egypt. Tunisia was the hardest on it I believe.

I think more of an issue was the banning of the turban, obligatory for Sikhs and of little justifiable threat whatsoever- yet there did not seem to be a big outcry for the Sikhs. :confused:

If the laws of the countries say the face should not be covered in public and the covering of faces is not even a religious obligation as such then, well- it's tough luck.

Now, the real question is whether the government have this right in the first place.

[#FF0000]

I read somewhere that most French muslims- support the ban? :confused: Some Islamic countries in the recent past also moved against the burqa- Tunisia and Egypt. Tunisia was the hardest on it I believe.

I think more of an issue was the banning of the turban, obligatory for Sikhs and of little justifiable threat whatsoever- yet there did not seem to be a big outcry for the Sikhs. :confused:

If the laws of the countries say the face should not be covered in public and the covering of faces is not even a religious obligation as such then, well- it's tough luck.

Now, the real question is whether the government have this right in the first place.

I was under the impression that the ban was for all head-scarf-type-things, not just nijabs and burkas.

[ComradeMan]

I was under the impression that the ban was for all head-scarf-type-things, not just nijabs and burkas.

It is- but it's complicated by the laws in continental Europe about covering your face in public too. Added to this France has these laws about ostentating religious symbols in public.

[The Red Next Door]

A lot of the time, they're very nice! Usually full of colour. My college has a fair amount of Muslims, and the girls who choose to wear the hijab wear it as if it's a fashion item, which goes along with other 'typical girly' clothing. Nothing oppressive about it in my books.


I have seem some sexy hijabs and fit with the girls, i kind of drool for.

[Viet Minh]

I read somewhere that most French muslims- support the ban? :confused: Some Islamic countries in the recent past also moved against the burqa- Tunisia and Egypt. Tunisia was the hardest on it I believe.

Turkey even banned the hijab, but I think that was repealed recently. There seems to be a big divide on the issue, thousands actually protested against the ban being lifted.


I have seem some sexy hijabs and fit with the girls, i kind of drool for.

Yeah if its meant to make women unappealing to men, it doesn't work. :blushing:

[Bud Struggle]

This is all stoopid. People should be able to wear any chothes they want for any reason they want. Who cares what people wear or date or marry or what church they go to or if they go to church at all. Or for what reasons they post on Internet forums.

Lets get our noses out of other people's business.

[Devrim]

Turkey even banned the hijab, but I think that was repealed recently. There seems to be a big divide on the issue, thousands actually protested against the ban being lifted.

In Turkey headscarves are still actually banned inside public buildings. A teacher in a school, or a nurse in a hospital could not wear a headscarf. Recently the government has practically overturned the ban as it applies to university students.

Many workers, particularly women in the state sector are firmly opposed to the ban being lifted. However, the context is very different from that in France. In Turkey it is obviously not part of a racist campaign as it clearly is in France.

That said even here I don't see how communists can support the idea that the state has the right to tell people how to dress.

Devrim

[hatzel]

This is all stoopid. People should be able to wear any chothes they want for any reason they want. Who cares what people wear or date or marry or what church they go to or if they go to church at all. Or for what reasons they post on Internet forums.

Lets get our noses out of other people's business.

Oh, Bud, I couldn't have said it better myself! Proud of you :blushing:

[Bud Struggle]

Oh, Bud, I couldn't have said it better myself! Proud of you :blushing:

I know. :rolleyes: But these "clothes" arguments are a bit rediculous. I mean you shouldn't wear stripes with plad or white after labor day--but beside that there shouldn't be any rules.

[Che a chara]

I read somewhere that most French muslims- support the ban? :confused: Some Islamic countries in the recent past also moved against the burqa- Tunisia and Egypt. Tunisia was the hardest on it I believe.

I think more of an issue was the banning of the turban, obligatory for Sikhs and of little justifiable threat whatsoever- yet there did not seem to be a big outcry for the Sikhs. :confused:

If the laws of the countries say the face should not be covered in public and the covering of faces is not even a religious obligation as such then, well- it's tough luck.

Now, the real question is whether the government have this right in the first place.

If a minority are going to feel repressed by the failure of the state to allow them the freedom of their religion/values then i think we should be outraged, especially knowing now that the French Government have become very right-wing, therefore their actions are obviously going to have a detrimental effect on foreigners, minorities and workers, so I don't think whatever support there is for these new laws should come into it as we criticise them.

These are policies of a clearly racist government and we can bet that they wont be consistent in their secular approach, just like they wont be consistent when it comes to punishing criminals (like their expulsion of thousands of apparent criminal Romanis)

[Bud Struggle]

Well then as far as clothes go--in a Socialist society would you ban the wearing of the Swastika?

[Viet Minh]

This is all stoopid. People should be able to wear any chothes they want for any reason they want. Who cares what people wear or date or marry or what church they go to or if they go to church at all. Or for what reasons they post on Internet forums.

Lets get our noses out of other people's business.

What about this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Gough)?

[hatzel]

Well then as far as clothes go--in a Socialist society would you ban the wearing of the Swastika?

Not for Hindus, that's for sure :thumbup:

Seriously, I'm very critical of German Europe's absolutely rabid banning of anything remotely Nazi. Not productive. But yeah, whatever...

[Bud Struggle]

What about this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Gough)?

Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.--Mark Twain

[Viet Minh]

Well then as far as clothes go--in a Socialist society would you ban the wearing of the Swastika?

No. Thought policing is dangerous territory, who decides whats right or wrong? If someone intentionally offends someone else or attacks them then that is where their rights end and another persons rights are compromised. So for instance if someone verbally attacks another person THAT is the offence, not any sexist or racist bollocks that they happen to bring into it. Racism is a construct, as is race, to legislate in terms of race only strengthens the illusions of racial divide.
Again controversial perhaps but its my opinion that the taboo applied to the swastika has given it far power than it is worthy of. It becomes a symbol of defiance, even rebellion, and exciting to idiots who don't necessarily comprehend its meaning but wish to be controversial. If you look at the symbol of the swastika versus the hammer and sickle, disregarding their history and context, the former is a powerful shocking and deeply meaningful symbol, and almost everybody instantly comprehends its meaning entirely. The latter is sadly a cliche with trendy students who have pin badges on their che guevara t-shirts to impress girls in Starbucks. That is the power of censorship.

[The Red Next Door]

remember what lenin said.

[hatzel]

remember what lenin said.

I heard he said plenty of stuff...I can't be expected to remember it all! :lol:

[PhoenixAsh]

Was it the electrification thing? Or the children thing?

[Tim Finnegan]

remember what lenin said.
I'm guessing you're meaning "it is true that liberty is precious—so precious that it must be rationed". Close to the mark?

[hatzel]

"it is true that liberty is precious—so precious that it must be rationed"
That Lenin was such a schmuck, really...:bored:

[Red Commissar]

I'm not really sure what the validity of this measure is. Sarkozy's drive for this- as I remember from discussions now and back in the summer when the parliament passed the measure- took a position that they were "protecting" the woman and fighting against fundamental Islam.

Thing is, from that justification, it doesn't do what some of its defenders claim. I mean how much of the Muslim community in France even wears a full-face veil like a Burka or mostly covered as in the case with a Niqab? AFAIK most of the Muslim community in France doesn't even apply for this- one number indicating a maximum of 2,000 possible people (I believe the measure also covers foreign nationals and tourists). Why did Sarkozy feel the need to single it out and focus national debate on it? To me it only seems that Sarkozy is looking for an issue he can get people distracted from the country's economy and drives against the working class, and re-focus it into topics like these (remember the Roma laws?) as he readies himself for a re-election bid. It taps into France's (and much of Europe and the US, imo) pre-occupation with the "Islamification" of Europe and in turn another issue, immigration.

It's just Sarkozy's way to try and win back potential voters who've swung further to the right and an indication of the hate-fueled politics, not a concern for womens' rights or "secularism". I think there are more effective ways to deal with issues of religious fundamentalism and women oppression than by taking the measures that Sarkozy (or any other politician) proposes at face value.

[ComradeMan]

Well then as far as clothes go--in a Socialist society would you ban the wearing of the Swastika?

Nazi/Fascist symbols being exposed are banned in Italy and Germany.

[RGacky3]

I move I am entirely against, for the same principle.

[The Red Next Door]

I'm guessing you're meaning "it is true that liberty is precious—so precious that it must be rationed". Close to the mark?

No, the one about religion

[hatzel]

No, the one about religion

"Discrimination among citizens on account of their religious convictions is wholly intolerable. Even the bare mention of a citizen’s religion in official documents should unquestionably be eliminated"? You'll really have to stop being so cryptic about this! :lol:

[Viet Minh]

"Discrimination among citizens on account of their religious convictions is wholly intolerable. Even the bare mention of a citizen’s religion in official documents should unquestionably be eliminated"? You'll really have to stop being so cryptic about this! :lol:

Ah but you're forgetting the words of Kim Jong-il ;)

[hatzel]

Ah but you're forgetting the words of Kim Jong-il ;)

Which ones exactly? "The revolution is carried out by means of one's thought, not through one's family background"? It's nice how words and actions always correspond perfectly...:)

[RATM-Eubie]

Might as well get rid of bridal vails now too.

[ComradeMan]

Might as well get rid of bridal vails now too.

The law applies to public places, not inside private homes or religious houses of any type.

[hatzel]

The law applies to public places, not inside private homes or religious houses of any type.

Some proud brides might want to keep the veil on for years afterwards...or get married on a street corner...different strokes for different folks, you know...

EDIT: Serious semi-related point: I vaguely remember there are laws in some parts of Germany against teachers wearing such religious garb in public schools unless they're nuns in habit...so I don't think this French law would stretch to banning veiled Christian brides in public places, don't ask me why :rolleyes:

[Devrim]

EDIT: Serious semi-related point: I vaguely remember there are laws in some parts of Germany against teachers wearing such religious garb in public schools unless they're nuns in habit...

It is sort of a bizarre law. You can't wear religious symbols in public unless you are a religious lunatic.

Devrim

[Red Future]

One a relevant Note didn't the PCF vote for the veil ban ??:confused:

[PhoenixAsh]

One a relevant Note didn't the PCF vote for the veil ban ??:confused:


Yes...they did. And the chairman of the committee who researched the subject was from the PCF and was a mayor of Vinnesieux.


The committee chairman, Andre Gerin, a member of the Communist Party of France (PCF), told parliament on Tuesday that wearing a full veil was just "the tip of the iceberg." He said there were "scandalous practices hidden behind the veil," and vowed to fight "gurus" who were seeking to export a radical brand of Islamic fundamentalism to France.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,674390,00.html

[Ostrinski]

Strange, I was under the impression that France was one of the more progressive European countries.

[Viet Minh]

Strange, I was under the impression that France was one of the more progressive European countries.

Far from it. I have friends from Cameroon and Algeria, formerly French colonies, who have also lived in France and have told me (to my surprise at the time) that there are little to no rights for immigrants, not only socially but legally as well. Basically the immigrants are ghettoised and not viewed or treated as French citizens, rather as cheap labour and convenient scapegoats for public opinion. This is at least what i have been told.

[RGacky3]

Strange, I was under the impression that France was one of the more progressive European countries.


It is economically, but foreign policy is still pretty colonialist and the right wing in France is extremely racist.

Economically its progressive, but you know, its not all black and white, you can have socially liberal extremely capitalist or corporatist nations and economically progressive conservative nations.

[Bud Struggle]

It is economically, but foreign policy is still pretty colonialist and the right wing in France is extremely racist.

Economically its progressive, but you know, its not all black and white, you can have socially liberal extremely capitalist or corporatist nations and economically progressive conservative nations.

Though of course union membership in France is one of the lowest in Europe.

[RGacky3]

I don't think thats the case I've seen different statistics, from 33% to 9%, I think it depends how the count them, sometimes they just count dues paying member, sometimes they count those represented by unions (who are not always dues paying), but either way French unions are extremely powerful and in my opinion play the game pretty well, if it is just 9%, it just shows what a strong no-bullshit union movement can do.

[Ostrinski]

I've heard that French (Parisian at least) workers strike at the drop of a dime (from traveling family members). I'm going to France next summer, guess I'll have to see for myself.

[Hoipolloi Cassidy]

I don't think thats the case I've seen different statistics, from 33% to 9%, I think it depends how the count them, sometimes they just count dues paying member, sometimes they count those represented by unions (who are not always dues paying), but either way French unions are extremely powerful and in my opinion play the game pretty well, if it is just 9%, it just shows what a strong no-bullshit union movement can do.

It is around 9%, but there's a difference between being represented by a union and actually being a dues-paying member. You actually have unions competing on the factory floor for your allegiance. And the strength of the unions (which by the way is fading very fast) is due on the one hand to their tight integration and participation in Government policies (out of the "Social Compact" worked out by the Gaullist/Communist Gov't just after WWII), on the other hand on the pressure the workers can, and do put on them.

BTW, the CGT, the major Communist-affiliated union, has made some genuine efforts to work with undocumented immigrant workers...

[AfricanAztecSamurai]

this whole ordeal is stupid i'm muslim and all of the women i know who wear veils CHOOSE TO.and on the note of it being oppressive I see plenty of christians forcing their kids to wake up and go to church on sunday,hell i knew a dude in highschool who was only alloiwed to listen to christian music and couldnt read anything other than the bible.now thats oppressive.it seems to me because of afew radicals islam is being attacked in the western world but does anyone remember the witch hunts of colonial america?

[Dimmu]

this whole ordeal is stupid i'm muslim and all of the women i know who wear veils CHOOSE TO.and on the note of it being oppressive I see plenty of christians forcing their kids to wake up and go to church on sunday,hell i knew a dude in highschool who was only alloiwed to listen to christian music and couldnt read anything other than the bible.now thats oppressive.it seems to me because of afew radicals islam is being attacked in the western world but does anyone remember the witch hunts of colonial america?

In both of your cases the children "choose" to do it because since birth they have been brainwashed into believing that there is an "god" who is all powerful and all-knowing and that there are certain things that you must do in order to please him.

Get a child, isolate him from the religious indoctrination tills he/she is around 18 years of age and then tell it about the religious practices and see if it will pray every day or wear the hijab.

[#FF0000]

In both of your cases the children "choose" to do it because since birth they have been brainwashed into believing that there is an "god" who is all powerful and all-knowing and that there are certain things that you must do in order to please him.

Get a child, isolate him from the religious indoctrination tills he/she is around 18 years of age and then tell it about the religious practices and see if it will pray every day or wear the hijab.

you might as well everyone is brainwashed to do anything because they are socialized.

[Dimmu]

you might as well everyone is brainwashed to do anything because they are socialized.


Well there are some things that child should learn because some things are just based on facts, religion is not one of them.

[hatzel]

In both of your cases the children "choose" to do it because since birth they have been brainwashed into believing that there is an "god" who is all powerful and all-knowing and that there are certain things that you must do in order to please him

Get a child, isolate him from the religious indoctrination tills he/she is around 18 years of age and then tell it about the religious practices and see if it will pray every day or wear the hijab.

This would almost be a good point if it didn't happen that previously irreligious children became religious adults, so instead it's gross generalising. I'm sure you've heard of 'born again' people, or even converts, who were not necessarily indoctrinated into a faith as children. I vaguely remembering going to religious services with my grandmother a couple of times when I was about 2. By 'a couple', I can assure you it was single figures, I remember nothing of them except for that I was mainly there for the tunes, I liked them. Both of my parents were atheists, though, and my other grandparents, and there was no religion in my household. I attended a 'normal' school here, which means that it was officially a Church of England school, and we were taken to church a couple of times a year, yes. The Easter services, and maybe Christmas. This definitely didn't 'indoctrinate' me into Judaism, yet somehow, around 18 years of age...well, I didn't start wearing the hijab, but I started wearing the yarmulke and tallit katan, for example. Entirely autonomously, without anybody coming and telling me to. I might argue that I fit the mould of somebody who was effectively isolated from religious indoctrination until the age of 18, at which point I heard about (or, myself researched) the religious practices, on my own accord.

A better example would be the numerous young women I know who had an entirely non-religious upbringing, most definitely a non-Muslim one, and in their late teens or early twenties decided to convert to Islam, and now pray every day, and wear the hijab. I can't really talk about how that came to pass, because I'm not in their heads, but I can assure you that their choice to wear the hijab was not at all based on their being brainwashed since birth nor was it (to preempt a point that might be raised) based on their falling in love with a Muslim man who had them convert. It seems somewhat simplistic to say 'hey, if you wear the hijab, it's because you've spent your life being brain-washed, you know no different'. Such a thing may apply to some people, who knows, but you know nothing of the women AfricanAztecSamurai mentioned, except for the fact that they wear the hijab. Is it not possible that these could be Muslims from non-religious households, or converts, who may have actually had to run a bit of a gauntlet from their families when they decided to wear it?I'm sure plenty of women who have converted to Islam and decided to wear the hijab have found their parents saying to them 'what are you wearing that silly thing for?', and I wouldn't be surprised if the same even applied in non-religious or moderate Muslim families where one member decides to be more observant. It's incredibly patronising to assume, without the faintest shred of evidence, that these people have all been brainwashed by their parents into wearing the hijab, when in fact it doing so may have been a monumental step for them to take precisely because they knew that their parents would disapprove of that decision...

In this case, your point seems to be aimed at delegitimising the hijab as an article of clothing, in the process legitimising this law. It is not an acceptable position, by any stretch of the imagination, to say 'some women who wear the hijab are forced to by their families or husbands, some women who wear the hijab only do so because they've been brainwashed by some evil evil religious teacher or something, and therefore all women should be expressly banned from from wearing it'. Claiming flat out, as you have, that those who wear it do so because they have been brainwashed, gets around that by recasting it as 'all women who wear the hijab are either forced to by their families or husbands or have been brainwashed by some evil evil religious teacher or something, and therefore all women should be expressly banned from from wearing it.' Basing the justification for what is clearly a discriminatory law on a completely bogus statement, though, is little better than basing it on the first supposed 'justification' given in this paragraph...

[#FF0000]

Well there are some things that child should learn because some things are just based on facts, religion is not one of them.

What about morality and ethics.

EDIT: well w/e I kind of agree with you on this anyway.