Muslim veils?

[ReD_ReBeL]

So in the UK right now there is a big discussion whether if muslim woman should be allowed to wear these veils out in public...y'all have probably heard about this so i wont go into huge detail..
I am just curious as to what every1's view is on this? ban then in public? or continue to accept them in modern society?

I dont know wht my personal view is.....but i think they should have the right to wear whtever pleases them and also if this was a white christian woman behind these veils this discussion wouldent even exist..this annoys me .

[LoneRed]

as much as i dislike religion, if the woman wants to wear them she should be allowed, outlawing them ties very closely to racism and discrimination of muslims, If they dont wanna wear them they shouldnt have to either

[RedKnight]

Mature adults should be allowed to wear whatever they choose. But girls, who are not able to exercise there will, should not have the head coverings imposed upon them. http://www.m-hekmat.com/en/1035en.html

[Morag]

The discussion on the veil is interesting, to say the least. While I don't like the veil, I still think any woman should wear one if they want to. But it isn't a religious necessity, rather it is a cultural one (and it isn't even a symbol of Arabic or Persian culture, but rather a symbol of upper-class Byzantine culture; when the Ottomans overtook the Byzantine Empire, the upper-class Muslim women took the veil which upper-class Byzantine woman had worn, and it continued down the ages). The Quran does state that women should dress modestly, but it also states that men dress modestly as well, and I've yet to see a Muslim man in a veil, nor is it considered necessary for them to do so. Moreover, the Quran's edict to dress modestly does not say that women must wear the veil. Plus, when a women enters a mosque for prayer, they must remove the veil, and their hijab if they have one, so it apparently doesn't please Allah. Personally, I think the veil is a way of destroying a woman's sense of self and individuality, while forcing them to take responsibility for men's sexuality by submerging their own. I think it's wrong, but I'm not interested in telling grown women what they can and cannot do.

However, something can be said for the veil being an imediment to integration and a way of rejecting other cultures. Whether we like Western culture or not, it doesn't help Muslim women if they refuse to interact with other people. So, I really do understand the argument that the veil restricts integration and social cohesion.

[LuXe]

People have a right to wear anything they like. Even if that is nothing, in my opinion. :P

[Mariam]

Plus, when a women enters a mosque for prayer, they must remove the veil, and their hijab if they have one, so it apparently doesn't please Allah.

:huh:..do you mean that muslim women take off their veils and hijabs when they pray???

[Morag]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2006 01:43 pm

Plus, when a women enters a mosque for prayer, they must remove the veil, and their hijab if they have one, so it apparently doesn't please Allah.

:huh:..do you mean that muslim women take off their veils and hijabs when they pray???
That is what I'm told by my Muslim friends.

[Mariam]

Im a muslim i don't take off my hijab when i pray...well i must be wearing the hijab while praying but veils are not that important.. i mean even as daily clothes it's not obligatory.

[Sadena Meti]

The problem with this issue is while on one hand we don't want a government telling women they can not wear a veil, but should we tolerate a religion that teaches women they have to wear a veil.


"Some people must be forced to be free." - Jean-Jacques Rousseau

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by Morag+October 27, 2006 12:06 am--> (Morag @ October 27, 2006 12:06 am)
[email protected] 26, 2006 01:43 pm

Plus, when a women enters a mosque for prayer, they must remove the veil, and their hijab if they have one, so it apparently doesn't please Allah.

:huh:..do you mean that muslim women take off their veils and hijabs when they pray???
That is what I'm told by my Muslim friends. [/b]
i think that the opposite is true... that is, those who don't wear hijab like me would don it for prayer.

[Morag]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2006 02:16 pm
Im a muslim i don't take off my hijab when i pray...well i must be wearing the hijab while praying but veils are not that important.. i mean even as daily clothes it's not obligatory.
Fair enough. I think that there are too many different practices within the Islamic world to really say what is or is not religious necessity, beyond the pillars or roots or whatever, depending on your sect, especially when several communities have different interpretations of the Quran. The girls I know who remove the hijab when they enter a mosque are all from the same community.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2006 12:40 am
Fair enough. I think that there are too many different practices within the Islamic world to really say what is or is not religious necessity, beyond the pillars or roots or whatever, depending on your sect, especially when several communities have different interpretations of the Quran. The girls I know who remove the hijab when they enter a mosque are all from the same community.
that's interesting for sure. i've never heard of that, but yeah each to their own!

[Marx Lenin Stalin]

Religion is an evil opium and tool of the powerful and the capitalists over the masses and over the proletariet. Therefore anything that works to smash religion and anything associated with it...is good. :)

http://www.wissen.swr.de/sf/begleit/bg0039/bg0039x/ch12r.jpg

[Hiero]

Originally posted by Marx Lenin [email protected] 27, 2006 01:42 am
Religion is an evil opium and tool of the powerful and the capitalists over the masses and over the proletariet. Therefore anything that works to smash religion and anything associated with it...is good. :)

http://www.wissen.swr.de/sf/begleit/bg0039/bg0039x/ch12r.jpg
Even bourgeois law? Do you support the US imperialists because they removed the Taliban?

The only people who can progressively and successfully destroy religion are Communists. Anyone else is a 1st world chauvinist or petty opportunist.

[afrikaNOW]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2006 12:23 pm
The discussion on the veil is interesting, to say the least. While I don't like the veil, I still think any woman should wear one if they want to. But it isn't a religious necessity, rather it is a cultural one (and it isn't even a symbol of Arabic or Persian culture, but rather a symbol of upper-class Byzantine culture; when the Ottomans overtook the Byzantine Empire, the upper-class Muslim women took the veil which upper-class Byzantine woman had worn, and it continued down the ages). The Quran does state that women should dress modestly, but it also states that men dress modestly as well, and I've yet to see a Muslim man in a veil, nor is it considered necessary for them to do so. Moreover, the Quran's edict to dress modestly does not say that women must wear the veil. Plus, when a women enters a mosque for prayer, they must remove the veil, and their hijab if they have one, so it apparently doesn't please Allah. Personally, I think the veil is a way of destroying a woman's sense of self and individuality, while forcing them to take responsibility for men's sexuality by submerging their own. I think it's wrong, but I'm not interested in telling grown women what they can and cannot do.

However, something can be said for the veil being an imediment to integration and a way of rejecting other cultures. Whether we like Western culture or not, it doesn't help Muslim women if they refuse to interact with other people. So, I really do understand the argument that the veil restricts integration and social cohesion.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Targui.jpg/300px-Targui.jpg

the Tuareg men where veils and the women do not. Is that destroying the men's sense f self and all the humbug you said as far as women wearing veils?

[EwokUtopia]

These women want to wear hijab, and telling them they cant is simply xenophobic and wrong. We are seeing alot of that comming from Europe lately, many Europeans do not want to see Muslims so they force women not to look like what they are to make European Xenohpobes more at ease. This must be stopped. It has nothing to do with "smashing religion" as some of our more enlightened comrades have pointed out, you do not go about removing power from organized religion by attacking the beliefs and traditions of the people, this is stupid. Hijab does not represent oppression of women, it is not the burqa. Many Muslim women wear it because they feel it to be an equalizer, that when they are in hijab, people will judge them on their words and minds rather than their appearence. And, unfortunately, we live in a world where it is a fact that women are judged by their appearences to appauling degrees. This is what must be smashed. Hijab is a choice. When it is not a choice, when women are forced to wear or not to wear it, then it is a huge problem. Forcing women to wear it is Sexist to an appauling degree, and forcing them not to wear it is racist, and reflects the torrents of Islamophobia sweeping through the west.

[Morag]

Originally posted by afrikaNOW+October 26, 2006 03:21 pm--> (afrikaNOW @ October 26, 2006 03:21 pm)
[email protected] 26, 2006 12:23 pm
The discussion on the veil is interesting, to say the least. While I don't like the veil, I still think any woman should wear one if they want to. But it isn't a religious necessity, rather it is a cultural one (and it isn't even a symbol of Arabic or Persian culture, but rather a symbol of upper-class Byzantine culture; when the Ottomans overtook the Byzantine Empire, the upper-class Muslim women took the veil which upper-class Byzantine woman had worn, and it continued down the ages). The Quran does state that women should dress modestly, but it also states that men dress modestly as well, and I've yet to see a Muslim man in a veil, nor is it considered necessary for them to do so. Moreover, the Quran's edict to dress modestly does not say that women must wear the veil. Plus, when a women enters a mosque for prayer, they must remove the veil, and their hijab if they have one, so it apparently doesn't please Allah. Personally, I think the veil is a way of destroying a woman's sense of self and individuality, while forcing them to take responsibility for men's sexuality by submerging their own. I think it's wrong, but I'm not interested in telling grown women what they can and cannot do.

However, something can be said for the veil being an imediment to integration and a way of rejecting other cultures. Whether we like Western culture or not, it doesn't help Muslim women if they refuse to interact with other people. So, I really do understand the argument that the veil restricts integration and social cohesion.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Targui.jpg/300px-Targui.jpg

the Tuareg men where veils and the women do not. Is that destroying the men's sense f self and all the humbug you said as far as women wearing veils? [/b]
According to wiki, which I suppose you visited:


The Tuareg are matrilineal, though not matriarchal. Unlike many Muslim societies, the women do not traditionally wear the veil, whereas the men do. The most famous Tuareg symbol is the Tagelmust, their veil often blue indigo coloured. The men's facial covering originates from the belief that such action wards off evil spirits, but most probably relates to protection against the harsh desert sands as well; in any event, it is a firmly established tradition (as is the wearing of amulets containing verses from the Qur'an).

I miss the part where it discusses how this is a religious necessity for the Tuareg men, or has anything to do with modest dress.

[afrikaNOW]

You probably miss the part because you are solely relying on wikipedia for your information. The men never take it off. It has very little to do with sand as wiki proclaims. If you were to catch a Tuareg without his veil on he will cover his face/mouth

[Mariam]

Fair enough. I think that there are too many different practices within the Islamic world to really say what is or is not religious necessity, beyond the pillars or roots or whatever, depending on your sect, especially when several communities have different interpretations of the Quran. The girls I know who remove the hijab when they enter a mosque are all from the same community.

But all islamic sects agree on the hijab issue...i mean to be worn during the prayers.
Viels are okay to be removed during the prayer but not the hijab. How the hell do they pray then?? coz wearing the hijab is a must in praying.

[An archist]

in the whole veil discussion, has it ever ocurred to anyone that nuns wear a sort of veil too? Why has there never been a discussion about that?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Somebody has to pull these people out of the middle ages so why not start now?

Banning such absurd crap like the niqab is one step closer to telling these freaks that were sick of their primative bullshit and refuse to take it anymore!

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Obviously we're against the backwardness of religion, and it must be wiped out; but just it's just as obvious that the bourgeois state is not out to abolish religion.

Under socialism, I would fully support the banning of the hijab and all other religious artifacts, once society had progressed to that point; but I can't support the bourgeois state doing it for their own reasons.

This is dangerous, and as Heiro said, would be equal to supporting the U.S. government's invasion of Afghanistan on the grounds that it ousted the Taliban.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 26, 2006 08:12 pm
Under socialism, I would fully support the banning of the hijab and all other religious artifacts
Would you impose your will on womens choices by telling them what they can and can not wear? I was not aware that socialism had a dress code...

What people wear in public or believe in private is their own concern, and the state has no right to stop them. When religion gains power and threatens the liberties of other people, then it will be stopped, but there is no justification for persecuting private personal beliefs.

[Sadena Meti]

Originally posted by An [email protected] 26, 2006 02:48 pm
in the whole veil discussion, has it ever ocurred to anyone that nuns wear a sort of veil too? Why has there never been a discussion about that?
The reason that doesn't come up is because the vast majority of nuns rarely leave church property (convent, church, school) and they very rarely hold down jobs in the public arena.

Also politicians won't criticise nuns because they still fear them from their schoolboy days.

[Morag]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2006 07:45 pm

Fair enough. I think that there are too many different practices within the Islamic world to really say what is or is not religious necessity, beyond the pillars or roots or whatever, depending on your sect, especially when several communities have different interpretations of the Quran. The girls I know who remove the hijab when they enter a mosque are all from the same community.

But all islamic sects agree on the hijab issue...i mean to be worn during the prayers.
Viels are okay to be removed during the prayer but not the hijab. How the hell do they pray then?? coz wearing the hijab is a must in praying.
I'm not an expert, I can only go on what I was told by my friends, who take their hijab off when they enter a mosque. They might put it on when they begin prayers, I don't know. But, this thread is really about the veil, and unless I'm completely off the mark, veil's are generally removed while praying?

africaNOW: Provide me with something that says that Tuareg men wear their veil for religious purposes. While I quoted wiki, in fact, I have done some research into the group, and have never seen it suggested that the veil was worn for any religious purposes. The fact that they do not like to be seen by strangers does not mean that it is a religious garment, nor that it deals with modesty, necessarily.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Would you impose your will on womens choices by telling them what they can and can not wear? I was not aware that socialism had a dress code...

If it was socialism, I wouldn't be able to impose my will. Such a determination would have to be made by society itself, in the interests of supressing the bourgeoisie and their influence, and backwardness (like religion). Notice I said "once society had progressed to that point". How long that will take will depend on the material conditions in each case.


What people wear in public or believe in private is their own concern, and the state has no right to stop them. When religion gains power and threatens the liberties of other people, then it will be stopped, but there is no justification for persecuting private personal beliefs.

There is a justification for sweeping away superstition and promoting truth. And for the most part what people wear is up to them, but when it's a part of a reactionary current, it affects others, and isn't. Swastikas, crosses and the hijab fall into that category.

[Mariam]

unless I'm completely off the mark, veil's are generally removed while praying?

you're not off the mark and yes veils are not nessecery while praying.


the Tuareg men where veils and the women do not. Is that destroying the men's sense f self and all the humbug you said as far as women wearing veils?

I though that the Tuareg men put those veils as symbols of dignity, honor, and social status.

[Wash Me]

aslong as no one is forcing me to wear it.
i dont care..


frankly

i think this discussion is rather...... how do i say it in anice way?? STUPID.

[EwokUtopia]

If it was socialism, I wouldn't be able to impose my will. Such a determination would have to be made by society itself

Exactly, so you see where the logic fails when you say with no reservation that Hijab will be forbidden in socialism. It isnt your call, it is the call of the different communes and societies, thankfully, not all of whom will be willing to forcefully coerce people to change their personal beliefs and customs. Remember that it is the women in Hijab who most staunchly oppose the outlawing of it, it is their choice what to wear and think. By no means is the majority of the working class explicitly opposed to religion, so spamming about how they will be forbidden to wear hijab or yarmulke's or what have you doesnt do much aside from alienating yourself from them. Opposing religion is one thing, imposing restrictions on the religious people is quite different. Atheism should never be manditory, then it just becomes another organized cult like Evangelicism or Catholicism or Wahabism.


Notice I said "once society had progressed to that point". How long that will take will depend on the material conditions in each case.

Then they will slowly dissappear by themselves with no need for any forcible restrictions every to be imposed, and we need not even discuss such things that would defeat the purpose of overthrowing power.


There is a justification for sweeping away superstition and promoting truth. And for the most part what people wear is up to them, but when it's a part of a reactionary current, it affects others, and isn't.

What is the truth for you is not the truth for everyone else, and if you get into an arguement with any devout muslim workers (of which there are plenty), you will not be able to change their beliefs and will probably just end up pissing them off and alienating them from Socialism. Most of the working people in the middle east are Muslims, and the middle east is arguebly where the most dramatic enforcements of Imperialist aggression are being undertaken. Of course there are terrible Fundamentalists who must be faught as well, but much of the defence from Imperialism that people from Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq recieve comes from Islamic groups, take Hezbollah's defence of Lebanon this year for example. If you would have people simply drop these traditions and become Atheist Communists, then you dont have a sense of realism, because that just wouldnt work for many places around the world. collaberation is required for victory in our immensly diverse world.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Exactly, so you see where the logic fails when you say with no reservation that Hijab will be forbidden in socialism.

No, I don't.

But I didn't say "hijab will be forbidden in socialism". I said I'd be for the ban of it, and all other religious article, if we were living in socialism.

For the progression to communism to succeed, the repression of the old exploiting classes, and the ideas from the epoch (including religion) must be repressed and eventually abolished. This is why socialism exists.


It isnt your call, it is the call of the different communes and societies, thankfully, not all of whom will be willing to forcefully coerce people to change their personal beliefs and customs.

Not "all" need to be. Not all people were for the collectivization of farms in Cuba during their revolution. Some of the petty bourgeoisie, landed aristocracy and comprador bourgeoisie left completely. That happens in a revolution.


Remember that it is the women in Hijab who most staunchly oppose the outlawing of it, it is their choice what to wear and think.

Women who are coerced and brainwashed since birth. You think if a woman was born in isolation, on an island somewhere, that she would just spontaneously decide to cover her head with a hijab? Come on.

"People believe in, for instance, hell and angels, okay, these are very primitive, very, very backward to me, backward sounding beliefs, these are child-like, and that's the key, because they get you when you're a kid, they get you when you're little, and they tell you there's a God, and if you can make people believe, I believe this, if you can make someone believe that there's an invisible man, living in the sky, who's watching everything you do, and keeping count of everything you do, which is good and which is bad, then you can make that person believe anything after that, you can add anything you want, the 4th of July shit just rolls right in, land of the free, home of the brave, the press is fair and impartial, justice is blind, all men are created equal, your vote is important, the United States government is on your side, the army is here to keep the peace, the police are on your side..." - George Carlin


By no means is the majority of the working class explicitly opposed to religion, so spamming about how they will be forbidden to wear hijab or yarmulke's or what have you doesnt do much aside from alienating yourself from them.

I'm not opposed to working with people who hold religious beliefs, otherwise I'd be opposed to working with the majority of people. I am opposed to religion entirely, but I understand that I need to fight the conditions that gave life to it, and perpetuate it. Fighting for socialism is in that sense, fighting against religion, and other backward ideas.


Opposing religion is one thing, imposing restrictions on the religious people is quite different. Atheism should never be manditory, then it just becomes another organized cult like Evangelicism or Catholicism or Wahabism.

Like I said, under socialism, the old ruling classes, and their ideas need to be swept away into "the dustbin of history," through supression (of the remnants of the old exploiters), broad expansion of the rights of workers and increasing involvement in everyday life, planning and decision making, a scientific education that can root out superstition and backwardness.


What is the truth for you is not the truth for everyone else

Post-modernist garbage. The truth is the truth. Period.


and if you get into an arguement with any devout muslim workers (of which there are plenty), you will not be able to change their beliefs and will probably just end up pissing them off and alienating them from Socialism. Most of the working people in the middle east are Muslims, and the middle east is arguebly where the most dramatic enforcements of Imperialist aggression are being undertaken. Of course there are terrible Fundamentalists who must be faught as well, but much of the defence from Imperialism that people from Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq recieve comes from Islamic groups,

That's due to a lack of proper direction and activity on the part of communsts. At one time, leftists were the leading force against imperialism in the Middle East.

And the reactionary Islamacists aren't fighting against imperialism, they're fighting on behalf of the "khans, landowners, mullahs, etc."

Working people need to organize independently of the imperialists and their puppets and the reactionary religious nutters.


take Hezbollah's defence of Lebanon this year for example. If you would have people simply drop these traditions and become Atheist Communists, then you dont have a sense of realism, because that just wouldnt work for many places around the world. collaberation is required for victory in our immensly diverse world.

Class collaboration? No thanks. We've seen where that gets us.

The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.

In the case of the invasion of Lebanon, the proper position to take was to call for the military defeat of the Israelis, while not lending an once of political support to the reaction Hezb'ollah (Army of God). Communists called for working people to organize to defend themselves against the invasion. We were not opposed to Hezb'ollah soldiers and armed workers firing at the same invaders, but there could be no formal alliances between the two. If Hezb'ollah was victorious, it would soon turn its guns on the workers, as we saw in Iran.

[Hiero]

I wonder what the policy for Muslim veils were in the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen?

Most religious countries, like Russia and China during revolution it was the once religious proletariat and peasant which eradicated the power organised religion had over society.

[YSR]

Religion tends to lose strength during times of social revolution. Why use unneccessary state coersion to accomplish what gets done anyway?

[afrikaNOW]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2006 09:38 pm

africaNOW: Provide me with something that says that Tuareg men wear their veil for religious purposes. While I quoted wiki, in fact, I have done some research into the group, and have never seen it suggested that the veil was worn for any religious purposes. The fact that they do not like to be seen by strangers does not mean that it is a religious garment, nor that it deals with modesty, necessarily.
How about the wiki section that you quoted? It said they wear it to ward of evil spirits, the evil spirits they are referring to is known as djinn or jinn. Muslims as well as other non muslim peoples in north africa believe in these spirits. As it said they wear amulets with quranic verses for religious purposes and the veil is tied to their religious beliefs also as a form of modesty.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2006 07:38 am
I'm not an expert, I can only go on what I was told by my friends, who take their hijab off when they enter a mosque. They might put it on when they begin prayers, I don't know. But, this thread is really about the veil, and unless I'm completely off the mark, veil's are generally removed while praying?
what it could be, is that they remove their hijab when they enter a mosque because they would most likely be in a women's only section and so can be hijab-less... and maybe put it on again before praying. i dunno of course.

in saudi arabia all the women i saw who wore a niqaab (veil) didn't take them off for prayer.

[Cooler Reds Will Prevail]

Religion eventually dies out regardless with social advancement. Even capitalist nations of Europe are significantly less religious than less developed countries because religion ceases to be a "necessity". Even in the Middle East we can see this, Egypt under Nasser relied far less on religion than Egypt does even today, because of the social optimism and economic progress. Religion didn't cease to exist, but it was far less influential, even though Gamal abd al-Nasser was himself Muslim and the national religion was Islam. Hijabs shouldn't even be a discussion, they are cultural and a personal choice, and I personally think it looks good on some Middle Eastern women. Seriously. The veil I personally think is dumb but there's no point in outlawing it. Attacking Muslims is alienating a core group of people that are important for anti-imperialism, even radical Muslims like Ahmadinejad are acknowledging that neoliberal capitalism doesn't work (see Ahmadinejad's letter to GWB). Iranian society is slowly moving more to the left economically, sooner than later people there will be moving to the left socially as well as long as the left is inviting to them. Does that mean include people like Ahmadinejad into the movement leadership? Absolutely not, but leave the door open for people to join the Socialist movement freely and abandon their old ways; attacking their religion is just going to push them in the opposite direction.

Think about it like the Political Compass we're all so fond of. As the anti-imperialist struggle continues, people will start moving more to the left economically to improve the living conditions of everyday working people. Once the economy improves for the majority of people, religion loses influence and then people start moving more to the left socially. It's a process, one that in the Middle East will be a little slower, but a process nonetheless. That's my take anyway.

[Raisa]

Its not obligatory to wear the niquab - the veil that shows only your eyes.
That is a complete choice. The Quran says to cover your ornaments.
Everyone knows hair is sexy. When you cut it off everyone goes crazy on you like you just grew an ass out of your head. Hair on a man is different to the world but our hair is anotehr symbol of our sexuality as women and is very lustful, so i also would consider your hair an ornament and another thing that makes you beautiful.
Muslim women cover their hair alot of times because people in the world should only be concerned with what you are saying and feeling and whats on your mind. Your beauty is for people who know who you are and belong in your life for apreciating that. And those people are your choice....
It is stupid to go and prepare your self for strangers at work who will never give three shits about you and look ugly for your family who is a blessing.

For men, men are supposed to be modest too.
The reason for this is the same for women. People in class society look at each other based on what eachother can do for them. In a capitalistic way.
So as women , especially women of knowlege, we dont want people befriending us based on our bodies. It seems that up untill this day, that is what we are judged for. What kind of sex we can have. But most of those people we wont ever have sex with. We need friends based on who we are not what we are to you.
Men are looked at for their wealth. You see a man the first thing you say isnt " i bet i can fuck him sideways" ...you say "wow, I bet he has his life together" or " I bet hes got alot of money" or they think "damn....what a LOSER!"
Men dont need to make friends and lose friends based on that. Man, people got minds. So men are not supposed to wear gold and jewels and flashy things so as not to atract people who care about the wrong things.
We need people in our lives with better intents that those.
Thats the real reason behind the Islamic dress no matter how it is sliced to different people in different families.




NO one should be forced to wear hijab becuase some people do not apreciate one so their is no point in pushing it on them unless they would understand.

To ban wearing a veil in public is stupid cause it isnt like those women wear a veil in their HOUSE> Its for public. Thats usually their choice and they got their reasons.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

The answer is conversational intolerance, as proposed by Sam Harris in The end of faith.

Of course we can't ban the veil, it wouldn't work, and it would split the muslim section of the working class from the rest.

What we can do is bring it up in conversation. Most muslim women wear the veil out of choice, not because they are forced. Why not politely talk about the issue, ask a couple of questions, be understanding? Don't lends the idea any credibility of course, since it's tosh, but don't batter it left right and centre, because it isn't persuasive.

It works with politics too. Up until about 3/4 months ago, if anyone said something a bit ignorant, such as "homeless people only have themselves to blame", I would launch into an angry diatribe and basically brow beat them ito submission. And of course, it all fell on deaf ears. Now, I'm calm and careful and clear. And it works. We have the advantage of being correct, all we need to do is adjust our approach to best demonstrate this fact. :)

-Alex

[Nate]

I'm not going to say anything on the subject (for/against etc.) All I'm going to say, is Muslim head veils are not going to be banned in the street, or in day to day lives, at home etc. They're only talking about banning them if working in a public environment: Shops, schools etc. Where 'some' people feel more uncomfortable not being able to see the whole of the person's face, or in schools where people believe it would be harder to interact with children (atleast thats the case in England anyway).

I have not formed my own opinion yet, I'm just clarifying the context they were discussing.

Nate. :)

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I wouldn't neccessarily object to banning the veils. However, I would be more inclined to set an age restriction on wearing them in public. Then again, I really have nothing against banning them outright. No one makes a rational choice to wear them. They are either directly forced, pressured socially, or the victim of religious propaganda. Society should collectively look after its people and prevent them from becoming victimized by such nonsense. When people with mental disorders need help and refuse it, society intervenes. I don't see how this case is any different.

[Jhé]

It is important to understand the motive behind wearing the Hijab. A Muslim woman should not wear the Hijab because her husband wants her to, to impress people at the mosque, or just for change. Muslim women wear it following god's commands, purely for the sake of Allah. Of course it comes down to the Muslim Woman's choice to whether they want to wear the Hijab, however if they wear it they will be doing the will of Allah.

"Oh Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters, and wives and daughters of the believers, to extend their outer garments around themselves, so that they would be distinguished and not molested. And God is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful".
(Qur'an, 33:59)

[Spirit of Spartacus]

The Muslim veil is symbol of patriarchal authority, there is little doubt about that.

I live in a Muslim society, I'd know.

But the fact remains that quite a few Muslim women choose to wear it as a personal choice.

Whatever their reasons for making this decision, I feel that we should not approve of any government, least of all a bourgeois-dominated one, interfering with their right to wear what they want to wear.

[Enragé]

Everyone knows hair is sexy. When you cut it off everyone goes crazy on you like you just grew an ass out of your head

nonsense
this friend of mine just cut off her hair, and its short now (shorter than mine)

and its fuckin hot.

and its the same for men, i know a couple of girls who go crazy for boys just because they have an "emo" haircut.



in any case
people should be free to wear whatever they want, and "forcing them to be free" (which is a contradiction in terms anyway) only leads to people getting alienated from the ideas you put forward, to people retreating into their community and grasping on to backward/traditional ideas

[Klement Gottwald]

If this was in a Muslim majority country like Syria I would support a full ban on this reactionary, senseless custom. As part of a campaign to eliminate Islam, mosques would be razed or converted into barns, and sheikhs would be sent off to hard labour. Islam tries to obstruct modernity, progress, and complete freedom for women. I think all Muslim majority countries need to go through a democratic socialist transformation like in Uzbekistan and other parts of former Soviet Central Asia.

But in the West, I fully support the right for Muslims to practice their religious nonesense so that there will be subversion of western civilization. With the presence of a large Muslim minority in western Europe and America, perhaps these countries will be pressured to stop supporting to lawless Zionist regime occupying Jerusalem. I am seriously tired of Left opportunists embracing the fabricated frustrations of Muslims. Just because Muslims employ an anti-western and anti-Zionist political thought, it does not necessarily mean that they automatically become allies. Many Muslims want for women to be kept in chains and force people to pray to an imaginary god a dozen times per day. Fuck all that.

[manic expression]

Originally posted by Klement [email protected] 11, 2006 06:35 pm
If this was in a Muslim majority country like Syria I would support a full ban on this reactionary, senseless custom. As part of a campaign to eliminate Islam, mosques would be razed or converted into barns, and sheikhs would be sent off to hard labour. Islam tries to obstruct modernity, progress, and complete freedom for women. I think all Muslim majority countries need to go through a democratic socialist transformation like in Uzbekistan and other parts of former Soviet Central Asia.

But in the West, I fully support the right for Muslims to practice their religious nonesense so that there will be subversion of western civilization. With the presence of a large Muslim minority in western Europe and America, perhaps these countries will be pressured to stop supporting to lawless Zionist regime occupying Jerusalem.
It's the choice of the individual who wears it, period. Do away with the unfair external pressures upon a woman, and let her make the decision. When a woman wears the veil/other article out of her own genuine beliefs, that is her prerogative; when she is pressured and coerced into doing so, that is far from acceptable. Please recognize the difference.

"A campaign to eliminate Islam" would be both counterproductive and detrimental to all quarters. It would make people embrace Islam even more, it would make them hate you, leading to the utter failure of your efforts. The aim of a revolution is to remove the societal power of religion, not to remove religion itself (see Lenin's writings on the subject). In your haste to throw out the bathwater, you will throw out the individual in it.

[Klement Gottwald]

It's the choice of the individual who wears it, period.

Individuality is completely unproductive and obstructs any revolutionary change which can only be brought about collectively.


"A campaign to eliminate Islam" would be both counterproductive and detrimental to all quarters.

No, it has not. It has proven to be highly successful in former Soviet Central Asia.


It would make people embrace Islam even more

On what do you base this statement? Ever since increasing secularization in the West, there has been a steep drop in the practice of religion. It is a fact when there have been efforts to secularize society and decrease the influence of religion, society has become decreasingly interested in religion.

[manic expression]

Individuality is completely unproductive and obstructs any revolutionary change which can only be brought about collectively.

Clothes obstruct revolutionary change? When it comes to the economy, production, control of wealth, etc., what you say is true, but this is a cultural issue. Forcing people to drop a part of their culture against their will is contrary to a collective effort. People will stop wearing such things if you give them a real choice, and while some may not stop, that does absolutely nothing to impede or weaken said change (and in my opinion, it confirms the value of that change).


No, it has not. It has proven to be highly successful in former Soviet Central Asia.

Would be in favor of those policies? Are there are not drawbacks to what has occured there?


On what do you base this statement? Ever since increasing secularization in the West, there has been a steep drop in the practice of religion. It is a fact when there have been efforts to secularize society and decrease the influence of religion, society has become decreasingly interested in religion.

People in the west were not barred from wearing crucifixes, they stopped on their own accord. This change came about because of education and other non-coercive developments, not because anyone forced them to do anything. On the other hand, if you try to force a presently-religious population away from religion, you will find their reaction and the subsequent results to be undesirable. Look at what France is trying to do with its Muslim population, they are finding that people are resenting those policies and defying them.