I like France ... more often than I fall into the usual bloody French standpoint anyway.
I like, too, Sarkozy's views as expressed in his speech today about the burka worn by Muslim women in France. He said that the burka reduced to servitude the women who wore it and undermined their dignity. He has backed a commission to investigate whether to ban the burka altogether in public. The veil is already banned in schools.
In his speech, he saidI'm totally with him thus far, but then he says thatWe cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity, ...That is not the idea that the French republic has of women's dignity.
OK, he might be setting the ground rules in advance of the almost inevitable "war on Islam" outcry that any legislation will provoke, but surely the burka is in fact a sign of religion ... as well as being one of subservience?France must not fight the wrong battle. The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience. It will not be welcome on the territory of the French republic. The Muslim religion must be respected as much as other religions in the country.
Story in BBC
I think that it is arguable. It doesn't say in the Koran that women should wear a burka. Many Muslim countries don't require it, Iran didn't when it was a democracy, or even after the UK imposed the Shah on them. So someone could say that they were a Muslim opposed to the wearing of the burka, or could theoretically be a Christian, Scientologist or an atheist and be in favour of women wearing them. Victorian Christians had more of a thing about covering women up than modern day UK Christians.Originally Posted by DrS
I'm not quite sure how the legislation would work. How do you define a burka? Suppose the women who were wearing burkas switched to superhero costumes, or dalek costumes, or something else that covered all their features? If that was illegal then fancy dress parties would have been outlawed in France.
If the burka was a religious taboo for women then why would a man wear a burka and sneak about is he then not breaking a fundamental religious rule or can he do this disguise because it is only a tradition and not a religious precept.
Thought provoking as always!
You're right of course, that it's not an Islamic textual issue, but in terms of a political religion, which is how I see Islam, I find it hard to separate the wearing of a burka from the religion it's associated with.
Last edited by DrS; 22nd June 2009 at 04:36 PM.
Yes, but as you suggested, he's trying to dodge accusations of being anti-Islam. You can't blame Sarkozy for wanting to avoid being the new Rushdie.
I also agree with Sarkozy. Whichever way you look at it, it is deliberately antisocial.
Apart from the other considerations mentioned, covering the face in public should also be forbidden for security reasons, however it's done and whatever the garment is called.
I'm fairly certain that you are asked to remove a full face motorcycle helmet before going into a bank, and surely anyone trying to enter in a Balaclava would set the alarm bells ringing. Does anyone know if burkas are allowed? If they are they shouldn't be - it doesn't have to be a muslim woman under there - it could be anyone.
It would be really helpful if some gangs started robbing banks while dressed in burkas - that ought to do the trick...
It would be really helpful if some gangs started robbing banks while dressed in burkas - that ought to do the trick...
Don't have to go that far - just street gangs of teenagers wearing them instead of hoodies maybe?
A burkha flash mob in the middle of London ought to get things going!
Is a properly modest and deferential muslim lady actually allowed to handle her own finances? What's she doing in a bank then.
Last edited by Matt; 26th June 2009 at 10:37 AM.
Brilliant! How do these things get started?
A vicious armed gang robbed the high street bank this morning the thieves got away with over £10- the police have look at the cc camera video and have released this description of the three assailants.
1. About 5ft 4in tall possibly male or female dressed in black hood, veil, long cowl down to the ground. Dark sun glasses. Black woollen gloves covering their wrists.
2. About 6ft tall possibly male or female dressed in black hood, veil, long cowl down to the ground. Dark sun glasses. Black woollen gloves covering their wrists.
3. About 4ft 8in tall possibly male or female dressed in black hood, veil, long cowl down to the ground. Dark sun glasses. Black woollen gloves covering their wrists.
The police have warned the public to be on their guard as these are armed and extremely dangerous and should not tackle but inform the police immediately upon seeing these suspects. Phone number is Whitehall 1212.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/i...-200906241851/
Sarkozy insisted he did not want to offend muslims, stressing: "My concern is for the personal liberty of French citizens, be they a humble housewife or a top-class ride like Carla.
"Seriously, have you seen that photo of her bending over a desk? I get to go home to that every night. Unbe-fucking-lievable."
I bloody hope he was targeting muslims. The alternative is much worse.
The jilbab and more so the burhka have transformed from a cultural custom in the middle east to a badge of Islam world wide. Whilst the quran tells women to be modest, it says nothing explicit about covering the hair or face. There is nothing exculsingly Islamic about the Jillbab. Any image of the Blessed Virgin mary or a catholic nun should confirm this. It's simply a customary dress from the middle east.
Nor should it be imagined that covering the hair or face preculdes modesty. Whether it's the carefully arranged diaphomopnous patterned scarf favoured by Benezir Bhuto, or Jemima Khan (which does more to highlight than hide their appearance) or the laboriously tightly pinned jilbab of the exceedingly concious muslim woman (which ensures that not the slightest wisp of hair may be seen) both are ways of putting effort into one's appearance to make a statement. The lack of modesty in such a statement is betrayed by a letter writer in today's Metro who proclaimed her pride in wearing a burka.
Which of the follwing displays modesty -
or this
But how in all seriousness are muslim women to be banned from hiding thier face.
Will we also ahve to ban this.
and this
and this
and most impartantly this.
Yes that's right. If this isn't targetted as muslims, lilke it damn well ought to be then it's a way of leveraging xenophobia to keep tabs of anarchists through big brother's facial recognition software.
The law of the excluded middle allows for no other explanation.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks