I believe that there are some versions of Islam that are dangerous to Western society, that seek to overthrow and destroy everything that does not fit in with their ideology and beliefs. These versions are almost always very conservative in how they view what women can wear. I feel like this law is targetting that kind of Islam, so I support the feeling behind it.
On the other hand, Holland is showing that same attitude towards these Muslims that the extremists have towards Holland and the west. It presumes guilt on people before the fact. So, I can't say that I support this law in principle, because of that.
I'm sure that many of you will want to make this into a pure freedom of religion issue and be against this law without question. While I respect that, I think we ought to acknowledge that there are some religions, forms of religion, which are just inimical to both the members and others around them. Laws like this speak to that truth.
I don't know what the answer is, but I can condemn both this law and Islamofascism.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Overwhelmingly, abortion clinic bombers wear crosses. We should ban the wearing of crosses, in hopes that this will suppress clinic bombing.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
The problem is that burka-wearing is not confined to the most virulent strains of Islam. I have some sweet and wonderful girls in my classes right here in Central Florida who wear one daily.
I am pretty much against this law without question. I condemn terrorism, but I don't see this law as anything like a solution. I don't even see this law as an attempt at a solution, but merely as a hateful act. A sticking out of the civic tongue.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
And I had an awkward situation last year when I walked in on one with her ankles, and possibly her bare head (I wasn't really looking, so I don't know what all, just that people were upset) exposed.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is a thought experiment. What if we could somehow, beyond a shadow of a doubt, say that a certain percentage of some forms of Islam that support women wearing burkas support terrorism, want to overthrow the state and replace it with an Islamofascist state. Is there a point a which laws like this *might* be justified? At what percentage, if any? 50%? 75%? 90%?
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow. It says something about those girls' parents that they are willing to mix their children in with girls who don't dress the way they theirs do. Good for them. Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: I walked in on one with her ankles, and possibly her bare head (I wasn't really looking, so I don't know what all, just that people were upset) exposed.
Who could be upset? The girl and her father?
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
IMO, while the burkas may symbolize that kind of ideology to some, they don't symbolize that to everyone. Remove the burkas and some would feel the threat removed. Others would likely be incensed at such a confusing and insulting act.
The law is poorly placed that wants to remove what only some see as an ominous symbol. Or, it is well-placed, itself symbolizing the point that Holland's leaders seem to be trying to make: that they don't want overt Muslim presence in the country.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
To me, the burka represents deep-rooted misogyny, not violence. I'd support a women's lib movement against the burka, but banning it altogether exchanges fundamentalist control for governmental control -- too slight an improvement, and too dangerous a precedent.
The devil's advocate in me would enjoy seeing this law last five years or so, then being withdrawn. Just so what Muslim women remained in Holland would live life without the burka, then have the choice to return later. I can't support this, but my inner fascist likes the thought.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:It says something about those girls' parents that they are willing to mix their children in with girls who don't dress the way they theirs do.
Is there not a very large Muslim community in your area, Storm? Around here, both burkas and headscarves are relatively common.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Theaca, I don't really have all the facts, but I'll do my best to explain:
A group of girls, with a female faculty member, were doing this afterschool dance thing. Apparently, they wanted to see this middle eastern dance that this girl had told them of. So, after school they went to the teacher planning are on my floor--chose because of its lack of windown. They covered the one window with paper, and started playing their music and doing their thing.
Now, I'm used to seeing that planning area used by teachers for different student activities, so I don't think twice about it. However, that area is where the faculty restrooms are. So when I needed to go to the restroom, I went to the workroom and used my key to let myself in. I heard the music coming from inside, and saw the paper over the window in the door, but it never occurred to me that I was not supposed to go into the faculty planning area. There was no sign on the door to this effect.
Apparently, when I walked in, the other girls quickly attempted to block my view of the girl in question by standing between me and her. I couldn't tell you for sure, frankly, because I didn't stop to look. I walked straight through to the bathroom, and left immediately afterward.
I didn't find out there had even been an issue until a couple of kids told me about it later.
Nobody ever expressed anger at me or anything. But when I say that people were upset, I mean, in addition to presumably the girl herself, her friends were upset for her that this had happened. Not necessarily angry at me, but . . .
I don't know what the consequences were, if any, for this girl. I'd feel bad if there was anything unpleasant.
posted
That's what I was wondering... if non burka wearing girls were protecting her/upset for her. I don't know that I could have been so thoughtful.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Is there not a very large Muslim community in your area, Storm? Around here, both burkas and headscarves are relatively common.
...and they all go to public schools, or what?
I don't know how large the Muslim community is around here. I have never seen a burqa that I can recall around here. However, I do know many people who are strongly religious, and it is somewhat common for them to not want to expose their children to 'worldly influences'. They want to send their children to religious schools that cater to their faith and their worldview. My comment was based solely on that.
Is it very common in your area for burqa wearing girls to go to public schools or more common for them to go to Muslim schools?
By the way, I don't like to just answer questions from you, where I write something and you continually just ask questions or just kind of grunt one-line expressions in response. I find it extremely irritating for a lot of reasons. If you want to have a dialogue with me, that's great. I look forward to an exchange of ideas.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Muslims are less likely to go to Muslim schools than Christian kids are to go to Christian schools because--and forgive me if I am horrifically misinformed here--I think Christian schools are just so much more common than Muslim schools. I've seen like two private Muslim schools ever.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: To me, the burka represents deep-rooted misogyny, not violence. I'd support a women's lib movement against the burka, but banning it altogether exchanges fundamentalist control for governmental control -- too slight an improvement, and too dangerous a precedent.
I have heard of several Muslim women's groups that oppose the burka for the reasons you have given.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's what I was wondering... if non burka wearing girls were protecting her/upset for her. I don't know that I could have been so thoughtful.
I think you would. If they spent that much time with her, they had probably become friends, and had a discussion at one time or another about what covering herself meant to her, or at least understood that it was important to her. They immediately moved to protect their friend from something they knew would embarass her and violate her bounds of modesty-- like they would move to stand in front of a girl who was in a sports bra without a top if a man walked into the locker room.
I hope rivka doesn't mind if I use this as an example: When we were at Dallas Con, I happened to be in the hotel room while she was getting ready and did not have her head covered yet (we were all girls in there.) If the door had been unlocked and a man had unexpectedly walked in, I would have immediately called out, "Man in the room!" while turning him around and getting him out the door so her modesty would not be violated. I wouldn't have thought twice about it, even though it doesn't violate my personal bounds of modesty for a man to see my head uncovered. Since you're a good person and a good friend, I think you would do the same were you friends with this girl. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Is it very common in your area for burqa wearing girls to go to public schools or more common for them to go to Muslim schools?
I'm not actually aware of a single Muslim school in the area, although there's probably one somewhere; these are public school students. And frankly, based on the madrasa precedent, I think we have plenty of religious private schools already.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Here is a thought experiment. What if we could somehow, beyond a shadow of a doubt, say that a certain percentage of some forms of Islam that support women wearing burkas support terrorism, want to overthrow the state and replace it with an Islamofascist state. Is there a point a which laws like this *might* be justified? At what percentage, if any? 50%? 75%? 90%?
At no percentage. I'd say we've got a pretty high percentage of swastika-wearing, shorn-headed guys in black boots that want to overthrow the government and implement a white-supremecist state and I don't support banning those things, either.
quote:I'm sure that many of you will want to make this into a pure freedom of religion issue and be against this law without question.
Which is pretty much a good indication that you don't understand the position on religious free exercise that many of us take. It's never unquestioning - the easy example would be human sacrifice.
But here we have personal behavior which affects no one else. A particular type of clothing is being banned because it is worn by believers of a particular religion. It's the same problem I have with France's law: the practice does not directly affect others, and the intent of the law is to inhibit free exercise. There's no non-discriminatory motive even attempted in either case. In France, if it's religious and visible, you can't wear it to school. In the Netherlands, the law will be, if it's a particular form of religious garment, it can't be worn in public.
From the article:
quote:The country’s hardline Integration Minister, Rita Verdonk, known as the Iron Lady for her series of tough anti-immigration measures, told Parliament that she was going to investigate where and when the burka should be banned. The burka, traditional clothing in some Islamic societies, covers a woman’s face and body, leaving only a strip of gauze for the eyes.
Mrs Verdonk gave warning that the “time of cosy tea-drinking” with Muslim groups had passed and that natives and immigrants should have the courage to be critical of each other. She recently cancelled a meeting with Muslim leaders who refused to shake her hand because she was a woman.
...
The ban is likely to be enforced in shops, public buildings, cinemas, train and bus stations and airports, as well as on trains and buses.
For those who think this might somehow "liberate" the couple dozen women in the Netherlands who wear them:
quote:“Women have a very strong opinion about the burka. If you ban it they won’t leave the house. It is not a good way to integrate and emancipate Muslim women. Everything Muslims do is criticised by Verdonk. She is doing it to get votes. She doesn’t care about Muslims and their problems.”
The supposed justification (they can use it for concealment) is ridiculous. The person who proposed it did not do so merely for security reasons:
quote:Mrs Verdonk made the proposals after Geert Wilders, the right-wing MP, requested the ban. Mr Wilders claimed that the garment was unfriendly towards women and a threat to security.
This is an attempt to restrict a religious practice, motivated at least in part by a desire to change a religous belief. There's no way to pretend otherwise.
If the concealment issue is really the problem, will they ban carrying non-transparent bags in public? Mandate mini-skirts? A black armband could carry a joint, but no one even tried to pretend that was the reason for banning the armbands in t Tinker.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Icarus, there's a Muslim school in Clermont, and, I believe, another one in the Orlando area.
My friend's wife was going to be a teacher at the one in Clermont until they left town.
But I can't imagine there are more than a handful of formal Muslim schools in the Central Florida area. Perhaps there are places kids can go for language or religious training in people's homes, though.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I want to feel outrage because I am religious and wouldn't want to have my rights taken away. My own feelings about the secularization of society makes me respect the Muslim perspectives. It would be nice to live among such conservatively God fearing people as long as they allowed me to be equally conservatively God fearing in my own way.
However, I just can't feel outrage at this. My feelings against Modern Muslims are too strong. Their actions are a danger to world peace and society. Not enough of them are speaking out against violence and extremism violence. Those who claim they are, but we don't hear them, only goes to show they aren't trying hard enough. Where are the anti-terrorist Muslim marches? Where are the Muslim countries sending troops or even using troops to root out insurgence? Where are the harsh words toward Iran's government and Middle East news? Even the most Democratic of Muslim nations are doing nothing (or very little) toward controlling terrorist Muslims. Those they don't support, they fight for purely political reasons! In fact, they seem to be rooting for them (and financially supporting them) in Israel and Iraq. I will feel outrage at Holland as soon as my outrage at the Muslim community is quelled by actions rather than quiet and almost unperceptable whispers.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Could you give examples of what you think the average Muslim should be doing in order to convince you of their commitment to peace?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
We have at least a small population of Muslim students here, since I've seen severl girls with burkas and I know they had an "Understanding Islam" talk thing at one point.
I disagree with this law. It's basically what Tom pointed out. Just because a few bad eggs from that group do something horribly wrong doesn't mean you can deny the whole group its rights. I know there are some extreme sects that basically want to overthrow western society, but I'm not sure if banning burkas is the way to combat them.
Posts: 1960 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd be interested in hearing just how much marching Occassional did in support of things like, say, the Civil Rights movement, or in outrage over things like My Lai (sp?).
Also, I'd be interested to hear how much exactly Muslims in the Arabic world should be doing to protest the actions of their frequently brutal, authoritarian, often cruel governments...while under the power of that same government.
As for what Muslims in the West should be doing, well, they are doing those things. You just don't hear about it on Fox.
I think it's an interesting point of view that in your opinion, Occassional, one outrage negates any possibility of outrage about anything else.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm curious what Holland is trying to get out of this law. It seems to be to make the country less attractive to conservative Muslims so they don't move there. It certainly isn't going to do anything for the oppression of women. . . none of these women are going to say, oh, it's illegal to wear my burka now, guess I better embrace feminisim and the West. Instead, it's just going to make them (and their men) feel more oppressed and quite likely more sympathetic to the terrorists, seeing this as a sign that western governments really are evil and out to destroy their religion.
In other words, not only do I think this law is wrong, I also think it's counterproductive and stupid. (Not that I see it as a legitimate justification for terrorism. I don't believe there is such a thing. But I can see, for people who are already leaning that way, how it could increase their support.)
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Not enough of them are speaking out against violence and extremism violence. Those who claim they are, but we don't hear them, only goes to show they aren't trying hard enough.
The reason we don't hear them is because they aren't being listened to, or fear retribution. There are women that are beaten in their homes but people aren't doing anything because they think they "deserve" it. Men have most of the power in those societies, and if they refuse to listen to them, then there's nothing they can do without fear of being hurt even more by the men in their lives.
And in terms of the insurgency and standing up to extreme terrorism, it's the same thing. People live in so much fear of being targeted by those groups that they feel they can't say anything. I don't think it's the fact that people just don't feel like saying anything. It's the fact that people are still afraid.
In terms of the burka, I think it is wrong to prohibit religious expression. Just because a small percentage of Muslims are extremists doesn't mean that Holland has the right to ban burkas. It is a personal choice, like Tom said, it's like wearing a cross. We shouldn't ban religious expression, no matter what a small group of individuals do.
Posts: 1789 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
What exactly should they be doing? Standing up to said governments with life and limb. People are blowing themselves up in the name of Islam. Don't see why others are afraid to die for the ideal of freedom and social change. Someone mentioned FOX (to get my goad of course), but you don't see anything on CNN either.
Where are the powerful Western Muslim voices? Oh yea, saying nasty things about Bush and the U.S. Token statements about how bad terrorism is happens to be just that: Token. How does that saying go? If your not part of the solution than your part of the problem.
Rakeesh, considering what you picked I would say no marching, as they are issues not of my concern. Then again, I don't live in a part of the country that believes in marching. At least, you won't see other than a very few people who march or would consider it socially acceptable to march. Besides, I don't have the money, means, or influence for a march of any consiquence. I am, however, here writing my mind in an open forum. That is a start.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Standing up to said governments with life and limb. People are blowing themselves up in the name of Islam. Don't see why others are afraid to die for the ideal of freedom and social change.
I should think it was obvious that the people blowing themselves up in the name of Islam don't think the same as the 'average' Muslim. D'uh.
quote:Where are the powerful Western Muslim voices? Oh yea, saying nasty things about Bush and the U.S. Token statements about how bad terrorism is happens to be just that: Token. How does that saying go? If your not part of the solution than your part of the problem.
What would suffice to you as a non-token statement? Since you're ready and willing to be the arbiter of what Good Muslims should be saying, of course.
Turn that cutting rhetorical wit inward, Occassional. If you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem. (This was not italicized to criticize spelling, but to ask the question: Whnat are YOU doing?)
No marching? Issues not of your concern? What, you're not a human being, Occassional? Does not the standard of living, does not justice, concern you as a human being? And what is this nonsense about living in a part of the nation that 'doesn't believe in marching'? Which part of the nation is that?
And besides, you're nitpicking on marching to attempt to avoid the question which was not hinged upon marching. The question you have yet to answer, Occasional, is which moral, social, or legal problems have you, personally, ever done anything about to the same degree that you're insisting Muslims should be doing things?
You don't need money, means, or influence to 'march' or agitate for social change. It helps a great deal, yes, but to begin these things are not required. Malcolm X started his efforts from a prison cell. That's just one example.
And as for writing your mind on an open forum? Talk is cheap. In fact, talk is free. It's not a start, it's not anything.
Or at least it's certainly not a start the way you mean it's a start. Do some volunteer work. Work for a political campaign. Try to persuade people face-to-face about the things you believe. Spend your money according to your political and moral beliefs. Those things are a 'start'. Certainly not what we're doing here.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
What should average Muslims be doing? I would say, for every body bag filled by Terrorists, they should be writing a column in their local papers expressing disdain for that action. They should be writing books, getting interviews, starting a PR campaign. If you have to start your own papers, produce your own shows, and present your own words than try. Most of all, talking with their mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, and nieghbors about how horrible it all is and discussing what to do about the carnage. Then, along with that, rat out potential terrorists in public and private. Make it a shame to be considered a radical Muslim. Don't let the Imams speak for you if you don't believe they speak your words.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Occasional. Do that in the Arabic world, and please, by all means, we'll have a seance with you to hear about what else you're doing after the first time you did one of those things.
Of course, it's very easy to tell other people, living far, far away from you with problems you've never experienced in your life, to risk their lives for what you say is right.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or at least it's certainly not a start the way you mean it's a start. Do some volunteer work. Work for a political campaign. Try to persuade people face-to-face about the things you believe. Spend your money according to your political and moral beliefs. Those things are a 'start'. Certainly not what we're doing here.
Actually, I have done all of those things for many things I believe in.
Do some volunteer work: I have done at least two years of that actually. Of course, I have done more than just that, although not nearly as intense.
Work for a political campaign: Actually something I haven't done, but definantly supported those I voted for.
Try to persuade people face-to-face about the things you believe: Again, for at least two years I did this continually, and continue to not hesitate doing this when presented with the opportunity.
Spend your money according to your political and moral beliefs: I have been doing this since I was old enough to earn money.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you speaking of missionary work for the LDS Church? If so, good for you.
Of course, that doesn't do much to help raise the standards-of-living and lower the crime-rates of people and places outside the areas you proseltized.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't really want to get into this argument, but I wanted to point out a flaw in Rakeesh's statement. Protestants survived in hostile and dangerous times, and yes they did behave in an un-Christlike fashion to do this. That's true. Muslims at the moment aren't in hostile and dangerous times. They are in times of religious tolerance, unlike the early days of the Protestants (where Catholicism was the major religion and it was trying to squash out Protestantism). Protestants' un-Christlike behavior can be somewhat forgiven for their circumstances (note, I say somewhat, since nothing excuses all of it). Some of the Muslim behavior being exhibited though is not excusable in a religiously tolerant world. Now maybe if everyone was out to squash Islam or something, then I might be more likely to agree with the comparison. This is a much different thing though, therefore the comparison is flawed.
Posts: 1960 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again Rakeesh, you ask me to support things I don't particuarly support as priorities. You are asking why I am not more of a Liberal when I am actually a Conservative.
By the way, what have YOU done?
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most conservatives I know are extremely supportive of private persons working to raise standards of living and lower crime rates.
But allow me to summarize so far:
Raise standards of living, negative.
Lower crime rates, negative.
Be okay with laws preventing law-abiding citizens from exercising their religious beliefs, affirmative.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
The world here is not hostile or violent-to us, the majority. I put forward that the Arabic world is quite different.
I put forward also that the horribly unChristlike behavior of the Protestant world in general extended beyond its status as a minority in Christendom. In many of the same ways as does the current Islamic world.
------
Occasional,
The things I mentioned are not Liberal priorities, and I think it's pretty unsurprising that you've already assigned Liberal and Conservative labels to this discussion-with yourself as the Conservative and presumably myself as the Liberal.
Which is funny, given my voting history. But that's a complicated issue, and you're more prone to telling people who live in a world totally alien to you what to do than think about complex issues.
----
Fugu,
I don't get what you're saying.
But for the record, Occasional isn't 'OK' with it, he's just not outraged about it. Because when you think about it, 'the Muslims' haven't 'earned' his consideration.
The idea you're supporting, Occasional, that it's acceptable to tolerate injustice just because the victim has behaved badly, is reprehensible. And also very unChristlike, I might add, since you brought up your missionary work.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh! I forgot to answer your question as to what I've done, which is put simply not much. I can answer 'yes' to the questions I put forward to you, as well as the one about supporting political campaigns, but not to the degree that I'd like. Right now I work mostly paycheck to paycheck.
But then again, I'm not telling people what standard they need to measure up to before I'll get huffed up about people pushing them around, either.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And of course, I do have to wonder what Occasional expects.
For instance, here's a Google search which shows plenty of vocal, peace-oriented groups (and its a naive search, not targeting many terms I know muslim peace organizations to use).
I'm not sure why he's blaming the millions of islamic people involved in peace efforts for his own inability to see.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some of you seem to be missing the point. Most Muslims that are allowed to speak do speak against terrorism. I don't know what things you've done to make the world a better place, but does that mean you haven't done anything? Just because you may not be aware of them, doesn't mean they aren't doing anything.
Let me ask you, is it a good thing to deprive a people of the right to practice their religion? Would you have that done to you? Burkas harm no one. Banning them won't stop terrorism.
Posts: 46 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
The world here is not hostile or violent-to us, the majority. I put forward that the Arabic world is quite different.
I put forward also that the horribly unChristlike behavior of the Protestant world in general extended beyond its status as a minority in Christendom. In many of the same ways as does the current Islamic world.
I didn't realize we were speaking about the Arabic world. I thought we were talking about the Western world and the Muslims in it. Sorry, my mistake.
Posts: 1960 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think this law is absolutely disgusting. If their religion requires them to wear a burka, how dare anyone pass a law preventing them from doing so?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
