France approves burqa ban

[Jiro]

Short answer: No.

what's the long answer?

 

[Jiro]

Kidsare being told how to dress in public schools and some public have kids wear uniforms. I think that wrong , the state , cities and government has no business telling us how to dress , what to eat or not eat . We do not live in a communist country , at least not yet .

um... the schools are run by the Board. In short - the local community decides on it. Not government.

 

[TXgolfer]

what's the long answer?

 

[naisho]

I don't really mind them taking any form of headwear off for a photo ID.
It is a no-brainer and I doubt much of the Islams would be against taking the photo in a foreign nation, nor would anyone in the public be generally against having to do so for an identification photo. You are asked the same to do with baseball caps, hats, anything at the DMV. It's pretty much a moot point.

As far as wearing it in public institutions, well that is the critical issue. We don't really enforce things like that here; I mean some even wear turbans at local parks in California and no one is making that big of a deal out of it except the extremes.

 

[Foxrac]

Well, in other Islamic countries women, any women, are required/forced to cover their bodies or faces per the religious laws in those countries. I think that's insulting and demeaning.

First off, if a country has a law people don't like, then they don't need to go there. Just as there is a law for driver licenses that require the full picture of your face on it. Either you abide by it or you don't. And if you don't, well, you don't get to drive. It's a priviledge, and not a right in this case.

Well, Islamic countries don't have same government as our country does and they are different government and culture.

For me, I don't see as insulting and demeaning because of religious and culture.

 

[faire_jour]

Well, in other Islamic countries women, any women, are required/forced to cover their bodies or faces per the religious laws in those countries. I think that's insulting and demeaning.

First off, if a country has a law people don't like, then they don't need to go there. Just as there is a law for driver licenses that require the full picture of your face on it. Either you abide by it or you don't. And if you don't, well, you don't get to drive. It's a priviledge, and not a right in this case.

And this ban is in France where they have the right to NOT wear it if they wish. If a country supports personal freedom, that means that they support your right to choose, even if they disagree with it.

 

[Foxrac]

I don't really mind them taking any form of headwear off for a photo ID.
It is a no-brainer and I doubt much of the Islams would be against taking the photo in a foreign nation, nor would anyone in the public be generally against having to do so for an identification photo. You are asked the same to do with baseball caps, hats, anything at the DMV. It's pretty much a moot point.

As far as wearing it in public institutions, well that is the critical issue. We don't really enforce things like that here; I mean some even wear turbans at local parks in California and no one is making that big of a deal out of it except the extremes.

I know about Saudi Arabia requires all women to wear abaya and they aren't allowed to drive.

In Iran, it is different because women require to wear hijab and they are allowed to drive.

 

[Banjo]

And this ban is in France where they have the right to NOT wear it if they wish. If a country supports personal freedom, that means that they support your right to choose, even if they disagree with it.

It's interesting to see how people keep referring to Saudi Arabia and other countries where people are forced to wear them.

Why are we using these countries to make an argument to justify the ban in France? France is doing the same thing, only they are doing it backward.

I think it's ridiculous.

 

[faire_jour]

It's interesting to see how people keep referring to Saudi Arabia and other countries where people are forced to wear them.

Why are we using these countries to make an argument to justify the ban in France? France is doing the same thing, only they are doing it backward.

I think it's ridiculous.

Ah, I knew here had to be something on earth we could agree on

 

[Banjo]

Ah, I knew here had to be something on earth we could agree on

Well, I don't let our disagreements get into the way of us agreeing on some subjects.

 

[posts from hell]

To be honest, I don't care if they wear that stuff.

 

[faire_jour]

Well, I don't let our disagreements get into the way of us agreeing on some subjects.

Everybody knows that I value people's right to choose above all else...that's what starts the other fights

 

[TXgolfer]

It's interesting to see how people keep referring to Saudi Arabia and other countries where people are forced to wear them.

Why are we using these countries to make an argument to justify the ban in France? France is doing the same thing, only they are doing it backward.

I think it's ridiculous.

Simple just as those countries make their laws.....France is free to make theirs. They are free to define what is acceptable in their country. Nobody is forced to live in France......people are free to leave.

What is ridiculous is that Muslim countries will arrest and punish a foreign couple for a kiss in public and people will defend their right to do it, yet those same people will condemn a western country for banning certain types of clothing.

 

[naisho]

I dug around a bit on this photo because I was curious as to what happened. It appears from what I read those women pictured were voluntarily wearing hijabs but those who weren't were rounded up by some middle eastern extremists..

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/10/29/somalia.women.flogged/
(CNN) -- Militants who control parts of Somalia's capital city are beating women in broad daylight for violating their radical brand of Islamic law, according to local officials and witnesses in Mogadishu.

"Just today, Al-Shabaab dispatched men with whips to the streets around Bakara market and they are flogging any woman who is found not wearing socks," according to a female maize trader at the Mogadishu market, who spoke Thursday.

She did not want to be named for security reasons.

In the past two days, more than 130 people, including women who were not wearing headscarves and men chewing dried khat leaves, have been detained for violating Al-Shabaab's interpretation of sharia, or Islamic law, according to witnesses and officials.

Hooded Al-Shabaab gunmen rounded up 50 women on Wednesday from Mogadishu's Bakara market for not wearing the veil that is required for women under some interpretations of Islamic law, according to the maize trader.

Check out the wiki link regarding the hijab reference.

A hijab or ḥijāb (Arabic: حجاب, (he-zjab)pronounced [ħiˈʒæːb]/[ħiˈɡæːb]) is both the head covering traditionally worn by Muslim women and modest Muslim styles of dress in general.

The Arabic word literally means curtain or cover (noun). Most Islamic legal systems define this type of modest dressing as covering everything except the face and hands in public.[1][2] According to Islamic scholarship, hijab is given the wider meaning of modesty, privacy, and morality;[3] the word for a headscarf or veil used in the Qur'an is khimār (خمار) and not hijab. Still another definition is metaphysical, where al-hijab refers to "the veil which separates man or the world from God."[2]

Muslims differ as to whether the hijab should be required on women in public, as it is in countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia, or whether it should be banned in schools, as it is in France and Turkey.

 

[posts from hell]

I dug around a bit on this photo because I was curious as to what happened. It appears from what I read those women pictured were voluntarily wearing hijabs but those who weren't were rounded up by some middle eastern extremists..


Check out the wiki link regarding the hijab reference.

 

[Banjo]

If people opposed to the law are living in France, it is their country too.

Might as well tell every opponent of President Obama's to leave the country since that's the logic many are subscribing to.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

If people opposed to the law are living in France, it is their country too.

Might as well tell every opponent of President Obama's to leave the country since that's the logic many are subscribing to.

Ding, ding, ding.

You won a prize!

Shall it be behind Door #1, Door #2, or Door #3?

 

[naisho]

If people opposed to the law are living in France, it is their country too.

Might as well tell every opponent of President Obama's to leave the country since that's the logic many are subscribing to.

oh no you don't!
zomg!!! reverse discrimination..

 

[TWA]

I don't think it is insulting or demeaning to women. They are covering their own bodies because their bodies are so sacred and special that they don't want other men to see them. Other men, non-relatives, do not have the right to see what is so sacred to them.

Do you really believe that? Do you think that's what they really believe? Hardly. It's about ownership of women and patriarchal jealousy that has been pushed to an extreme and then sanctioned by dogma. Sorry, but I don't buy your "sacred body" line for a second. If this were true, then male bodies would be just as sacred, so men would also wear the burga, right?

Well, in other Islamic countries women, any women, are required/forced to cover their bodies or faces per the religious laws in those countries. I think that's insulting and demeaning.

First off, if a country has a law people don't like, then they don't need to go there. Just as there is a law for driver licenses that require the full picture of your face on it. Either you abide by it or you don't. And if you don't, well, you don't get to drive. It's a priviledge, and not a right in this case.

LOL, take a swig of your own medicine will ya?

 

[TXgolfer]

If people opposed to the law are living in France, it is their country too.

Might as well tell every opponent of President Obama's to leave the country since that's the logic many are subscribing to.

Nah...... Apples to oranges.

obama is temporary.......even if he is two terms. The people will decide that at the polls.

However protecting citizens is a function of government. Sometimes governments have to make tough choices like in this case......Protect women's rights/national security vs. protect religious rights. France made their choice (well supported in polls there). Again pretty simple. They can leave and go to another country or they can abide by the law and try to change it. You can't please everyone........

By your logic we should allow cults to do as they please with children because they are citizens too. What about honor killings? Should we not prosecute those because they are part of a groups culture???