Belgium Bans the Burka

[oldr_n_wsr]

sexism, that's what it is.

[Gob]

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has for the first time said that she backs her party’s proposals for a partial ban on burqas.

Speaking at her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party’s congress in Essen, Merkel said the full facial veil was “not appropriate and should be banned wherever it is legally possible.”

Merkel had spoken out against the burqa in the past, saying that in her view, “a fully covered woman has little chance of integrating in Germany.”

However, this is the first time she has backed an outright ban, after having previously suggested that such plans could face legal challenges and would seem excessive.

[Lord Jim]

Just a guess, but I think this may have had something to do with it:

Chancellor Angela Merkel will rally her conservatives at a party conference on Tuesday to gird for a German election in 2017 that she expects to be "tough like no other".

Seeking a fourth term in office, Merkel must unite her Christian Democrats (CDU) and try to recapture some of her personal popularity, undermined by the crises that have rocked Europe.

Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi's referendum defeat on Sunday and the impending departure of French President Francois Hollande underline Merkel's status as Europe's most experienced leader, but she needs to win back disgruntled voters at home.

The CDU has seen its support eroded by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), which has profited from popular concern about the influx into Germany in 2015 of around a million refugees, many fleeing war in the Middle East.

"We know our world is changing. It always has been. Anyone who promises to be able to stop that isn't being honest," said Peter Tauber, Secretary General, CDU. "What we are promising is to turn this change in a good direction for our country.", he added.

http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-an ... on-2280294

[Big RR]

Yep--picking on the moslems is a great way to whip up support on the right without eroding left of center support too much; how lucky she is to have a group so easily marginalized.

[Burning Petard]

Does the costume have any connection to the theology espoused by the final prophet? Seems to me it is a cultural tradition independent of the Muslim religion. It certainly is not typical of females in the largest Muslim country--Indonesia. The Prophet himself is quoted as advising women to cover their breasts when strangers appear in the village. Clear indication that ordinarily breasts were not covered.

I have frequently pondered the sexual/gender cultural expectations where the slightest glimpse of female skin is expected to drive a man into uncontrollable sexual behaviors.

snailgate

[Big RR]

It might have begun as a cultural traditions, but it appears certain branches of islam have embraced this manner of dress as indicated for the faithful (or a certain part of the faithful), much as RC Nuns developed a mode of religious dress which included head to toe dresses, the head being surrounded by layers of cloth, etc. Sure, it is not stated in either the Koran (I assume) or the bible, but they have evolved into religious tenets (and even 20 years ago when my kids were in a day care center run by a fairly conservative order of nuns (Franciscans) they still dressed pretty much that way). Add to that the general public (in the west at least) tendency to associate the burqua with islam, and you can see how outlawing it can be seen as a justified slap at those "others" who they don't want around anyway. It's just a convenient group to marginalize for political advantage.

[rubato]

A good John Stewart Mill Liberal, such as myself, would agree that one boundary on individual liberty is that you cannot conceal your identity when in the public sphere. "Who are you" is a fundamental question when regulating and judging the behavior of people in society; we cannot function as a community if you allow people to go 'masked' and thus avoid accountability for their actions to the community as a whole.


yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

What if it, and other aspects of Islam, denies women the ability to integrate into society?

Yet I’ve met far too many women suffering the effects of misogyny and domestic abuse, women being subjugated by their husbands and extended families.

Often, the victims are foreign-born brides brought to Britain via arranged marriages.

They have poor English, little education, low confidence, and are reliant on their husbands for their income and immigration status.

They don’t know about their rights, or how to access support, and struggle to prepare their children effectively for school.

This is far from everyone’s experience of course, but even one woman in such a situation is one too many, and these were not isolated incidents that I saw.


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... on-britain

[rubato]

Foolish question. It is like asking "why does Christianity forbid driving cars and using cell phones" just because the Amish and Hutterites forbid these things.


And besides, the Christian world, on the whole, denied women equal rights until very recently and used their religion to justify it. Human rights are a creation of liberal secular society and have been won by confining religious authority to voluntary submission.


yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

Foolish question. It is like asking "why does Christianity forbid driving cars and using cell phones" just because the Amish and Hutterites forbid these things.

Well, Roger Irrelevant you've certainly confused yourself there.

[Gob]

On Tuesday Moutia Elzahed requested permission to wear a niqab while giving evidence in the district court of New South Wales. Her request was denied. Reproduced here is the full transcript of the reasons Judge Audrey Balla gave for her decision:

This is a claim by four plaintiffs for damages for injuries each of them say they sustained during the execution of a search warrant at their home on 18 September 2014. The AFP is the first defendant, and the New South Wales police is the second defendant. Liability is in issue.

The first plaintiff is the wife of the second plaintiff, and the mother of the other two plaintiffs. She is a religious Muslim. She wears what I understand is a niqab; that is, her whole body, other than her eyes, is covered. Senior counsel for the plaintiffs informed me earlier today that he intended to call the first plaintiff to give evidence. The issue then arose as to whether she should give that evidence with her face covered or uncovered. Just before I adjourned I was told that the first plaintiff refused to give evidence with her face uncovered.

Since I have resumed after lunch, I have offered other courses to the first plaintiff; that her evidence be taken while she is in a remote room. Her face would be uncovered, but she could choose not to see who is watching her to give evidence; and/or I close the court so that only lawyers involved in the proceedings would be in the court. She has decided not to do so.

It is my role to ensure that there is a trial which is fair to all parties. I must balance on the one hand the need to respect the first plaintiff’s religious beliefs. In this case, those beliefs mean that she may choose not to give evidence which could impact on the successful prosecution of her case.


On the other hand, I must take into account whether I would be impeded in my ability to full assess the reliability and credibility of the evidence of the first plaintiff if I am not afforded the opportunity of being able to see her face when she gives evidence. I am well aware that the demeanour of a witness and the viewing of their face is not the only way in which credibility is assessed. In some cases the demeanour of a witness may be misleading. However, neither of those considerations can, in my view, mean that I should be completely deprived of having the assistance of seeing her face to assess her credibility.

I have only heard the evidence of one of the sons. However, yesterday I asked senior counsel for the plaintiff whether there will be a conflict in the evidence as to what actually occurred, and he replied that there is bound to be. He agreed that I will need to make a finding about whose evidence I prefer.

As the resolution of the likely conflict in the evidence as to exactly what occurred that morning is essential to the determination of the proceedings or the part of the proceedings involving the first plaintiff at least, and the assessment of the weight to be given to the evidence of the first plaintiff is part of that exercise, I have decided that she can only give evidence with her face uncovered. I decline to permit her to give evidence with her face covered.

[rubato]

Foolish question. It is like asking "why does Christianity forbid driving cars and using cell phones" just because the Amish and Hutterites forbid these things.

Well, Roger Irrelevant you've certainly confused yourself there.

What if it, and other aspects of Islam, denies women the ability to integrate into society?

So you are really unable to understand that the rules of one or two sects of Islam cannot be blamed on all of it?

It is not an "aspect of Islam" any more than some Mennonite communities rejection of electricity is an "Aspect" of Christianity. That's just stupid.


Wow.

Glad you didn't have to rely on your mental ability to get paid employment.


yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

What if it, and other aspects of Islam, denies women the ability to integrate into society?

So you are really unable to understand that the rules of one or two sects of Islam cannot be blamed on all of it?

Gibberish, try speaking English.

It is not an "aspect of Islam" any more than some Mennonite communities rejection of electricity is an "Aspect" of Christianity. That's just stupid.

The only thing "stupid" there is your feeble attempts to make a comparison Aspy

Glad you didn't have to rely on your mental ability to get paid employment.


yrs,
rubato

Playing "beard" to your wife is the only thing which keeps the roof over your head Roger Irrelevant, you're in no position to criticise working people.

[Scooter]

It is an "aspect of Islam" that is observed by only a small minority of Muslim women, just like the rejection of modern machinery and electronics is an "aspect of Christianity" that is observed by only a small minority of Christians who are concentrated in certain sects.

Islam is not some monolithic block of uniform faith and belief. And the answer to your question is, what if prohibiting a veiled face in public makes her unwilling to leave her home? How well integrated will she be then?

She may never give up the niqab (my grandmother put on a headscarf or some other covering before coming down for breakfast, and worn it until she went to sleep, until the day she died). But her daughter will probably never put one on.

[wesw]

yeah, Saudi Arabia is just a muslim backwater, in no way representative of islam...

[Scooter]

Saudi Arabia is 30 million Muslims out of 1.7 billion. That, and the fact that religious leaders from neighbouring states frequently publicly disagree with the pronouncements coming from its clerics should be enough of a clue that Muslims from elsewhere couldn't give a toss about what Saudi Muslims believe.

Oh dear, I just stated two facts in support of my argument. I'll be called a hater for sure.

[Gob]

It is an "aspect of Islam" that is observed by only a small minority of Muslim women, just like the rejection of modern machinery and electronics is an "aspect of Christianity" that is observed by only a small minority of Christians who are concentrated in certain sects.

That is why my statement was; "What if it, and other aspects of Islam, denies women the ability to integrate into society?"

Islam is not some monolithic block of uniform faith and belief. And the answer to your question is, what if prohibiting a veiled face in public makes her unwilling to leave her home? How well integrated will she be then?

Well that's added more problem to the problem. How about some ideas on how best to help Muslim women in a first world country integrate?

[dales]

Well that's added more problem to the problem. How about some ideas on how best to help Muslim women in a first world country integrate?

Get them a credit card.

(sorry, just a very weak attempt at humour)

No racism implied.

[wesw]

[Big RR]

How about some ideas on how best to help Muslim women in a first world country integrate?

And add to that the requirement of freedom of religion a very high bar for government to interfere with religious practices. At best I would think all such a government would do is to give women the choice to either accept or reject any religious dictates. If someone chooses to remain outside of mainstream society, I would think that should be there right absent some compelling governmental interest in abrogating any particular aspects of the religion in particular circumstances (such as giving of testimony in court as mentioned above).