www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6557252.ece


My First thought was that women should be able to wear what they want. However on reading further into Sarkozy's argument it would seem that the burka is a sign of the repression against women and is only used by extremists and not a part of the Koran. You could argue that if you ban the hoody from certain places (i.e. Bluewater shopping centre), you could also ban Burka's as they disguise the identity equally, if not more than a hoody. Italy and parts of Germany have already banned the Burka, should we follow suit.

Repressive or not we have no rght to ban the burqa. As a symbol of religious faith it should be regarded as untouchable. I've heard every argument from "if you can't see the face you can't really communicate" {which makes telephone conversations apparently impossible} to "it could be used to conceal a bomb belt" {tell that to Jean Charles De Menezes who was wearing a big brown coat - do we propose banning those as well?}. The fact is that by banning individual religious expression we violate a basic human right. You can make any excuse you like {as can Sakozy}. Many women choose to wear the burqa as a free choice. Remove that choice and you erode still further the human rights we once enjoyed here. This is intolerance. Pure and simple. Ban the burqa? Sure. Now, what can we think of to ban next?

Charles de Menezes was wearing a thin denim jacket when he was murdered, not a big brown jacket.

The police lied (i.e. perverted the course of justice) about him wearing a big bulky jacket in the middle of summer. They were forced to retract that lie when eyewitnesses refuted it and cctv proved it false.

I know this isn't entirely revelent to your argument about the ban on the burka, but it would be a shame to propagate a police lie on this board.

Locked Out wrote:
As a symbol of religious faith it should be regarded as untouchable.
No it shouldn't. Why should people who choose to buy into fanciful and often ludicrous belief systems (this includes all religions, not just Islam) enjoy special treatment? You can bet your bottom dollar that anyone who feels the constant need to be demanding respect actually deserves none, and has earned none. It's high time humanity grew up, and stopped giving religious nutters a credibility which we don't give to other types of nutter. I refer you also to Giles' post about Christians holding rituals to exorcise gay demons.

There may be some Muslimas who choose to wear a Burka, but given the extreme nature of the Burka wearing sections of Islam, I doubt they are allowed any opinions of their own.

That said, I do have mixed feelings on the issue of actually banning Burkas. I generally hate government passing laws under the pretext that they are for our own good, and there has been far too much of that recently, so I do see an inconsistency in my instincts to want rid of these mobile prisons.

France's position is that they are a secular society, a state of affairs they actually had a revolution to achieve. Any outward displays of religious affiliation are considered provocative, exclusive and divisive. By banning them, the hope is that all citizens can co-exist without the barriers of religion in the way. This in no way precludes religious freedom any more than not being able to have sex in public precludes your freedom to have sex in private in any way you see fit... and if you/they/we don't like it, then feel free to move elsewhere, maybe to one of those nice countries where women are killed for _not_ wearing a burka...

The sooner we and everywhere else follows France's example, the better.

I can follow both arguments but I find it very hard to accept any item of clothing should be banned.

But what would I think if I saw a bunch of people marching in full Nazi uniform or the Klu Klux Klan outfit?.

I think persuasion would be better (and probably ineffective). But telling people what they can and can not wear?.A very slippery slope.

wasn't the old nun's habit a sort of bridal dress for Christ?

Anthony-
"Why should people who choose to buy into fanciful and often ludicrous belief systems (this includes all religions, not just Islam) enjoy special treatment?"

You think that having the right to wear a particular item of clothing is being allowed "special treatment?" In what way? And {more to the point} Allowed by whom? Society? Governement? Who exactly has the right to take it upon themselves to be the arbiters of what someone can or can't wear? I have no particular kick for any religion myself, being pretty pugnaciously irreligious. However, live and let live.

Blackit- OK, I fell for the police lie. However, I'm sure you get my point. The use of bulky, coverall clothing for the concealment of ill intention cannot be said to be limited to the burqa. Will that do?

Veritas- As usual your points are balanced. However the burqa has absolutely no equivalence in terms of ill fame as Nazi or KKK regalia. Until it has done something to gain anythinkg like that level of notoriety I'd argue that it doesn't deserve anything like a similar level of revulsion. Or disrespect.

The MD-
"Any outward displays of religious affiliation are considered provocative, exclusive and divisive."
Erm... what? Last time I checked there was no such feeling directed toward regular churchgoers. Indeed, most churces remain stalwartly and resolutely open for business at the time of writing. Priests go about their daily business unmolested as indeed do nuns. France has a large number of both and neither are the subject of religious sanction in theis secular society of yours. I put it to you, sir, that your statement is either misinformed, misinterpreted or just plain wrong. And "feel free to move elsewhere, maybe to one of those nice countries where women are killed for _not_ wearing a burka..." is the worst kind of strawman argument.

You dont want to be banning the Burka til you have seen what is under it ! this should be a case on case basis and for some it should in fact be compulsory.

Integration is the only way forward, multiculturalism cannot work though Multiracialism is a fantastic and workable concept

Locked Out wrote:
Anthony-
"Why should people who choose to buy into fanciful and often ludicrous belief systems (this includes all religions, not just Islam) enjoy special treatment?"

You think that having the right to wear a particular item of clothing is being allowed "special treatment?" In what way? And {more to the point} Allowed by whom? Society? Governement? Who exactly has the right to take it upon themselves to be the arbiters of what someone can or can't wear? I have no particular kick for any religion myself, being pretty pugnaciously irreligious. However, live and let live.
I was just responding to your comment that as a symbol of religious faith it should be untouchable. It was that comment in particular that I disagreed with. I did go on to say that I have mixed feelings about whether it should be banned. I always support freedom of the individual, but on the other hand, should I apply those ethics to a belief system which does not believe in such freedoms? A tricky one.

Dont ban it - just laugh at it. In the same way a man in a 3 piece suit in the Middle East sweating and looking out of place would be laughed at.

It is not functional for our weather and way of life. No need to ban it - just mention the word "Dalek" when you see someone wearing once ( It is a free country and if you think someone looks like a Dalek then you are totally entitled to laugh and mention it !! in love of course )

Banning people's clothing or symbols is wrong. We dont need to conform to any one way. But at the same time we should be in a position where we can have opinions about clothing which is possibly a little daft.

Laughing at these women could make their possibly already miserable lives of repression even more miserable. If they are been forced to wear such things then surely laughing at them is kicking them when they are down.

"It gives us equality with men" says woman dressed as Dalek on Nicky Campbell this morning.

"So why shouldn't men wear burkas?" asks Nicky.

Silence. Confusion. Panic.

DOH.

Organised religion can be SOOO stupid.

They should be forced to remove it when entering any premises that require full faces to be shown.


Stuff all these "religious rights". Basic human rights for all yes, religious rights no.