(for the following-the-news challenged: http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/04/23/robertson.belgium.burqa.ban.cnn?iref=allsearch) On one side I appriciate that there has been some secular justification given behind this ban and that the law applies to all face covers not only the muslim veils but on the other hand I would rather see few people displaying their pre-medieval beliefs in the public rather than infringe on their civil liberties.
you realize it is still a proposed ban, something about every western country(and turkey) has now? If people want to wear a burqa, let them wear a burqa. If people don't want to wear a burqa, don't let them wear a burqa. Same goes for those jewish caps, those crucifix-necklaces, dots on head a.o.. Exceptions are of course a large number of public positions and anyplace with a uniform. Also, i wouldn't call this against muslims, most muslim women wear those caps instead of burqa's anyway.
The lower house passed it. As far as I know the upper house won't be a big problem either. And to claim that this law is not aimed against (the more fundamental) muslims is laughable at best.
and the big difference is in the more fundamental part. The difference is targeting 1/5th - 1/4th of the world and 1/400th-1/200th of the world(don't know exact percentages of the last one)
10% is still a considerable number of people. But even if the law was to target a single person I would still give a damn. People have to learn to defend peoples rights even if they themselves consider the thing that they are protecting silly otherwise there will be no real liberty only the will of the majority forced on the minority.
I see very little difference between forcing someone to wear one and forcing them not to. I 100% agree with drie's point. If they DO ban a burqa, I better see Christian crucifixes banned, Hindi dots, Bhudda earrings, etc banned as well. Otherwise, it's simple discrimination based upon popular world opinion.
I am actually very torn on this issue. I think what you're saying Fenix is asinine. I don't think that this issue could be dismissed by simply mentioning the slippery slope argument since burqa is very distinct religious simple and you cannot easily equate it with a crucifix or an earring. I am too honest with myself to be satisfied with such argument. Personal liberties are at the top of my list together with human rights. But this is where the two clash. On one hand I revere their right to put that revolting symbol comparable with the KKK hood on their head but on the other hand I appriciate the fact that many of these women are very strongly pressured into this form of clothing by their intellectually retarded male counterparts. Let's face it burqas (remember we are talking about burqas, not simple veils) are not the sort of thing many women would willingly like to wear at all times. They are pressured into it by life-long indoctrination and in the more extreme cases forced by their family. I am not convinced that the case has been made that would sufficiently support a full-scale ban on the burqa (although I think a case could be made to ban it in certain institutions such as the school system) but it is definetly something to be scoffed upon and which should be subject to a social stigma. Oh and remember: These are all the symptoms of the problems. When will people finally stop giving religion the undeserved respect it gets and deal with it on its own merit?
burqa bans are just stupid. you may as well ban hats and scarves, as most people cover up their faces in winter. anyone wearing a burqa, however, should be required to show their faces when photo ID is required. how hard is this to understand? instead we have idiots arguing that burquas should be banned outright, and other idiots saying forcing people to remove a burqua to get a driver's license is infringing religious rights or something.
I live in Belgium. I know what the matter there is in here. The main problem is not yes or no the muslim women can or can't wear those burqas ( a burqa is the suit that covers the woman totally, and we just see her eyes, not even her cheek and face). The women rights organizations here in Belgium have done a big job in this question that became a polemic. And this "social" polemic became a political polemic. You have to know that after July the 1st Belgium will have the presidency of Europe during 6 months. And now currently we (the Belgians) have no Prime Minister yet. There were so many political troubles that arrived before this question of the burqa came. Actually there were a lot of problems between the Flemish and the Walloons, the problem of Brussels-Hal-Vilvoorde, the finance, the employment, etc ... many and many BIG questions. But as in June we'll have to vote to choose our Prime Minister (actually it is more complicated) the only arguments that the politicians are defending are those that they are sure to resolve, like banning the burqa in the public function. A muslim woman who wants to work in the public function can't wear the burqa. Some years ago the polemic was about to ban or not the islamic cap in the public function AND in the schools ! So little young girls had to de-cover their hair. And they were not allowed to follow the cursus if they didn't accept the rule. Or they were banned from the school. Yeah, it's far more easy to take care of this problem than giving a job to everybody ! Actually most of the muslims don't accept the burqa. This suit is exagerated. The muslim woman has to cover her hairs with a cap (in French, "le voile islamique", that we see in the CNN broadcast). Some muslim women accept to keep the burqa, other not ... This is a typical question for muslims only. But the Belgian representatives are debating about it in their campaign because they have a lack of arguments.
