PDA

View Full Version : Court upholds city's ban on wearing Islamic burka


Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 10:42 AM
13 June 2006

BRUSSELS — The Flemish city of Maaseik has won a court battle allowing it to maintain its ban on the wearing of an Islamic burka.

A magistrates court rejected an appeal on Monday lodged by Moroccan woman Khadija El Ouazzanik.

El Ouazzani was one of five women in Maaseik who wore a complete Islamic veil or burka on city streets.

She was fined EUR 75 in April 2005, but lodged an appeal with the Maaseik magistrates court.

And the ruling is important nation-wide, given the fact it is the first time that a Belgian court has banned a burka or niqab (a face veil up to the eyes).

"A lot of colleagues in Belgium are considering a ban on burkas or face veils,"
Maaseik Mayor Jan Creemers said.

"They have waited for this ruling because they feel strengthened by a ban from a court."

[Copyright Expatica News 2006]

-----------------------------------------------

Now a nation-wide ban, please...

marmite1
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:31 AM
Why are they banning it? That is ridiculous.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:34 AM
hmm, i agree, people should be able to wear whatever they want. if they can ban burqas they can ban anything.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:34 AM
Why is it ridiculous?

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:37 AM
Oh c'mon Burkas have nothing to do with Islam, they are just a mean to keep women silent.

"Sluggy"
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:38 AM
They are banning it probably because they believe there is a connection with covering womens' bodies in veils and the suppression of womens' rights. We have similar issues in France and our only solution is to forbid the veil in school and in public jobs. it is the only way to make all women understand that violence towards them will not be tolerated.

"Sluggy"
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:39 AM
hmm, i agree, people should be able to wear whatever they want. if they can ban burqas they can ban anything.

Including hand guns, grenades, etc.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:39 AM
Why is it ridiculous?
why should politicians be able to make decisions about what people wear? that sounds ridiculous to me.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:40 AM
Including hand guns, grenades, etc.
and nuclear weapons :p

i'm talking about clothes, obviously :rolleyes:

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:41 AM
why should politicians be able to make decisions about what people wear? that sounds ridiculous to me.

It's not politicians, it's judges.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:41 AM
Oh c'mon Burkas have nothing to do with Islam, they are just a mean to keep women silent.
who mentioned islam? :confused:

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:42 AM
The article did and so did I...Why? :shrug:

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:43 AM
It's not politicians, it's judges.
ok, and who created the laws that make it possible for judges to make decisions like this? each way, i think everyone can wear whatever they wish.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:45 AM
ok, and who created the laws that make it possible for judges to make decisions like this? each way, i think everyone can wear whatever they wish.

The decision was based on the fact that the women refused to take off the Burka when they were asked to identify themselves. People should at all times be able to identify themselves, that's why burkas are forbidden.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:48 AM
The decision was based on the fact that the women refused to take off the Burka when they were asked to identify themselves. People should at all times be able to identify themselves, that's why burkas are forbidden.
ok, now that ressembles an argument. not a very powerful one, though.

so what was that supposed to be? a routine check? do the police stop the people in belgium at random and demand documents from them? or were these women behave in dissorderly manner or something?

"Sluggy"
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:49 AM
why should politicians be able to make decisions about what people wear? that sounds ridiculous to me.

You really dont understand or are not trying to. You can take differing points on issues, but you have to acknowledge what the issues are. It is simple, if we permit women in France and rest of Europe to walk around like mummies with eyeslits, they are basically under the complete control of their men. Do you think men should control women this way? No, im sure you dont. Women in France are under tremendous pressure to wear veils, but if the State tells women that they are free to chose, we are empowering them and presumably gently reminding them that they come to the State for help if they are being controled against their will.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:51 AM
I don't know the exact circumstances but I suppose it was a routine check.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:55 AM
You really dont understand or are not trying to. You can take differing points on issues, but you have to acknowledge what the issues are. It is simple, if we permit women in France and rest of Europe to walk around like mummies with eyeslits, they are basically under the complete control of their men. Do you think men should control women this way? No, im sure you dont. Women in France are under tremendous pressure to wear veils, but if the State tells women that they are free to chose, we are empowering them and presumably gently reminding them that they come to the State for help if they are being controled against their will.

I agree with this and therefore I think the government should ban burkas so that judges can enforce the law instead of having to point out identification problems like this judge had to do.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:55 AM
You really dont understand or are not trying to. You can take differing points on issues, but you have to acknowledge what the issues are. It is simple, if we permit women in France and rest of Europe to walk around like mummies with eyeslits, they are basically under the complete control of their men. Do you think men should control women this way? No, im sure you dont. Women in France are under tremendous pressure to wear veils, but if the State tells women that they are free to chose, we are empowering them and presumably gently reminding them that they come to the State for help if they are being controled against their will.
how are we empowering women by forcing them to do something? aren't we doing the same thing that their men do? and does not wearing a veil automatically translates to "empowerment"? worse still, what if women want to wear a veil, just for the sake of it. should we still blame their husbands for that? should we force them not to wear veils even in such cases? is that saying them that they are "free to choose"?

i don't think this is the best approach. it's like saying that european women must wear mini-skirts, because that would "empower" them.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:57 AM
I don't know the exact circumstances but I suppose it was a routine check.
ok. but why ban burqas altogether? for example, a lot of people celebrate helloween and they wear masks for a night. should that be forbidden too?

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:57 AM
^^This is not about the veil but the burka, big difference.

Kart
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:58 AM
Seems to me a bit harsh to ban them wearing these items of clothing it it's their choice.

That said, if a police officer approaches you in the street asking you to identify yourself and you flat out refuse, you're asking for this kind of thing to happen.

With a bit of flexibility on both sides this could probably be avoided.

Sadly it's probably just a sign of things to come :(.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 11:59 AM
ok. but why ban burqas altogether? for example, a lot of people celebrate helloween and they wear masks for a night. should that be forbidden too?

Because those women refuse to take of the burka.

Brαm
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:02 PM
ok. but why ban burqas altogether? for example, a lot of people celebrate helloween and they wear masks for a night. should that be forbidden too?Actually, I think it's forbidden to wear masks in some Flemish cities and that's why burqas were banned in the first place!

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:03 PM
Actually, I think it's forbidden to wear masks in some Flemish cities and that's why burqas were banned in the first place!

This only counts for the photo on your ID, you have to show your face because otherwise it makes identification impossible.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:04 PM
Because those women refuse to take of the burka.
you just said you think burqas should be banned so the judges don't need to invoke the identification problems when they uhold these decisions, so you obviously don't care about such problems. therefore we don't need to pursue this argument anymore and you let's stick to what sluggy posted. it does not matter whether we are talking about veils or burqas.

i have only seen a woman wearing a burqa in vienna once. it looked ridiculous, but i did not know what to say. she appeared to be there with her man who was dressed in some strange clothes as well. they appeared to be well-off visitors from some islamic country - possibly saudi arabia? i have no idea, but i did not mind them.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:05 PM
Actually, I think it's forbidden to wear masks in some Flemish cities and that's why burqas were banned in the first place!
i did not know they have such silly laws in belgium. well, i disagree with that as well.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:09 PM
you just said you think burqas should be banned so the judges don't need to invoke the identification problems when they uhold these decisions, so you obviously don't care about such problems. therefore we don't need to pursue this argument anymore and you let's stick to what sluggy posted. it does not matter whether we are talking about veils or burqas.

i have only seen a woman wearing a burqa in vienna once. it looked ridiculous, but i did not know what to say. she appeared to be there with her man who was dressed in some strange clothes as well. they appeared to be well-off visitors from some islamic country - possibly saudi arabia? i have no idea, but i did not mind them.

Women who wear a burka do this because they don't want their face or any other body structure to be shown to anyone except their husband. SO when a police officer asks them to take it off for identification they will always refuse because they are not allowed to. Why wear a burka then if you could also wear a simple veil? So yes, burkas should be banned because of that, the ideology behind them makes it impossible for them to show their face to strangers so ID problems will always exist.

Brαm
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:09 PM
This only counts for the photo on your ID, you have to show your face because otherwise it makes identification impossible.
No, it is illegal to walk around in some cities while wearing a mask or anything that covers your face.

"Eerder verbood de Brusselse gemeente Molenbeek het dragen van de burka al, op basis van een oud carnavalsreglement. Een vrouw die toch met een burka op straat komt, loopt kans op een boete van 150 euro."

http://www2.telegraaf.nl/buitenland/article14172781.ece

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:11 PM
No, it is illegal to walk around in some cities while wearing a mask or anything that covers your face.

"Eerder verbood de Brusselse gemeente Molenbeek het dragen van de burka al, op basis van een oud carnavalsreglement. Een vrouw die toch met een burka op straat komt, loopt kans op een boete van 150 euro."

http://www2.telegraaf.nl/buitenland/article14172781.ece

Ah wist ik niet maar is wel logisch.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:13 PM
Women who wear a burka do this because they don't want their face or any other body structure to be shown to anyone except their husband. SO when a police officer asks them to take it off for identification they will always refuse because they are not allowed to. Why wear a burka then if you could also wear a simple veil? So yes, burkas should be banned because of that, the ideology behind them makes it impossible for them to show their face to strangers so ID problems will always exist.
i don't think it's the state's business to question any ideologies. if identification is necessary and these women refuse to identify themselves that can be in a way acceptable (though i am not a huge fan of routine checks at all, the police should leave people alone unless they are doing something against the law), but then you can fine them and that's it.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:15 PM
When ideologies preach discrimination or hatred for example, I do think it's the state's business to interfear.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:24 PM
When ideologies preach discrimination or hatred for example, I do think it's the state's business to interfear.
well, i don't. because who makes decisions about stuff like that and how? it goes againt basic democratic principles.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:25 PM
well, i don't. because who makes decisions about stuff like that and how? it goes againt basic democratic principles.

Discrimination also goes against democratic principles.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:33 PM
Discrimination also goes against democratic principles.
we were talking about ideologies, not about discrimination. and preventing people from dressing the way they want is also a form of discrimination, so that can't be a solution. while people are wasting their time supporting rubbish laws something meaningful could be done, perhaps. but that's not even on the table. a lot of people have been mislead to believe that dress codes represent a major form of discrimination.

no, people, that's the wrong place to start.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:35 PM
What would your meaningful solution be then?

And for the record I do believe that wearing a burka is discriminating. In this situation for instance, men can at all time be identified while women can't.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:50 PM
What would your meaningful solution be then?

And for the record I do believe that wearing a burka is discriminating. In this situation for instance, men can at all time be identified while women can't.
so, not being identifiable by the police means being discriminated against? :lol: no, being forced to wear a burqa is a form of discrimination, wearing a burqa or anything else because you want to isn't. but even then, you need to take into account that there is also a pressure from the society to uphold certain dress codes. i don't think people who wear suits and ties are smarter than those who don't, but in a lot of places you have to wear them. i hate wearing a suit, but often i have to. can i say i am discriminated against? :p

muslim women now experience pressure from both sides and both sides demand the opposite from them. in this way i even think we are making it more difficult for them.

a meaningful solution can't be described here, because it involves many different things that need to be explained in detail. not surprisingly, such programs involve a lot of social work and no police state measures and they yield some results, even if only slowly. but that's to be expected anyway.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 12:56 PM
so, not being identifiable by the police means being discriminated against? :lol: no, being forced to wear a burqa is a form of discrimination, wearing a burqa or anything else because you want to isn't. but even then, you need to take into account that there is also a pressure from the society to uphold certain dress codes. i don't think people who wear suits and ties are smarter than those who don't, but in a lot of places you have to wear them. i hate wearing a suit, but often i have to. can i say i am discriminated against? :p

muslim women now experience pressure from both sides and both sides demand the opposite from them. in this way i even think we are making it more difficult for them.

a meaningful solution can't be described here, because it involves many different things that need to be explained in detail. not surprisingly, such programs involve a lot of social work and no police state measures and they yield some results, even if only slowly. but that's to be expected anyway.

Actually I was refering to the men being discriminated against because they can at all time be identified but apparently women don't if they wear a burka.

And your meaningful solution seems like a lot of hollow words, sometimes a drastic measure is needed to change mentality.

"Sluggy"
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:01 PM
how are we empowering women by forcing them to do something? aren't we doing the same thing that their men do? and does not wearing a veil automatically translates to "empowerment"? worse still, what if women want to wear a veil, just for the sake of it. should we still blame their husbands for that? should we force them not to wear veils even in such cases? is that saying them that they are "free to choose"?

i don't think this is the best approach. it's like saying that european women must wear mini-skirts, because that would "empower" them.

For crissakes asdaja, if a person's entire body is covered, and she is not supposed to even talk to men who are not in her family, how is a woman supposed to get help from male French police officers who are not her family members? The point of the law is to make sure that ALL WOMEN living in occidental countries are FREE to do what they like. SEE, in many cases the women have no choice, their Male Family Members foce them to dress that way. the state is only telling them that they dont have to and they we will protect them from domineering bad muslim men.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:06 PM
Actually I was refering to the men being discriminated against because they can at all time be identified but apparently women don't if they wear a burka.

And your meaningful solution seems like a lot of hollow words, sometimes a drastic measure is needed to change mentality.
it may seem like a lot of hollow words to you, but you are not the one who needs to be helped here. pretending that you know what's best for others is patronising. there are feminist movements in islamic societies and their opinions matter more to me than anything you can say. their words are not hollow. try to inform yourself and you will see.

Diam's
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:10 PM
They are banning it probably because they believe there is a connection with covering womens' bodies in veils and the suppression of womens' rights. We have similar issues in France and our only solution is to forbid the veil in school and in public jobs. it is the only way to make all women understand that violence towards them will not be tolerated.

:confused:
I don't think it was the main reason for the ban of the muslim headscarf in French state schools.Btw Sikh turbans, Jewish skullcap and large Christian crosses are also banned.
The main raison was that the law should prohibit the wearing of visible religious signs in schools, according to laïcité requirements.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:11 PM
For crissakes asdaja, if a person's entire body is covered, and she is not supposed to even talk to men who are not in her family, how is a woman supposed to get help from male French police officers who are not her family members? The point of the law is to make sure that ALL WOMEN living in occidental countries are FREE to do what they like. SEE, in many cases the women have no choice, their Male Family Members foce them to dress that way. the state is only telling them that they dont have to and they we will protect them from domineering bad muslim men.
i think these laws contribute more to stereotyping "bad muslim men" than to protecting women. if women in occidental societies are free to do what they like that includes wearing whatever they want. i mean, are we now supposed to make christian nuns wear mini-skirts and have sex as well?

things are more complicated than that and therefore they need more sophisticated solutions.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:14 PM
:confused:
I don't think it was the main reason for the ban of the muslim headscarf in French state schools.Btw Sikh turbans, Jewish skullcap and large Christian crosses are also banned.
The main raison was that the law should prohibit the wearing of visible religious signs in schools, according to laïcité requirements.
i'm not sure even that was necessary. but as you can see, a lot of people probably perceived it as something different, and to be honest, i think those who introduced these laws wanted them to be preceived in this other way.

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:20 PM
Burkas should be forbidden, I don't see how there could be a compromise on this issue.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:24 PM
Burkas should be forbidden, I don't see how there could be a compromise on this issue.
well, you are entitled to your opinion.

ceiling_fan
Jun 13th, 2006, 01:29 PM
In a perfect society, the burka should be able to be worn.

In Australia they say women who wear religious coverings are scorned instead of the girls who wear nothing on the beach. seems silly to me but i guess it is backed up by the facts about the womens' rights being suppressed and how they need to be identified.

Lord Nelson
Jun 13th, 2006, 02:39 PM
:confused:
I don't think it was the main reason for the ban of the muslim headscarf in French state schools.Btw Sikh turbans, Jewish skullcap and large Christian crosses are also banned.
The main raison was that the law should prohibit the wearing of visible religious signs in schools, according to laïcité requirements.
that is the political answer. The real answer had to do with religious tensions in the banlieus within Muslim comunities and inter community violence. It was mostly because of the Islamic community that the law was passed. Many Muslims realize this and don't want to be westernized and that's why they protest.

arn
Jun 13th, 2006, 07:18 PM
It also has to do with the safety feeling. Many people would not feel safe if there are people running around in burka. It's still the basic task of the government to create and uphold a safe society.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 07:30 PM
It also has to do with the safety feeling. Many people would not feel safe if there are people running around in burka. It's still the basic task of the government to create and uphold a safe society.
:lol:

-Ph51-
Jun 13th, 2006, 07:38 PM
well, you are entitled to your opinion.
Who are you to judge our laws? :confused:

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 07:48 PM
Who are you to judge our laws? :confused:
you are a country in european union. stupid laws in one country can easily affect others. and if there are laws that i feel are not right i would say so even if the country in question is tuvalu. there.

gentenaire
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:03 PM
azdaja, do you feel people should be allowed to walk around naked too?

gentenaire
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:04 PM
and I agree with Arn, a burqa is a clear sign of muslim extremism so if I saw a woman dressed like that, I'd be worried.

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:08 PM
azdaja, do you feel people should be allowed to walk around naked too?
as far as i'm concerned yeah :p but i don't think this is really comparable to that. i think this is more about people's prejudices (some of which you have just expressed :p ) than about any real problem.

gentenaire
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:12 PM
You don't think a burqa is extreme?

When I see a guy with bombs wrapped around his waist, you'll call me prejudiced too for calling him a terrorist, I suppose.

alfajeffster
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:22 PM
I wasn't aware Margaret Court has taken to wearing a burka, much less parading around the streets of Brussels...:confused:

azdaja
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:31 PM
You don't think a burqa is extreme?

When I see a guy with bombs wrapped around his waist, you'll call me prejudiced too for calling him a terrorist, I suppose.
burqa is extreme in my opinion, but so is making an immediate connection between burqas and suicide bombs :p to be honest, burqas do annoy me a bit, just like all signs of religiousness do, and i wouldn't mind seein them dissappear from the face of earth, but what can i do about it? i simply don't think that introducing laws of this kind is a step in the right direction. if you can ban burqas, you can ban bikinis as well. and i wouldn't want to see that happening :p

i'm joking of course, but people should really think about it. we are supposed to have free societies, not the ones where the state prescribes dress codes. that's what iranians do, you know. and no, i don't feel scared whenever i see a religious muslim. many of them are extremely conservative, but "harmless" in the same way that most religious christians are. let's not get carried away here. because terrorists are more sophisticated than that.

so, let the people dress the way they want, i think.

gentenaire
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:41 PM
I do make that connection, yes. When a man dresses himself and wears a beard exactly like Osama, it is safe to presume that he doesn't disapprove of Osama's actions. I think it's also safe to presume that the husbands of the women wearing burqas aren't too keen on our western society. It's a clear disapproval of everything we stand for.

PointBlank
Jun 13th, 2006, 08:54 PM
This is rediculous. You guys are so into sterotypes in this thread.

Not all Muslim men require their wives to wear burqas. Many women who do wear them wear them at their own choice. In conservative Islamic families the women there are raised and think thats what they should do. Its not always forced. We are not beating our women for not wearing them. I think thats a very bad sterotype. Amish people are never talked about for the bonnet. I know the bonnet is just a hair covering thing, but its still something they are raised and taught to wear, much like the burqa.

When a man dresses himself and wears a beard exactly like Osama, it is safe to presume that he doesn't disapprove of Osama's actions. I think it's also safe to presume that the husbands of the women wearing burqas aren't too keen on our western society.

Nice judgement there. My dad has a beard much the same way, and he is very against Osamas actions. Also, many members of our family have their wives wear burqas and they live in the USA and love it here. Funny because you said theyd hate western society.

Martian Willow
Jun 13th, 2006, 09:04 PM
You don't think a burqa is extreme?

When I see a guy with bombs wrapped around his waist, you'll call me prejudiced too for calling him a terrorist, I suppose.

Of course; the politically-correct term is 'freedom fighter'. :)

gentenaire
Jun 13th, 2006, 09:40 PM
BTW, the whole fine thing is rather ironic since it's social services that ends up paying the fines anyway since these women live on wellfare.

gentenaire
Jun 13th, 2006, 09:43 PM
Not all Muslim men require their wives to wear burqas. Many women who do wear them wear them at their own choice. .

No one said anything about all muslims forcing their wives to wear a burqa. I seriously doubt the women wear them because they want to, though. We're not talking about a mere headscarf here but a full burqa!

Josh
Jun 13th, 2006, 09:46 PM
I'm sorry but there is no way to justify the wearing of a burka. It has nothing to do with Islam and you won't find it being justified in the Quran. It's just an interpretation of some male sexists who like to oppress and brainwash women. Therefore any democratic society should ban it and those who want to wear it should just move to Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia.

arn
Jun 13th, 2006, 10:18 PM
:lol:

You may laugh, but I'm sure many people would feel that way. When judging somebody you never saw before, part of it comes from facial expression, the way somebody dresses,...

When I cannot see somebodies facial expression AT ALL (is that person angry, drunk,...???)(for me this issue weighs heavier than anything else cos in any situation I like to know what and who I'm dealing with) and when I see somebody wearing clothes that stand for the oppression of women and extreme religious thoughts, it creates a mixture in which I'm not jumping for joy to start a conversation with that person. Just the way I feel about it.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:42 AM
You may laugh, but I'm sure many people would feel that way. When judging somebody you never saw before, part of it comes from facial expression, the way somebody dresses,...
that's all nice and dandy, but in the past a lot of people also thought black people were closer to monkeys than to us. had we played by their rules where would we be now?

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:47 AM
I do make that connection, yes. When a man dresses himself and wears a beard exactly like Osama, it is safe to presume that he doesn't disapprove of Osama's actions. I think it's also safe to presume that the husbands of the women wearing burqas aren't too keen on our western society. It's a clear disapproval of everything we stand for.
what do we stand for, though? how are we perceived by others? if you think you are the sexiest man in the world and no girl can resist you you may end up raping one, ya know? :rolleyes:

and the rest of your post is full of jumping to conclusions. i know it's grass season, but let's not get that high yet :p

dementieva's fan
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:15 AM
I do make that connection, yes. When a man dresses himself and wears a beard exactly like Osama, it is safe to presume that he doesn't disapprove of Osama's actions.

:lol: ^^ was the most ridiculous post of this thread by far.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:17 AM
:lol: ^^ was the most ridiculous post of this thread by far.
come to think of it, yeah :tape:

Scotso
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:21 AM
What would your meaningful solution be then?

And for the record I do believe that wearing a burka is discriminating. In this situation for instance, men can at all time be identified while women can't.

So does forcing the minority to conform to the majority. If these women want to wear a simple piece of clothing over their heads, they should be allowed to do so.

Scotso
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:24 AM
They should make a lot forbidding women from shaving their legs, because male dominated society forces them to do so. We also need to ban people from wearing any Christian insignia whatsoever, because those markings are oppressive to the rights of other religions.

dementieva's fan
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:31 AM
BTW-- for me this is stupid because it is a court making a decision on what should be worn and what not simply on the basis of what it feels is the opression of the women, for those here asking for the solution to the problem, the solution cannot be acheived by a judge alone. Such issues are to be tackeled involving the members of th community in question not by some random judge. This is the kind of issue that should be put to a vote in the parliment. I would perosnally love to see the burkas dissapear, but forcing people to give them up is bound to cause a backlash. And honestly you can't tell if the women are being forced to do it, I know a muslim colleague at work who wears a headscarf because she wants to not because anyone forces her to do so. Maybe the Belgian ministers should try to work on more important things like blocking all monetary aid to belgian mosques from fundamentalist countries Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the gang.

wta_zuperfann
Jun 14th, 2006, 03:44 AM
I'm all for people dressing as they please. But I'm troubled by women wearing full burqas when they drive as does a particular woman in my neighborhood. It's down right scary to think what would happen if it slips and covers her eyes when she's driving and can easily hit someone. Ugh!

wta_zuperfann
Jun 14th, 2006, 05:15 AM
patriotic American burqa:

http://www.hollywoodinvestigator.com/2004/flag%20burka.jpg

wta_zuperfann
Jun 14th, 2006, 05:18 AM
another patriotic burqa:

http://www.jav.lautre.net/burusa.jpg

wta_zuperfann
Jun 14th, 2006, 05:19 AM
gay burqa:


http://www.jav.lautre.net/burgay.jpg

wta_zuperfann
Jun 14th, 2006, 05:21 AM
commerical burqa:


http://www.jav.lautre.net/cola1.gif

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 06:33 AM
So does forcing the minority to conform to the majority. If these women want to wear a simple piece of clothing over their heads, they should be allowed to do so.

A burqa is not a 'simple piece of clothing to cover their heads'!!! We're not talking about a headscarf here, but about a burqa. What are the odds, you think, of a woman in burqa finding a job?

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 06:41 AM
:lol: ^^ was the most ridiculous post of this thread by far.

fne, laugh at me. I suggest you go to certain parts of Brussels where muslims have changed from moderate muslims to extreme muslims looking like Osama. And believe me, those people aren't so innocent. Moderate muslims are saying it too, that's where the terrorist cells operate.

I suppose you could say that the Belgian woman who blew herself up in Iraq did it out of her free will, just like she wore that burqa out of free will. It had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that she was married to an extreme muslim, nope, not at all...

You really can't compare a simple headscarf to a full burqa!! There is a world of difference.

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 07:52 AM
that's all nice and dandy, but in the past a lot of people also thought black people were closer to monkeys than to us. had we played by their rules where would we be now?

The comparison with black people doesn't hold for me, at least not for both the arguments I gave.

Seeing a black person you can see facial expression, opposite to a burka
Seeing a black person you don't have a clue about his way of leaving, seeing somebody with a burka you can be 90% sure that woman comes from on extremely religious family where the rights of women are oppressed.

Just in case there is any doubt, I'm talking about http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/images/bandfront.jpg

I'm perfectly fine with

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d9/Esharplar.jpg/180px-Esharplar.jpg

*abby*
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:53 AM
see that picture just scares me!
i do actually find it frightening when i turn round and see a woman dressed like that only being able to see her eyes.i think it is unnecessary.
and in the wake of the terrorist attacks it seems to me that anything could be hidden underneath all that material and it could actually be a man wearing it!you just never know

-Ph51-
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:41 AM
you are a country in european union. stupid laws in one country can easily affect others. and if there are laws that i feel are not right i would say so even if the country in question is tuvalu. there.
What i mean is that you allow yourself to criticise us but do not accept it when we say something you don't like concerning your beliefs. ;)

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:42 AM
The comparison with black people doesn't hold for me, at least not for both the arguments I gave.
it does hold in the sense that in both cases there is some prejudice involved and by adopting laws based on prejudice you are reinforcing prejudice.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:42 AM
What i mean is that you allow yourself to criticise us but do not accept it when we say something you don't like concerning your beliefs. ;)
:confused:

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:48 AM
it does hold in the sense that in both cases there is some prejudice involved and by adopting laws based on prejudice you are reinforcing prejudice.

I completely agree, but ( :p ) in the case of black people it was/is totally based on prejudice while the banning of a burka also can come up with good argument.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:53 AM
I completely agree, but ( :p ) in the case of black people it was/is totally based on prejudice while the banning of a burka also can come up with good argument.
that's partly true, but reinforcing prejudice is a good argument against a ban. each way i remain unconvinced that there is a good reason to ban burqas in general, as much as i don't like them myself.

"Sluggy"
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:55 AM
Many women who do wear them wear them at their own choice.

So many are forced then. thank you for making that clear.


In conservative Islamic families the women there are raised and think thats what they should do. Its not always forced. .

So it is SOMETIMES forced. If you admit that, then you also concede there are good reasons for the State to forbid them? We can't have people being forced to do things in Western culture.

We are not beating our women for not wearing them. I think thats a very bad sterotype. Amish people are never talked about for the bonnet. I know the bonnet is just a hair covering thing, but its still something they are raised and taught to wear, much like the burqa.

I can only imagine what the Amish "religious police" would do to women who disobeyed their laws.



Nice judgement there. My dad has a beard much the same way, and he is very against Osamas actions. Also, many members of our family have their wives wear burqas and they live in the USA and love it here. Funny because you said theyd hate western society.

In france, the veil is a big problem, muslim girls are at risk of being beaten by their male family members if they dont wear these things. that is not what we want in Europe, France is a secular state, people need to get the message.

-Ph51-
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:55 AM
it does hold in the sense that in both cases there is some prejudice involved and by adopting laws based on prejudice you are reinforcing prejudice.
Belgian law says that no one is allowed to walk around on the streets disguised. That goes for everyone. And it is for security reasons. The only exception are a few days a year during carnival.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 11:14 AM
Belgian law says that no one is allowed to walk around on the streets disguised. That goes for everyone. And it is for security reasons. The only exception are a few days a year during carnival.
and i think it's a silly law :shrug:

-Ph51-
Jun 14th, 2006, 11:17 AM
and i think it's a silly law :shrug:
really!

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:17 PM
come to think of it, yeah :tape:

Ok, so it's ridiculous. Know that the husband of the woman who was fined is currently in prison in connection with the terrorist attacks in Casablanca. She came here 4 years ago after an arranged marriage with a Moroccan here. She lives off wellfare, doesn't speak the language. I'm sorry for not jumping with joy and not calling these people an asset to our society!
Yes, burqas scare me, and I know I'm not the only one.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:27 PM
Ok, so it's ridiculous. Know that the husband of the woman who was fined is currently in prison in connection with the terrorist attacks in Casablanca. She came here 4 years ago after an arranged marriage with a Moroccan here. She lives off wellfare, doesn't speak the language. I'm sorry for not jumping with joy and not calling these people an asset to our society!
Yes, burqas scare me, and I know I'm not the only one.
that's silly as well, but this was truely ridiculous:

When a man dresses himself and wears a beard exactly like Osama, it is safe to presume that he doesn't disapprove of Osama's actions.
i'm sorry, but you are generalising in worst ways.

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:31 PM
i'm sorry, but you are generalising in worst ways.

That actually refers to a comment made by a moderate muslim who warned us for what's happening in Molenbeek (suburb of Brussels where I wouldn't dare walk alone), how the area is becoming quite extreme, how you can tell things have shifted towards extremism by the way the people are dressed. A few years ago, they were dressed like any other muslim, now they're dressed like Osama, wear beards like Osama. Whether you like it or not, it IS a sign of how things have shifted from moderate towards extreme.

gsm
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:34 PM
http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/images/bandfront.jpg
omg...

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:36 PM
That actually refers to a comment made by a moderate muslim who warned us for what's happening in Molenbeek (suburb of Brussels where I wouldn't dare walk alone), how the area is becoming quite extreme, how you can tell things have shifted towards extremism by the way the people are dressed. A few years ago, they were dressed like any other muslim, now they're dressed like Osama, wear beards like Osama. Whether you like it or not, it IS a sign of how things have shifted from moderate towards extreme.
whether you like it or not it's not a sure sign of anything. that is the problem. you need to be careful not to antagonise people by sweeping generalisations.

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:39 PM
whether you like it or not it's not a sure sign of anything. that is the problem. you need to be careful not to antagonise people by sweeping generalisations.

Generalisations are often true though. It's not because there are some exceptions, that we can't generalise. I hate all that PC rubbish. it's getting us nowhere.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:45 PM
Generalisations are often true though. It's not because there are some exceptions, that we can't generalise. I hate all that PC rubbish. it's getting us nowhere.
i'm not being politically correct at all. you say it your self generalisations are often true. it does not matter how correct this statement is, but until you can say that they are always true generalisations will be bad.

fifiricci
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:51 PM
Actually, I think it's forbidden to wear masks in some Flemish cities and that's why burqas were banned in the first place!

OMG, did they ban the Kim masks at the Bree party? :lol:

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:53 PM
whether you like it or not it's not a sure sign of anything. that is the problem. you need to be careful not to antagonise people by sweeping generalisations.

Calling with a mobile while driving is forbidden because it sometimes causes an accident, still everybody is forbidden to call while driving. Wearing a burka is forbidden because sometimes (allthough in my opinion the correct word should be often) it points to an extremely religious background in which women are suppressed.

I know this example doesn't hold completely, but it's just to say society has to draw the line somewhere and in a western society wearing a burka is one step too far.

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 12:56 PM
i'm not being politically correct at all. you say it your self generalisations are often true. it does not matter how correct this statement is, but until you can say that they are always true generalisations will be bad.

Often generalisations are bad, but how can you govern a state in a good manner without generalisations? A state cannot make personal rules for every individual citizen.

fifiricci
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:00 PM
All I can conclude so far is that the Belgians seem to feel much more intimidated by people covering up than we Brits do. In fact, I was reading in my newspaper earlier ths week that the Belgians in general are not exactly top of the league when it comes to racial tolerance, I'm afraid (and I didn't read that in the Sun, it was in a reputable broadsheet and it was talking about the persistent Belgian intolerance of some Jewish communities). :o

Wearing the burkha is relatively common here - I've walked past at least three women in burkhas in Cardiff just this week. I honestly can't see why people get so upset by it. If a woman wants to be under her husband's rule, is that not her decision alone? What business is it of yours? What damage does it do to us if she makes that decision? The covered up women I have passed haven't frightened me at all, why on earth should they?

I find this a very bizarre and objectionable decision by the Belgian judiciary.

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:03 PM
Often generalisations are bad, but how can you govern a state in a good manner without generalisations? A state cannot make personal rules for every individual citizen.
a state should leave its citizens alone as much as possible.

i'm not pleased to see how easy it is to convince people that police state measures should be introduced. it does not matter whether it's burqas or shoot to kill policies in britain, it's all a part of the same as far as i can tell. and while we worry about evil muslims our own politicians can proceede to fuck us in all possible positions.

edit: typos

Ems__
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:23 PM
I'm all for rights of pursuing of individual freedoms in your own time, including religion, politics, practising etc. I believe women should be allowed to wear whatever clothes they desire, however my biggest concern (and I believe this would have been the reasoning behind such a decision) is that by wearing the burqa, its an unconcious (or maybe even concious) decision to segregate yourself from 'main stream' society which can thus inevitably leads to stereotyping and moreover religious/ethnic tensions within a society. And I suppose if Belgains were/are aiming at promoting unity within their society they would go about it by attempting to stamp out this individual religious freedom (which isn't necessarily a good or bad thing)

However if this decision is a consequence of the current western trend towards islamophobia..then they're addressing the problem in a very backward way.

"Sluggy"
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:41 PM
I'm all for rights of pursuing of individual freedoms in your own time, including religion, politics, practising etc. I believe women should be allowed to wear whatever clothes they desire, however my biggest concern (and I believe this would have been the reasoning behind such a decision) is that by wearing the burqa, its an unconcious (or maybe even concious) decision to segregate yourself from 'main stream' society which can thus inevitably leads to stereotyping and moreover religious/ethnic tensions within a society. And I suppose if Belgains were/are aiming at promoting unity within their society they would go about it by attempting to stamp out this individual religious freedom (which isn't necessarily a good or bad thing)

However if this decision is a consequence of the current western trend towards islamophobia..then they're addressing the problem in a very backward way.

You guys are missing the point. What the ban on headscarves does is give women the choice NOT to wear the scarves. Without the prohibition, the woman's family members could require it. And, if the woman is not wearing the scarve, she could easily get a beatdown or worse from her male family members. Remember, some marriages in islamic culture in Europe are arranged and largely forced, so that the man and woman have no real choice but to marry each other. :)

fifiricci
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:46 PM
You guys are missing the point. What the ban on headscarves does is give women the choice NOT to wear the scarves. Without the prohibition, the woman's family members could require it. And, if the woman is not wearing the scarve, she could easily get a beatdown or worse from her male family members. Remember, some marriages in islamic culture in Europe are arranged and largely forced, so that the man and woman have no real choice but to marry each other. :)

Sorry, that argument still won't wash with me. According to you, in this situation, the woman is either being ordered by her family into wearing the veil or being prevented by the state for wearing it. Either way that's bullying, but you seem to believe that bullying by the state is better for a person than being bullied by their own family? Well that's fine for as long as a state is prepared to play fair. I would argue its better to walk away from your bullying family if you disagree with them that strongly, than for all of this to be regulated by the state.

Ems__
Jun 14th, 2006, 01:49 PM
You guys are missing the point. What the ban on headscarves does is give women the choice NOT to wear the scarves. Without the prohibition, the woman's family members could require it. And, if the woman is not wearing the scarve, she could easily get a beatdown or worse from her male family members. Remember, some marriages in islamic culture in Europe are arranged and largely forced, so that the man and woman have no real choice but to marry each other. :)

Well if its a ban, its not really giving anyone a choice is it? What if she chooses to wear it?

-Ph51-
Jun 14th, 2006, 02:58 PM
Can't you people understand it is a law. And an old law in fact. Not made to discriminate anyone...just out of security.
Long before 9/11 in fact. But of course some have to see racism and intolerance everywhere. :rolleyes:

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 03:37 PM
Can't you people understand it is a law. And an old law in fact. Not made to discriminate anyone...just out of security.
Long before 9/11 in fact. But of course some have to see racism and intolerance everywhere. :rolleyes:
noone mentioned racism. i think the law is silly as it is.

SelesFan70
Jun 14th, 2006, 03:46 PM
Good for that court! :bounce:

Hulet
Jun 14th, 2006, 04:52 PM
Can't you people understand it is a law. And an old law in fact. Not made to discriminate anyone...just out of security.
Long before 9/11 in fact. But of course some have to see racism and intolerance everywhere. :rolleyes:
My Left Hand: Come on let's type a response to this.
My Right Hand: Why bother - let them wallow in their ignorance.
My Left Hand: But but this deserves response.
My Right Hand: I refuse to answer to morons who twist themselves in illogical fear that they spun for themselves.
My Left Hand: So, are you going to leave all this injustice to go on?
My Right Hand: Sometimes resignation is better solution. Let's move on to the worldcup thread.

[Right Hand pulls left hand and both exit thread].

-Ph51-
Jun 14th, 2006, 05:00 PM
My Left Hand: Come on let's type a response to this.
My Right Hand: Why bother - let them wallow in their ignorance.
My Left Hand: But but this deserves response.
My Right Hand: I refuse to answer to morons who twist themselves in illogical fear that they spun for themselves.
My Left Hand: So, are you going to leave all this injustice to go on?
My Right Hand: Sometimes resignation is better solution. Let's move on to the worldcup thread.

[Right Hand pulls left hand and both exit thread].
Yes...move. And don't forget the world cup is about football. ;)

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 05:05 PM
Wearing the burkha is relatively common here - I've walked past at least three women in burkhas in Cardiff just this week. I honestly can't see why people get so upset by it. If a woman wants to be under her husband's rule, is that not her decision alone? What business is it of yours? What damage does it do to us if she makes that decision? The covered up women I have passed haven't frightened me at all, why on earth should they?



I think it's too easy to say. I'm sure it holds for some wearing the burka, but my problem is when it's not her decision?!? It's very difficult to point a percentage on the amount of people wearing the burka at their own will (they will always say it's their own choice anyway) , but I'm convinced it's under 50%. I don't believe the women who are oppressed have the option to just take their stuff and walk out. They are in many many ways dependable of their husband/family/social structure.

noone mentioned racism. i think the law is silly as it is.

Well, we are silly belgians afterall, so no problem there ;)

azdaja
Jun 14th, 2006, 05:16 PM
I think it's too easy to say. I'm sure it holds for some wearing the burka, but my problem is when it's not her decision?!? It's very difficult to point a percentage on the amount of people wearing the burka at their own will (they will always say it's their own choice anyway) , but I'm convinced it's under 50%. I don't believe the women who are oppressed have the option to just take their stuff and walk out. They are in many many ways dependable of their husband/family/social structure.
well, here is where some social work could make it possible for such women to escape if they wish. and those who really want to wear burqas, head scarves, veils, clingon costumes or roman togas should be able to do so.

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 07:01 PM
however my biggest concern (and I believe this would have been the reasoning behind such a decision) is that by wearing the burqa, its an unconcious (or maybe even concious) decision to segregate yourself from 'main stream' society

Exactly!
I work hard, I pay an awful lot of taxes and it frustrates me that I have to pay for people who come here, have 0 intention of integrating into our society, have 0 chance of ever adding anything to our society and who then complain that we're racists.

I have relatives all over the world, my eldest brother lives in Switzerland, my youngest in Japan, my sister will be moving to Australia soon. None of them would ever dream of demanding anything from the country they live in. They wouldn't dream of living of the tax money from the people there, they wouldn't dream of demanding the people there change to their habits. And yes, they all speak the language of the country where they're staying.

Let's face it, when it comes down to it, we are far more lenient than they will ever be!

When in Rome, do as the Romans do. A head scarf doesn't prevent women from doing day to day things, from getting a job (except in some cases where it's better not to wear it). A burqa OTOH completely erases all chances of ever finding a job. A burqa has no place in our society. If they want to wear a burqa, they can do so in their own country. No one forced them to come here.

The Crow
Jun 14th, 2006, 07:37 PM
I'm not saying I'm against this ban on burqa's (I'm really confused on this one to be honest ;)), but your fascination on following 'the mainstream society' is as disturbing, since nowadays mainstream society seems to be largely based on commercials and what TV pushes down our throats :tape:

Volcana
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:07 PM
Either the government has the authority to mandate what people can and cannot wear, or they don't. For example, that court can clearly ban the wearing of yarmulkes, if that ruling stands. It could ban the wear of any religious paraphenalia. Given that this is likely just an instance of anti-Islamic bigotry, they probably won't, but that's the authority being claimed.

Let's face it though. Government should have strict control over religious expression, as well as personal dress. More proof of what an enlightened country Belgium is.

Kart
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:18 PM
Exactly!
I work hard, I pay an awful lot of taxes and it frustrates me that I have to pay for people who come here, have 0 intention of integrating into our society, have 0 chance of ever adding anything to our society and who then complain that we're racists.

I have relatives all over the world, my eldest brother lives in Switzerland, my youngest in Japan, my sister will be moving to Australia soon. None of them would ever dream of demanding anything from the country they live in. They wouldn't dream of living of the tax money from the people there, they wouldn't dream of demanding the people there change to their habits. And yes, they all speak the language of the country where they're staying.

Let's face it, when it comes down to it, we are far more lenient than they will ever be!

When in Rome, do as the Romans do. A head scarf doesn't prevent women from doing day to day things, from getting a job (except in some cases where it's better not to wear it). A burqa OTOH completely erases all chances of ever finding a job. A burqa has no place in our society. If they want to wear a burqa, they can do so in their own country. No one forced them to come here.

Just out of interest, if a woman moved to your country, found a job - say cleaning or something like that - that was compatible with her choice of dress, paid her taxes and lived and carried out her religious lifestyle without causing any overt disturbance, would you object to her wearing a burqa?

A lot of 'ifs' I know but not beyond the realm of possibility.

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:25 PM
Just out of interest, if a woman moved to your country, found a job - say cleaning or something like that - that was compatible with her choice of dress, paid her taxes and lived and carried out her religious lifestyle without causing any overt disturbance, would you object to her wearing a burqa?

A lot of 'ifs' I know but not beyond the realm of possibility.

Too many ifs. And even in that case, I'd oppose to the burqa. I don't think it has a place in our society. There are plenty of other places in the world where she can go should she insist on wearing it.

Kart
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:31 PM
It was too many ifs in retrospect I agree.

If I can think of a better way of phrasing my point I'll try again.

Kart
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:32 PM
^ If I have a point that is.

fifiricci
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:40 PM
Too many ifs. And even in that case, I'd oppose to the burqa. I don't think it has a place in our society. There are plenty of other places in the world where she can go should she insist on wearing it.

So you want your country to be open only to the indigenous nationals who were born there? Is that what you mean?

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:48 PM
I do understand your point in a way, I think. What I want to say that it's not only about the tax money, but also about not wanting to live in a dual society.

I want ONE society, not two. Women wearing burqas are clearly setting themselves apart from our society. Religion shouldn't be an excuse to accept everything.

When I see muslim women queue at the school in front of my apartment to enroll their kids, I smile because it's a sign these women care about the education of their children, as it's a really good school. It so happens to be a catholic school, they don't make a problem of accepting children of other faiths. Schools should be mixed, people of different backgrounds have to interact. Those women, those children are part of our society.

When I saw 4 muslim girls, 2 of them wearing a scarf, 2 without scarf (one was even showing her belly), chatting and gosipping in the Ghent dialect, I had to smile as well. These girls are also true 'Gentenaars'.

I can give numerous examples of how moderate muslims are part of our society and I don't have a problem with that at all.

A woman in a burqa, however, is clearly setting herself apart from all that.

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 08:54 PM
So you want your country to be open only to the indigenous nationals who were born there? Is that what you mean?

Eh? Following your logic, you're basically saying that all foreigners, all non-Belgians wear burqas. Methinks that's some twisted logic.

fifiricci
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:07 PM
and in a western society wearing a burka is one step too far.

I have to disagree with you there. The UK is a Western society and I passed a woman on the street today in a Burkha. I think you mean that wearing a burkha is a step too far in YOUR Western society (I'm not sure which country you are from). I would't make the mistake of assuming or thinking that all Western countries are against the Burkha because in the UK for one they are not banned and I am not aware of any official statement for or against them being made. I also every day pass hordes of muslim girls on their way to school wearing head scarves, so I assume that is also tolerated in the UK.

Over here, Sikhs have even been exempted from wearing crash helmets on bikes, because it is culturally and religiously unacceptable for them to be removed out of doors.

Someone quoted earlier "When in Rome do what the Romans do". I do believe that the ancient Roman Empire in fact was enormously tolerant of the cultural and religious differences in the lands that they conquered and allowed them to continue with their traditions, provided they paid taxes to Rome and answered the call to arms. Some historians argue that this was the secret of the Roman's success. This "live and let live" attitude took away the impetus to rebel against the Roman occupiers. The Romans were also very open to influence and were enormously influenced in their cultural and social life by the Greeks. In fact, I do believe that the Romans adopted the culture for shagging young men from the Greeks ;)

fifiricci
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:10 PM
Eh? Following your logic, you're basically saying that all foreigners, all non-Belgians wear burqas. Methinks that's some twisted logic.

Erm no, I think you misunderstood my English (sorry, its my first language you know ;) ). I wanted to know if you believe that Belgium should only be for the Belgians.

Brαm
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:10 PM
When people walk around like this ---> http://www.alarmco.com/images/uploads/burglar.jpg

people will not feel safe.

When women start wearing this ---> http://www.tribalelegance.net/Afghani%20Burqa.gif

people will not feel safe either.

Oh and some people here said that Muslim women choose to wear these things. Please! A Muslim girl in my brother's class HAS to wear shirts with long sleeves and a head scarf even when it's 35°C. If she took off her shirt and wore a top or a t-shirt she would get into serious trouble if her elder brother found out. She doesn't even want to wear these clothes but she has NO CHOICE. If she takes off her headscarf or shirt, her brother would say she's no longer his sister :retard:

Free choice my ass!

fifiricci
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:16 PM
When people walk around like this ---> http://www.alarmco.com/images/uploads/burglar.jpg

people will not feel safe.





Ah, but his hands may well be superglued to that wall! :D

And he looks a bit girlie and not very scary at all ;)

Hulet
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:40 PM
The feud b/n my hands continues
Left hand: Hey, this thread is still here, I want to type a message here.
Right Hand: I thought we agreed that it's not worth posting here.
Left Hand: No, we didn't agree - you forced me out of this thread. And, beside I have a new insight into this issue that hit me all of a sudden.
Right Hand: What would this new insight be?
Left Hand: Consider all the countries that banned the wearing of headscarve and bourkas.
Right Hand: Yeah, what about them?
Left Hand: What reasons did they gave?
Right Hand: I think one of the official reasons was to maintain the secularity of their public schools.
Left Hand: What other reasons?
Right Hand: There is also the reason of security. There is reason of preventing extremism.
Left Hand: Is that it?
Right Hand: Well there is a reason of protecting young girls from abusive family rules.
Left Hand: So in each country or town different reasons for the same ban?
Right Hand: Yes, what of it?
Left Hand: So, if this bourka was so evil then there must have been one overriding reason for it being so instead of a smattering of numerous reasons here and there.
Right Hand: Is that necessarily so?
Left Hand: Yes, consider the case of pitbull dog bans for example. There is one single reason for the ban: they attack. Simple. Instead with the case of burkas you got a confusion of reasons.
Right Hand: I don't see the relationship but I will bite, so what are you saying?
Left Hand: Since there isn't a single official reason for banning burkas instead of different reasons given depending on where such a law is passed these "reasons" must be excuses that cover up the real motive. This real motive for those laws must be so shocking that it needs all those official excuses to cover it up.
Right Hand:And, you know the real motive?
Left Hand: Yes, that is my insight.
Right Hand: This gotta be good.
Left Hand: Remember Lyndie England?
Right Hand: Yeah, the soldier who abused prisoners in Iraq.
Left Hand: Not only abused but stripped them naked before abusing them. She knows that those pesky Arabs/muslims consider nude body parts as humiliating. But, she was crude about it.
Right Hand: So, what has that got to do with these?
Left Hand: Can't you see? These type of laws are designed to literaly strip muslims off their clothing one by one, there by humiliating them. But, they are designed so craftly and so incrementally that even you my twin brother can't see them.
[Right Hand keeps quiet here - It isn't known whether it's stifling a laughter or seriously considering Left Hand's "insight"]

Kart
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:48 PM
Hulet, (another just out of interest question from me in this thread) how many words per minute can you type?

Hulet
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:50 PM
Hulet, just out of interest, how many words per minute can you type?
On my best days [when my hands are not feuding], 30 - 40 letters per minute.
Worst days [ when everything in me is fighting each other], 1 or 2 words per day.

Kart
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:56 PM
What happens if you're driving along and your hands decide to argue - isn't that like a major driving hazard ?

Kart
Jun 14th, 2006, 09:56 PM
^ Ok ignore that last question I'm pushing the realms of stupidity, clearly an indication that I need to go to bed.

meyerpl
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:06 PM
It's a qustion of religious freedom, imo. I don't like the practice, but I believe people should have the right to voluntarily practice their religion in a free society.

lakeway11
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:14 PM
i'm not sure what is worse burkas or 12yo girls dressing like prostitutes :confused:

SelesFan70
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:18 PM
Exactly!
I work hard, I pay an awful lot of taxes and it frustrates me that I have to pay for people who come here, have 0 intention of integrating into our society, have 0 chance of ever adding anything to our society and who then complain that we're racists.

I have relatives all over the world, my eldest brother lives in Switzerland, my youngest in Japan, my sister will be moving to Australia soon. None of them would ever dream of demanding anything from the country they live in. They wouldn't dream of living of the tax money from the people there, they wouldn't dream of demanding the people there change to their habits. And yes, they all speak the language of the country where they're staying.

Let's face it, when it comes down to it, we are far more lenient than they will ever be!

When in Rome, do as the Romans do. A head scarf doesn't prevent women from doing day to day things, from getting a job (except in some cases where it's better not to wear it). A burqa OTOH completely erases all chances of ever finding a job. A burqa has no place in our society. If they want to wear a burqa, they can do so in their own country. No one forced them to come here.

:worship:

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:21 PM
I have to disagree with you there. The UK is a Western society and I passed a woman on the street today in a Burkha. I think you mean that wearing a burkha is a step too far in YOUR Western society (I'm not sure which country you are from). I would't make the mistake of assuming or thinking that all Western countries are against the Burkha because in the UK for one they are not banned and I am not aware of any official statement for or against them being made. I also every day pass hordes of muslim girls on their way to school wearing head scarves, so I assume that is also tolerated in the UK.



For me wearing a burka in a western society (doesn't matter if it's England, Belgium, San Marino,...) is saying you don't want to take up the basic values of that society (I'm not saying you have to adapt completely offcourse, wearing headscarfs, following the Islam,..is totally fine). I know this isn't true for 100% for all women with Burka, but for the greatest part it is.



Over here, Sikhs have even been exempted from wearing crash helmets on bikes, because it is culturally and religiously unacceptable for them to be removed out of doors.




I'm not sure but I think in Belgium it's the other way around here, everybody has to wear crash helmets, no exceptions at all.

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:28 PM
If a woman wants to be under her husband's rule, is that not her decision alone? What business is it of yours? What damage does it do to us if she makes that decision?


Yesterday there was another case on tele (again with Muslims, but for me I could have been about any other social group). It was about some youngsters following Koran classes after school. They were disciplined by their teachers by hitting on their fingers (and other places) with a rubber hose. The teachers of the school the children went to noticed this and alerted the police. Say (I don't know if this is the case) the parents and the children are fine with this way of discipline, should we also say what business is it of us, what damage does it do to us and just leave it there?

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:33 PM
What do you make of honour killings? You could say it's none of my business since it doesn't affect me personally. So should we just accept it then?

meyerpl
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:34 PM
I'm not sure but I think in Belgium it's the other way around here, everybody has to wear crash helmets, no exceptions at all.
Are we talking bicycle here, the kind you peddle? Laws mandating that people wear helmets while riding a bicycle?

arn
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:36 PM
Are we talking bicycle here, the kind you peddle? Laws mandating that people wear helmets while riding a bicycle?
You're right, in Belgium we don't have to wear crach helmets for bikes, just for motorcycles.

gentenaire
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:37 PM
Are we talking bicycle here, the kind you peddle? Laws mandating that people wear helmets while riding a bicycle?

No, we're talking motor bikes. Wearing a helmet when riding a bike isn't mandatory.

meyerpl
Jun 14th, 2006, 10:39 PM
No, we're talking motor bikes. Wearing a helmet when riding a bike isn't mandatory.
Thanks. Whew! I thought the world was going insane.

fifiricci
Jun 19th, 2006, 09:36 AM
Thanks. Whew! I thought the world was going insane.

Is that worse than sikhs going without crash helmets? ;)