First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Should full-face veils and burqas be banned?
35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 8/29/16 , edited 8/29/16

MrAnimeSK wrote:

Well, that's all good in theory and in rainbow marshmellow land. However, they would not agree to that. They would refuse and call racisim and Islamaphobia at the suggestion.


My proposal does not require a "rainbow marshmallow land" to function as intended, and it doesn't matter if people complain about policies generally prohibiting articles of clothing that obscure the wearer's face on the premises of petrol stations, financial institutions, and so on provided those policies are designed and implemented in such a way that comers' religious affiliation isn't the basis thereof. Complaints of religious discrimination would, under such circumstances, carry no merit since the reason the veils would need to be temporarily removed wouldn't be the religion of the wearer and the policy wouldn't be enforced such that Muslim women's veils would be given any special scrutiny.

Meanwhile, anyone who did design or enforce their institution's policy such that it would unduly target customers' religious affiliation would deserve the complaints they received and any subsequent penalties in the event they did not stop discriminating. Banning burqas and niqabs in public spaces specifically and entirely would serve as an example of action warranting complaints of discrimination, only in that case it would be the state that was acting in a discriminatory manner rather than a private vendor.


Plus, all those things that you mentioned are already in place. Also why should companies and buisnesses have to pay more for extra security just so Muslim women can walk around completetly unidentifiable and possibly carrying god knows what?


The listed measures were intended to serve as examples of mitigating factors collectively demonstrating that a general ban on burqas and niqabs in public spaces would be both unnecessary and excessive. Concerning your question, I expect most private establishments are not basing their decision about hiring security personnel on whether conservative fundamentalist Muslim women are allowed to wear veils publicly. Financial institutions, for example, hire security personnel because the nature of the services they provide, the goods they keep on site, and the information they retain in their electronic and written records demands it.


Well i dont wear sunglasses in doors like a dick head myself so.....
And well i've never seen a nun in public EV ER. Literally. Not once in my life. Honest to god.


Well, I have seen them in public wearing habits and black dresses. I've also seen Orthodox Jews wearing their shtreimel. I've seen Sikhs in turbans, I've seen Muslims in hijabs and niqabs, I've seen lots of different things people wear in public for religious reasons. I notice when I walk by a woman clad from head to toe in a black dress and a fully obscuring veil since that kind of clothing stands out, but I don't feel less safe for having had that experience because I've already had it lots of times without incident. Because of my past experiences around Muslims I don't look at them as ticking time bombs even though I know there are radical, militant, conservative, fundamentalist Muslims out there who could be quite literally described as such. Banning burqas and niqabs won't appreciably impact the latter's ability to commit heinous acts of terrorism while it will appreciably and unduly impact the former's religious freedom, so I oppose the measure.


I guess out on the street is not so bad. But yeah, in a crowded areas i dont think it should be allowed. I guess in places where they've been checked with metal dectors first (not just them, i mean events or places where everyone is checked upon entry) would be ok.


A crowded area might be a busy New York City sidewalk, which would constitute being out on the street. I'm afraid you've just set too far-reaching, vague, and impacting a standard for me to find agreeable.
2076 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / F
Offline
Posted 8/29/16 , edited 8/29/16

XxDarkSasuxX wrote:


BlueOni wrote:

As this is a matter of free exercise of religion I say they ought to be allowed if people want to wear them. Nuns' habits shouldn't be banned, and neither should those. With that said, I also personally view things like burqas as unnecessary, repressive, and unfashionable besides, and I would not wear one.

^

More or less the exact response I was thinking of.


Same. While I personally find it oppressive and dehumanizing: It's just not a part of the culture, religion, or ethnicity. I am an outsider observing their issues.
17189 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 8/29/16

MrAnimeSK wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:

It isn't a double standard, it's religous freedom. Making a religous attire illgeal to wear doesn't make sense because simply wearing it doesn't break the law. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the hijab is not the same as the burqa, which covers the face. There is no reason why someone would need to remove their hijab if they can be easily identified with it on.

FYI in many states, and no doubt in the South, concealed carry is legal. It's ironic since I'm sure the idea of a Muslim person carrying a concealed weapon under their burqa would scares some people shitless enough that they'd welcome anti-gun legislation.


Yeah i meant the burqa.
We can just agree to disagree i guess. You care more about not offending someone than you do about saftey i guess.

Well i mean at least if the person packing heat is identifiable he/she could be identified and caught if he/she were to get a away. Not that helps the dead person(s).
I live in Australia and we dont walk around with guns so i dont want people completely covered up walking through crowded malls and plazas n etc cos if shit goes down we are un armed to fight back.

yes well guess they should also ban Santa suits, who knows how many bombs he or she might be hiding in that belly. With so many of them walking around during Christmas, its hard to tell who is who.

When you ask someone to give up their livelihood just so you can feel more comfortable ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
17189 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 8/29/16

ReaperEXE wrote:


DanteVSTheWorld wrote:

Yes they should be banned because they wear it as their husbands forces them too and no one else is to look at her except him, or maybe they like being treated like an object because they believe their religion tells them it has to be this way. It's pathetic, I don't like walking near anyone wearing it, makes me uncomfortable not being able to see who I'm walking past, and they could at least take the top off to reveal there face whenever they go into a shop.


How embarrassing for you.
Wow I've missed you!
Posted 8/29/16
It does seem a bit strange to wear them here, but I don't see why not.. except in convenience stores, banks, and the like. Since they would need to remove them in those places, which sort of defeats the point of wearing them in the first place. I don't know how that would work to be honest.
556 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/29/16
I will provide some background knowledge about this issue. Contrary to Western stereotype, many Muslim women do not view the veils as a form of oppression but as a form of pride; in fact, those Muslim women actually have to fight get into fight with their parents to wear veils. This is where politicians can use political correctness from the "one cultural interpretation per concept"; although the veils can be used as a symbolic attempts to shield women from individual expression, the veils can also be used to shield a women from the lustful eyes of men. Comedic anime like Durarara!! do break this mindless "only one interpretation for every thing".
9459 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 8/29/16
At least in the United States, I see no reason why they should be banned. Yes, there are security concerns in Europe, but the U.S. isn't Europe. To me, people should be allowed to wear whatever the hell they want.
9299 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Australia
Offline
Posted 8/29/16 , edited 8/29/16

FlyinDumpling wrote:

yes well guess they should also ban Santa suits, who knows how many bombs he or she might be hiding in that belly. With so many of them walking around during Christmas, its hard to tell who is who.

When you ask someone to give up their livelihood just so you can feel more comfortable ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Funny you should mention that. With the way that things are going Santa suits will be banned because it might offned Muslims.
1395 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United States
Offline
Posted 8/29/16
Where I could see this being a problem is that when you go into a bank, or other high-security area, they want to see your face. Therefore some banks (maybe all, but I haven't been everywhere) ban sunglasses and hats indoors. That would mean if someone wore that into a bank they can't see their face.........I don't think Security there would like it.

On a personal level.........I just don't get it. The way of thinking behind wearing those is not something I can understand. From my perspective if I see someone wearing one in public I feel immediately sorry for them, most American women feel the same way. To us, it's a sign of oppression, it's as if your wearing an iron collar around your neck claiming you have no will of your own, that you are letting your family and religion dictate all of your actions, that you are a slave. That you have no choices. If you HAVE a choice, don't wear one! If you don't have a choice, then maybe my feelings on you wearing one has some small degree of accuracy.
9299 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Australia
Offline
Posted 8/29/16

Chris00099 wrote:

Where I could see this being a problem is that when you go into a bank, or other high-security area, they want to see your face. Therefore some banks (maybe all, but I haven't been everywhere) ban sunglasses and hats indoors. That would mean if someone wore that into a bank they can't see their face.........I don't think Security there would like it.

On a personal level.........I just don't get it. The way of thinking behind wearing those is not something I can understand. From my perspective if I see someone wearing one in public I feel immediately sorry for them, most American women feel the same way. To us, it's a sign of oppression, it's as if your wearing an iron collar around your neck claiming you have no will of your own, that you are letting your family and religion dictate all of your actions, that you are a slave. That you have no choices. If you HAVE a choice, don't wear one! If you don't have a choice, then maybe my feelings on you wearing one has some small degree of accuracy.


I feel the same.
35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 8/29/16 , edited 8/29/16

sinoakayumi wrote:

I will provide some background knowledge about this issue. Contrary to Western stereotype, many Muslim women do not view the veils as a form of oppression but as a form of pride; in fact, those Muslim women actually have to fight get into fight with their parents to wear veils. This is where politicians can use political correctness from the "one cultural interpretation per concept"; although the veils can be used as a symbolic attempts to shield women from individual expression, the veils can also be used to shield a women from the lustful eyes of men. Comedic anime like Durarara!! do break this mindless "only one interpretation for every thing".


I am aware of this explanation for why the veils aren't repressive, but I think it a very weak one since at its core it mirrors the same sort of rationale that conservative fundamentalists in Islam use to justify all sorts of repressive policies against women.

Saleh Al-Saadoon used this exact sort of rationale to explain why Muslim women should be prevented from driving in Saudi Arabia: if you let those women drive they might break down in the desert, and then they'll be rendered vulnerable, helpless prey for the savage impulses of the men around them. It's really incredible because it manages to be sexist in both directions at once, simultaneously stripping women of freedom of travel and reducing us to the role of children in one breath and casting men as beasts with no control over themselves in the very next. He even went through the bonus round and cast foreign, non-Muslim women like me as whores who wouldn't care if we were raped.

It's also the sort of logic that justifies "honour killings" against women. The argument goes that a woman who has recently been killed must have done something or other to "dishonour" their murderer (a "dishonour" could be something like adultery, speaking "out of turn", defying a family elder, or even merely questioning traditionalist conservative Islamic beliefs), and so the murderer ought not be held liable for having murdered her. This is the justification a man in Karachi, Pakistan has used for killing two wives at this point, and a troubling number of women have died under similar circumstances (Amnesty International estimates 1,100 minimum in Pakistan in 2015).

Now mind you, I still think that women should be able to freely choose to wear these veils if they want to for any reason or no reason at all. I won't stop them. But if the reason they're doing so finds as its root an appeal to the savage nature of men and the helpless nature of women for want of a veil to shield us from said savages I'm going to call that out for what it is: repression and sexism.
1395 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United States
Offline
Posted 8/29/16 , edited 8/29/16
Very well said.
9299 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Australia
Offline
Posted 8/29/16
Yup. Well said indeed but i still dont think they should be able to wear them in non Islamic countries. In public i mean. To me they have no place in the modern day western society.
And i honestly , for the most part am a non judgmental person who dose believe in freedom. Contradicts a bit i know but eh, that's how i feel.
9524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Imoutoland!
Offline
Posted 8/29/16
You know, I think BlueOni has a point. You're speaking for the government to ban Burquas on any property. Perhaps we should leave it to businesses to determine what is appropriate wear should be used in their establishments. I've been given a lot to think about.
9299 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Australia
Offline
Posted 8/30/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

You know, I think BlueOni has a point. You're speaking for the government to ban Burquas on any property. Perhaps we should leave it to businesses to determine what is appropriate wear should be used in their establishments. I've been given a lot to think about.


Imagine the response though if a buisness choses to ban it whilst most other do not. Would end badly for them.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.