France outlaws burkas

[Ravi]

im talking about in terms of dress. obviously France isn't stoning anybody. but my point is that dictating how women dress is something that a country like Iran would do.

so those who support france shouldn't complain about Iran's enforced hijab anymore because France is dictating how women dress.

my thing is why is women's dress always the focus of these type of clothing laws? it's sexism at it's finest.

It has nothing to do with sexism nimrod unless it was you women trying to burn Paris down.

Actually, I see it as a form of sexism, too. Of course, those women who are coerced into wearing one by the males in their lives is blatantly sexist. But, there are women who freely choose to wear one (so I hear). Taking away a woman's choice is sexist on its face.

Now, government's prevention of sexism is usually a good idea, in my book. But, at the cost of another inalienable right - freedom of religion - seems like a bad idea.

If they can show that all women who wear one are coerced into doing so, I might give this law further consideration.

They have also made it illegal for men to force women to dress in this manner. From what I've read, France has done this to protect women...but how are you protecting women if you are also forcing them to adhere to a dress code of the country's choosing?

 

[manifold]

How are laws mandating that certain parts of the body MUST be covered any dfferent in principal than laws mandating that certain parts MUST NOT be covered?

 

[saveliberty]

Can we outlaw wearing pajamas in public and other Walmart fashion violations?

 

[Valerie]

How are laws mandating that certain parts of the body MUST be covered any dfferent in principal than laws mandating that certain parts MUST NOT be covered?

That's a good question.



Note there is a difference between a "burka" and a "niqab".

Dissenters have 10 days to challenge the measure in the constitutional Council watchdog, but that is considered unlikely.

Legislative leaders said they wanted the constitutional Council to examine it.

"This law was the object of long and complex debates," the Senate president, Gerard Larcher, and National Assembly head Bernard Accoyer said in a joint statement explaining their move. They said they want to be certain there is "no uncertainty" about it conforming to the constitution.

The measure affects fewer than 2,000 women, but Muslims believe it is one more blow to France's second religion, and risks raising the level of Islamophobia in a country where mosques, like synagogues, are sporadic targets of hate. Some women have vowed to wear a full-face veil despite the law.

The proposed law was passed overwhelmingly by the National Assembly on July 13. The green light from the Senate would make it definitive once the president signs off on it — barring amendments and an eventual legal challenge.

In France, the terms "burka" and "niqab" often are used interchangeably. The latter is a full-face veil, often in black. Unlike the burka, it does not obscure a woman's eyes.


CBC News - World - French Senate bans burka

 

[Ozmar]

I can understand why they did it...

Yep. Fear makes people do stupid things and take away everyone's freedom to dress as they please.

If you aren't doing anything wrong who cares how you dress? It would actually benefit society at large if some people went around with bags over their heads.

You seem conflicted. And that is a good thing.

Perhaps some day you'll even be able to contemplate a reasonable hypothetical question that forces you to evaluate such inner-conflict.







maybe...

Are people in burkas blowing things up in France? No? Then it isn't a matter of an imminent threat.

There were definitely some bomb threats and evacuations linked to this new law. Probably from those same guys who brainwash their little girls from infancy to want to wear those burkas.

It has nothing to do with sexism nimrod unless it was you women trying to burn Paris down.

Actually, I see it as a form of sexism, too. Of course, those women who are coerced into wearing one by the males in their lives is blatantly sexist. But, there are women who freely choose to wear one (so I hear). Taking away a woman's choice is sexist on its face.

Now, government's prevention of sexism is usually a good idea, in my book. But, at the cost of another inalienable right - freedom of religion - seems like a bad idea.

If they can show that all women who wear one are coerced into doing so, I might give this law further consideration.

They have also made it illegal for men to force women to dress in this manner. From what I've read, France has done this to protect women...but how are you protecting women if you are also forcing them to adhere to a dress code of the country's choosing?

Well, if they're brainwashed, oppressed and devalued from a young age to want to wear the burkas, then I suppose it would be their choice to want to wear one to begin with. Tell a woman she's a doormat from infancy, and she's bound to believe she's one, and cling to it. Try to un-cling her, and protests of "rights" violations will ensue. BTW, I don't recall there being a ban on Islam, so how is this religious oppression?

The image that comes to my mind as I write this is of a non-Muslim lady wearing normal European clothes being heckled and harassed for walking through a predominantly Muslim neighborhood. Where's the freedom there?

 

[Ravi]

Obscenity laws are not easily comparable.

 

[manifold]

I didn't know that about the burka vs the niqab. Thanks for the info.

Am I to understand that this law doesn't also ban the wearing of a niqab?

 

[Gatekeeper]

Personally I see the Burkas and just another oppressive move by the Islamic men to control their 'wives' in the name of this largely perverted belief. They, in my opinion, demean women and place them at the bottom of the rung right next to the gutter.

These Islamic 'husbands' or jailers if you will have a thing about total control of others, women being the easiest to control through FEAR and Intimidation, and I believe they are so afraid of their husbands, and the beatings and other abuses that would follow if they protested, so they keep their mouths shut, maybe not all but most.

We have all seen these maniacs place an AK-47 in the back of the head of a woman and blow her brains out for minor so called offenses, or anyone else who they feel violated their fanatic laws in the Qur'an. And they have no qualms taking an AK and blowing the brains out of ANY non Muslim. Wake up folks.

 

[Si modo]

It has nothing to do with sexism nimrod unless it was you women trying to burn Paris down.

Actually, I see it as a form of sexism, too. Of course, those women who are coerced into wearing one by the males in their lives is blatantly sexist. But, there are women who freely choose to wear one (so I hear). Taking away a woman's choice is sexist on its face.

Now, government's prevention of sexism is usually a good idea, in my book. But, at the cost of another inalienable right - freedom of religion - seems like a bad idea.

If they can show that all women who wear one are coerced into doing so, I might give this law further consideration.

They have also made it illegal for men to force women to dress in this manner. From what I've read, France has done this to protect women...but how are you protecting women if you are also forcing them to adhere to a dress code of the country's choosing?

Unfortunately, I had to look for that information about it being illegal to force women to wear one, on my own...again...ravi. Burqa Is Banned in France - WSJ.com

....
The ban would apply to everyone in France, including visitors. Offenders face a maximum fine of €150 (about $190) and could be asked to attend courses on what the government calls "republican values." Individuals who encourage others to ignore the ban would face tougher penalties: up to one year in prison and a maximum fine of €30,000.
....

It would be more cool if you sourced stuff.

Anyway, I agree. Taking religion out of the equation, this is an infringement on individual freedom. Big time.

When the individual freedom endangers the public, yeah - take it away. I don't think France has demonstrated in any significant manner that it has.

I'm not a fan of the Muslim culture, at all. But I am a fan of inalienable rights. They have a perfect right to show all that they live in the stone age.

 

[Ravi]

You seem conflicted. And that is a good thing.

Perhaps some day you'll even be able to contemplate a reasonable hypothetical question that forces you to evaluate such inner-conflict.







maybe...

Are people in burkas blowing things up in France? No? Then it isn't a matter of an imminent threat.

There were definitely some bomb threats and evacuations linked to this new law. Probably from those same guys who brainwash their little girls from infancy to want to wear those burkas.

Actually, I see it as a form of sexism, too. Of course, those women who are coerced into wearing one by the males in their lives is blatantly sexist. But, there are women who freely choose to wear one (so I hear). Taking away a woman's choice is sexist on its face.

Now, government's prevention of sexism is usually a good idea, in my book. But, at the cost of another inalienable right - freedom of religion - seems like a bad idea.

If they can show that all women who wear one are coerced into doing so, I might give this law further consideration.

They have also made it illegal for men to force women to dress in this manner. From what I've read, France has done this to protect women...but how are you protecting women if you are also forcing them to adhere to a dress code of the country's choosing?

Well, if they're brainwashed, oppressed and devalued from a young age to want to wear the burkas, then I suppose it would be their choice to want to wear one to begin with. Tell a woman she's a doormat from infancy, and she's bound to believe she's one, and cling to it. Try to un-cling her, and protests of "rights" violations will ensue. BTW, I don't recall there being a ban on Islam, so how is this religious oppression?

The image that comes to my mind as I write this is of a non-Muslim lady wearing normal European clothes being heckled and harassed for walking through a predominantly Muslim neighborhood. Where's the freedom there?

First of all, there is no evidence the bomb threats were real or that they were linked to this law.

Second...who are you to decide why they wear them? IMO, Republican women are brainwashed from birth...maybe Republicanism should be banned.

 

[Ravi]

Personally I see the Burkas and just another oppressive move by the Islamic men to control their 'wives' in the name of this largely perverted belief. They, in my opinion, demean women and place them at the bottom of the rung right next to the gutter.

These Islamic 'husbands' or jailers if you will have a thing about total control of others, women being the easiest to control through FEAR and Intimidation, and I believe they are so afraid of their husbands, and the beatings and other abuses that would follow if they protested, so they keep their mouths shut, maybe not all but most.

We have all seen these maniacs place an AK-47 in the back of the head of a woman and blow her brains out for minor so called offenses, or anyone else who they feel violated their fanatic laws in the Qur'an. And they have no qualms taking an AK and blowing the brains out of ANY non Muslim. Wake up folks.

So now they have to stay inside their homes or risk being beaten...how is that progress?

 

[Ozmar]

Obscenity laws are not easily comparable.

The hell they're not. In Muslim countries, it is considered "obscene" for a woman to be uncovered in public. Is that the kind of hardline values you want imported to your neck of the woods?

Having the body too revealed is socially unacceptable. The converse, that having the body too hidden is also socially unacceptable in a Western society. This law going into effect is a reaction to a group of people who unabashedly do not want to accept the customs and norms of Western culture. This whole thing is about separateness and contempt for the West.

 

[manifold]

Obscenity laws are not easily comparable.

Obscenity... is a matter of opinion.
Imminent threat... is a matter of opinion.

In my opinion the comparison is quite reasonable.

So again I ask, how are laws mandating that certain parts of the body MUST be covered any different in principal to laws mandating that certain parts MUST NOT be covered?

 

[Ravi]

Actually, I see it as a form of sexism, too. Of course, those women who are coerced into wearing one by the males in their lives is blatantly sexist. But, there are women who freely choose to wear one (so I hear). Taking away a woman's choice is sexist on its face.

Now, government's prevention of sexism is usually a good idea, in my book. But, at the cost of another inalienable right - freedom of religion - seems like a bad idea.

If they can show that all women who wear one are coerced into doing so, I might give this law further consideration.

They have also made it illegal for men to force women to dress in this manner. From what I've read, France has done this to protect women...but how are you protecting women if you are also forcing them to adhere to a dress code of the country's choosing?

Unfortunately, I had to look for that information about it being illegal to force women to wear one, on my own...again...ravi. Burqa Is Banned in France - WSJ.com

....
The ban would apply to everyone in France, including visitors. Offenders face a maximum fine of €150 (about $190) and could be asked to attend courses on what the government calls "republican values." Individuals who encourage others to ignore the ban would face tougher penalties: up to one year in prison and a maximum fine of €30,000.
....

It would be more cool if you sourced stuff.

Anyway, I agree. Taking religion out of the equation, this is an infringement on individual freedom. Big time.

When the individual freedom endangers the public, yeah - take it away. I don't think France has demonstrated in any significant manner that it has.

I'm not a fan of the Muslim culture, at all. But I am a fan of inalienable rights. They have a perfect right to show all that they live in the stone age.

You have my word that I don't post things here as fact that cannot be sourced.

Looks like you and I are in total agreement on this subject.

 

[Ozmar]

Personally I see the Burkas and just another oppressive move by the Islamic men to control their 'wives' in the name of this largely perverted belief. They, in my opinion, demean women and place them at the bottom of the rung right next to the gutter.

These Islamic 'husbands' or jailers if you will have a thing about total control of others, women being the easiest to control through FEAR and Intimidation, and I believe they are so afraid of their husbands, and the beatings and other abuses that would follow if they protested, so they keep their mouths shut, maybe not all but most.

We have all seen these maniacs place an AK-47 in the back of the head of a woman and blow her brains out for minor so called offenses, or anyone else who they feel violated their fanatic laws in the Qur'an. And they have no qualms taking an AK and blowing the brains out of ANY non Muslim. Wake up folks.

So now they have to stay inside their homes or risk being beaten...how is that progress?

If they're stupid enough to allow themselves to be oppressed like that, cordoned off in their little separate society, I'm not sure any progress can be made.

 

[Ravi]

Obscenity laws are not easily comparable.

Obscenity... is a matter of opinion.
Imminent threat... is a matter of opinion.

In my opinion the comparison is quite reasonable.

So again I ask, how are laws mandating that certain parts of the body MUST be covered any different in principal to laws mandating that certain parts MUST NOT be covered?

In principal, they aren't. But I'm not getting how you are justifying denying women wearing something they wear for religious purposes by saying you can't walk down the street naked.

 

[Ravi]

Personally I see the Burkas and just another oppressive move by the Islamic men to control their 'wives' in the name of this largely perverted belief. They, in my opinion, demean women and place them at the bottom of the rung right next to the gutter.

These Islamic 'husbands' or jailers if you will have a thing about total control of others, women being the easiest to control through FEAR and Intimidation, and I believe they are so afraid of their husbands, and the beatings and other abuses that would follow if they protested, so they keep their mouths shut, maybe not all but most.

We have all seen these maniacs place an AK-47 in the back of the head of a woman and blow her brains out for minor so called offenses, or anyone else who they feel violated their fanatic laws in the Qur'an. And they have no qualms taking an AK and blowing the brains out of ANY non Muslim. Wake up folks.

So now they have to stay inside their homes or risk being beaten...how is that progress?

If they're stupid enough to allow themselves to be oppressed like that, cordoned off in their little separate society, I'm not sure any progress can be made.

So it is the women's fault. Got it.

 

[Si modo]

They have also made it illegal for men to force women to dress in this manner. From what I've read, France has done this to protect women...but how are you protecting women if you are also forcing them to adhere to a dress code of the country's choosing?

Unfortunately, I had to look for that information about it being illegal to force women to wear one, on my own...again...ravi. Burqa Is Banned in France - WSJ.com

....
The ban would apply to everyone in France, including visitors. Offenders face a maximum fine of €150 (about $190) and could be asked to attend courses on what the government calls "republican values." Individuals who encourage others to ignore the ban would face tougher penalties: up to one year in prison and a maximum fine of €30,000.
....

It would be more cool if you sourced stuff.

Anyway, I agree. Taking religion out of the equation, this is an infringement on individual freedom. Big time.

When the individual freedom endangers the public, yeah - take it away. I don't think France has demonstrated in any significant manner that it has.

I'm not a fan of the Muslim culture, at all. But I am a fan of inalienable rights. They have a perfect right to show all that they live in the stone age.

You have my word that I don't post things here as fact that cannot be sourced.

Looks like you and I are in total agreement on this subject.

[Emphasis added] Dammit, ravi...don't highlight THAT!

 

[Ozmar]

Obscenity laws are not easily comparable.

Obscenity... is a matter of opinion.
Imminent threat... is a matter of opinion.

In my opinion the comparison is quite reasonable.

So again I ask, how are laws mandating that certain parts of the body MUST be covered any different in principal to laws mandating that certain parts MUST NOT be covered?

In principal, they aren't. But I'm not getting how you are justifying denying women wearing something they wear for religious purposes by saying you can't walk down the street naked.

If we're going down this route of "religious freedom," is it oppressive of governments not to allow Mormons to have polygamous marriages?

There has to be a happy medium for a society to function.

 

[Si modo]

Obscenity laws are not easily comparable.

Obscenity... is a matter of opinion.
Imminent threat... is a matter of opinion.

In my opinion the comparison is quite reasonable.

So again I ask, how are laws mandating that certain parts of the body MUST be covered any different in principal to laws mandating that certain parts MUST NOT be covered?

In principal, they aren't. But I'm not getting how you are justifying denying women wearing something they wear for religious purposes by saying you can't walk down the street naked.

OK, you two. It's principle.

Sorry, was sorta bugging me.