Kai, just as I was defending the west and their freedoms yesterday, the UK don fall my hand!

55% of the British support a ban on the Burkha like France did!
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/24/niqab-ban-britain_n_4158159.html?ncid=webmail1



Here I was saying freedom is in the west. So now, they feel that they can tell a woman what not to wear and still claim freedom?

While I doubt that the UK will ever ban the Burkha, I am quite disappointed in the UK public. I sha hope the polls werent a true reflection

Logicbwoy: Kai, just as I was defending the west and their freedoms yesterday, the UK don fall my hand!

55% of the British support a ban on the Burkha like France did!
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/24/niqab-ban-britain_n_4158159.html?ncid=webmail1



Here I was saying freedom is in the west. So now, they feel that they can tell a woman what not to wear and still claim freedom?

While I doubt that the UK will ever ban the Burkha, I am quite disappointed in the UK public. I sha hope the polls werent a true reflection

Peace to you Logicbwoy.
Have you considered why they want to ban it? Our faces are our identity, much as it is ours, we owe it to the public to be identified. We as human want to know who is sitting behind us,who we are talking to, who we are dealing with. This is why randomly wearing even a mask is not right.
Moreover,no where did the Qur'an command women to wear face-veil. This another misconception among muslims:
https://www.nairaland.com/1493271/ten-misconception-among-muslims

usermane:

Peace to you Logicbwoy.
Have you considered why they want to ban it? Our faces are our identity, much as it is ours, we owe it to the public to be identified. We as human want to know who is sitting behind us,who we are talking to, who we are dealing with. This is why randomly wearing even a mask is not right.
Moreover,no where did the Qur'an command women to wear face-veil. This another misconception among muslims:
https://www.nairaland.com/1493271/ten-misconception-among-muslims

Dude, you should get an education before talking about some things please... You are going to mislead people with what you are writing.

There are various ways to justify this op. Primarily though, I'd say it's about values. Would you find walking around in public na.ked acceptable? Same thing here. Would you like to see slaves running about showing off their tatoos and chains, even if they're very happy slaves, endorsing slavery left, right, centre? Same thing here. Slavery is illegal sef..

Women are second-class citizens islamically, regardless of what they tell you. The way inheritance is handled alone justifies this, not to mention the other stuff. That sort of stuff is illegal in the west. Discrimination is not supported or condoned. The burkha is a nice symbol of women in islam, and the message it sends across shouldn't be tolerated. Tolerating intolerance isn't exactly the way to go about protecting tolerance. Endorsing pseudo-slavery isn't the best way to go about protecting freedom, etc etc. If muslims showed tolerance for other views then it'd be a different story, but they don't. Women could try walking around without covering up in Saudi to see what I mean.

Is there hipocrisy here? Of course. Value systems are subjective, they are not (and cannot be) fully rational per say.

Moral relativity is inescapable, if the muslims want to whine, then they should let, say foreigners at least, that visit their countries walk around without the burkha, etc. If they can force women there to wear them when in their backyard, I fail to see why they would have an issue with others forcing them not to wear them when they visit other backyards. Nobody forced them to come over, and in those parts, that is what they value. That is the law. Muslims themselves use this reasoning to justify their morality (eg oga prophet and his child-bride). Hypocrisy, but it's a small price to pay for freedom from the POV of the west.

There are also security issues, wearing a mask in certain places aids committing crimes.....blah blah blah..

TLDR; they simply find the way women are treated in the islamic world appalling, and will not stand or condone it in anyway. If they were more tolerant it'd be a different story, but they aren't

wiegraf: There are various ways to justify this op. Primarily though, I'd say it's about values. Would you find walking around in public na.ked acceptable? Same thing here. Would you like to see slaves running about showing off their tatoos and chains, even if they're very happy slaves, endorsing slavery left, right, centre? Same thing here. Slavery is illegal sef..

Women are second-class citizens islamically, regardless of what they tell you. The way inheritance is handled alone justifies this, not to mention the other stuff. That sort of stuff is illegal in the west. Discrimination is not supported or condoned. The burkha is a nice symbol of women in islam, and the message it sends across shouldn't be tolerated. Tolerating intolerance isn't exactly the way to go about protecting tolerance. Endorsing pseudo-slavery isn't the best way to go about protecting freedom, etc etc. If muslims showed tolerance for other views then it'd be a different story, but they don't. Women could try walking around without covering up in Saudi to see what I mean.

Is there hipocrisy here? Of course. Value systems are subjective, they are not (and cannot be) fully rational per say.

Moral relativity is inescapable, if the muslims want to whine, then they should let, say foreigners at least, that visit their countries walk around without the burkha, etc. If they can force women there to wear them when in their backyard, I fail to see why they would have an issue with others forcing them not to wear them when they visit other backyards. Nobody forced them to come over, and in those parts, that is what they value. That is the law. Muslims themselves use this reasoning to justify their morality (eg oga prophet and his child-bride). Hypocrisy, but it's a small price to pay for freedom from the POV of the west.

There are also security issues, wearing a mask in certain places aids committing crimes.....blah blah blah..

TLDR; they simply find the way women are treated in the islamic world appalling, and will not stand or condone it in anyway. If they were more tolerant it'd be a different story, but they aren't

look, I am not a fan of the Burkha but if some women want it, so be it. The burkha should not be banned

However, they Burkha women should understand that in court sometimes, they would have to remove their veil. Furthermore, they should accept some level of harrassment by shop/mall guards because it is wrong to cover your faces in shops. I have been followed around many times in stores because I sometimes use my hoodie to cover my face when I listen to music on earphones. Petty theives normally steal and cover their faces with hoodies to avoid cctv.

Logicbwoy:



look, I am not a fan of the Burkha but if some women want it, so be it.

Not good enough. "They want it" is not good enough, at all. Terrorists would like nuclear weapons, should we let them have them simply because they want it? This isn't a case of not harming others as far they're concerned, it clearly is. Again, mostly because muslims are intolerant. Do you think this same population would have issues with say Buddhist attire? Being tolerant does not equal accepting intolerance, else tolerance will cease to exist.

Their stance is well justified.

tbaba1234:

Dude, you should get an education before talking about some things please... You are going to mislead people with what you are writing.

Guy, either comment on topic or keep quiet. Why the attack on Usermane?

wiegraf:

Not good enough. "They want it" is not good enough, at all. Terrorists would like nuclear weapons, should we let them have them simply because they want it? This isn't a case of not harming others as far they're concerned, it clearly is. Again, mostly because muslims are intolerant. Do you think this same population would have issues with say Buddhist attire? Being tolerant does not equal accepting intolerance, else tolerance will cease to exist.

Their stance is well justified.

Nonsense. If a woman wants to wear a sack from chest down, it is her choice
If a woman wants to wear a burkha, it is her choice.

Choice is the keyword.

I still dont understand the reason anyone would want to control the choices others make for themselves.

And dont tell me some warped reasoning of social responsibility.

Logicbwoy:


Nonsense. If a woman wants to wear a sack from chest down, it is her choice
If a woman wants to wear a burkha, it is her choice.

Choice is the keyword.

Again, it is also by choice one can go about committing any manner of crime, doesn't mean we should just let it be.

You've added nothing. You might as well be italo, telling me shikena!

It's simple, explain to me why their intolerance should be indulged, then perhaps you'd have a case.

deols: I still dont understand the reason anyone would want to control the choices others make for themselves.

And dont tell me some warped reasoning of social responsibility.

It is, though somewhat simplifying, exactly that. Just as you have your own warped reasoning/social responsibility that entails your forcing women to wear the full ninja uniform or even just cover their hair, legs, etc.

World cup time is coming, how are you going to handle the hom.osexuals and drinkers that are bound to show up? Do you think that because your storybook claims GOD!!?, your reasoning is some way, in any way whatsoever, more sensible than theirs??

It's really simple, if you don't approve of their norms, leave the country or don't visit. Same you tell foreigners who show up in islamic countries, no?

wiegraf:

Again, it is also by choice one can go about committing any manner of crime, doesn't mean we should just let it be.

You've added nothing. You might as well be italo, telling me shikena!

It's simple, explain to me why their intolerance should be indulged, then perhaps you'd have a case.

Is wearing a burkha a crime? False equivalence

What is with this false equivalence? This guy, learn to argue properly.


Burkha a type of clothing. It is a choice to wear it

wiegraf:

It is, though somewhat simplifying, exactly that. Just as you have your own warped reasoning/social responsibility that entails your forcing women to wear the full ninja uniform or even just cover their hair, legs, etc.

World cup time is coming, how are you going to handle the hom.osexuals and drinkers that are bound to show up? Do you think that because your storybook claims GOD!!?, your reasoning is some way, in any way whatsoever, more sensible than theirs??

It's really simple, if you don't approve of their norms, leave the country or don't visit. Same you tell foreigners who show up in islamic countries, no?

lol......you are wharrrgarbling...you sound disjointed.

Focus on the issue= the right to wear the burkha.


There is hypocrisy because many of the people who push for burkha rights do not talk about the other side of it- where women are actually forced to wear the burkha in some muslim countries. However, that is not what this thread is about.


This thread is about the banning of the burkha. Once you agree to the principle of human rights and freedom of expression, you cant restrict clothing unless it is harmful to others.

wiegraf:

It is, though somewhat simplifying, exactly that. Just as you have your own warped reasoning/social responsibility that entails your forcing women to wear the full ninja uniform or even just cover their hair, legs, etc.

World cup time is coming, how are you going to handle the hom.osexuals and drinkers that are bound to show up? Do you think that because your storybook claims GOD!!?, your reasoning is some way, in any way whatsoever, more sensible than theirs??

It's really simple, if you don't approve of their norms, leave the country or don't visit. Same you tell foreigners who show up in islamic countries, no?

what is this one saying?

If I think women should not be forced to not wear what they want, don't you think that I would want that people be not forced to wear what they don't want ?

You seem to be reasoning backward not to be able to tell that I do not care whether someone is gay or not so far they are not bothering me with it.

If you care for gay people, isn't it just a warped up thinking that makes you want the rights of some others trampled on?

Ban! What could their reason be this time again? I think these western countries really need to stop hiding under the canopy of 'social responsibility or whatever' to deprive people of their freedom of choice... What happen to 'freedom' that the west claim to offer? Oh, I forgot this(burqa) is a muslim thing and restrictions has to come in... Freedom that in other words says ''freedom to non-muslims''? Why am I surprised anyways.
Have read through the comments above but if you remove religious sentiments from your hearts, you will realise that it's not fair to do that... Many times, Islam is accused of oppressing women by forcing them to use hijab/burqa but what do we call 'forcing women to take off burqa'? And what will muslims be called if they act against this(just asking though)?
@wiegraf, the world is almost at its(her) peak of 'no peace,' don't you think muslims leaving that country and non-muslims asked to leave muslims'(arab) countries only complicates the already complicated world?
@usermane, you really have to stop this and stick to whatever you believe. If everyone has to identify who he/she talks, sits or does whatever with, then I think everyone should also be able to be with anybody, see/talk to anyone without having to see unclad bodies and in that case, indecency MUST be 'banned' too but things arent that easy so they should let people be(especially the right doers).
@Op, U said u aren't for burqa but think people should be left entitled to their choices, I respect you for that...
Not as if my epistle is gonna reach the authorities incharge of the ban nor is it gonna make things different but feelings better 'aired'... Off here joor

Logicbwoy:


Is wearing a burkha a crime? False equivalence

What is with this false equivalence? This guy, learn to argue properly.


Burkha a type of clothing. It is a choice to wear it

Lb, it's quite the task for you, but try to limit your eediocy. It obviously isn't a crime, but they're trying to make it one, no? You talk as if what is a crime is objective, that's silly. We simply stick up for our values.

If you think there's no problem here then you shouldn't have any issues with yarima and those kids. You do know that if asked most of those kids are quite content being a ped.o's plaything, yes? You do know that they will quite willingly get married to uncle, yes? After all, god decreed it, therefore it's fine. So yarima really should be allowed to get his wives recognized legally, yes? He should be allowed to wear rings and whatnot, and extol on the virtues of child marriage, no? To present it as something positive, no?

Again, what is a crime in the west is robbing people of their rights. The burkha is a clear cut symbol of that, just as say some sort of marriage rings for pe.dos would be a symbol of that practice. Neither of these should be tolerated so long as we're sticking to what the west values.

To compound on that, there's their infamous intolerance. Consider NAZI, their shi.t isn't allowed in a lot of places just because they stand for heinous morals by the average western standards, it's mostly because they're terribly intolerant. If they get a chance they will act on said intolerance, like they did during hitler's years. If muslims get a chance they'll rob females of their rights, like they do in islamic societies.

It's not like they've not been given their chance to demonstrate maturity, they have and they have failed. Again, do you see anyone clamoring for the same for buddhists, sikhs, etc?

You do not condone nonsense from intolerants, simple. That is the west's value system at work there.

Now, try to use your head and be reasonable if you're going to reply

Logicbwoy:


lol......you are wharrrgarbling...you sound disjointed.

Focus on the issue= the right to wear the burkha.


There is hypocrisy because many of the people who push for burkha rights do not talk about the other side of it- where women are actually forced to wear the burkha in some muslim countries. However, that is not what this thread is about.


This thread is about the banning of the burkha. Once you agree to the principle of human rights and freedom of expression, you cant restrict clothing unless it is harmful to others.

What in the universe makes you think you are capable of telling me what a good argument is?

What are you smoking?

deols: I still dont understand the reason anyone would want to control the choices others make for themselves.

And dont tell me some warped reasoning of social responsibility.

lol.

deols:

what is this one saying?

If I think women should not be forced to not wear what they want, don't you think that I would want that people be not forced to wear what they don't want ?

You seem to be reasoning backward not to be able to tell that I do not care whether someone is gay or not so far they are not bothering me with it.

If you care for gay people, isn't it just a warped up thinking that makes you want the rights of some others trampled on?

You do not care? I do not care as that's irrelevant. And you aren't the only muslim that doesn't care, mind you. BUT ISLAM CLEARLY DOES. And in islamic societies you have failed to show any sort of respect to women's rights (in particular), gay rights, etc, as far as western standards are concerned. Non at all.

Again, the intolerance clearly makes you stand out. No one's complaining about the other groups, no? Everyone else plays nice except you. If gays were advocating for robbing the rights of straight people I will not support them, in any way whatsoever, as well. That is a salient difference between their case and yours.

ummsulaym:
@wiegraf, the world is almost at its(her) peak of 'no peace,' don't you think muslims leaving that country and non-muslims asked to leave muslims'(arab) countries only complicates the already complicated world?

I wish it could be avoided, but it can't. Else the very foundation of western society is in jeopardy.

Some prices are far too high.

wiegraf:

Lb, it's quite the task for you, but try to limit your eediocy. It obviously isn't a crime, but they're trying to make it one, no? You talk as if what is a crime is objective, that's silly. We simply stick up for our values.

If you think there's no problem here then you shouldn't have any issues with yarima and those kids. You do know that if asked most of those kids are quite content being a ped.o's plaything, yes? You do know that they will quite willingly get married to uncle, yes? After all, god decreed it, therefore it's fine. So yarima really should be allowed to get his wives recognized legally, yes? He should be allowed to wear rings and whatnot, and extol on the virtues of child marriage, no? To present it as something positive, no?

Again, what is a crime in the west is robbing people of their rights. The burkha is a clear cut symbol of that, just as say some sort of marriage rings for pe.dos would be a symbol of that practice. Neither of these should be tolerated so long as we're sticking to what the west values.

To compound on that, there's their infamous intolerance. Consider NAZI, their shi.t isn't allowed in a lot of places just because they stand for heinous morals by the average western standards, it's mostly because they're terribly intolerant. If they get a chance they will act on said intolerance, like they did during hitler's years. If muslims get a chance they'll rob females of their rights, like they do in islamic societies.

It's not like they've not been given their chance to demonstrate maturity, they have and they have failed. Again, do you see anyone clamoring for the same for buddhists, sikhs, etc?

You do not condone nonsense from intolerants, simple. That is the west's value system at work there.

Now, try to use your head and be reasonable if you're going to reply

You know when someone is arguing nonsense- they bring irrelevant stuff to the argument.

-child marriage
-pe.dophilia

^^
These have nothing to do with the argument at hand.

The case is simple- a woman is free to wear what she wants to wear, given that she is not naked. Why is such a simple explanation of freedom of expression and freedom of religion so hard to understand?

Do I like the burkha? No
Do I like women in baggy pants? No
But like all articles of clothing, it is the woman's choice to make for herself.

The argument is so simple.


Thank goodness that the UK is not like france or saudi arabia where women are told what not to wear.

wiegraf:

What in the universe makes you think you are capable of telling me what a good argument is?

What are you smoking?

You are embarrassing yourself here with your shallow and non sequitur arguments.

wiegraf:

I wish it could be avoided, but it can't. Else the very foundation of western society is in jeopardy.

Some prices are far too high.

Agreed that it may not be avoided but the way and with what they want to fuel it, is soooooo wrong... Burqa isn't just 'anything.' That it has to do with one's religion is enough reason to free them...

And what could that 'very foundation' be and how high can we say this price is? I want to know

on a level ground and regardless of whatever, banning burqa cannot be justified... Am not asking anyone(e.g wiegraf) to agree with that, but truth is clear...

ummsulaym: Ban! What could their reason be this time again? I think these western countries really need to stop hiding under the canopy of 'social responsibility or whatever' to deprive people of their freedom of choice... What happen to 'freedom' that the west claim to offer? Oh, I forgot this(burqa) is a muslim thing and restrictions has to come in... Freedom that in other words says ''freedom to non-muslims''? Why am I surprised anyways.
Have read through the comments above but if you remove religious sentiments from your hearts, you will realise that it's not fair to do that... Many times, Islam is accused of oppressing women by forcing them to use hijab/burqa but what do we call 'forcing women to take off burqa'? And what will muslims be called if they act against this(just asking though)?
@wiegraf, the world is almost at its(her) peak of 'no peace,' don't you think muslims leaving that country and non-muslims asked to leave muslims'(arab) countries only complicates the already complicated world?
@usermane, you really have to stop this and stick to whatever you believe. If everyone has to identify who he/she talks, sits or does whatever with, then I think everyone should also be able to be with anybody, see/talk to anyone without having to see unclad bodies and in that case, indecency MUST be 'banned' too but things arent that easy so they should let people be(especially the right doers).
@Op, U said u aren't for burqa but think people should be left entitled to their choices, I respect you for that...
Not as if my epistle is gonna reach the authorities incharge of the ban nor is it gonna make things different but feelings better 'aired'... Off here joor

The UK is just fed up with the hypocrisy and intolerance of many muslims. I think that anger is reflected in the polls. However, it is not going to be banned. I have seen political debate where most pundits/politcians have said that they wont ban it.

Here is the hypocrisy of muslims in the west and UK
-Crying and whining about France's banning of the burkha but silent about Saudi and sharia countries banning "western styled" dresses for women
-Silence about the other extreme- people who force burkha on women
-Claiming islamophobia or intolerance to muslims in the west but support the beating/arrest/execution of atheists or apaostates and other non-muslims in sharia countries.


Still, I believe that a woman should be free to wear the Burkha

am not surprise that you typed that, I expected someone and/or anyone to bring up an issue related to that as comments continue on this thread...

You don't know how sharia is applied... I don't support forcing burqa on anyone but enjoining (which you call force) hijab i.e proper islamic dress code for women in sharia abiding countries isn't barbaric or whatever people call it... They didn't ban 'western style' cuz a woman is allowed to wear any style whatsoever provided it's within the limit of women cover in sharia. It's better put 'western indecency' cuz that's what they don't tolerate and any region isn't suppose to tolerate it too..
Hey! Arresting,beating and execution of non-muslims, is that true? If at all yes, for NO justified reason? Killing of apostate is in accordance to their 'interpretation' of sharia regarding apostacy...
Am I defensive? NO, I'm not...
It's okay(what can I say) to think bad of muslims but people's thoughts should be locked up in them(after all, it doesn't matter), it shouldn't surface just to forge issues when none exist...

ummsulaym:

Agreed that it may not be avoided but the way and with what they want to fuel it, is soooooo wrong... Burqa isn't just 'anything.' That it has to do with one's religion is enough reason to free them...

And what could that 'very foundation' be and how high can we say this price is? I want to know

on a level ground and regardless of whatever, banning burqa cannot be justified... Am not asking anyone(e.g wiegraf) to agree with that, but truth is clear...

And you wonder why people think you're intolerant? You're not asking me? Who do you think you are? Not to mention you agree it cannot be avoided??

Do you even understand what separation of church and state is? Hint; it does not involve telling people how to dress because a story book said so. Or giving people a free pass to do as they wish simply because GOD!!??

Moving on, good, so you state it cannot be justified (shikena!!), then you'd agree forcing women to wear it cannot be justified as well, yes?

Logicbwoy:


You know when someone is arguing nonsense- they bring irrelevant stuff to the argument.

-child marriage
-pe.dophilia

^^
These have nothing to do with the argument at hand.

The case is simple- a woman is free to wear what she wants to wear, given that she is not naked. Why is such a simple explanation of freedom of expression and freedom of religion so hard to understand?

Do I like the burkha? No
Do I like women in baggy pants? No
But like all articles of clothing, it is the woman's choice to make for herself.

The argument is so simple.


Thank goodness that the UK is not like france or saudi arabia where women are told what not to wear.

You're an eediot. Nothing more to add

wiegraf:

And you wonder why people think you're intolerant? You're not asking me? Who do you think you are? Not to mention you agree it cannot be avoided??

Do you even understand what separation of church and state is? Hint; it does not involve telling people how to dress because a story book said so. Or giving people a free pass to do as they wish simply because GOD!!??

Moving on , good, so you state it cannot be justified (shikena!!), then you'd agree forcing women to wear it cannot be justified as well, yes?

first bolded explains your level of understanding so am just gonna do the second bolded... Right is right and wrong is wrong, there are no two ways about that, so 'moving on...'

ummsulaym:

first bolded explains your level of understanding so am just gonna do the second bolded... Right is right and wrong is wrong, there is no two ways about that, so 'moving on...'

Thank you for making my point

Your morality, with it's child brides amd female slaves you hold as absolute truths; right is right and wrong is wrong. Excellent. The rest of us have no place questioning tje absolute word of allah, yes? How dare silly man made institutions like government do that.

You didnt address anything as well. You even concede the clash in inevitable, yet you want the west to just bend over?

Keep your nonsense in the caves. Nobody forvrs you to come over. Especially considering how repressive your silly beliefs are


Lb, in my opinion it's silly to encourage these folk. Just as it's silly to accept any nonsense theory like demon SMS simply because you want to appear open-minded. Being liberal does not equal turning a blind eye to intolerance

Sharia is the CODE and muslims(individually) are responsible for their interpretations, understanding, implemention and execution of the Sharia just as other talkers/haters(e.g wiegraf) are responsible for their opinion (it doesn't matters anyway) concerning the Sharia... So stick to it(everyone entitled to his/her opinion)...

waiting to see how it ends with briton and the banning of burqa(the real issue)...

ummsulaym: am not surprise that you typed that, I expected someone and/or anyone to bring up an issue related to that as comments continue on this thread...

You don't know how sharia is applied... I don't support forcing burqa on anyone but enjoining (which you call force) hijab i.e proper islamic dress code for women in sharia abiding countries isn't barbaric or whatever people call it... They didn't ban 'western style' cuz a woman is allowed to wear any style whatsoever provided it's within the limit of women cover in sharia. It's better put 'western indecency' cuz that's what they don't tolerate and any region isn't suppose to tolerate it too..
Hey! Arresting,beating and execution of non-muslims, is that true? If at all yes, for NO justified reason? Killing of apostate is in accordance to their 'interpretation' of sharia regarding apostacy...
Am I defensive? NO, I'm not...
It's okay(what can I say) to think bad of muslims but people's thoughts should be locked up in them(after all, it doesn't matter), it shouldn't surface just to forge issues when none exist...

What is "western indecency"? As if there are no indecent people in the Middle East? Some atheists have been arrested, some beaten in muslim countries. Bangladesh and Pakistan....

Anyway, we are on the same page. Burkha should not be banned

wiegraf:

You're an eediot. Nothing more to add

Ohhh, I love the smell of butthurt