Behind the burka

shawn

shawn

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,085
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
No longer here
BBC - Gavin Hewitt's Europe: Behind the burka
Seems like some women are going to fight for their right to wear it.

You know, I think it is a great idea, lets have face masks...........given all the cameras and invasion of privacy I think I will start packing a kennedy mask around, or maybe a storm trooper helmet, you know, for those special occassions:p
 
Superb idea. Like in point break, where everyone wheres a dead presidents mask...or was it ex presidients? I think I would like to wear the V for Vendetta guy fawks mask. Or Boba Fett!

We have way too many cameras on our streets.
Jeremy Benthams panopticon on society as a whole, looms ever closer.
 
Burkas? I think that textiles technology is moving forward, and soon they will make an air-conditioned burka that cleans the body, never needs taking off and is bullet proof. When that happens, I'm getting one.
 
Since you hang "Jesus" on your crosses with only little covering his groin, why don't you all go naked to the church? Lets make nuns not wear their head dress and long dresses, and have them start wearing bikinis. The priests could wear little coverings on their groins, no? That would be very fun indeed. You already dance and sing and applaud in churches, so why not little clothes stripping? It's hand in hand with "modernity"??


:D I can't wait for Christians to take that leap of "faith" lol
 
and why should they not fight for their right to wear niqab or burka? The lady in this article made the choice to wear it, not for political reasons or through force but because she wants to.
 
But why is a good question.
People running around in concealment is kind of creepy really.

Women wear it as they don't want to be immodest and so they cover up thinking that it will help the wayward men somehow by concealing the object of their lusts.
But this doesn't work as the changes needed are in the hearts and minds of people.
 
Interesting. It makes me look up the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. It leaves a lot up to each member state.
 
An observation - no one ever complains about Muslim states enforcing their own standards on Westerners - visiting or resident - yet when Western countries try enforcing standards, people cry "foul"!
 
Seems some Muslims think it's a good thing to throw acid in the faces of women who don't wear a burka:
BBC News - Arrests made over Pakistan acid attack

However, to be fair, this is a tactic commonly used by Indian Hindu's as well.

Ultimately, it is a matter of male control of women in both instances.

Perhaps a necessity in a lawless Arabian desert during the Dark Ages - but not necessarily applicable to modern developed societies.
 
I for one, think it is high time to put an end to medieval social control tactics.
and for those women who will fight for "their right" :rolleyes: to wear such garb, they ought to get help for their "stockholm syndrom", as they are needing therapy.
 
shawn said:
Women wear it as they don't want to be immodest and so they cover up thinking that it will help the wayward men somehow by concealing the object of their lusts.
But this doesn't work as the changes needed are in the hearts and minds of people.
Click to expand...

Firstly you haven't quite understood why we dress this way and there is no one singular and simple reason.

Secondly, as concelaling the object of men's lust is one reason, I would love to know what you believe would change men's hearts and minds, because I would love to try it out in the West and see if it reduced the number of rapes and sexual assaults.

You see that's the problem, until men's minds and hearts are all changed some women feel it is better not to put temptation in their way.

I said:
An observation - no one ever complains about Muslim states enforcing their own standards on Westerners - visiting or resident - yet when Western countries try enforcing standards, people cry "foul"!
Click to expand...

It is a good point Brian but Muslim states don't hold themselves up to be secular and democratic. When you state you are both secular and democratic then you have to live by those principles surely?

I said:
Ultimately, it is a matter of male control of women in both instances.
Click to expand...

As this is a tradition and not based in religion I'm not sure it is relevant to a discussion about Islamic dress codes.

shawn said:
and for those women who will fight for "their right" :rolleyes: to wear such garb, they ought to get help for their "stockholm syndrom", as they are needing therapy.
Click to expand...

That is certainly one of the least educated responses I have read on this forum for a while.

c0de said:
:rolleyes:here's some more Girl Power 4 ya

Kavita Ramdas: Radical women, embracing tradition | Video on TED.com
Click to expand...

Brilliant video c0de, thanks for sharing it. Some of the strongest women I know dress in religious garb but, like the women talked of in that video, it does not define them or force them to behave in a given way.
 
Muslimwoman said:
It is a good point Brian but Muslim states don't hold themselves up to be secular and democratic. When you state you are both secular and democratic then you have to live by those principles surely?
Click to expand...

Exactly, and one facet of being truly secular and democratic is to protect the rights of the minorities and allowing them the freedom to practice their beliefs. Otherwise, you just have a tyranny of the majority: Case in point:

GENEVA — In a vote that displayed a widespread anxiety about Islam and undermined the country’s reputation for religious tolerance, the Swiss on Sunday overwhelmingly imposed a national ban on the construction of minarets, the prayer towers of mosques, in a referendum drawn up by the far right and opposed by the government.

The referendum, which passed with a clear majority of 57.5 percent of the voters and in 22 of Switzerland’s 26 cantons, was a victory for the right. The vote against was 42.5 percent. Because the ban gained a majority of votes and passed in a majority of the cantons, it will be added to the Constitution.

The Swiss Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, but the rightist Swiss People’s Party, or S.V.P., and a small religious party had proposed inserting a single sentence banning the construction of minarets, leading to the referendum.

The Swiss government said it would respect the vote and sought to reassure the Muslim population — mostly immigrants from other parts of Europe, like Kosovo and Turkey — that the minaret ban was “not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/30/world/europe/30swiss.html



:rolleyes:

lolz

ahan... sure..

thanx 4 the "reassurances" there

u "neutral" pocket knife makin' morons


Brilliant video c0de, thanks for sharing it.
Click to expand...
pleasure.
 
Salaam--

Although I wear not hijaab, niqaab nor burka, I am a practicing Muslim (to a degree some may say, I guess). Anyway.

According to the Noble Qur'an, the Muslim woman AND man's demonstration in faith comes through belief and chastity. Chastity is described in the Qur'an as lowering one's gaze and not provoking another person to commit a sin, whether male or female (i.e. making them lust for another that is not lawful to him/her).

On the other hand, when the covering of a Muslim woman was instituted, the purpose for that was so they do not get assaulted/insulted. The Noble Qur'an tells women that if they wish to avoid insults, that they should not provoke them and the way to help is to cover the adornments of their beuaty. Regarding the men who assault/insult women, Allah SWT gives strong order that such men MUST restrain themselves or face banishment.
 
The issue is simple: Muslims MUST abide by the laws of the coutnry they live in as long as it does not pose a problem for the practice of Islaam. If uncovering one's face means respecting a law, then for sure it will not inhibit a Muslim woman's practice of Islaam, as she can still keep her chastity and practice of Islaam.

In regards of non-Muslims having to abide by the laws of Muslims in the Muslim lands. Again, regardless if you are a Muslim or not and regardless where you are, one must abide by the laws of the land.

Muslims, in majority Muslim lands, have religious laws a lot of times as the laws of the lands. According to the Noble Qur'an, Muslims are to judge the non-Muslims in accordance with their scriptures. According to the Bible, women are to wear head coverings in public and to wear modest clothing. Hence, since the laws in the Muslim lands are religious laws, the Jews and Christians are expected to abide by the biblical laws too (Mosaic laws which Muslims view as the laws Christians are expected to follow, too, according to the NT we have).

It is not just Muslims who require head coverings. Hindu women when they marry like to wear veils. Some Hindus, both male and female, wear veils as a sign of respect during the religious ceremonies. Some Buddhists wear head coverings too as a way of respect by covering the Crown Chakra, etc.
 
Amica said:
If uncovering one's face means respecting a law, then for sure it will not inhibit a Muslim woman's practice of Islaam, as she can still keep her chastity and practice of Islaam.
Click to expand...

Salam Sister

I agree that we must all abide by the laws of the country we live in or move to another country.

However, the discussion of whether niqab is mustahab (recommended), wajib (compulsory) or fard (Divinely ordered duty) has gone on for centuries. Now what if you are a woman who believes it is fard (as some women I know do) and are then told you can practice your Islam without it? :eek:

Would you say a Muslim man could wear speedo's and still practice his Islam unhindered?
 
I said:
An observation - no one ever complains about Muslim states enforcing their own standards on Westerners - visiting or resident - yet when Western countries try enforcing standards, people cry "foul"!
Click to expand...


I don't complain because we are better than they are and should be held to a higher standard. It's that simple. If we are better than they are, we are to hold ourselves to a higher standard. If we are no better than they are, then we can play the same kind of games they play.

That's really the choice. It's the same reason we are behooved to treat any of them we capture under arms according to the usages of civilized principles even if they act like savages and murder reporters on camera merely for being Jewish and then distribute the movie they made. We are better than they are, so we don't act that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top