• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Belgian Burkha ban for only 30 women?

rivrrat said:
No, we should ban behavior that directly harms others.

Do tell me how my wearing a veil on my face directly harms anyone.
Click to expand...

I cant identify you for one. You are a massive security risk where ever you go. Not to mention you are a health risk since I have no way of knowing if you are sick or not, since I cant see your face.
 
rivrrat said:
So it's "freeing" me by not allowing me to wear a veil if I so choose? When I CHOOSE to wear a veil, I'm oppressing .... myself? And I should be freed from... myself?

I think we should go after nuns next. We should free them from those god-awful habits they oppress themselves with, and their life of abject servitude to their master god.
Click to expand...

Get back to me when your owner beats you senseless for not wearing one, o.k.?
 
Gardener said:
Get back to me when your owner beats you senseless for not wearing one, o.k.?
Click to expand...

is their any evidence that spousal beating are higher in the muslim population of western countries than the non muslim population?
 
PeteEU said:
I cant identify you for one. You are a massive security risk where ever you go. Not to mention you are a health risk since I have no way of knowing if you are sick or not, since I cant see your face.
Click to expand...

If they merely wanted to ban things that covered people's faces (which I don't agree with) then that's what they should have done. Of course, that would include winter scarves and other cold-weather face and head protection gear. And full face helmets.

But they didn't do that. So, guess the whole 'security risk' thing is just bull****.

And health risk? Holy ****, talk about reaching. You can't tell if I'm sick even if you CAN see my face. Should we have our health conditions tattooed to our forehead so we're not "health risks"?
 
spud_meister said:
is their any evidence that spousal beating are higher in the muslim population of western countries than the non muslim population?
Click to expand...

No, because the males of Muslim countries refuse access to their women to make a comprehensive analysis. On top of that there is no such thing as "battered womens" homes or sanctuaries. They suffer silently when they dont die in kitchen fires.. oh wait thats the Indians that do that.

For example, in Saudi Arabia the government has a hell of a time getting accurate census figures because women are hidden away and not reported by the male members of the family.
 
Gardener said:
Get back to me when your owner beats you senseless for not wearing one, o.k.?
Click to expand...

What's that got to do with me choosing to wear a veil?

If my husband beats me up if I don't wear a bra, should we ban all bras in order to "fix" it?

How about we make a law against beating people up and focus on THAT. OMFG what a novel idea!!


What next? Ban sex because some people are raped or forced to be sex slaves?
 
spud_meister said:
is their any evidence that spousal beating are higher in the muslim population of western countries than the non muslim population?
Click to expand...

How could there be much evidence when the culture in which they are immersed is so intimidating to the women involved that they don't dare report it?
 
rivrrat said:
What's that got to do with me choosing to wear a veil?

If my husband beats me up if I don't wear a bra, should we ban all bras in order to "fix" it?

How about we make a law against beating people up and focus on THAT. OMFG what a novel idea!!


What next? Ban sex because some people are raped or forced to be sex slaves?
Click to expand...

You are ignorant of the nature of the practice, so you are making assumptions that this is an individual matter. It is not. It is an ingrained practice born of culture, and needs to be addressed on the level of the system and not an individual.

If this were 1850, you would be arguing in favor of the continuation of slavery simply because some of the slaves accepted their lot.
 
rivrrat said:
If they merely wanted to ban things that covered people's faces (which I don't agree with) then that's what they should have done.
Click to expand...

Thats what they ARE doing. It is not targeted Muslim women, but EVERYONE.

Of course, that would include winter scarves and other cold-weather face and head protection gear. And full face helmets.
Click to expand...

It does in theory. However commonsense is allowed you know. If it is minus 15 degrees then I doubt that the law will be enforced.

But they didn't do that. So, guess the whole 'security risk' thing is just bull****.
Click to expand...

No they did. You have been hoodwinked by US and British anti-Euro media.

And health risk? Holy ****, talk about reaching. You can't tell if I'm sick even if you CAN see my face. Should we have our health conditions tattooed to our forehead so we're not "health risks"?
Click to expand...

Sure I can, not for everything, but I can see if you have glazed eyes, look white in the face and so on. Not saying it is a primary reason by any means, since the security reason is the main reason.
 
Gardener said:
How could there be much evidence when the culture in which they are immersed is so intimidating to the women involved that they don't dare report it?
Click to expand...

so you're just assuming that muslim men in western countries beat their wives
 
rivrrat said:
Has nothing to do with culture whatsoever. Has to do with freedom to wear a ****ing veil if one wants. Ditto with removing one's organs or marrying whomever one wants to.
Click to expand...

well the difference is that it seems that in many case, they're not really "free" to wear it or not.
 
spud_meister said:
is their any evidence that spousal beating are higher in the muslim population of western countries than the non muslim population?
Click to expand...

That evidence would be hard to come by, due to the oppressive nature in some sections of the Muslim community, any community for that matter. The victim is normally the last person to speak out.

Paul
 
rivrrat said:
If they merely wanted to ban things that covered people's faces (which I don't agree with) then that's what they should have done. Of course, that would include winter scarves and other cold-weather face and head protection gear. And full face helmets.

But they didn't do that.
Click to expand...

Yes they did that. I don't think the word "burqa" appears in the ban (which still has to be voted by the senate)
 
bub said:
well the difference is that it seems that in many case, they're not really "free" to wear it or not.
Click to expand...

The law doesn't address that in the slightest. Kind of like banning sex because sometimes women are forced to do it.
 
gunner said:
That evidence would be hard to come by, due to the oppressive nature in some sections of the Muslim community, any community for that matter. The victim is normally the last person to speak out.

Paul
Click to expand...

so its just "assume muslims are wife beaters" day until evidence comes out to the contrary?
 
Gardener said:
You are ignorant of the nature of the practice, so you are making assumptions that this is an individual matter. It is not. It is an ingrained practice born of culture, and needs to be addressed on the level of the system and not an individual.

If this were 1850, you would be arguing in favor of the continuation of slavery simply because some of the slaves accepted their lot.
Click to expand...

So, we should ban sex since some women are forced to do it? Because that's the same idiotic notion this law represents and what you seem to be so agreeable to.

PeteEU said:
Thats what they ARE doing. It is not targeted Muslim women, but EVERYONE.

It does in theory. However commonsense is allowed you know. If it is minus 15 degrees then I doubt that the law will be enforced.

No they did. You have been hoodwinked by US and British anti-Euro media.
Click to expand...
Ahh.. so it's even more idiotic than I was led to believe.
 
A simple google search offered,


"In chapter 33, entitled Soorah Al-Ahzaab (The Clans), verse 59 Allaah The Exalted Almighty Says (what means): "O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the woman of the believers to bring down over themselves (part) of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known (as free respectable women) and not be abused. And ever is Allaah Forgiving and Merciful." [Quran 33:59] This verse shows that Islam makes wearing a Hijaab necessary. Hijaab is the word used for covering, not only the headscarves (as some people may think) but also wearing loose clothes that are not too bright."


IslamWeb - Are Muslim women oppressed?

I cant comment on the validity of the site.

Paul
 
rivrrat said:
The law doesn't address that in the slightest. Kind of like banning sex because sometimes women are forced to do it.
Click to expand...

The problem is solved since burqas are totally forbidden.

Do you think there would have been another way to adress the problem of women being forced to wear a burqa and the other problems caused by the burqa itself (women considered as inferior, women forbidden to meet strangers, impossibility to integrate...)?
 
spud_meister said:
so its just "assume muslims are wife beaters" day until evidence comes out to the contrary?
Click to expand...

The evidence is there. As i said, its hard to extract.

Paul
 
rivrrat said:
Ahh.. so it's even more idiotic than I was led to believe.
Click to expand...

There are far more idiotic laws out there.. look at Arizona :)

At least this one makes a bit sense and hopefully will free some women from slavery.
 
gunner said:
The evidence is there. As i said, its hard to extract.

Paul
Click to expand...

and i could say that everyone is a closet zoophiliac, but are too ashamed to admit it, but the evidence is there, just hard to extract.
 
spud_meister said:
so you're just assuming that muslim men in western countries beat their wives
Click to expand...

No, not at all.

Why are you conflating the wearing of Burkhas with all of Islam?
 
For those who are interested in the debate that happened in the chamber of deputees, it's on page 12

D:\wwwroot\Documents\PCRA\html\52\ap151

it's in dutch and in french, I'll translate the relevant parts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom