If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Is Dutch government right to back burqa ban?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
.
0
Comments
Well that was easy.
Seconded.
[edit]
Thirded even.
But banning people from walking down the streets wearing one? Can't see its any of the states business what they wear in public.
That would make snese!
As long as there's no specific reason that a kind of clothing can't be worn, I say let people wear anything they want.
On the other hand, there's the issue on whether someone is being forced to wear a burqa when she doesn't want to...
Very good point. They are the elected representatives.
Just because we might not agree with them, doesnt mean they shouldnt do it, if it is clear the people of Holland want such a thing to occur.
Isnt that what the France is like though? They do not allow any religious expression of any kinds in Government or educational facilities. Holland are attempting to impose the same measures but on a much lkarger blanket scale.
I never said I was pro France's policy on religious expression (save myself from hypocricy ). I found a quote from president Chirac:
"Wearing a veil, whether we want it or not, is a sort of aggression that is difficult for us to accept."
I haven't done enough research on intolerance and built a personal view to simply pinpoint the line of religious tolerance but I do agree that in public places, you should be allowed to express your religion. However, i am strictly against wearing full veils in schools and i am generally pro a completely secular state (although this is not always possible). I find it sad that Holland are following France's past road towards complete religious intolerance and that you have, as an individual, the right to wear whatever you want, providing no harm is being caused (which, clearly, it isn't - i find Chirac's view of a veil being a sign of agression completely ludicrous).
Secularism and religious expression can co-exist and, in fact, they should.
So, if the majority of the MPs of country X were voting for genocide, you would support their decision? Democracy is not always the way to go. Other factors simply have to be taken into consideration.
Expecting people to conform to local standards is not unreasonable, and lots (and that means lots as in more than a few, rather than a majority, just so we're clear) of people feel threatened or intimidated by someone who is hiding their identity, which is what wearing a burkha in public does.
You see very confused as to what i am saying, as you keep using this word "liberal" which i am pretty sure i have not used so far when describing Holland, though if i have i am sorry i led to this misunderstanding as i did not mean to use the word. I used the word Democracy and pointed out they can vote such things into law. Maybe in a "Liberal Democracy" it is the responsibilty to uphold minority wishes and freedom of religious expression, but i am not saying Holland is Liberal, i am only saying it is a Democracy, a highly conservative Democracy if i am not mistaken and to force them to be Liberal by telling them how to be is not our place. We can just dislike it from a distance, after all there are countries in thw world where it is the law women can not show any part of themselves except for their eyes and must be covered at all times and not go anywhere with out a man escorting them, yet this is already the law and has been for a long time so people in the rest of world mostly turn a blind eye and accept it. It is only because Holland is trying to change its own laws that any one has noticed or cares.
It maybe the first step to ethnic cleansing or it may only be the first step to a Holland with out self imposed exclusions by minorities with in the nation.
Would there be such a fuss is single faith school were been abolished in Holland or would most people agree thats a good idea? It is after all just another law that could come into effect if the majority desired it and it was put into effect by the government on a religious based issue.
:yes: I find this a very agreeable and intelligent point :yes:
I never said in the remotest sense that Liberal meant Liberalism, i did study politics and learn what the ideology of Liberalism is, i also learned to be democratic does not mean the state has to defend minorities with in that state. It is pretty clear what i said and my point is the same.
It even says in that wiki quote that the individual has a part to play in the choice of those who govern them, it does not say that those who govern them cannot make laws that a minority disagree with. If they do, then that government can be voted out of power, well only enough people disagree with such a policy that is.
Members of the KKK might have had more extreme and more offensive beliefs than most women wearing the burqa but if Klansmen cannot hide their face it is discriminatory to allow Muslim women to hide their face. For the state to assign different rights to people depending on what their religious/political beliefs are would be ill-fitting with the attributes of a liberal democracy.
There are some pretty sound security and identification reasons for banning the burqa in public places; someone wearing a motorcycle helmet has to remove it when entering a bank, an off license or an airport - I can't see why Muslim women should get special treatment. I don't care what their religious beliefs are, if I invent a religion stipulating that followers must wear a motorcycle helmet - and this religion in my mind would have as much validity as Islam do you think I would be allowed to stroll into NatWest wearing a motorcycle helmet?
I would not like to contemplate the response of many of Britain’s 1.8 million Muslims however were we to ban the burqa in public places. It's partly for that reason that I probably would not extend a ban on the burqa to public places - I would only ban it in schools funded by the government and government buildings. (Unless discreet and inconspicuous religious paraphernalia has absolutely no place in a school).
But when this is seen to infringe on safety and public order then the government has the right to pass a bill that takes away the freedoms. Look at the Patriot Act in America, hardly a sign of a liberal democracy.
Exactally.
I think all religious stuff should be banned in public to make life easier. Then it is at least fair and not descriminating against one religion.
Fuck it, ban organised religion whilst you are at it.
I'd rather ban brainwashing (sorry, religious education) of children, but that still would not solve the problem as people who grew up elsewhere would have still been influenced by it.