http://www.turks.us/article.php?story=20040402093348817
I seen this article on bbc.co.uk not sure if they mension it here. 5 More german states have laws that are like the one Baden-Wurtenburg passed in the works and will probably have them passed soon. So Germany is definetely going to get rid of it slowly but surely. I commend them on banning hijabs.

This reinforces my belief in the slow but sure trend of anti-islam thats spreading through europe. I posted on it when the French banned hijab. The main thing the europeans dislike is that by showing islamic symbols in public schools it propogandizes public opinion to sway in their favor on all issues which is very despicable.

Okay. So the Germans are practicing bigotry once more. Gettin' back to their Nazi heritage in a different way with different targets. So entire Europe is catching that fever, and Muslim rights everywhere will be violated because of Islamic fanatics, who happen to be a great minority, who just use the name of their religion to justify killings. Europe is making no sense and is illogically extending "Islamic terrorists, must resist" to all of Muslims. Explain again why banning the hijab is "commendable"? :rolleyes:

Geez.

-- Long live the Female Messiah!

By having someone remove their "hats" isn't bieng racist or bigotry at all. I believe that this in no way stops anyone from practicing their religous views whatsoever. If anyone would think that by removing a "hat" would cause a person to lose their religon, those people don't have much intelligence whatsoever. Remember they aren't allowed to wear them at schools only, so once they leave school they can do as they please.

Explain again why banning the hijab is "commendable"?It fallaciously calms people's irrational fears.

Er .... If anyone would think that by removing a "hat" would cause a person to lose their religon, those people don't have much intelligence whatsoever.Neither will someone lose their religion if you force feed a Jew pork, make a Catholic choke down red meat on a Friday, or rape a Baptist virgin.

But it doesn't mean it's right to do so.

It's not as if they have to burn incense in class, or carry knives as part of their religion.

I mean, when it's not Muslims, Americans have problems with very simple dress codes in schools:

• ACLU. "Judge Rules in Favor of Michigan Studen'ts Right to Wear Anti-War T-Shirt to School." October 1, 2003. See http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=13913&c=87
• ACLU. "At ACLU Urging, FL High School Ends Discriminatory Graduation Dress Code." May 23, 2002. See http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=10387&c=156
• Benjamin v. Natalia Independent. See http://www.tea.state.tx.us/commissioner/2001/008901.DOC Note: This is a .DOC file download.
• Kaytie v Forney Independent. See http://www.tea.state.tx.us/commissioner/2001/040101.DOC Note: This is a .DOC file download.I believe learning to live with ethnic, racial, and a social difference is a big part of growing and maturing. I also believe we need to celebrate these differences and not try to force everyone to conform to one standard. I think Natalia School District's diversity is one of its assets in teaching our children this important life lesson. I believe this lesson would greatly benefit my son after school when he enters the real world. (Benjamin v. Natalia)

Petitioners do not assert that their objection is based upon a specific doctrine of a religious or philosophic group that its members must not wear uniforms. They do, however, contend that their objections are rooted in philosophy and religion. Petitioners cite to passages in the Bible, which emphasize parents' authority over children. Proverbs 23:6; Colossians 3:20. They also cite a passage about not subjecting oneself to regulation. Colossians 2:20. They argue that allowing a school to establish a uniform for their child infringes on their biblical beliefs as to parental authority and not subjecting oneself to worldly regulations. These beliefs are religious beliefs. It is not for the Commissioner to decide whether Petitioners have properly interpreted the Bible. His job is to determine whether the beliefs in question are religious. Petitioners' beliefs are rooted in religion. Hence, they are religious beliefs. (Kaytie v. Forney)• Tinker v. Des Moines. See http://www.landmarkcases.org/tinker/home.html

"In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views."

- Tinker v. Des Moines, 1969 -

Now--and just work with me here--if we're going to skip dress codes for the Bible; if we're going to skip dress codes for nonconformity and diversity's sake; if we're going to toss graduation dress codes for equal-protection gender standards, we can certainly make room for the hijab.

Foolish paranoia and cultural arrogance are no reasons to go banning the hijab in the name of freedom.

Bigotry and hatred will lead only to bigotry and hatred:

Look at thess pictures:

http://www.geocities.com/headscarfban/

Taking off Muslim girl hijab by force !! so much for WESTERN FREEDOM AND HUMAN RIGHTS !!!

They might oppress us today, but we will liberate them tomorrow.

Islam has been in many parts of the world for centuries. It is that most of the time Islamic peoples conform, or are tollerant of the countries dress codes that they reside in. When they are in America they have, in the past, dressed according to whatever dress codes were appropriate where they lived which never interfered with them being Islamic.

i think its totally different. The majority in europe is feeling that they are being force fed to live up to a minority view and agenda. What is happening is fairly simple countries like france and germany and others are feeling that the country has been hijacked by immigrants and their ideals + agenda and they are begining to take the helm back. This is symbolic of that shift and change. The muslims in those countries have long felt that they should be accepted as is and the majority should conform to suit their needs instead of the other way around. This is reality smacking them in the face.
http://www.indolink.com/displayArticleS.php?id=040104075113
(if the first link didn't work try this one)

Notice they are banning it in public institutions just like the French so that Muslim views wouldn't influence the public body.

In before Pentax defends it.

By having someone remove their "hats" isn't bieng racist or bigotry at all.

It most certainly is bigotry. Our convention of removing a hat indoors is arbitrary, and not even a particularly passionate point for most anyone. These "Hats" however are holy to them, and they believe women should have their hair covered at all times. Its a stupid crazy belief, but as long as you are going to insist that religion is a part of civilization you want to keep, you have to admit its no less or more valid a conviction than anything else religious. This is an intolerable ban designed to persecute a religious group. Holy hats hurt no one, its not even hard to see over them if you are sitting behind someone who is wearing one!

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty carries an article discussing the hijab in Germany, France, and the US: "Headscarves in the headlines, but countries take different approaches (http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/04/b48b33db-99cd-47af-95d1-1aef4153b5f1.html)." Behind the ban is the longstanding principle that religion should be kept out of the public sphere. A long history of battles between church and state has led many people in France to see secularism as the best way to guarantee national unity and peace.

Other countries too have constitutions that separate religion and state. But none guard the separation so strenuously as France. That may explain why recent moves to curb the hijab in Germany have taken a different form. Last week, Baden-Wuerttemberg became the first federal state in Germany to bring in an anti-head-scarf law. Other parts of Germany have similar laws in the pipeline.

The difference there is that the ban in Baden-Wuerttemberg applies to state school teachers, not students. And it forbids only the head scarf, not other religious symbols . . . .

. . . . As for the French ban, Khosrokhavar says it is likely to backfire and lead to a more fragmented society. "It's a way of giving an imaginary mythical homogeneity of French society to those who are in the state sponsored educational system.... At the same time, French society needs that feeling of cultural homogeneity, which is more fictitious than real, but it gives them some sense of nationhood," he says. "I don't think in real life it will change too much, and in reaction to this ban many women might be induced to wear it more ostentatiously than before."

As for schoolgirls, he says those who can afford it will go to where the scarf is allowed -- the country's Catholic schools.You did not read that last sentence incorrectly.

Go figure.

If you're really afraid of Muslims, what will happen when you can't tell them apart?

What I'm getting at is that you should let Muslims dress as their faith dictates; that way, if you're afraid of Muslims, you'll always know when one is around.

Are beards and temple locks banned anywhere right now?

Forget the religous symbols. Ban religion.

Ban banning.

Eluminate
The Muslims in those countries have long felt that they should be accepted as is and the majority should conform to suit their needs instead of the other way around.

They do want to be accepted as they are but what makes you think they want the majority to conform to their needs? What 'conforming' is required by the majority when somebody wears a hat? It is their own decision. I would wager it would be a different story if they were attempting to ban wearing a cross.

Cosmictraveler
It is that most of the time Islamic peoples conform, or are tolerant of the countries dress codes that they reside in. When they are in America they have, in the past, dressed according to whatever dress codes were appropriate where they lived which never interfered with them being Islamic.


That does not make it right. Most blacks in America conformed during slavery because they had no other option. On this premises then we should return to slavery. Just because people are forced to conform does not mean it is right.

taken from ht://www.turks.us/article.php?story=20040402093348817
The State justice minister voiced reservations, saying the law could be easily invalidated by the constitutional court for its religious discrimination.

Even they see that it blatantly discriminates based on religion.

The story is about a TEACHER wearing religious symbols and influencing NON-Islamic children.... But this basicly bans all headscarve wearers in the public sphere. Imagine the influence teachers have on little kids.

I m sure some of them would ask what it is and improvise at home to the detrement of their secular and non-religious parents....

NON-Religious people have every right to protect themselves from Religious ones who practice and imprint their beliefs on others. SO IT IS COMMENDABLE AT LEAST BY MY VIEW! Hijabs should be banned all through Europe period.

the more countires start to do this the more angry the people will become. theres no point it is just gonna make people hate the west.

Or perhaps the West will succeed in destroying Muslim culture within the borders of its States?

That would be sad in a way but also funny, considering the Christians would probably escape unscathed.

Dear Lords,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of myself, the following declaration of sympathy with Muslim aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, um, myself (in light of rising European persecution of Muslims).

"I view with favour the establishment in Israel/Palestine of a national home for the Muslims, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Muslim communities in Israel/Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Muslims in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of anyone who gives a rat's ass.

Yours sincerely,

H.W. Balfour

It's not that I like the ongoing trend at all, but logic dictates that if you push people they start pushing back at some point, this can be said for palestines pushing back for instance and also now for europeans feeling threatened and pushed by a dogmatic fundamentalistic branch of islam (are there other branches anyway?). In Holland there has been plenty of freedom and tolerance for different cultures to co-exist, wich for instance the surinam and asian people have done very well, kind of respecting the laws and customes where it matter, of the host country while retaining parts of their culture. Now the islam is more dogmatic bend or break religion wich goes against most of our basic values, wich is why islam culture does not mix fluid with western culture and why Morrocan kids for example make bad headlines all the time in our newspapers (that includes the left wing newspapers).

For instance , if i ever go to saoudi - Arabia, I would perhaps drink alcohol in my private appartment, but you wouldn't catch me with a can of beer walking in the streets of Riaad, because I wouldn't want to insult people of the host culture/country (besides the religious police would have your hands chopped off).

and that's exactly what I mean with the dogmatic nature of islam, geared towards conquerring, obedience enforced by heavy heavy sanctions. Now the lack of these heavy sanctions for immigrants in western europe means that they suddenly feel free to kinda "walk with a can of beer in our streets and insult us" (figuratively speaking), now taking the hijab is the first sanction of some "religious" police like you have back home, hey maybe we should adapt even more muslim values and introduce hands and headchopping for offenders...

angry = nothing when they can be deported for acting out on that anger...
And Europe is defenitely feeling hijacked by the muslim faith. Most of Europeans don't care much about mid east , they simply don't give a flying ****. But the muslim minority does pushing their agenda on is begining to annoy the core europeans. This annoyance and frustration out of feeling that your country is hijacked by a minority gives ground to nationalism + reinforcements of core values and beliefs in defense of minority onslaught...

sounds a bit prophetic but I think its true.

Explain again why banning the hijab is "commendable"? :rolleyes:


Ignoring all the hatred in your speech:
The idea is to make schools neutral grounds. In Germany they are also banning all large Christian symbols along with all other religions, let it be on students or walls.
It makes sense to me. You are supposed to learn. Step out of your limited world (and all of our world's are limited) and try to reach out to others without prejudice. I think any organised religion should be flexible enough to accommodate minor compromises like this, in order to widen horizons. What is the worst that could happen? Chances are it will make your life only richer.

Ps: Could somebody tell what the story of the Hijab is?

I am a Christian so this may be wrong and correct me if it is. The Muslims in Europe are feeling singled out and that they have two choices they can hide their faith and not face the pressure or they can accept the consequences of negative feelings towards them and show their faith. If this was happening to Christians in America, my beliefs would require me to wear something that declared that I was a Christian. My faith says that to deny Christ is eternal damnation if their faith says the same things then they have to choose between civil disobedience and apostasy. That is a strict and harsh choice to force on some one just because of a hat.

great, Binladen is gonna be real happy about this isnt he Eluminate. dont worry you'll find out when your country gets blown up!

Germany, its a lot easier then America!

Sister Huda Kaya and her three daughters were arrested with fifty others protesting the ban on hijab (islamic headscarf) in Ynonu University, Turkey. The prosecutor is demanding the death penalty for them. The trial adjourned on 22 June 1999.


We have a new letter from Sister Nurcihan Saatcioglu, daughter of Huda Kaya, now aged 17 currently on trial facing the death penalty. It was sent from her prison in Malatya.
The english translation isn't brilliant but still understandable:


THE LETTER OF NURCIHAN SAATCIOGLU
08-07-1999

THURSDAY

TO ISLAMIC HUMAN RIGHTS COMISSION

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

Elhamdulillah and salam to His Honourable Prophet Muhammed, our lovely leader, our lovely guide. Salam to Honourable Prophet Muhammed (s)'s followers, the momineen resisting against oppression and the mmomineen whose hearts are beating with us, sharing our pains.

My lovely sisters and brothers,

It doesn't matter how far away you are as we feel our hearts beating as one and as we feel you are our brothers and sisters. How happy we are, that we have a Holy Dava'ah. It is so holy that we can resist against all the forces of infidels and munafiqeen. Elhamdulillah. Elhamdulillah for thousands of times.

After the arrest of my mother, my sister Intisar, me and my sister Nurulhak on 21 May 1999, as I was going out of the classroom a final look to all my class mates was glanced by me. At that time all my classmates and the teacher in that class could do nothing for me. They were wondering what I had lived through, the first time I was arrested. And now I have one more experience to tell them. For the last time I was going to the classroom to take my bag. I saw that my friends from other classes were also very much surprised. Some of them were trying not to leave me. And the others and my teacher were trying to share my emotions while I was trying to calm them.

For the last term of our school life we are going to be away from our class and the teachers and our classmates. But we feel and know that it was worth it, and we are ready for it.

And we all know that one day we are going to face that four walls, the jails....

We are not going to graduate. All we want is to get Allah's pleasure. So we say Elhamdulillah that we are here, because we know that the only thing that worth is to get His pleasure. So it doesn't really matter whether we graduate from school, because for us it is important to take our graduation licences through Allah's pleasure. It is important for us to see the Allah's sign in our graduation licences . It is very important for us that our graduation licences be prepared for that Big Day on Allah's side. Allah is enough for us as a best friend...

Below is the "OATH of FREEDOM" that I read out in the headscarf demonstrations on 30 04 1999 Friday in front of the Governor's Building.

OATH OF FREEDOM

We were born freely

We will live freely and when death comes to us

We will die freely

Because we have written "Jihad" on our foreheads

We put the struggle in the beginning of our prayers,
in every morning.

"For a free country"

"For a free school"

"For our honour"

"For our identity"

Giving no concession

We'll resist,

RESIST !!!

We'll WIN !!!

We have SWORN !!!

Be our witness, Allah !!!

Be our witness, Allah !!!

Be our witness, Allah !!!

If one day I get the death penalty, I am going to repeat the same oath. I am going to read the "Oath of Freedom" again.

"And whoever takes Allah and His apostle and those who believe for a guardian, then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant."

(Maidah-56/ Holy Qur'an).

My Lord be our friend and assistance.

WITH SALAM AND PRAYERS

Nurcihan Saatcioglu

E-Type Prison

Malatya

Every one who is for freedom of expression should show up wearing a Hijab on their head as a protest. Why the heck don't we just start issuing the Muslims yellow stars to wear? Wouldn’t that make us good Nazis? This is the kind of sick prejudice that we accuse them of. How can we get mad at them when we break our own rules? I thought that the Indian wars were a dark stain in our past. Maybe we Americans are naive but I think the only way different cultures can get along is by respecting each other and trying to treat every one as we would want to be treated in the same situation. It is not right to oppress any race based on the actions of a few bad members.

I hat to be ignorant. Would preacher x please explain what a hijab is and what its importance is.

thank you for your message, laughing weasel.

i agree with you above post about respect.

the Hijab is the scarf that Muslim women wear, along with it come the responsibility of repersenting Islam by doing good actions and being nice to people. it is obligatory action of islam to wear it but it is a CHOICE if the woman wants to wear it or not.

there are a lot of misconceptions about Hijab. firstly it is the CHOICE of the individual woman and not of the mother, husband etc. infact, a non relative can't even tell a woman to wear Hijab (he can tell her the benifts though but not actualy tell her to wear one)

so if it is a choice, then outlawing this choice is the true oppression.

its importance is it allows women to be judged on their character and not their outward physical appearance which is how it works in most non muslim society where the pretty girls are always the most popular. (they get alot of free drinks too and dont have to pay as many speeding tickets!).

also, there are many misconcpetions on womens rights in islam mainly becasue of other peoples culutres. people think if a woman wears a hijab she is opressed and has to saty at home and cant work etc. well this is complete nonsense, firsty jst ask a woman who chooses to wear a Hijab and next that woman is making a statement, dont judge me on my looks and im proud to be Muslim.

also the house prison stuff is nonsense too, and is a common argument used by anti-hijabist. well this is complete ignorace as an Islamic socierty NEEDS women in the workforce for all jobs such as doctor, teachr, socail worker etc.

what is most sad though, laughing weasal is that how unfairly women wearing hijabs are getting treated as a result of this ban. Doctors in france are refusing to treat women with hijabs, so are lawyers and banks. police are forcing women to take off their Hijabs.

Turkey, which is meant to be an "Islamic state" even outlaws it in certain parts. a 72 year old women who needed emergency teatment from a hospital was refused treatment becaue her medical card had a picture of her with a Hijab and she had to make anther card even though she was in a critical state. despite a 4,000,000 strong march, Turckey still went along with the ban of the Hijab. the letter above is of a women in Prison for visisting her Muslim husband in jail and weariong a Hijab (the husband is in jail for peacfully reciting Islamic, Ottomon poetry in a march against the Hijab ban.

the so called Islamica state bans people from praying at work, weraing a Hijab or being at certain senior positions if you are Muslim

Sounds like the same problem the blacks were having as well as the Indians from India were having in Germany a few years ago. It seems that Germany wants to have cheap laborers until there's to many of them then they want to remove them. Very stupid to want something cheap then only want to remove it when it becomes wanting more and getting more power within the German economy. Germany should leave the non troublesome Muslems alons for they want nothing more than a good job and a decent place to live and practice THEIR OWN religion as does the German people.

I can see that a state might have a problem issuing an identity card to some one when they cannot see their face but that should require a specific limitation for that picture. I do not think it is right to ban the hijab entirely. I am worried if the wrong picture on an identity card which the state had issued her was worse than no card at all. In America public hospitals are required to treat every one irregardless of their identity situation.

I think the practice of wearing the hijab should not be banned but limited to certain circumtances since there can be problems when a woman wearing a hijab does something illegal in public then get away with it because nobody can identify her. This can also make it much easier for female criminals to dress up with hijabs for the sole purpose of commiting crimes.

By the way, obtaining an ID with a hijab, to me, is extremely ridiculous. What good does an ID bring if the ID picture shows only a pair of eyes?

It fallaciously calms people's irrational fears.

Then in that area this law makes sense.


Er .... Neither will someone lose their religion if you force feed a Jew pork, make a Catholic choke down red meat on a Friday, or rape a Baptist virgin.

But it doesn't mean it's right to do so.

The issue was about restrictions. Cant you give examples that are also restrictions? Afterall nobodys forcing muslims to eat pork.

One of the reasons given for banning the hijab is because it is open to various interpretation. And one such interpretation is that it serves as a political symbol. The hijab is also seen as a symbol for oppressing women (for it is used as such in some Islamic states). It has also become a symbol of religious fanatism.


Foolish paranoia and cultural arrogance are no reasons to go banning the hijab in the name of freedom.

I dont think that is the reason given.

If you're really afraid of Muslims, what will happen when you can't tell them apart?


At it tells people that there are no female fanatics around, right?