where do you all stand on the issue of veils? i personally think that Jack Straw was well within his rights to make his request. there was nothing offensive meant by it and i think that the muslims who are making an issue out of this are blowing it all out of proportion.
as for the teacher who was suspended for refusing to take of her veil should have been given NO compensation for being suspended. as a student myself i would be tremendously uncomfortable with any-one covering their face so that only their eyes show. i wouldnt care who they were, if they refused to take of a face covering i would be the first person to complain. what do the rest of you think?

veils look so sexy...its like unwrapping a gift package...
http://www.infermierionline.net/images/burqa%203%20mini.jpg
they turn me on...oh yeah...*bites his lip*

I don't wear one myself.

The practice of wearing a veil didn’t start in Islamic countries until the 9th century - it was adopted from the Byzantine Christians

I don't have a problem with veils. Particularly this kind. http://img.costumecraze.com/images/vendors/forum/56622-main.jpg

Straight of the bat I would agree with you about the veil, that it would not be fair on the students, but then i think about this:

If a teacher was burnt seriously and had to wear a cover to protect from the sunlight, would it be fair to sack them?

And I must say, i've had teachers that have been so disinterested in educating that it wouldn't have mattered if I could see their face or not, as they would not show emotion, therefore they should be sacked too, but i've never heard of any teachers been given the sack over lack of emotion in their educating.

where do you all stand on the issue of veils?
I would treat veils the same as we already treat concealed (weapons) carry: Registration of veils so that their misuse carries litigous civil/criminal liabilities/penalties.

Mr. G proposes a society that regulates what you can put on your head, and prosecutes you for not wearing the correct 'headware'.

Ok, Mr. G, once you impose that one, what to next? Footwear? How about sunglasses, if you wear them, we can't see if you have some 'evil' doings on your mind.....

Hate to live in your world G.

The real question is not about wearing a veil, the real question is about one group of people coming to a new land in hopes of prosperity and the natural inhabitants trying to get said group to integrate into their society.

Does wearing a veil facilitate or inhibit Muslim integration?

I personally think it inhibits it a bit. If modesty is the reason then shouldn’t the butt-ugly and old be exempt from wearing a covering? I mean come on, some really old obese woman post-5 kids walks up wearing nothing – THAT would probably reduce any sexual desire down to zero! ;) Also, why don’t the men cover up? There are probably lots of Gay Muslim men that must endure this sexual taunt of Muslim men prancing around in shorts – their face uncovered no less!

:p

I am sure that if the Japanese dressed in their traditional costumes, shaved head and their eyebrows, blackened their teeth and made it plain that they thought of the English as Barbarians, worshipped their Emperor and hoped that one day the entire world would be under their God-King’s subjugation – well, I think people would have a problem. They would not integrate.

That is how many English view people wearing a veil that only shows the eyes.


question: Can two people living in one society worship two different (imaginary) deities, both preach that the other is going to go to hell (or at least is completely wrong in regards to “God”) and still get along? Why do the Hindu get along so swimmingly in England and Australia and America? Maybe 2 monotheism are destined to bump heads? Or maybe not? Probably during times of affluence there is tolerance but probably during times of poverty there is not. People will always make type2 errors, it’s in our DNA, therefore there will always be religious belief. But, do we really want a society that teaches this one-God stuff? Is it all that helpful to society? A beleif that condemns 2/3 of the world to a place of fire pain and death that actively seeks to convert them?

I still think that we should teach some serious archeological evidence in middle and high school on just where Islamic, Xian and Jewish beliefs came from – that is polytheism. Knock down the old walls and build something new.

Oh well,


Michael

question: Can two people living in one society worship two different (imaginary) deities, both preach that the other is going to go to hell (or at least is completely wrong in regards to “God”) and still get along?


Do they preach that? And they can get along, they have, when the focus is the welfare of the community (and the world) rather than self-interest and profit.


I still think that we should teach some serious archeological evidence in middle and high school on just where Islamic, Xian and Jewish beliefs came from – that is polytheism. Knock down the old walls and build something new.

Actually everyone should study world religions, it brings people of different religions closer. And really understand what freedom of expression means, not just say the words.

as a student myself i would be tremendously uncomfortable with any-one covering their face so that only their eyes show.

Pythagorus instructed his pupils from behind a curtain.

Are you in college to learn or stare at the lecturer?

The question is irrelevant.

The source of all knowledge is the invisible.

Hence, Pythagorus' teaching method was the correct one.

whhhhatt?

who gives a

They wear the veil because they can't face reality.

where do you all stand on the issue of veils? i personally think that Jack Straw was well within his rights to make his request. there was nothing offensive meant by it and i think that the muslims who are making an issue out of this are blowing it all out of proportion.
as for the teacher who was suspended for refusing to take of her veil should have been given NO compensation for being suspended. as a student myself i would be tremendously uncomfortable with any-one covering their face so that only their eyes show. i wouldnt care who they were, if they refused to take of a face covering i would be the first person to complain. what do the rest of you think?

where do you all stand on the issue of veils?
first the issue has to be identified and then addressed on a dialectical level, and for that one has to possess knowledge on the issue which is being addressed.



i personally think that Jack Straw was well within his rights to make his request.
jack straw offered nothing but subjective views and opinions tainted by prejudices and misconceptions which had no foundation in knowledge and facts. The issue of the veil was made an issue and was a thinly veiled excuse to vent deep seated prejudices about islam.
straw is a wretch.

there was nothing offensive meant by it
nothing offensive to you.

and i think that the muslims who are making an issue out of this are blowing it all out of proportion.
what you think is irrelevant.
muslims are not blowing it out of all proportion, the blame for this lays solely and totally with the media, and to suggest otherwise illustrates pure ignorance and a distorted view.

as a student myself i would be tremendously uncomfortable with any-one covering their face so that only their eyes show.
the root of your feeling of uncomfortableness lies in your deep and indoctrinated prejudice and distorted view of islam. This feeling is an irrational fear, which only occours because you do not possess any knowledge on islam, hence your ignorance fuels your sense of paranoia and fear.
the problem lies with your perception of islam.
muslims and islam cannot be blamed for the ignorance of non muslims, and as such are in now way obligated to justiify their beliefs to anyone.

I don't have a problem with veils. Particularly this kind. http://img.costumecraze.com/images/vendors/forum/56622-main.jpg

Masterfull.

The real question is not about wearing a veil, the real question is about one group of people coming to a new land in hopes of prosperity and the natural inhabitants trying to get said group to integrate into their society.

Does wearing a veil facilitate or inhibit Muslim integration?

I personally think it inhibits it a bit. If modesty is the reason then shouldn’t the butt-ugly and old be exempt from wearing a covering? I mean come on, some really old obese woman post-5 kids walks up wearing nothing – THAT would probably reduce any sexual desire down to zero! ;) Also, why don’t the men cover up? There are probably lots of Gay Muslim men that must endure this sexual taunt of Muslim men prancing around in shorts – their face uncovered no less!

:p

I am sure that if the Japanese dressed in their traditional costumes, shaved head and their eyebrows, blackened their teeth and made it plain that they thought of the English as Barbarians, worshipped their Emperor and hoped that one day the entire world would be under their God-King’s subjugation – well, I think people would have a problem. They would not integrate.

That is how many English view people wearing a veil that only shows the eyes.


question: Can two people living in one society worship two different (imaginary) deities, both preach that the other is going to go to hell (or at least is completely wrong in regards to “God”) and still get along? Why do the Hindu get along so swimmingly in England and Australia and America? Maybe 2 monotheism are destined to bump heads? Or maybe not? Probably during times of affluence there is tolerance but probably during times of poverty there is not. People will always make type2 errors, it’s in our DNA, therefore there will always be religious belief. But, do we really want a society that teaches this one-God stuff? Is it all that helpful to society? A beleif that condemns 2/3 of the world to a place of fire pain and death that actively seeks to convert them?

I still think that we should teach some serious archeological evidence in middle and high school on just where Islamic, Xian and Jewish beliefs came from – that is polytheism. Knock down the old walls and build something new.

Oh well,


Michael

[QUOTE]Does wearing a veil facilitate or inhibit Muslim integration?

I personally think it inhibits it a bit. If modesty is the reason then shouldn’t the butt-ugly and old be exempt from wearing a covering? I[/QIUOTE]

1) the burqah is not prescribed within islamic shariah, sunna or ahadith, however a women who does choose to wear the burqah not breaking any islamic law, or indeed any western law for that matter. It really is a matter of personal choice.
2) the concept of linking the issue of the veil with the issue of integration is a deeply surreptitious and subversive ploy implemented by the western popular media and serves no purpose but to further villify muslims and further perpetuate stereotypical views on islam held by nonmuslims.

Really? wow

another banning, i'm so happy now:)

They wear the veil because they can't face reality.

You are talking about men who have the problems extracting reality from fantasy aren't you?

"Now it’s been proven to me that anything with tits and a cunt can do anything to a man."
-Interviews With Seven Erotic Dancers [Tim Keefe]

.
Didn't you say there were a lot of religious groups in India that get along fine?
The real question is not about wearing a veil, the real question is about one group of people coming to a new land in hopes of prosperity and the natural inhabitants trying to get said group to integrate into their society.
Why do the natives want the said group to integrate to their way of life? Won't they become more cultured by being exposed to others'?
Does wearing a veil facilitate or inhibit Muslim integration?
Why?
I personally think it inhibits it a bit. If modesty is the reason then shouldn’t the butt-ugly and old be exempt from wearing a covering? I mean come on, some really old obese woman post-5 kids walks up wearing nothing – THAT would probably reduce any sexual desire down to zero! ;)
That's the whole point. It's the "what's on the inside" bullshit that you probably preach to your children.
Also, why don’t the men cover up? There are probably lots of Gay Muslim men that must endure this sexual taunt of Muslim men prancing around in shorts – their face uncovered no less!
Their God doesn't like homosexuals, like most monotheistic gods. Sikhs are my favorite monotheists.

I am sure that if the Japanese dressed in their traditional costumes, shaved head and their eyebrows, blackened their teeth and made it plain that they thought of the English as Barbarians
Do muslims call the english barbaric? I've never had any I know call me barbaric, and I used to hang out with one of them almost every day. Then again, I'm not English.
worshipped their Emperor and hoped that one day the entire world would be under their God-King’s subjugation –
Don't all monotheisms do that?


question: Can two people living in one society worship two different (imaginary) deities, both preach that the other is going to go to hell (or at least is completely wrong in regards to “God”) and still get along?
Yes, I get along with people who tell me I'm going to Hell and am completely wrong in regards to God, and life in general in my own house.
Why do the Hindu get along so swimmingly in England and Australia and America? Maybe 2 monotheism are destined to bump heads? Or maybe not? Probably during times of affluence there is tolerance but probably during times of poverty there is not.
All religions are destined to bump heads in terms of their beliefs and philosophy.
People will always make type2 errors, it’s in our DNA, therefore there will always be religious belief. But, do we really want a society that teaches this one-God stuff? Is it all that helpful to society? A beleif that condemns 2/3 of the world to a place of fire pain and death that actively seeks to convert them?
Does society teach this or do individuals?

This bears repeating on one more thread. This is not about America--yet--but it soon will be. In America we have no "racial memory" of gallant knights hidden inside their shiny suits of armor like Europeans have. Everyone is expected to show their face here. It's part of the way we communicate. The only people who hide their faces are robbers and bandits. Anyone who walks around in America with their face hidden from view--except at a Halloween party--is advertising to us that they are dishonorable.

This is more important than speaking our language or eating our pizza or watching our baseball. If you want to live here you have to show us your face. We will not tolerate people going out in public with their faces concealed. We won't talk to you. We won't let you ride our buses, eat in our restaurants, shop in our stores, work in our businesses, or attend our schools. Even if the government tells us we have to, we still won't do it.

For all we know there could be a man hiding under that curtain with a stick of dynamite.

The veil is a symbol of male power. They say it prevents men's temptation, as if men should not have any control over themselves, a rule that must have been invented by men. I wonder, do they cover their luxury cars, too, so people won't be tempted to steal them?

In all fairness to Islam, veils were common in western countries, even into the 60's, and it meant the same thing.

Anyone who walks around in America with their face hidden from view--except at a Halloween party--is advertising to us that they are dishonorable.

For all we know there could be a man hiding under that curtain with a stick of dynamite.

Why would you be so afraid of someone hiding their face?

Is it because you have so many enemies?

Women veil themselves because in Islam the source of all beauty is invisible.

It is the same with Native American religions.

Only barbarians cannot see beyond the material.

Why would you be so afraid of someone hiding their face?

Is it because you have so many enemies?

Women veil themselves because in Islam the source of all beauty is invisible.

It is the same with Native American religions.

Only barbarians cannot see beyond the material.

WOULD YOU WEAR A VEIL ALL THE TIME, IN 99 DEGREE HEAT?:mad:

Only barbarians cannot see beyond the material.

YEAH, VERY GOOD.

** Do they preach that? I'm pretty sure they do.

Isn't that the reason for having the last Prophet?
(That being Bahá'u'lláh ;)

OK, I'm talking with a Muslim friend and a Baha’i friend (I said I was Atheist) The Muslim buddy (knowing that I wasn’t Xian) agreed with me that the Bible had many flaws and was wrong on many counts – of course he’d think this, he’s a Muslim, that’s part of the justification for Mohammed coming along and “fixing” things. What he didn’t know that the girl I was friends with is Baha’i. You should have seen the look on his face when she said the same of the Qu’ran and then pointed out what a mess the ME has been (since even before the time of Bahá'u'lláh – which is why God sent him). Quite funny! Needless to say, while she made many valid points (as he had about the Bible)he didn't agree with her - at all.

I was with another Muslim friend of mine (we were talking about religion) when a Hindu friend of mine came in the room. My Muslim friend flat out said Hinduism is stupid and then went on a tirade about how Mohammed was obviously the greatest thing since sliced bread… bla bla bla The Hindu friend said he was an idiot and a misogynous and left. I was kind of shocked he went off like that - as he is usually quite quiet.

Back in MI (the USA) my Xian friend’s father flat our said anyone who hasn’t accepted Christ as Lord will burn in Hell. Done. No argument.

The only people that have (well seemingly) been tolerant of other religions have been my Buddhist friends. Of course they still think practicing Buddhism will bring you closer to leaving the Karma cycle – but hey, if you worship a God go for it, it may even be real (but that God will probably end up reborn and not leave the cycle).

Even when the world was pretty much polytheistic the Jews living in Rome didn’t make so many friends for themselves teaching that they were a chosen people with the only true God. They didn’t even proselytize and people were pissed off. Had Caligula lived another year he would have erected a statue of himself in their sacred temple just because he didn't like their attitude (I mean come on - HE was GOD!!).

The Japanese tossed the Jesuits out of Japan (and killed any Japanese Xian that wouldn’t “de” convert).


Monotheism teaches there is one true God. Other than that I don’t see where the “enlightening” part comes in? Hell, many Muslims (appear) to think that if one is born Muslim and converts to polytheism or ect… that such a person should be killed? Or so my buddy has told me – and he was born in a typical town in the ME. And he wasn't talking about "radical" people - he was referring to his close friends and neighbors.

When I think of the 100’s of millions of Hindi, Africans, Europeans and native Americans who have died in conversion to monotheism - I really don’t see much good it has brought.

And they can get along, they have, when the focus is the welfare of the community (and the world) rather than self-interest and profit. Well it seems, to me, they get along (with one another) when religion is removed from politics and/or the society is very wealthy – and even then - just tenuously. I can’t think of too many (if any at all) Xians that would be happy to see a Mosque built in their neighborhood (or a Temple for that matter). But in ultra rich UAE they are building Churches – to the distain of some Muslims, but the general populous is rich enough not to care. I wonder what they will think if many Muslims start converting to Xianinity? Do you suppose the tolerance would still hold?

In all fairness to Islam, veils were common in western countries, even into the 60's, and it meant the same thing.



In all fairness to humanity - get rid of religion, it is doing more harm than good, and history has a habit (no pun intented) of repeating itself.

Onward Christian soldiers.


Just Kidding.

hey i was kidding

hey wer'd everybody go:)

They all went to Heaven, turns out it was real afterall.....><

I agree with stu, abloish religion.

I just can't fathom how much misery and blood has been spilt over something which has no physical proof.
It is just magic stories.

Religion is just another means to divide people.

Its sad to think most humans need the threat of eternal pain and suffering in hell to keep them being good to each other.
And even sadder to think some twist and warp this as an excuse to 'not' be good to each other.

Islam, christianity, Hinduism, get rid of it all! It divides us more then it unites us and no can say it doesn't!

Mr. G proposes a society that regulates what you can put on your head, and prosecutes you for not wearing the correct 'headware'.

Ok, Mr. G, once you impose that one, what to next? Footwear? How about sunglasses, if you wear them, we can't see if you have some 'evil' doings on your mind.....

Hate to live in your world G.
Funny you should choose a world to live in that's based on clothing, rather than a world based on I.Q..

At least you're honest.

If one wishes to remain wearing veils, why do you come to countries where such is not the cultural norm? If you have no intent to live in a country and become a citizen/subject of said country and become culturally united with said country, then why come to it at all? If you want to keep your culture, remain in your country.

If one wishes to remain wearing veils, why do you come to countries where such is not the cultural norm? If you have no intent to live in a country and become a citizen/subject of said country and become culturally united with said country, then why come to it at all? If you want to keep your culture, remain in your country.
Precisely.

I agree with stu, abloish religion.

Religion is just another means to divide people.
So is secularism.

Philosophies don't divide. People using philosophy as a tool divide.
Its sad to think most humans need the threat of eternal pain and suffering in hell to keep them being good to each other. And even sadder to think some twist and warp this as an excuse to 'not' be good to each other.
I'm an atheist. So far, I've never been honored here with a parade.
Islam, christianity, Hinduism, get rid of it all! It divides us more then it unites us and no can say it doesn't!
I can say it doesn't.

I'm not of the local areligious religion.

It's not enough that I'm an atheist. I'm supposed to also subscribe to the local group-think in order to "fit in".

Sorry. I don't need your religion, either.

** I'm pretty sure they do.

Isn't that the reason for having the last Prophet?
(That being Bahá'u'lláh ;)

OK, I'm talking with a Muslim friend and a Baha’i friend (I said I was Atheist) The Muslim buddy (knowing that I wasn’t Xian) agreed with me that the Bible had many flaws and was wrong on many counts – of course he’d think this, he’s a Muslim, that’s part of the justification for Mohammed coming along and “fixing” things. What he didn’t know that the girl I was friends with is Baha’i. You should have seen the look on his face when she said the same of the Qu’ran and then pointed out what a mess the ME has been (since even before the time of Bahá'u'lláh – which is why God sent him). Quite funny! Needless to say, while she made many valid points (as he had about the Bible)he didn't agree with her - at all.

I was with another Muslim friend of mine (we were talking about religion) when a Hindu friend of mine came in the room. My Muslim friend flat out said Hinduism is stupid and then went on a tirade about how Mohammed was obviously the greatest thing since sliced bread… bla bla bla The Hindu friend said he was an idiot and a misogynous and left. I was kind of shocked he went off like that - as he is usually quite quiet.

Back in MI (the USA) my Xian friend’s father flat our said anyone who hasn’t accepted Christ as Lord will burn in Hell. Done. No argument.

The only people that have (well seemingly) been tolerant of other religions have been my Buddhist friends. Of course they still think practicing Buddhism will bring you closer to leaving the Karma cycle – but hey, if you worship a God go for it, it may even be real (but that God will probably end up reborn and not leave the cycle).

Even when the world was pretty much polytheistic the Jews living in Rome didn’t make so many friends for themselves teaching that they were a chosen people with the only true God. They didn’t even proselytize and people were pissed off. Had Caligula lived another year he would have erected a statue of himself in their sacred temple just because he didn't like their attitude (I mean come on - HE was GOD!!).

The Japanese tossed the Jesuits out of Japan (and killed any Japanese Xian that wouldn’t “de” convert).


Monotheism teaches there is one true God. Other than that I don’t see where the “enlightening” part comes in? Hell, many Muslims (appear) to think that if one is born Muslim and converts to polytheism or ect… that such a person should be killed? Or so my buddy has told me – and he was born in a typical town in the ME. And he wasn't talking about "radical" people - he was referring to his close friends and neighbors.

When I think of the 100’s of millions of Hindi, Africans, Europeans and native Americans who have died in conversion to monotheism - I really don’t see much good it has brought.

Well it seems, to me, they get along (with one another) when religion is removed from politics and/or the society is very wealthy – and even then - just tenuously. I can’t think of too many (if any at all) Xians that would be happy to see a Mosque built in their neighborhood (or a Temple for that matter). But in ultra rich UAE they are building Churches – to the distain of some Muslims, but the general populous is rich enough not to care. I wonder what they will think if many Muslims start converting to Xianinity? Do you suppose the tolerance would still hold?

You missed the atheists. Or do you consider them to be tolerant?;)

What would an atheist think of a former atheist finding "religion again"?

You missed the atheists. Or do you consider them to be tolerant?;)

What would an atheist think of a former atheist finding "religion again"?

Burn that mother fucker.

You missed the atheists. Or do you consider them to be tolerant?;) Good point.

Did I mention I am agnostic atheist!

It seems that societies which have experimented with Atheism were mainly communist. They purposely replaced religion with themselves – The Party. The people would now worship The Ideal. It didn’t work.

Perhaps monotheistic religion had a time and a place. Even early Jews believed in multiply Gods, they just worshipped one (well actually really early Jews worshiped a God and a Goddess). In today’s global word Religion will need to be considerably more tolerant than it has been. Xitianity decimated societies across the globe. Whether of good intention or not (yes many Jesuits were fervent in their belief) the ultimate goal was to convert the “heathens” be they Japanese, Chinese, Indian, African or native American.

There’s a reason why monotheism concocted the words gentile, heathen or infidel.


What would an atheist think of a former atheist finding "religion again"?I’d stone him …

Haaa! Just kidding :)


I’d be surprised – I’ve never known it to happen to one of my atheist friends. Most of my friends are not atheists - most have some sort of belief or another. If they don’t believe in "Gods" they often do believe in sprits or ghosts? It's kind of funny to me - I suppose accepting oblivion is too difficult.

Societies probably work better with some sort of religion. Or else that wouldn’t be the case. Maybe it allows people to toil day after day because they think there is something better for them – after oblivion. Probably.


Anyway, to answer your question, I’d accept their belief. They would know where I am coming from so I don’t think it would be a problem. Unless they felt that I was a sinner and wicked and needed to accept Jesus – then there may be a problem? I wouldn’t be happy having a friend do too much proselytizing – a little is OK though :)

The choice of wearing a veil should be given to an individual. I don't know if Britain has any Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but Canada does and it violates the rights of the individual to not allow them to wear a veil.

I think we're making an issue out of nothing. Anyone should be allowed to wear anything, as long as it's not a weapon. Veils should be 100% allowed anywhere. Not allowing it shows intolerance, no matter what you say.

The choice of wearing a veil should be given to an individual. I don't know if Britain has any Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but Canada does and it violates the rights of the individual to not allow them to wear a veil.

I think we're making an issue out of nothing. Anyone should be allowed to wear anything, as long as it's not a weapon. Veils should be 100% allowed anywhere. Not allowing it shows intolerance, no matter what you say.

people who go on about personal choice really fuck me off. so should the choice of an individual go against what the vast majority want. and you use personal choice like its an excuse..i mean cmon if everything was down to personal choice there would be problems wouldnt there i mean you would get rapists in court going it was my choice or maybe prostitutes whoring themselves in the middle of a high street as its there choice

Perhaps the most interesting thing is that when given a (true) choice most people may choose not to wear it.

If it was allway's choice and it had advantages then wouldn't men be wearing them?

I guess it is often times a choice, religion in any form tell's us more about what it mean's to be human than anything i can think of. I could see the good side to believing, having intimately experienced an array of belief's in documentary work i conclude that - i forgot what i was thinking....but they hold much cultural value......good parties too.

Well many of them are already wearing blinkers.....

people who go on about personal choice really fuck me off. so should the choice of an individual go against what the vast majority want. and you use personal choice like its an excuse..i mean cmon if everything was down to personal choice there would be problems wouldnt there i mean you would get rapists in court going it was my choice or maybe prostitutes whoring themselves in the middle of a high street as its there choice

But it's what the vast majority want for that person. A rapist want to fuck SOMEBODY ELSE. There's a big difference between a choice about yourself and somebody else. How does a veil on somebody else hurt you?

it helps to promote division. many people i have spoken to agree that muslims are starting to become more unpopular here in britain and its through events like this and what can only be described as a tabloid hate campaign thats its started

DUDE,

Why not blame the individual's involved? It shows us that we are divided. Religion does not change that fact.

im merely stating that muslims have to watch themselves at the moment. with the events of the last 5/6 years they have been becoming increasingly unpopular and mistrusted and individuals like these adding to it are most certainly not helping

thedevilsreject

people who go on about personal choice really fuck me off.
was this statement an intended pun?


so should the choice of an individual go against what the vast majority want.
we are talking about veils right? Or did I miss something in the numerous responses which caused the subject to change focus?


and you use personal choice like its an excuse..i mean cmon if everything was down to personal choice there would be problems wouldnt there i mean you would get rapists in court going it was my choice or maybe prostitutes whoring themselves in the middle of a high street as its there choice

therefore you see that legislation determines the limits of a citizens freedom in terms of damage (property or social) - its not clear what are the damagin effects of wearing a veil

im merely stating that muslims have to watch themselves at the moment. with the events of the last 5/6 years they have been becoming increasingly unpopular and mistrusted and individuals like these adding to it are most certainly not helping

I would also suggest that the persons doing the watching should also watch themselves lest they act in ways contrary to the ideals they feel are being threatened and succumb to an unconsciousness of language

it helps to promote division. many people i have spoken to agree that muslims are starting to become more unpopular here in britain and its through events like this and what can only be described as a tabloid hate campaign thats its started

This very divisive stance against division is a prime example of what I mean

Why would you be so afraid of someone hiding their face?The reason doesn't matter. What matters is that every culture has some very basic rules and when people from other cultures visit or settle they simply must follow them or leave. This professional journalist says it better than I do.Op-ed 10/24/2006

VEILED INSULT

Quite a long time ago, having briefly joined the herd of 20-something backpackers that eternally roams Southeast Asia, I found myself in Bali. Like all of the other 20-somethings, I carefully read the Lonely Planet backpacker's guide to Indonesia and learned, among other things, that it was considered improper for women to wear shorts or trousers when entering Balinese temples. I dutifully purchased a Balinese sarong and, looking awkward and foreign, wore it while visiting temples. I didn't want to cause offense.

I thought of that long-ago incident during a visit last week to London, where a full-fledged shouting match has broken out over Muslim women who choose to wear the veil. This particular argument had begun because a teaching assistant in Yorkshire refused to remove her veil--a niqab , which covers the whole body except for the eyes--in the presence of male teachers, which was much of the time. She was fired; she went to court--and a clutch of senior British politicians entered the fray.

Jack Straw, the former foreign secretary, called the full-face veil "a visible statement of separation and of difference." Tony Blair, the prime minister, added that he could "see the reason" for the teaching assistant to be suspended.

What followed was predictable: accusations of racism, charges of discrimination... and disagreement about whether the veil was even a valid topic of discussion. If Blair and Straw were really concerned about Muslim women, shouldn't they be more interested in underage marriages, or wife beating, or something more important [like those execrable clitoridectomies--F.R.]?

The short answer is, yes, probably. But the curious fact is that the veil, as a political issue, won't go away. The French have banned not only the full veil but head scarves in state schools. Some German regions have banned the head scarf for civil servants too, and they are not permitted in Turkish universities at all. Slowly, the issue is coming to the United States: Just this month a Michigan judge dismissed a small-claims court case filed by a Muslim woman because she refused to remove her full-face veil while testifying. [It is a fundamental principle of American law that one must be given the right to "confront one's accuser." You cannot confront someone who is hiding behind a mask like a bandit.--F.R.]

Critics call the veil a symbol of female oppression or rejection of Western values. Defenders say that it is a symbol of religious faith and that it allows women to be "free" in a different sense--free from cosmetics, from fashion and from unwanted male attention. Debate about the veil inevitably leads to discussions of female emancipation, religious freedom and the assimilation, or lack thereof, of Muslim communities in the West.

And yet, at a much simpler level, surely it is also true that the full-faced veil--the niqab, burqa or chador--causes such deep reactions in the West not so much because of its political or religious symbolism but because it is extremely impolite. Just as it is considered rude, in Bali, to enter temple wearing shorts, so, too, is it considered rude, in America, to hide one's face. We wear masks when we want to frighten, when we are in mourning (and these days only the widow and only at the funeral), or when we want to conceal our identities in order to commit a crime and leave no eyewitnesses. To a Western adult a woman clad from head to toe in black looks like a ghost. To a modern child familiar with stories from other cultures, she looks like a ninja and is no less scary. Thieves and actors hide their faces in the West; honest people look you straight in the eye. "Face to face" has become an everyday phrase in our language because face to face communication is the foundation of our society. Americans will not willingly migrate our commerce to the internet until every computer has video.

Given that polite behavior is required in other facets of their jobs, it doesn't seem to me in the least offensive to require schoolteachers or civil servants to show their faces when dealing with children or the public. If Western tourists can wear sarongs in Balinese temples to show respect for the locals, so too can religious Muslim women show respect for the children they teach and the customers they serve by leaving their head scarves on if they must but removing their full-faced veils.

It would, of course, be outrageous if Tony Blair or the French government were to ban veils altogether--just as it is outrageous that Saudi Arabia bans churches and even forbids priests from entering the country. But just because authorities persecute Christians and Jews in some parts of the Muslim world, that doesn't mean we need to emulate them. In their private lives, Muslim women living in the West should be free to use veils or head scarves as they wish. But freedom to practice religion in the West shouldn't imply freedom to hold jobs that impinge on that practice. An Orthodox Jew should not have an absolute right to work in a restaurant that is open only on Saturdays. A Quaker cannot join the Army and then state that his religion prohibits him from fighting. By the same token, a Muslim woman who wants to cover her face has no absolute right to work in a school or an office where face-to-face conversations are part of the job.

It isn't religious discrimination or anti-Muslim bias to tell her that she must be polite to the natives, respect the local customs, try to speak some of the local patois--and uncover her face like all of the people she wants to live among.

The choice of wearing a veil should be given to an individual. I don't know if Britain has any Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but Canada does and it violates the rights of the individual to not allow them to wear a veil.

I think we're making an issue out of nothing. Anyone should be allowed to wear anything, as long as it's not a weapon. Veils should be 100% allowed anywhere. Not allowing it shows intolerance, no matter what you say.Do you suppost people that want to wear nothing? Or, say similar to men, women should be able to walk around topless :)

Fair enough?

Yes, why not? We're born naked. And isn't the idea that it's not decent for women to walk around topless simply a display of the man being superior to the woman?

Yes, why not? We're born naked. And isn't the idea that it's not decent for women to walk around topless simply a display of the man being superior to the woman? I agree! :)

BUT, the fact is society determines what is and is not acceptable and based on that decides what is and what is not legal. That's basically the way it works. drugs, prostitution, indecency, gambling, etc... are all regulated by one law or another.

Aren't WE the society?

Aren't WE the society?




Which "WE" society are you referring to?

The society of the USA or the society of Saudi Arabia?

Big difference.

Big difference.
EXACTLY! Shouldn't countries that preach freedom excercise it?

Do these veils pose a threat to anyone surrounding them, unless explosives are being hidden. But this is with all clothes. Why are cross dressers wearing such flamming clothing and noone bats an eye. Why can't people who follow their religion not wear clothes which symbolize their religion? You aren't having a debate with veils, you're questioning the constitution.

EXACTLY! Shouldn't countries that preach freedom excercise it?



When these countries that preach freedom have been terrorised, and are in threat of further terrorism, you will see that freedom you speak of sadly disappear.

For example see thread :-

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=59086

I wonder if the Islamophobes would have government step in to force the American Amish to shed their weird headgear for women? If one hates veils, DON'T LOOK AT EM fer christ's sakes!

Islamaphobes, theophobes, atheiphobes: Let's all meet in real life and settle it on ability.

Or are you a Darwiphobe?

As if life ain't happenin' real time already.

people who go on about personal choice really fuck me off. so should the choice of an individual go against what the vast majority want. and you use personal choice like its an excuse..i mean cmon if everything was down to personal choice there would be problems wouldnt there i mean you would get rapists in court going it was my choice or maybe prostitutes whoring themselves in the middle of a high street as its there choice

As long as it doesn't violate a person's human rights and doesn't break any law, then it should be allowed.

Does a veil break any law? Does it threaten you personally? I don't think so. What makes veils threatening to people is that they automatically co-relate a veil with Islamic extremist terrorism, which is totally off-base.

That's like equating a mullet haircut with backward, unintelligent rural, hick/hillbilly culture. Is it right to do that? No. It's just our own insecurities and fears that are fanning the flames.

Do you suppost people that want to wear nothing? Or, say similar to men, women should be able to walk around topless :)

Fair enough?

Does wearing nothing go against the law? Yes. Does wearing a veil go against the law? No.

Fair enough?

Does wearing nothing go against the law? Yes. Does wearing a veil go against the law? No.

Fair enough?

Is wearing a cross against the law - NO - well actually it is - in Saudi Arabia.

Does wearing nothing go against the law? Yes. Does wearing a veil go against the law? No.

Fair enough?yes thats' true.

Common law is based on common value - society determines what is acceptable. That's basically the way its always worked. I think it's fine to wear a veil, I used to tease a Muslim girl back when we were in Undergrad about spending time "alone" studying with a boy :) she always wore a head scarf - so what? I didn't even notice. As a matter of fact my grandma still wears one, and she's Catholic!

But I thought the question was about a full burka and integration? A full body covering probably inhibits integration. Westerners are not happy to see people covered from head to toe except for the eyes. So they will probably regard such a dressed person negatively and hence less integration into the community. I think some nudists would have a hard (no pun there :) time integrating into a non-nudest neighborhood? Don’t you think?

like equating a mullet haircut with backward, unintelligent rural, hick/hillbilly culture. Is it right to do that? No.


I agree - it is wrong to equate a mullet haircut with backward, unintelligent rural, hick/hillbilly culture




It's just our own insecurities and fears that are fanning the flames


Yeah right :rolleyes:

I suppose you think Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with it

Whats all the fuss about, a muslim teacher, teaching english with a veil on?

A pair of eyebrows & eyelashes can say so much right?

The fact that most humans dont understand what the other person is saying 100% of the time, & that most of us lip read to fill in the blanks has nothing to do with it?

The fact that they are children & they need to observe facial mannerisms of a teacher as they expess themselves in english also has nothing to do with it right?

Also if the teacher is reading a book to class, i am sure this muslim woman can say alot more with her eyebrows & eyelashes, than a standard human teacher could, who would only be able to put a face to the various characters in the book with her change of voices & different facial expressions.

I mean come on here, roger moor & spock from star trek have made millions from arching there eyebrows.

Only yeaterday i saw hundreds of adds in the english newspaper in bangkok, the bangkok post, they all said, eyebrows & eyelashes wanted to teach english to children with little attention span.The fact that most people find looking at a person with a burka on very boring, i am sure that wont effect children with a short attention span.

you know what Vince - I wonder what values kids in English schools are picking up on those so called "teachers" who refuse to remove the veils and integrate into western society.

No one has considered what the kids think.

If they wont remove the veils for the sake of the children then I would sack them, no problem.

you know what Vince - I wonder what values kids in English schools are picking up on those so called "teachers" who refuse to remove the veils and integrate into western society.

No one has considered what the kids think.

If they wont remove the veils for the sake of the children then I would sack them, no problem.


I think you know the answer to that stu, your a intelligent guy who can look at the big picture, unlike most here.

There learning isolation, there learning the ugly side of humanity as women are degraded to look like darth vader from star wars, there learning nothing from facial mannerisms as children need to do.

There learning to use there eyes more, because if they cant see her lips, the only chance of understanding her is to have your ears totally charged up to her voice.

There learning that it is normal for a woman to look like a burka leper in a a leper colony, when the reality is this is it belongs in backward muslim countries.

In the UK the veil will be banned in the next 1 or 3 years like it will be banned in all western countries as is the norm in some now, belgium & holland & many more.

If one wishes to remain wearing veils, why do you come to countries where such is not the cultural norm? If you have no intent to live in a country and become a citizen/subject of said country and become culturally united with said country, then why come to it at all? If you want to keep your culture, remain in your country.


If one wishes to remain wearing veils, why do you come to countries where such is not the cultural norm?
1)the burqah issue is irrlevant both i)qualitatively and ii)quantitatively
i) i don't need to go into this as it's irrelevant (within the context of islam)
ii) the women who choose to wear the burqah are statistically insignificant, less than 5% of the muslim women in Britain wear the burqah, yet attract a disproporionate amount of media attention, most of it negative further perpetuating negative stereotypes of islam/muslims.

2) many of these women were born in England so didn't come from abroad.

3) the fact that the burqah doesn't constitute what is "the cultural norm" doesn't equate to valid critisism of the burqah.

these women who choose to wear the burqah are in no way infringing on your beloved culture (whatever the hell that may be)
these woman are not undermining, subverting, or compromising your culture by choosing to wear a burqah.
These women are breaking no laws by wearing the burqah.

The real question is what's it to you, why does it bother you so much?

how many women have you physically come accross in you every day life who wear the burqah??

do you actually live in England.

I live in England - and if you cant respect our laws - then sod off elsewhere - period!

people who go on about personal choice really fuck me off. so should the choice of an individual go against what the vast majority want. and you use personal choice like its an excuse..i mean cmon if everything was down to personal choice there would be problems wouldnt there i mean you would get rapists in court going it was my choice or maybe prostitutes whoring themselves in the middle of a high street as its there choice

so should the choice of an individual go against what the vast majority want
we're not talkikng about a legitimate want based on valid arguments, we're talking about opposition to something which is of no relevance based on ignorance.

and you use personal choice like its an excuse..i mean cmon if everything was down to personal choice there would be problems wouldnt there i mean you would get rapists in court going it was my choice
prime example of ignorance and ill thought out reasoning:
how does a woman's choice to wear the burqah compare to a someone who is on trial for a crime?

maybe prostitutes whoring themselves in the middle of a high street as its there choice
again, no valid comparison, no valid argument.

I repeat as in my previous post:

-These women who choose to wear the burqah are in no way infringing on your beloved culture (whatever the hell that may be)

-These woman are not undermining, subverting, or compromising your culture by choosing to wear a burqah.

-These women are breaking no laws by wearing the burqah.

The real question is what's it to you, why does it bother you so much?

how many women have you physically come accross in you every day life who wear the burqah?? do you really care if they choose to cover their faces?

I'm guessing no, just another excuse to vent anti muslim prejudices, just like every other idiot on this topic.

I live in England - and if you cant respect our laws - then sod off elsewhere - period!

the burqah doesn't break any law.

If you can't handle it, then the problem lies with you and not muslims/islam.

and again what's it to you? some woman wishing to wear a burqah has no tangible effect on your life.

Get over it.

the burqah doesn't break any law.

If you can't handle it, then the problem lies with you and not muslims/islam.

and again what's it to you? some woman wishing to wear a burqah has no tangible effect on your life.

Get over it.


Its only a matter of time old chap, England isn't a muslim land and its about time you understood that.

Soon most of Europe will have banned the burqah, and that is great news!

And about time too.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1829416,00050003.htm

Debate over Islamic veil in UK

Its only a matter of time old chap, England isn't a muslim land and its about time you understood that.

Soon most of Europe will have banned the burqah, and that is great news!

And about time too.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1829416,00050003.htm

Debate over Islamic veil in UK

Soon most of Europe will have banned the burqah
I very much doubt it.

England isn't a muslim land

1) no relevance to this topic.
2) same applied to arabia pre mohammed.
3) Its only a matter of time old chap.


Debate over Islamic veil in UK
there is no debate over islamic veil (which isnt even islamic) only irrational fear and paranoia fuelled by prejudice and bigotry caused by ignorance.

again:

If you can't handle it, then the problem lies with you and not muslims/islam.
and again what's it to you? some woman wishing to wear a burqah has no tangible effect on your life.

Get over it old chap

Its only a matter of time old chap, England isn't a muslim land and its about time you understood that.

Soon most of Europe will have banned the burqah, and that is great news!

And about time too.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1829416,00050003.htm

Debate over Islamic veil in UK

Hi Stu,

i hope all is well with you,

even-though i dont personally like the niqab/viel if the girl wants to wear it there is not much we can do apart from take away her freedom to do so by banning it...


however i think the there is no issue if it is banned in businesses if the directors chose this as part of the dress code. I myself would ban it from my company if i ever faced this issue as i dont think it is good for team equostics.

however most of the staff i employ are women over 40 and usually white, i do have one lady from persia and another from Thailand. Basically i need to read the expressions on their faces when i issue instructions to see whether they totally understand the task in front of them...


~~~~~~~~~~~~~

take care
zak

zak stu's objection to the veil is not based on any valid argument. He is simply using the veil as an excuse to vent his deep seeded prejudices and bigotry against islam.

The real issue isn't with the veil, but with his ignorance and lack of understanding and lack of willingness to understand islam.

Hi Outlandish
Thank you for your post

well we have to educate him then, and try to make him understand that Islam is a progressive religion etc..

Unfortunately the actions and words of some muslims are detremental to this espicially as the media picks up on these things in a flash!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

take care
zak

Hi Outlandish
Thank you for your post

well we have to educate him then, and try to make him understand that Islam is a progressive religion etc..

Unfortunately the actions and words of some muslims are detremental to this espicially as the media picks up on these things in a flash!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

take care
zak

well we have to educate him then, and try to make him understand that Islam is a progressive religion etc..

yes educate them, but you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

I have heard from a Muslim friend of mine that the prophet (sallahhu-alaihi-wa-aaliwasalam) was so desperately anxious about whether the ummah would accept the message he had given to them that he would be consumed with worry and a surah was revealed basically saying you were only to deliver the message to the people, whether they accept it or not is their problem.

Also there is I believe a surah inwhich it states that a veil has been placed over the hearts of many non believers and they will never believe hence trying to make them believe is futile, they just have to be left to their own ignorance.

Does wearing nothing go against the law? Yes. Does wearing a veil go against the law? No.

Fair enough?

Well, what if it was made to be against the law?

Geoff

Also there is I believe a surah inwhich it states that a veil has been placed over the hearts of many non believers and they will never believe hence trying to make them believe is futile, they just have to be left to their own ignorance.

Interestingly, there is also a sura (9) which states that non-believers are to be given only three choices: death, dhimmitude or conversion.

Geoff

Interestingly, there is also a sura (9) which states that non-believers are to be given only three choices: death, dhimmitude or conversion.

Geoff

find it.


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

Can a male wear a burqah?

if he wants.

find it.


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

Sorry; I don't respond well to orders. Conflict issues; I'm sure you understand.

Read Sura 9. Not too difficult to locate, really. Q 9:5 would be a good start, I think - also Q 9: 29.

Geoff

zak stu's objection to the veil is not based on any valid argument. He is simply using the veil as an excuse to vent his deep seeded prejudices and bigotry against islam. The real issue isn't with the veil, but with his ignorance and lack of understanding and lack of willingness to understand islam.It has nothing to do with bigotry and misunderstanding and you people know damn well that it isn't. You throw that in our faces because it's an easy way to avoid having a meaningful dialog about something that is very important and will not go away.

We do not tolerate and will never tolerate people walking among us with their faces hidden behind masks. It doesn't matter if they're Muslims, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians or Eskimos. We will not tolerate this behavior from anyone. Seventy-five percent of human communication is non-verbal. Most of that is facial expression, but some of it is body language, which is also concealed by a hijab.

No one can communicate effectively with 75 percent of the bandwidth blocked. We're only willing to transact business of modest value and low risk over the telephone, and even less so by correspondence or e-mail, where we can't even hear the tone of voice and cadence. There is a good reason that all important business deals are conducted in person until the parties involved are very well acquainted and trust each other. It is the same reason that internet dating has so many tragic surprise endings. Internet commerce is a joke and will never be fully accepted until every computer has video so we can see each other's faces.

People who hide their faces are refusing to communicate effectively and they can never earn our trust. We will not tolerate a large number of people living among us who cannot be trusted.

It has nothing to do with religion. It's about communication. Wise up and stop hiding behind your religion. This may come as a shock to you but not everything is about religion.

It has nothing to do with bigotry and misunderstanding and you people know damn well that it isn't. You throw that in our faces because it's an easy way to avoid having a meaningful dialog about something that is very important and will not go away.

We do not tolerate and will never tolerate people walking among us with their faces hidden behind masks. It doesn't matter if they're Muslims, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians or Eskimos. We will not tolerate this behavior from anyone. Seventy-five percent of human communication is non-verbal. Most of that is facial expression, but some of it is body language, which is also concealed by a hijab.

No one can communicate effectively with 75 percent of the bandwidth blocked. We're only willing to transact business of modest value and low risk over the telephone, and even less so by correspondence or e-mail, where we can't even hear the tone of voice and cadence. There is a good reason that all important business deals are conducted in person until the parties involved are very well acquainted and trust each other. It is the same reason that internet dating has so many tragic surprise endings. Internet commerce is a joke and will never be fully accepted until every computer has video so we can see each other's faces.

People who hide their faces are refusing to communicate effectively and they can never earn our trust. We will not tolerate a large number of people living among us who cannot be trusted.

It has nothing to do with religion. It's about communication. Wise up and stop hiding behind your religion. This may come as a shock to you but not everything is about religion.

It has nothing to do with bigotry and misunderstanding
It has everything to do with bigotry and misunderstanding .

and you people
you people?? who?

Wise up and stop hiding behind your religion

1) you know nothing of what my religion is/isn't.
2) I'm not hiding behind anything.



You throw that in our faces because it's an easy way to avoid having a meaningful dialog about something that is very important and will not go away.
how many women wearing the burqah do you actually have to interact with on a daily basis?

We do not tolerate and will never tolerate people walking among us with their faces hidden behind masks.
why?

Seventy-five percent of human communication is non-verbal. Most of that is facial expression, but some of it is body language, which is also concealed by a hijab.
how many women wearing the burqah or hijab have you had to interact with personally?

No one can communicate effectively with 75 percent of the bandwidth blocked.
really? you and I are communicating perfectly well.

We're only willing to transact business of modest value and low risk over the telephone,
so how much business of high value and high risk have you personally had to conduct with women wearing the burqah?

People who hide their faces are refusing to communicate effectively
no they're not. the refusal lies on your part, and besides how do you know? again have you had to communicate with a woman wearing the burqah?


This may come as a shock to you but not everything is about religion.

tell that to kiwi123, vinnie, geofp who relentlessly vilify islam on this forum, i'm just offering a counter to their tirade.
I'm not the one with the bee in my bonnet about religion.

Outlandish,

A male can wear a burquh?

Can a male walk into a Mosque wearing a burqua?

So you have a teacher who wears a burqua, what if everystudent walked into class wearing a burquh?

What if every human wore burqua's?

Why dont you wear a burqua?

you know nothing of what my religion is/isn't.The Abrahamic religions are all the same.This earthly life doesn't matter. Nothing important happens until after you die. Men rule. Women are shit. Anyone who doesn't agree with my definition of religion is subhuman.This is not what you say your religion is but this is the way your religious community behaves.really? you and I are communicating perfectly well.No we aren't. This is a pathetic substitute for a real conversation. It takes two days to make a point. And you and I are pretty good writers. SciForums is full of discussions that go nowhere because people can't understand each other.so how much business of high value and high risk have you personally had to conduct with women wearing the burqah?Some damn fool woman actually tried to go to court wearing one of those stupid things. She could be smirking, she could be weeping, she could be giving every telltale sign of lying or of telling the truth, and no one in the court would be able to tell.no they're not. the refusal lies on your part, and besides how do you know? again have you had to communicate with a woman wearing the burqah?Every time the subway stops I look carefully at all the people who get on and size them up, to see if I think they might cause trouble. If someone looks risky I move to another car or just get off and wait for the next train. If some damn fool woman gets on my car hiding her face behind a mask like a robber, I am getting off and I know a lot of other people will too. If it happens twice the city will be overwhelmed with complaints and they will have to make the stupid things illegal on public transportation. As I've said, how the hell do we even know for sure that it's a woman under there? It could be anybody doing anything. It is a DISGUISE. People are not allowed to wear DISGUISES in public. They are a universal sign of being UNTRUSTWORTHY.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/10/061018-orchid-photos.html

do we fit in or are we an aberration?:)

OTOH, i think everyone should wear veil's.

itll decrease rape rates for sure.

Don't criminals in western cultures use face masks to hide their identity when they commit crimes? And what do we, the western culture, think when we see someone masking their face, their identity? If a person walked into a bank wearing a face mask, what's the first reaction?

Baron Max

dEAR baron

thank you for your comments

This is a good point, Viels should be banned in banks and other such institutions...If the woman who wears a burka/viel wants to do her baning she should either do it over the internet or if she has to go into the bank to pay in her cheques she should aks someone else to do it for her..

However the policy would ahve to be set-out by each individual bank. Rather like in the Uk where Hooded tops are not alow to be worn in Blue Water Shopping centre.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zak

itll decrease rape rates for sure.

Sure; and stink-breath.

The Abrahamic religions are all the same.This earthly life doesn't matter. Nothing important happens until after you die. Men rule. Women are shit. Anyone who doesn't agree with my definition of religion is subhuman.This is not what you say your religion is but this is the way your religious community behaves.No we aren't. This is a pathetic substitute for a real conversation. It takes two days to make a point. And you and I are pretty good writers. SciForums is full of discussions that go nowhere because people can't understand each other.Some damn fool woman actually tried to go to court wearing one of those stupid things. She could be smirking, she could be weeping, she could be giving every telltale sign of lying or of telling the truth, and no one in the court would be able to tell.Every time the subway stops I look carefully at all the people who get on and size them up, to see if I think they might cause trouble. If someone looks risky I move to another car or just get off and wait for the next train. If some damn fool woman gets on my car hiding her face behind a mask like a robber, I am getting off and I know a lot of other people will too. If it happens twice the city will be overwhelmed with complaints and they will have to make the stupid things illegal on public transportation. As I've said, how the hell do we even know for sure that it's a woman under there? It could be anybody doing anything. It is a DISGUISE. People are not allowed to wear DISGUISES in public. They are a universal sign of being UNTRUSTWORTHY.

The Abrahamic religions are all the same.This earthly life doesn't matter. Nothing important happens until after you die. Men rule. Women are shit. Anyone who doesn't agree with my definition of religion is subhuman.This is not what you say your religion is but this is the way your religious community behaves
1) again you know nothing of what my religion may or may not be. You assume my religion is abrahamic, assumption is the mother of all fuck ups
2)no relevance to this topic.

this is the way your religious community behaves
you have no idea on cognitive level how any muslim community behaves, you have no personal experience of how any muslim community behaves. Don't mistake the distorted information you absorb from an inherently biassed media as knowledge on an actual level.
Don't pontificate on a matter of which you have no knowledge of or a community of whom you know nothing about.


Some damn fool woman actually tried to go to court wearing one of those stupid things. She could be smirking, she could be weeping, she could be giving every telltale sign of lying or of telling the truth, and no one in the court would be able to tell
1)again this doesn't concern you or your life on an actual tangible level.
2)Where you in that court? Let the court decide on how to deal with that matter.
3) again as I have mentioned earlier women wearing the burqah equate to less than 5% of the muslim women in england, the stats would be even less in america, so why are you getting so riled over:
i)something which doesn't affect you tangibly
ii) is statistically insignificant anyway.

Every time the subway stops I look carefully at all the people who get on and size them up, to see if I think they might cause trouble.
1) irrelevant to this topic
2) your opinions on people you meet in the street are purely subjective and equate to nothhing within the context of actuality.


If some damn fool woman gets on my car hiding her face behind a mask like a robber, I am getting off and I know a lot of other people will too. If it happens twice the city will be overwhelmed with complaints and they will have to make the stupid things illegal on public transportation.

1) just because a woman decides to wear a burqah doesn't make her a "damn fool" this is pure conjecture and subjective, biassed opinion. Your prejudice is palpable.
2)if: you're so clouded by emotion, you have a hard distinguishing a hypothetical situaiton with reality.

1) again you know nothing of what my religion may or may not be. You assume
2)no relevance to this topic.
you have no idea... you have no personal experience... Don't mistake the distorted information you absorb...
Don't pontificate on a matter of which you have no knowledge of or a community of whom you know nothing about.

1)again this doesn't concern you
1) irrelevant to this topic
2) your opinions on people you meet in the street are purely subjective
this is pure conjecture and subjective, biassed opinion. Your prejudice is palpable.
2)if: you're so clouded by emotion, you have a hard distinguishing a hypothetical situaiton with reality.

The qualifiers to your so-called argument are typical to Muslims here, who refuse to objectively see themselves in any other position other than what Islamic indoctrination would place them.

Yet, you are as innocent as a puppy sitting next to a pile of pooh.

1) again you know nothing of what my religion may or may not be. You assume my religion is abrahamic, assumption is the mother of all fuck ups
2)no relevance to this topic.

you have no idea on cognitive level how any muslim community behaves, you have no personal experience of how any muslim community behaves. Don't mistake the distorted information you absorb from an inherently biassed media as knowledge on an actual level.
Don't pontificate on a matter of which you have no knowledge of or a community of whom you know nothing about.

And so, the usual refrain: you aren't muslim, you cannot understand, you may not comment. No response; merely a refrain to refrain.

Par for the course.

And since when is islam not an "Abrahamic" religion? :rolleyes:

2)Where you in that court? Let the court decide on how to deal with that matter.

And if the court decides to order her to remove the burkha: what then? Will they, too, have no right to 'comment on islamic issues'? Will no one, in extremis? And where or when could the morality or desirability of such issues then be debated, if not here? You seem eager to stop such debate. Why?

This smacks of regression to individualism.

Is wearing a cross against the law - NO - well actually it is - in Saudi Arabia.

And so, because Saudi Arabia doesn't allow crosses, Britain should retaliate and adopt those backward measures by not allowing veils?

Are you serious?

You really wish to stoop down low to the same level as Saudi Arabia?

What makes Western nations great is that they are nations of tolerance and acceptance. If you take away the tolerance and acceptance aspect of Western nations, well...

I think you know the answer to that stu, your a intelligent guy who can look at the big picture, unlike most here.

There learning isolation, there learning the ugly side of humanity as women are degraded to look like darth vader from star wars, there learning nothing from facial mannerisms as children need to do.

There learning to use there eyes more, because if they cant see her lips, the only chance of understanding her is to have your ears totally charged up to her voice.

There learning that it is normal for a woman to look like a burka leper in a a leper colony, when the reality is this is it belongs in backward muslim countries.

In the UK the veil will be banned in the next 1 or 3 years like it will be banned in all western countries as is the norm in some now, belgium & holland & many more.

That's all nice and fun. But as I said before, if the WOMAN CHOOSES to wear it, then she should. If she is FORCED to against her will, that's an entirely different matter and then I'd agree with you.

again you know nothing of what my religion may or may not be. You assume my religion is abrahamic, assumption is the mother of all fuck upsThis is not an assumption but an uncontroversial worldwide consensus including your own people. Two entire pages of Google hits--from sources religious and secular, academic and lay, Christian, Muslim, Jewish and non-Abrahamist--are unanimous over the fundamental fact that Christianity, Judaism and Islam are the three Abrahamic religions. Only the weakest and most specious arguments have been offered against this. For example, some turn on the fine point of missionaries. They insist that although Abraham ultimately effected the conversion of the entire Hebrew people to Judaism, he was not a "real" evangelist, so Christianity and Islam cannot be called Abrahamic because they are evangelical.

Ibrahim--or Abraham with the Hebrew vowels--has even been argued by some Islamic scholars to be the founder of Islam because he submitted to the will of Allah by offering to sacrifice his son. This is the defining trait of a Muslim and indeed what the word "Muslim" means.

This place is called SciForums because most of us, especially those of us who try to serve as the elders of the community, do our best to conduct ourselves like scientists. When we lapse someone immediately jumps up and calls us on it, which is the essence of the scientific method. If you're going to make statements like "Islam is not an Abrahamic religion" that contradict even what your own people have been telling us outsiders about yourselves for generations, this falls under the principle that "extraordinary assertions require extraordinary substantiation." The scientific method requires you to provide the source and reasoning behind this statement.you have no idea on cognitive level how any muslim community behaves, you have no personal experience of how any muslim community behaves.I beg your pardon? I spent most of my life in Los Angeles, which has a huge, thriving Muslim community. I worked in civil service, the sector that prides itself on "diversity" and probably employed most of those Muslims in those days. Now I work in Washington, DC, which is the most "diverse" place and has the largest Middle Eastern and North African community in America. Some of my Muslim friends are devout and some are secularized. Some were raised Muslim and others converted. They are Shia, Sunni, Wahhabi, and Sufi; Lebanese, Iranian, Iraqi, Moroccan, Pakistani, Indian, Filipino, Egyptian, and born here of European or sub-Saharan African ancestry.Where you in that court? Let the court decide on how to deal with that matter.It did. This has already been posted on SciForums, I guess you missed it. The judge threw her out. In America it is a fundamental principle of law that one has the right to confront one's accusers. You cannot confront someone who is hiding behind a damn fool MASK like a robber. You can't even tell if they got the right person.just because a woman decides to wear a burqah doesn't make her a "damn fool" this is pure conjecture and subjective, biassed opinion.My point is that it accomplishes exactly that in our society. People do not walk around hiding their faces from other people here any more than they walk around displaying their genitals to other people in your country. It is rude, it is outrageous, it is offensive. To hide behind a mask and look like a ninja about to rob or kill someone is just about as "damn foolish" as one can be in America. There are many places where people will unleash their dogs and have her run off the street like the common criminal she chooses to resemble. Even our dogs are smart enough to understand that civilized people have no reason to hide from each other.

And so, because Saudi Arabia doesn't allow crosses, Britain should retaliate and adopt those backward measures by not allowing veils?

Are you serious?

You really wish to stoop down low to the same level as Saudi Arabia?

What makes Western nations great is that they are nations of tolerance and acceptance. If you take away the tolerance and acceptance aspect of Western nations, well...


Terrorism is already taking away tolerance in Western nations

Update

A month after ex-foreign secretary Jack Straw suggested that Muslim women who wear veils over their face can make community relations harder, what do people within the Muslim community in the UK think of his remarks?

Jack Straw's comments on veils have been good news for the owner of The Hijab Centre in the MP's constituency of Blackburn.

"I used to sell two or three a week but now I am selling five to six. They are mainly being bought by young, British-born Muslim women," he said.

"These women are experimenting with the wearing of the niqab. Their mothers often do not cover themselves but they seem to want to do it."



The wearing of the veil has always been a controversial practice and there is no consensus amongst Islamic scholars.

There are roughly two schools of thought, one which says that it is obligatory and another that believes it is highly recommended but ultimately a matter of personal choice.

Mr Straw's intervention and the ensuing political storm have changed all that.

It now appears that British Muslims are less willing to publicly criticise those tiny minority of women who wear it.

A recent statement issued by nearly 30 Islamic groups, including one of the largest Muslim organisations - the Muslim Council of Britain, tells Muslims to "remain united, regardless of their differences of opinion in the wearing of the veil ... and to defend the veil with all their ability".

It also asks them to "avoid seeking to capitalise on this debate to further political or personal interests".

This statement has annoyed some Muslims but they are now choosing to remain silent.

They think it is open season on Muslims and do not want to be seen damaging the community anymore by offering support to the anti-veil lobby.

Jack Straw:

He told the Three Faiths Forum: "Simply breathing the same air as other members of society isn't integration.

"Britishness is thus an identity available to Anglicans, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus and those of other religions and none, and a central element of that identity is the principle that everyone has the freedom to practise their faith not as a matter of tolerance but of right."

He added: "There is no inevitability that our communities will splinter and divide.

"Nor is there any inevitability that our attempts to heal divides will succeed. Progress depends on our willingness to engage."

MUSLIM BEHAVIOUR in the U.S. and Europe

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatc...ves/013758.php




The difference in Muslim behavior in the U.S., as compared to that demonstrated in Western Europe, is owed primarily to several factors.

First, and most important, the Muslim population is a much smaller proportion of the American population -- scarcely 1%. And of even that 1%, most of the Muslims are homegrown Black Muslims, whose own easygoing and at times even syncretistic interpretation of Islam in the past caused the orthodox at Al Azhar to refuse to recognize Elijah Mohammad's group as really Islamic at all.

But what if there were not 3 million Muslims (two million of them identified as belonging to the "Black Muslims") but rather 15 million -- that is, 5% of the total population -- or even 30 million, or 10% of the total population, as may already be true in France? Wouldn't local Muslims, already so aggressive and unyielding in the demands of their so-called representative groups (e.g. CAIR), be far more aggressive and even more demanding, even more uncooperative with the authorities on matters of security, even more aggressive in demands to changes in our legal and political institutions, in our schools, in our social understandings and arrangements, in our everything?

Second, the non-Muslim population of the United States contains far more believing Christians and self-identifying Jews than anywhere in "post-Christian" Western Europe. They are powerful and self-confident, and will not yield as the French and English have yielded. America is a more violent society. Part of that violence includes a willingness, even an eagerness, to have those who threaten that society suppressed -- thank god -- unapologetically.

Third, the pre-existing mental pathologies that have helped Muslims to find allies of sorts in the countries of Western Europe are antisemitism, which remains a permanent presence in the Western world which nothing can eradicate, but which in the United States, for all sorts of reasons (including the identification of so many Americans, including the earliest Puritans, with the Israelites, and the role of the Old Testament in American intellectual and religious history) has been reduced far below its European levels.

The second pre-existing mental pathology cleverly exploited by Muslims and their willing collaborators in the countries of Western Europe has been anti-Americanism, strongest in France and England, less strong in Germany and especially, thank god, in Italy -- and visible on this side of the Atlantic only among media figures.

Fourth, Muslims are not provided with as many benefits paid for by Infidel taxpayers as they are in Western Europe, and so cannot rely on the dole for their every need, nor on fiddling the system to the degree that is now de rigueur in England and France.

They need, therefore, the good will of non-Muslim customers and employers. This may -- for a while, even a long while -- inhibit open political activity for the advancement of Sharia principles. After all, if one realizes that one's contribution to CAIR or one's open support for Muslim goals may cause direct economic losses, one may hesitate.

Fifth, in this country there are many more non-Muslim refugees from Muslim lands -- Christians who are descended from those Maronites who arrived between 1880 and 1940, or Jews who left Arab lands but did not go to Israel, or pockets here and there of smaller sects, including Assyrians and Chaldean Christians -- who are able to provide to those around them unpleasant monitory truths about Islam and its tenets, its attitudes.

Sixth, there are far more people in this country who have remained in possession of their senses, and who are quite capable of refusing to accept the party line of the members of MESA Nostra, and to find out for themselves about both the theory or doctrines of Islam and about Islam in practice -- as evidenced by 1350 years of Islamic conquest of non-Muslim lands and by the subsequent subjugation, and killing or forced conversion or reduction to the status of dhimmi, of the vanquished non-Muslims.

Seventh, given all that, it is cleverer to wait, to bide one's time. Who knows what will happen in ten years, or twenty? Why make moves too soon, when there is such a danger of imperiling oneself and one's ability to remain in this country, at this point?

But no one should remain sanguine. Look at Mike Hawash in Oregon, that Intel engineer, earning $360,000 a year, with his American wife and Little-League playing children, and the stout stand-by-your-man support of Intel executives, who nonetheless returned to that old-time religion. That old-time religion turned out, for "Mike" (Maher) Hawash, to be Islam.

So after 9.11.2001 it was off to western China in the hopes of reaching Afghanistan and killing fellow Americans who were, for Mike Hawash and all the Mike Hawashes of Islam, not fellow Infidel citizens of an Infidel nation-state, but enemies to be killed -- because they were Infidels, and because they stood in the way of, represented an obstacle to, the spread and future dominance of Islam.

And the would-be murderer in Chapel Hill, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, gunning his SUV and running over non-Muslim students, was the son of secular Iranians in exile -- but he, too, in a moment of intellectual and vocational confusion, apparently found Islam. And in finding Islam, he became the would-be Jihadist who would kill Infidels who had done nothing to him.

Why? Because that was what Allah wanted, that was what Muhammad wanted. He spelled it all out in long handwritten letters written while in custody. And there are many such -- people who are outwardly fine, until one fine day they are not so fine, and then, whatever the reasons, they have at hand someone to blame, someone to kill -- the Infidel.

In Afghanistan, in Chapel Hill, or in New York City, or anywhere at all.

Does that mean that Western secularism and democracy is not the answer to militant Islam?

Then what is the US doing in Iraq?

Does that mean that Western secularism and democracy is not the answer to militant Islam?

Then what is the US doing in Iraq?



They are doing the same thing as the UK - They are following orders from the governments, even the top notch British generals are against the idea of British troops still being there.

The sooner we get our troops out of that place of evil the better.

They are doing the same thing as the UK - They are following orders from the governments, even the top notch British generals are against the idea of British troops still being there.

The sooner we get our troops out of that place of evil the better.

Unfortunately, I have an idea that a lot of it is going to stick for many years to come, regardless of when the troops pull out.

Does that mean that Western secularism and democracy is not the answer to militant Islam?Many scholars see Islam on the cusp of its own Reformation, Renaissance and Enlightenment. After all it has tracked very closely to six centuries behind Christianity in its phases since its creation six centuries after Christianity. It was an ugly, violent time for Christendom but the result was a vast improvement over the Dark Ages. It has been suggested that the best thing for us to do is just let the Muslims resolve their own issues by fighting among themselves and serve as an example of a functional liberal civilization to the progressive faction among them, rather than distracting them by meddling.Then what is the US doing in Iraq?It is strictly an economic endeavor just like the war in Vietnam was. Our leaders didn't give a damn about the Vietnamese people, but war was good for business. Ditto for today's leaders and the Iraqis.

The ties of our leaders to key companies and key industries are obvious. Cheney's buddies in Halliburton get no-bid contracts for everything in Iraq including, I'm sure, port-a-potties. Bush's family are connected to the moguls in the energy industry and Bush's hand-holding gay boyfriend is an Arabian prince with a major interest in the petroleum industry.

This war has nothing to do with democracy or terrorism, those were just easy pretexts to justify starting it.

Yeah - not to mention oil