Jacpher Posted May 2, 2010 ^It has everything to do with secularism. Secularism suggests government operates free from any religious/values doctrine. No religious or values be imposed on anyone and people should freely choose whatever religious/values/morals they maintain. No government should be dictating or pointing out how one dresses. This ban clearly violates the freedom of expression and religion for women who choose to put on a niqab out of religious conviction. They argue women are forced to have niqab on but they don't want to acknowledge not everyone is forced and there are some women who do it out of religious conviction and firm belief but they don't care about them. Can you imagine a Muslim women would be accused of breaking a STATE LAW for putting on a piece of cloth on her face? WTF Bring the issue to Muslim streets and ban their products from the shelves. Hit them where it hurts the most. If a mother/sister/daughter can't practice her religion freely and French value forced down on her throat, they should choose to not do business with them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ibtisam Posted May 2, 2010 Bring the issue to Muslim streets and ban their products from the shelves. Hit them where it hurts the most. If a mother/sister/daughter can't practice her religion freely and French value forced down on her throat, they should choose to not do business with them. Where is the Muslim Streets located?? Also assuming Muslims were not too busy arguing about the length of the trousers, or the right colour of the hijab and actually decided to collectively boycott business from say France (Europe is impossible) Muslims are not self sufficient enough to produce anything and be truly independent. Additionally there is the issue that business are privately owned, so will you be punishing someone/company because of something they may or may not agree with?? Western companies might lose a bit of Money in the long term, but Muslims cannot plan nor able to sustain themselves without western produced goods. The whole Muslim community worldwide could not boycott Israeli products who murder and occupy Muslim land including one of the most holist Muslim sites, you think Muslims would boycott better about niqabis or hijabs? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ailamos Posted May 2, 2010 Originally posted by Jacphar: ^It has everything to do with secularism. Secularism suggests government operates free from any religious/values doctrine. No religious or values be imposed on anyone and people should freely choose whatever religious/values/morals they maintain. No government should be dictating or pointing out how one dresses. A traditionally Christian continent has to deal with another religious identity that has, since the Crusades, been seen as "the other". Although Europe likes to bask in the sun of secularism, it still retains its Christian identity and it is this homogeneous identity, or the fear of its loss, that is used to garner votes. Secular tolerance in Europe is fast becoming a myth and is being replaced by intolerance that is fueled by religious tension. Fear tactics, uninformed voting and religious polarization has caused democracy to fail in case of the George W. Bush re-election. And it seems that this trend is spreading in the "enlightened" continent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
genius pauper. Posted May 2, 2010 ~~~~charles knows how to hunt them, in thailand and nepal, even in india. i really like the man. though he is in jail in nepal, waiting for justice. anyone who follows the natgeo channel knows exactly what am talking about!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B Posted May 2, 2010 Originally posted by ailamos: Although Europe likes to bask in the sun of secularism, it still retains its Christian identity and it is this homogeneous identity, or the fear of its loss, that is used to garner votes. Secular tolerance in Europe is fast becoming a myth and is being replaced by intolerance that is fueled by religious tension. One small correction my friend. Europe is not homogeneous, this is an imagined history and a deliberate distortion of their collective histories! They are all different in terms of ethnicity, religious afflictions or political, social trajectories. We must NOT over-simplify things. Even England is not homogeneous, in its history there have been a myriad and diverse population from the Vikings, to Normans to Jewish, post-colonial Caribbean and Indian sub-continent migration settlements and now Somali diaspora. All these immigrants have contributed towards the make-up of this country. There are similar patterns across the European mainland and there is no such thing as a homogeneous Europe. In fact you would be hard-pressed to find a homogeneous nation anywhere in Europe! The 'othering' you have mentioned is a loose term applied to whoever is the current threat! Its Muslims now but in the past has been used for Blacks, Jews, Catholics and the indigenous population used it for the maunders who came to settle in this country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ailamos Posted May 2, 2010 ^^ it's not an over simplification yaa B... read "homogenous identity" as opposed to the new identity that has emerged in Europe, the Muslims. To the conservative Europeans, Islam is a homogeneous identity, never-mind the differences between Turks, Iranis, Arabs and Africans, they're all "Muslims". So, when I say homogeneous, that's what I mean, the perception from the outside, not the intricate details within. [q]The 'othering' you have mentioned is a loose term applied to whoever is the current threat! Its Muslims now but in the past has been used for Blacks, Jews, Catholics and the indigenous population used it for the maunders who came to settle in this country. [/q] That's correct, what is your point? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LayZie G. Posted May 2, 2010 Ibti, You talk about few hundreds or even few thousands, for me, it only takes 1 veiled woman to lobby a legislation on banning the veil to be carried out and implemented into law, waayo, primitive and backward cultures have no place in western societies, along with their refugees who flog to the borders of european towns. I'm sorry to say that english Canada where I reside isn't doing enough to uncover the veiled face but I did applaud french Canada with the news in March of the introduction of bill 94 being read in quebec national assembly as early as this june.(and making rounds in the committees as we speak) Bill 94 makes it illegal for veiled women to seek social and welfare service, government loans, applying for a job in the public sector, taking a driving test with a veiled face, seeking assistance in the healthcare industry. When bill 94 passes, Veiled women would no longer be able to seek a doctor without showing their face, nor would they demand a female doctor when going for physician visits on the tax payer dime. As for the quebecers, an overwhelming majority of the citizens support this bill and its passage to law for the simple reason that someone has to take a stand on drawing the line on the sand when it comes to reasonable accommodation. The movement has started and its just a matter of time before it spreads to Arab nations, who too will join and take a stand against the garment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Haatu Posted May 2, 2010 LG isn't it about choice and freedom to do what one wishes. Aren't those the basis of western societies? If they were to start limiting people freedoms and start becoming intolerant, wouldn't they then be backwards? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ailamos Posted May 2, 2010 Originally posted by LayZie G.: When bill 94 passes, Veiled women would no longer be able to seek a doctor without showing their face, nor would they demand a female doctor when going for physician visits on the tax payer dime. I understand the face-showing bit, but I don't see how requesting a female physician is an abuse of the taxpayer's dime? A bit over-stretched me thinks :rolleyes: ... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ailamos Posted May 2, 2010 Originally posted by Haatu: LG isn't it about choice and freedom to do what one wishes. Aren't those the basis of western societies? If they were to start limiting people freedoms and start becoming intolerant, wouldn't they then be backwards? The West wouldn't be any different than the oppressive countries they like to demonize. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B Posted May 2, 2010 Originally posted by ailamos: ^^ it's not an over simplification yaa B... read "homogenous identity" as opposed to the new identity that has emerged in Europe, the Muslims. To the conservative Europeans, Islam is a homogeneous identity, never-mind the differences between Turks, Iranis, Arabs and Africans, they're all "Muslims". So, when I say homogeneous, that's what I mean, the perception from the outside, not the intricate details within. If by homogeneous, you mean white skin colour! Then clearly we need to make the distinctions there. Muslims are not all non-whites. Take the Algerians in France, they look very Caucasian or even the Muslims in Albania, Bosnia and Muslim reverts! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ailamos Posted May 2, 2010 ^^ B, it's helpless talking to you man... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B Posted May 2, 2010 No No No! You come with an illogical and ineptly structured idea. Why is it helpless when your argument doesn't stand my friend. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ailamos Posted May 2, 2010 ^^ Nevermind... :rolleyes: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LayZie G. Posted May 2, 2010 ^Ailamos, it is, especially when you put pressure on a community clinic, whose staff might have to accommodate its residents who are heavily muslims in some areas than others, and who request to seek a female physician or lose the patient to another off-town clinic, thereby losing funding from the government or accommodating the patient by hiring more female physicians, nurses than males. Same scenario applies to the ministry of transportation offices in quebec, ontario , etc. A veiled woman comes, demands that the only way she will take her picture is if she is put in a private room, with a female representative because she is comfortable with a female than a male, prompting that office to indulge in unfair hiring practice by seeking female candidates and discriminating against male candidates. With a growing population and these cultures taking over, services are demanding and those that offer the service have to accommodate them because their choices are limited and this bill puts common sense back on the table. No single industry or institution or government body should have to accommodate one group over the other. We should all adhere to fair practice when accommodating clients, customers etc, muslim or not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites