Belgium Bans the Burqa
My family had a rather vigorous discussion of this news story this afternoon over breakfast. It seems Belgium's legislature has voted to ban the burqa in that country.
I suppose you will find some anti-Muslim sentiment underlying the vote. I have been in European countries where everyone in the street appeared to be from the Middle East. I am sure many of the locals feel they are being overrun, but after all Belgium never claimed to be "the melting pot," they don't automatically welcome everybody like we do. Still, it seems decent to respect everyone's religion, and if they're supposed to cover themselves it seems like a reasonable thing to permit.
There is a difficult question of women's rights here. Women should be able to dress as they wish, don't you agree? Of course. But some women are not allowed to dress as they wish, they are forced to wear burqas that cover every inch of their bodies. (By the way, I once read that there is a huge market for sexy lingerie that Arab women wear under their burqas. I really hope that is true.) That's one way of looking at it. The other way of looking at it is to say that the Belgian government is depriving women of the right to choose to wear the burqa. Either way, you're going to be wrong, you're either enabling a repressive patriarchal system or depriving women of an important personal choice.
Let's give Fox News a chance to tell us:
You gotta love that logic. Now they're banning burqas, the next thing you know it will be miniskirts.
Somehow, I don't think the Belgians will want to ban miniskirts.
I suppose you will find some anti-Muslim sentiment underlying the vote. I have been in European countries where everyone in the street appeared to be from the Middle East. I am sure many of the locals feel they are being overrun, but after all Belgium never claimed to be "the melting pot," they don't automatically welcome everybody like we do. Still, it seems decent to respect everyone's religion, and if they're supposed to cover themselves it seems like a reasonable thing to permit.
There is a difficult question of women's rights here. Women should be able to dress as they wish, don't you agree? Of course. But some women are not allowed to dress as they wish, they are forced to wear burqas that cover every inch of their bodies. (By the way, I once read that there is a huge market for sexy lingerie that Arab women wear under their burqas. I really hope that is true.) That's one way of looking at it. The other way of looking at it is to say that the Belgian government is depriving women of the right to choose to wear the burqa. Either way, you're going to be wrong, you're either enabling a repressive patriarchal system or depriving women of an important personal choice.
Let's give Fox News a chance to tell us:
Belgium is set to become the first ever country in Europe to ban the burqa being worn in public places.
The vote in Parliament for a nationwide ban on Islamic clothes or veils that do not allow the wearer to be fully identified was almost unanimous.
The full-face niqab and burqa worn by some Muslim women are not a mandatory requirements of Islam, but a personal choice.
People found flouting the new law could be given a fine of more than $30 or even be faced with a week in jail.
Vice president of the Muslim Executive of Belgium, Isabelle Praile, warned that the new law could be the start of a slippery slope.
"Today it's the full-face veil, tomorrow the veil, the day after it will be Sikh turbans and then perhaps it will be mini-skirts."
She went on to say that "the wearing of a full-face veil is part of the individual freedoms" protected by Belgian, European and international rights laws. Belgium Bans People Wearing Burqas in Public
You gotta love that logic. Now they're banning burqas, the next thing you know it will be miniskirts.
Somehow, I don't think the Belgians will want to ban miniskirts.
posted by JimK at 8:26 PM
8 Comments:
Is it just me, or does it seem to others that anytime a discussion turns the wrong way for Jim's objectives, he immediately issues two or three new topics to hide it ?
Interesting discussion on "a quiet tragedy in our county" two topics below.
thanks for posting Jim.
Anon, all that happened on that thread was that you (I presume) revealed yourself to be ignorant about the MCPS sex-ed curriculum and insensitive to the feelings of our neighbors who have lost their child. I try to post something on the blog every day on the average -- this is the 2,062nd post here -- and inevitably topics slide down the screen as new ones appear.
JimK
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anon, that was reprehensible. Please use the appropriate pronouns if you want to discuss here.
JimK
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
"Anonymous"
Are you once again trying to make a connection between this child's suicide and Montgomery County's sex education curriculum?
Where or from whom are you taking your cues? Traditional Values Coalition? PFOX? Family Research Council?
Do you get paid by somebody to spout your ridiculous crap here?
"Just because a female loves the outdoors and hiking does NOT make her male.
Just because a male likes to knit does NOT make him female."
And who, exactly, has suggested this here?
"your curriculum would imply differently.
and with Aidan's death, we have the result." What a reprehensible shame that you have to use a tragic event like Aidan's suicide in attempting to support your specious contentions.
"The portions [of the curriculum] that describe being transexual and coming out as transsexual as one of the greatest experiences of one's life or some such nonsense" is a prime example of your continuing distortion and misrepresentation of the curriculum. Please cite actual passages from the curriculum that make this claim.
Lying is a very unbecoming trait that you should make great efforts to avoid.
Unless you have definitive proof of a connection between curriculum and any child's suicide, I suggest that you remain silent, lest you embarrass yourself even more than you have so far.
so you are citing portions of a comment that was never posted ?
how very fair.
Anon, we are watching your comments closely here and deleting what we do not find acceptable. You seem not to understand that a family has been devastated by a child's suicide, friends are grieving in our community. You see this as an opportunity to make personal comments about someone you don't know, and to advance a political agenda of hatred.
We are not going to let you do that here.
Normally we let you spew, because your ugliness gives us a clear example of what we are up against. I cringe though to think of a grieving friend or relative who sees that our site has hosted your heartless sentiments. I notice that stormfront.org is having a discussion of this young boy's suicide, maybe that is a better place for you to present your views.
JimK
Post a Comment
<< Home