That's chutzpah.
European Politics
- Thread starter Forostar
- Start date
RTC
Libera et impera!
So Germany is discussing banning "the burqa" (i.e. complete veiling of women in Muslim context) in public. It is argued that we should emulate such laws passed in Belgium (2010) and France (2011), because apparently, these countries have not experienced problems with radical Islamism since doing so.
I don't see any logic behind outlawing the dress of one particular group on the grounds that it might lead to extremism. Taking legal action against people who put directly put pressure on women to dress like this, maybe, but you don't stop a drift to extremism by outlawing traditions associated with it. It just comes across as a hamfisted threat to the entire Muslim community and a move to placate Western traditionalists and the right wing, which of course has its own extremists.
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
No, this is a splendid idea. Ban the symptom (the clothing), that will obviously cure the problem (radical islamism) and cause all Muslims in the country to be happy, well integrated citizens.
Ariana
Black-and-white leopard
I'm not so sure things are so simple. In my opinion, banning burqas has nothing to do with eliminating radical Islam, that's not the aim. It's really simplistic to think that politicians or authorities would enforce such a rule because they would assume it would help integration. Of course they know it won't.
The (official) reason behind such a ban is that women wearing burqas are more difficult to control when it comes to suspicions of smuggling goods or dangerous objects. Women wearing burqas would be more likely to be subjected to searching and frisking, and of course, they would make a huge fuss about it.
And yes, we have the same ban, although it's not enforced nation-wide and each municipality decided whether to enforce it or not. Although I'm far from believing it would solve all the problems Europe has, I would not be as quick to dismiss it as bullshit.
The (official) reason behind such a ban is that women wearing burqas are more difficult to control when it comes to suspicions of smuggling goods or dangerous objects. Women wearing burqas would be more likely to be subjected to searching and frisking, and of course, they would make a huge fuss about it.
And yes, we have the same ban, although it's not enforced nation-wide and each municipality decided whether to enforce it or not. Although I'm far from believing it would solve all the problems Europe has, I would not be as quick to dismiss it as bullshit.
It's the fact that it zeroes in on Muslims, when the same could be said of other garments. The wearer hiding their face is the biggest potential security concern, but there's similar criticism of people wearing hooded tops and baseball caps or other headgear. Although you're more likely to be stopped by police if you're wearing your hood up, and definitely if you're wearing a balaclava, hoodie bans aren't usually an official thing.
Ariana
Black-and-white leopard
Again, this is too general. Not all Muslim women wear burqas.
And yes, I agree that hoodies can be used to hide people's faces, but they don't conceal their whole bodies. It's perfectly possible to hide an AK-47 or a bag of explosives under a burqa.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
If anything NOT banning burqas is the better idea to combat radical Islamism, because burqa is a dead giveaway for radical Islamist thought. You can track people down much easier.
Hijab isn't a giveaway, some moderate, even secular Muslim women wear hijab. Not the case with burqas, however.
Hijab isn't a giveaway, some moderate, even secular Muslim women wear hijab. Not the case with burqas, however.
Such a ban in Canada would be unconstitutional, and rightfully so.
Certain dresses do. Mumus and other tribal wear are very shapeless. What about wedding dresses? Some of those could easily hide an AK.
Ariana
Black-and-white leopard
Wedding dresses? How many people wearing wedding dresses have you seen walking around? If we keep this going, I might want to wear a sack for potatoes and hide an AK in. I don't know what other countries' bans state, but the one imposed here is not limited to burqas. It bans all attire that covers the face AND the body, including balaclavas, scarves and other garments that turn you into a shapeless walking lump. So no discrimination there.
I've never seen a balaclava that covers the entire body, same with scarves. So it would be illegal for me to wear a mumu and a scarf at the same time?
Ariana
Black-and-white leopard
If your face and body are covered entirely, yes.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
Ariana
Black-and-white leopard
Like I said, it's not a nation-wide ban; same as in France, as far as I know. It's up to local authorities to determine whether the ban is applicable. Generally speaking, what is illegal is wearing garments or accessories that prevent the identification of an individual. So yes, ski gear might be illegal too, according to the law.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
I do not think that would fly in the US constitutionally ... there are some exceptions .. schools can have dress codes, banks can refuse entry if you are covering yourself up like that, but a general you cannot fully cover up walking down the street would not fly.
That said, I think it is problematic that a section of society essentially requires that women dress like that. I see both sides of the argument. I see some women like that here .. fully covered when it is 110 degrees outside and their husband (assuming) is wearing shorts and a t-shirt.
That said, I think it is problematic that a section of society essentially requires that women dress like that. I see both sides of the argument. I see some women like that here .. fully covered when it is 110 degrees outside and their husband (assuming) is wearing shorts and a t-shirt.