I don't want to make an unfair blanket statement about a large number of people — most of whom, let me perfunctorily emphasize, are good, decent and, of course, above all, delightfully peaceful — but how much more evidence do we need that the adherence to Islam is, at the very least, intellectually stunting and, at the worst, a raving psychological disorder?
Okay, I'll even qualify that a bit. The fanatical adherence to Islam.
The evidence continues to pile up like refuse during a New York City garbage strike. Cartoon riots, endless terrorism and strife, a fascination with beheadings, the insane preoccupation with the tiny country of Israel, still more cartoon riots, societies that revere and encourage suicide bombers, a profound aversion to post-Dark Ages human progress, and, oh, did I mention riots over some silly cartoons?
Atheists might argue that the fanatical adherence to any religion is intellectually stunting, but we’re not talking about the unobtrusive Amish here, who just shun the modern world and keep to themselves. With Islam, we’re talking about a religious force that has the power to not only keep a huge swath of the world in darkness and ignorance, but to disrupt and destabilize other parts of the world that have managed to advance over the centuries.
It might be appealing to think that when Islam is practiced within the context of decent democratic societies in the West rather than the typical corrupt and dictatorial regimes that constitute most of the Islamic world, that intellectual stunting thing would be muted in favor of rationality. But then you go and read that a recent poll found that 40 percent of British Muslims want Sharia law in the U.K. And 20 percent sympathized with the 7/7 London subway bombers, and the only thing you can think is, nope, ‘fraid not.
It’s a bit dispiriting if you have high hopes of Islam and the West being able to coexist in some kind of warm and fuzzy multicultural tolerance. Instead, it just looks more and more like a true clash of civilizations that’s becoming as hard to ignore as, well, a New York City garbage strike.
But sometimes it's the little things that really nettle. Take, for instance, a 22-year-old Dutch-born Muslim woman named Hope. Her native country, the Netherlands, is thinking about becoming the first European country to ban the burqa and other Muslim face veils. If it does, Hope says she'll resort to wearing a surgical mask to dress in accordance with her religious beliefs.
Article comments
1 - RedTard
The line of reasoning you use to defend this decision is not all that much different than what the radical muslims use to ban women from wearing western apparel in the first place. You think they're culture is backwards, they think yours is immoral.
It's always 'progress' when your taking away the rights of some group you dislike. In the end, you're no different than they are.
2 - Bliffle
People who insist on hiding their face and their identity do worry one. Usually one associates masks with bandits and thieves.
3 - francis dutton
The main problem with any Muslim living in any developed Western country is this:
They have forgotten that they are the "guests" and as such have no "right" to impose their beliefs and habits on the "hosts".
great Britain has welcomed many disparate groups into its society in acccordance with our historical ("colonial") moral obligations. Unfortunately the wooly thinkers (polite term for the far-left political mindset) failed to appreciate that by trumpeting the advantages of a rainbow society, the other side of the equation has been silenced (until recently).
Anyone is welcome to come to Great Britain and become a citizen PROVIDED that person accepts the basic rules and norms of that society. They are coming to a country with centuries of CHRISTIAN history and with a political system renowned for its tolerance of poltical and religious beliefs. It behoves them, therefore to accept that the the way we function cannot change just because it offends their personal beliefs. Noone forces them to come, if they find those rules and ways of behaviour offend them then go live in a society more in keeping with their values but DONT expect us to alter our ways to suit them.
So, to all Muslims who want to wear veils, who dont want to swear allegiance to our Head of State and who dont want their new home to conduct its traditional foreign policy and who prefer to cheer their "old" homeplace's sporting heroes, I say go back to where you feel more comfortable but dont expect those of us who have lived there for centuries to change to suit you...unless of course I can go to Pakistan, Saudi arabia or elsewhere and get those societies to change to suit me!
4 - chip
I thought this article was one of the best I have read on the burqa issue. I myself am a western woman, from the " counter-culture of the SanFrancisco area where pretty much anything could go, and went! I really think that certain infadels would wear the burqa down castro street as a sort of kinky bondage thing, and folks would giggle about it, but it would not be banned. Neither are leather collars or whips. A lot of Muslim women wear their outfits 'cause they want to. Just like a lot of Bimbos in this country wear high stalleto heels, and crap like that. So, the problem starts when you tell somebody (especially women) that they have to do it! But seriously just like how the chineese built the great wall of china to keep out the foreigners, Islam needs to build a big wall and call all their people back home. Same with Israel. And if they blow each other up, well, that's their own problem. The rest of us can get back to our fun hedonistic living baby! CALLING ALL MUSLIMS, PLEASE GO BACK HOME! we don't need 'yer stinking oil anymore, we have wind, solar, hydro, ethanol, and french fry grease!!
Bye, Bye....loosers.
5 - sr
Chip#4, Dam that was good. You made my week. Thanks for makeing me laugh so hard on this Friday evening.
6 - ash
Everyone has the right to wear whatever he want. to wear naked clothes or respective clothes, or is it acrime nowadays to wear such respective clothes
7 - Arch Conservative
FRancis I couldn't have said it better myself. Here in America we have a similiar problem. The gay and lesbian movement here is telling the Catholic church that it must change to not only accept the gay lifestyle but approve of it.
Imagine that...........a small group of people telling a 2000 year old institution that it must change to satisfy thier views and desires.
In today's America the "wooly thinkers" we call them moonbats, call themselves "progressives" and are some of the most narrow minded, hypocritical, facist people on the planet.
8 - gazelle
a burqa is no different from from a psuedonym, a nickname, a mask, a worn identity - if done by choice, and in some cases this is so.
its a bit like anonymizer in the public websphere/blogoshere, where one wants to hide ones identity to escape unwanted theft of it, by assuming a particular one via a proxy or whatever.
what can really be assumed about an identity which is not by choice but is forced!?
1. that it is women who are involved
this might be true as far as the burqa is concerned, but it is also a tool against invasive sexual harrassment, whatever your definition of invasive. this implies that it is not necessarily a tool/symbol of sexual oppression but also one of anonymous female sexual assertion as 'woman', if so desired. In these cases it is so ironical that it also becomes a symbol negative stereotyping and ridicule based on association with an 'evil religion'. certain assumptions in stereotypes linger.
otoh burqa or no burqa, men/women are supposed in almost every culture, nudist or not, to regulate what to see/observe/stare at... the general necessity of being a little modest about one's instincts, to avoid self destruction.
2. that it is islam that legislates it
there is no strict injunction, only ones concerning modesty, covering hair ....
secondly it is also there in other religions hindus, sikhs... see western veils in wikipedia
3. that its patriarchal
this i am likely to agree with, that the society might be enforcing the code of the burqa or veil forcefully to protect a certain code of 'tradition' or custom, with special emphasis on regulating womens behavior, movement...and hence mens'.
this case/charge of patriarchy is entirely different from the above cases and may validate clauses such as 'treatment of women like cattle' - whether the burqa is involved or not. it is also un-islamic in being tribal and customary rather than rising above them, and in fact reversing this trend in the islamic spirit. this is the feminism struggle in-built inside the body of islam, as in other religions - and one of the strongest reasons why muslims have been eager to modernize, in varying degrees, during the past 150 years? matriarchal tendencies do hold the balance.
consider the review of murata's The Tao of Islam: A Sourcebook on Gender Relationships in Islamic Thought
so yes the last sort of reason - 3. patriarchal - is for me the most convincing argument against the coercive burqa/veiling in any religion but reasons 1. and 2. are absolutely neutral concerning the burqa and not an argument towards banning it.
and if really one is convinced that patriarchy is at the heart of the problem then a measure such as banning the burqa/veil will not do the trick. Other rights will be trampled, and also not achieve its purpose, like the iraq war...
Weakening patriarchy & taking off/on the burqa may happen simultaneously, but for reasons which are economic/social/environmental which are much more powerful and maybe much more subtle.
best
9 - Norm
Can't wear t-shirts with profanity in lots of places.
How about...
No shirt, no shoes, no service.
Can't Identify you with a hidden camera in the 7-11, no service.
No wait... everyone nude... no hidden weapons!
10 - Zainub
I wear a "burqa". No actually I wear abayas. These are similar to burqas but different only in the sense that they're side open (or sometimes not open at all so you have to wear them from the top, instead of putting them on as coat when they're side open). Burqas are front open. Abayas as such are a new, cooler version of burqas, especially since Abayas are available in lots of different colours, whereas burqas are usually black only.
Anyhow, I'll come to my real point. I'm sure Dutch women aren't dumb, they can speak for them selves. They don't need a certain parliment member to tell them that they're opressed and need liberation. Hope certainly doesn't seem opressed. And speaking of equal rights, how come a Dutch non-muslim has the right to walk naked if she wants to, but a Dutch Muslim women is prevented from wearing what she pleases? Doesn't this become an insult to the concept of equal rights? You want to put in laws regulating religious practice, do it but then don't blow your own trumpet about being a free, liberal and exteremly tolerant populace at the same time. It will only reek of hypocrisy and double standards. If Dutch people were really that tolerant, they they would not have had a problem with women wearing burqas.
And that argument about it being a security hindrance is on extremely slipper slope. Hundreds and millions of women in Muslims countries and various non-Muslims countries wear it, and it's not a security hindrence over there, so either Denmark has security measures that are much, much, much stringent then the rest of the worlds (which I highly doubt personally) or they're just making a lame excuse.
And since when did practicing hijab and abaya become associated with hiding your identity? My body is my body, it is my property, is it is simply put, mine, I can do anything I want with it. It is not an object of display, certainly not an object of public display. It is my choice and my right to display it to whom so ever I want. By wearing the burqa I simply restrict the no. of people who can view my body. Or in other words I chose who I need to show my body to and who not to. It is not about becoming anonymous.
11 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"No wait... everyone nude... no hidden weapons!"
Norm, this is not a solution you want to shoot for. Not everyone is a sex kitten between 16 and 30 or a muscular stud between the same ages.
Seriously, I agree with Zainub. Plenty of Moslem here women wear burqas or abayas, and the only problem I have with the idea is that they should not be forced to do so. Bear in mind I'm a police volunteer whose job is to watch out for terrorists - i.e. suicide bombers with bombs under their clothing.
You learn to see the woman as opposed to the bomb and to read the face (which tells a lot about the person).
12 - chantal stone
from the Western perspective, the burqa does appear to be very oppressive, and for most of us, we can't imagine WHY a woman would choose to to cover herself in a way that makes her appear subservient and compliant to a perceived-oppressive culture and religion. however, if the Dutch are so worried about equal rights for women, then they clearly need to respect a woman's decision and 'right' to cover herself in honor of her faith.
13 - Arch Conservative
I think everyone is still missing the point that Francis so articulately laid out.
When a person emigrates to a new nation that already has it's own established culture the onus is on the individual to abide by the rules and customs of that nations society and not the other way around.
Imagine if large numbers of Chrsitians were to emigrate to middle east Muslim nations and demand that they be allowed to publicly express thier Christian customs.
14 - gazelle
It is stupid to fight over the female head and body - exposed, hidden or ignored - anyway
but consider issues such as islam allows contraception but not abortion (? - more complicated subject than i know)
allows for organ transplants, and among shias legalizes temporary marriage for a short period of time - with specified responsibilities/payments...
zainub, thanks for telling us about your abaya - could you add how your wearing it in public or not is different - level of comfort, freedom, what it allows, etc.
there are of course variations of burqas, abayas, scarves and their contexts, they may also identify the particular community tribe or sect, like men's attire, like the light colored flowery bohris. some are made fun of such as the only-eyes -exposed "ninja" or the pashtun white shuttle-cock, and its amazing blue afghan variation.
chantal, you are correct in pointing out 'perceptions'. This is because of distance - genuine gaps of knowing the insider perspective/s. The perceptions are true but in some cases/scenarios. lets rightly not reduce the complexity and variation to black/white.
best
15 - gazelle
#13 no need to imagine or immigrate - look at lebanon or syria for instance - where the tolerance is accepted. There are bones of contention, but its not the abaya.
live and let live according to your own rules. I dont know about nude beaches - i dont think they are very christian.