Quote :

"THE HAGUE, Netherlands — The Dutch government announced plans Friday for legislation banning full-length veils in public places and other clothing that covers the face — putting the Netherlands at the forefront of a general European hardening toward Muslim minorities. The Netherlands, once considered one of Europe's most welcoming nations for immigrants and asylum seekers, is deeply divided over moves by the government to stem the tide of new arrivals and compel immigrants to assimilate into Dutch society. "The Cabinet finds it undesirable that face-covering clothing — including the burqa — is worn in public places for reasons of public order, security and protection of citizens," Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk said. Basing the order on security concerns apparently was intended to respond to warnings that outlawing clothing like the all-enveloping burqa, worn by some Muslim women, could violate the constitutional guarantee against religious discrimination. The main Dutch Muslim organization CMO has been critical of any possible ban. The idea was "an overreaction to a very marginal problem" because hardly any Dutch women wear burqas anyway, said Ayhan Tonca of the CMO. "It's just ridiculous." In the past, a majority of the Dutch parliament has said it would approve a ban on burqas, but opinion polls ahead of national elections Nov. 22 suggest a shift away from that position, and it is unclear if a majority in the new parliament would still back the government-proposed ban. The issue has resonance throughout Europe. Former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw recently caused a stir by saying he wants Muslim women to abandon the full-face veil — a view endorsed by Prime Minister Tony Blair. In France, the center-right's leading presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy has increasingly been adopting some of the rhetoric of the extreme-right. In Holland, policies associated with the nationalist fringe in 2002 have been co-opted by the center: holding asylum-seekers in detention centers, more muscle for the police and intelligence services, and visa examinations that require would-be immigrants to watch videos of homosexuals kissing and of topless women on the beach. Everyone must learn to speak Dutch, and Muslim clerics must mind what they say in their Friday sermons for fear of deportation. The issue was given added urgency with the 2004 slaying of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by a Muslim fanatic and the failed attempt to expel a Somali-born critic of Islam of her Dutch citizenship. About 1 million Muslims live in the Netherlands, about 6 percent of the population of 16 million, but only a few hundred are believed to regularly wear a burqa. After France banned the wearing of head scarves in public schools, the Dutch government decided to leave that question up to individual schools. Most allow head scarves. [b]The city of Utrecht has cut some welfare benefits to unemployed women who insist on wearing burqas to job interviews. The city claimed the women were using the burqa to avoid working, since they knew they would not be hired.[b/] "

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230277,00.html

I do not agree with this proposed ban. I think this causes just that much more hate and discontent. To me it imfringes on one's freedoms.

11/17/2006 3:06:59 PM

you have to understand the dutch mindset. Their liberal society has been under attack for many years by the muslim immigrants to want to impose sharia law.

11/17/2006 3:10:42 PM

Fuck Islam. I support anything to stem its expansion. It's good that Europe is starting to react this way, the worst thing that could happen is Muslims getting too entrenched there. It's good that they're starting to catch this shit before its so integrated that they can't do anything about it (France).

11/17/2006 3:41:34 PM

i am in support of this legislation

11/17/2006 4:05:29 PM

No, the worst thing that couple happen would be fascism and it is already begining to rise again.

11/17/2006 4:06:51 PM

Oh well. I'll take fascism over sharia.

11/17/2006 4:07:30 PM

The ultra-nationalist movements (or, as they were previously referred to, "fascist" movements) that have occured in response to European unity are, in fact, growing. However, they only persist in poorer areas (like E. Germany), and could be easily diffused through economic reforms, primarily.

Also, they aren't so much of a problem that they pose a threat to any national/EU governments.

[Edited on November 17, 2006 at 4:24 PM. Reason : .]

11/17/2006 4:24:05 PM

there is no way this would fly in the US.

And I think the objective should be to reduce both of these extreme ideologies. Not piss one of them off and feed the fire of the other.

[Edited on November 17, 2006 at 4:34 PM. Reason : !]

11/17/2006 4:32:24 PM

Quote :

"Oh well. I'll take fascism over sharia"

as if there was a difference between the two

11/19/2006 3:10:24 PM

well, one is secular, primarily. i'd have to agree w/ mcdanger, but both would cause me to flee the country.

11/19/2006 3:38:17 PM

I'd take Facism over Sharia as well (although as P&B said, I'd flee the country for either).

However, this kind of legislation infringes on what I perceive as a basic right of people. If they want to wear religious garb, no problem. The places I draw the line are when they actually want to force the wearing of it onto people OR when they try to implement any Sharia law. Fuck that, you don't get your own court system (like they want in Canada and some other countries). If you want that kind of shit, you can go to BFE and put it in place.

I am opposed to this bill for pretty standard reasons, but I do see how some in those countries would want this kind of thing. I can't stand "liberal" countries that tramp on people's rights. Like Germany, where you can't have a Swatsika without the new Gestapo putting you in jail.

11/19/2006 3:48:04 PM

Quote :

"However, this kind of legislation infringes on what I perceive as a basic right of people. If they want to wear religious garb, no problem. The places I draw the line are when they actually want to force the wearing of it onto people OR when they try to implement any Sharia law. Fuck that, you don't get your own court system (like they want in Canada and some other countries). If you want that kind of shit, you can go to BFE and put it in place."

I agree with you on this, and the imposition of religious law should be countered in whatever way that is best fitted to the situation. I would make exceptions for a place like Germany banning the swatstika or SS symbols. That's an unusual circumstance.

Then again, it's not even an outright ban, b/c plenty of stuff gets smuggled in:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo_nazi#Anti-Nazi_legislation

With talk of a "fourth-reich" among neo-Nazis in Germany, they have good reason to be apprehensive , imho. This is not to say that it is likely, but I personally wouldn't want to allow for the planting of those seeds in a country where there once was such a powerful, genocidal regime that too ahold by way of a popular movement. they want to prevent such a popular movement from having a chance again.

V as in, fascist society, in its broadest terms, is not based on relgious law.

I don't know, this is actually a tough one. I think I'm more w/ umbrellaman on this.

[Edited on November 19, 2006 at 5:41 PM. Reason : .]

11/19/2006 5:26:49 PM

im not sure if this is what was meant but I wouldn't exactly say Fascism is secular.

11/19/2006 5:33:16 PM

I want to say that this ban would be bad, but I'm actually torn on this issue. I'm not opposed to Muslims practicing the laws of their religion, but I also don't believe that they can practice said laws if they conflict with the laws of the country that is hosting them. Moving to a country that welcomes you and then trying to force everyone there to follow your rules is a dick move. These Muslims moved to the Netherlands presumably because they thought they could make a better life for themselves, and I applaud them for that. But I also believe that when you move to a country to become a permanent resident, you implicitly agree to follow that country's rules. If the Dutch government decides to follow through with this ban, then tough shit for the Muslims, they can either get use to it or get the hell out.

11/19/2006 5:37:19 PM

Pink, I would like your viewpoint on anti-anti-gay legislation of the type in Canada whereby dissing gays for being gay is illegal.

I don't have a problem with gays, so I don't plan to be out there dissing them for being gay, but I think being able to be an asshole is also a basic right of people.

What is your feelings on those types of laws?

11/19/2006 8:50:12 PM

i support this legislation

11/19/2006 8:51:31 PM

Quote :

"However, they only persist in poorer areas (like E. Germany), and could be easily diffused through economic reforms, primarily. "

actually, the far right parties are growing throughout the population and is not only present in the poorer areas.

11/19/2006 11:11:13 PM

Quote :

"Pink, I would like your viewpoint on anti-anti-gay legislation of the type in Canada whereby dissing gays for being gay is illegal."

Aha, you're baiting me into the same argument from the LGBT center thread. Nothing doing. I know your stance, I know what you'll respond with.

I think I've said enough about that on here. I support what Canada has done with regards to gay rights, and I wish we would be as giving with legal rights for gays.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_in_Canada

As for this dutch law, I really don't know how I feel right now. I'll get back to you later.

[Edited on November 19, 2006 at 11:44 PM. Reason : .]

11/19/2006 11:35:10 PM

Freedom of religion?

11/19/2006 11:44:37 PM

Dutch = USA?

now I already said I dont agree with this ban but this has nothing to do with freedom of religion. My religion can involve smoking a huge about of crack but if thats illegal it doesnt matter wtf my holy book tells me.

11/20/2006 12:46:22 AM

No government that claims to be liberal should regulate clothing, especially too much of it. That's what muslim countries do, after all.

11/20/2006 1:09:45 AM

This isn't a muslim country.

11/20/2006 10:05:59 PM

If they want to wear burkas and pretend they're in some backwards ass country run by some facist motherfuckers than let them.

Quote :

"No government that claims to be liberal should regulate clothing, especially too much of it. That's what muslim countries do, after all."

[Edited on November 20, 2006 at 10:09 PM. Reason : learn2crazycode]

11/20/2006 10:09:37 PM

i just want to know how a burqa is a security concern. maybe they should ban trenchcoats and bathrobes too. and ski masks. and those raincoats with hoods with drawstrings that you can tighten to close off your face.

11/22/2006 4:08:58 AM

Quote :

"Freedom of religion?"

So the point has been made that this law would never fly in the United States.

Yet I recall that when we went to war with the Taliban, one of our primary qualms with them -- as a society -- was that their women were forced to wear burqas. Of course that wasn't the reason for war, but it was certainly a taunt -- a sign of their barbarism.

Ironically, our burqa-allowing society definitely has contributed very directly to its downfall in major Muslim centers of the world.

And in the United States itself, we have very much a laissez faire idea towards these symbols. We don't ban them outright. But you wear them at your own risk.

The courts are well aware that if someone wears a nazi symbol, they're going to have bottles thrown at them. But I seriously doubt they'd ever get a 24-hour police detail just to protect their "speech."

So it is with burqas -- for the Dutch to take a laissez faire attitude towards them, is probably the most uncharitable route. I would imagine that burqas cause quite a lot of public consternation. They are symbols of oppression. Like white, pointy hoods, for example.

Personally, I don't think freedom of religion has much to do with it. A religion that requires women to wear such head-gear is inhumane. And do we really think the women have that much choice in the matter?

Even in our laissez-faire society, we draw the line. Just look at the Warren Jeffs trial. Who's to say polygamy is wrong, and burqas are OK? We the people, that's who.

11/22/2006 4:40:45 AM

Quote :

"forced to wear burqas"

Not all Muslim women are forced to wear burqas. Many of them choose to, because of some feeling that it is moral. You know how we all wear pants and underwear (most of us anyhow) because there's a law that you can't show your junk out on the street. That comes from our sense of morality.

I see your point though, that some women are forced to wear it by their husbands, but I think perhaps changing the law so husbands can't beat up their wives for not wearing a burqa would be a better plan.

11/22/2006 8:00:38 AM

durka durka

11/22/2006 8:05:28 AM

im sure its similar to catholics wearing a cross around their neck.

11/22/2006 10:08:17 AM

What?

11/22/2006 10:10:05 AM

Quote :

"Fuck Islam. I support anything to stem its expansion. It's good that Europe is starting to react this way, the worst thing that could happen is Muslims getting too entrenched there. It's good that they're starting to catch this shit before its so integrated that they can't do anything about it (France)."

McDanger, whats your deal with Islam?

11/22/2006 2:17:18 PM

Quote :

"Not all Muslim women are forced to wear burqas. Many of them choose to, because of some feeling that it is moral."

Sure. In the same sense that, say, teenage brides choose to marry polygamously because Warren Jeffs made them feel it was moral. I guess if you want to call that a choice then, ok, it's a choice. I prefer to call it a cult.

That society should (and does) find such arrangements distasteful is no surprise.

Let me pose this question to you and the religious-freedom crowd: should grown men be allowed to require their daughters to wear burqas, because their religion instructs them to do so?

11/22/2006 3:16:20 PM

That's a tough question. I'd say yes, until the daughter's turn 18.

I mean, if I want to force my kid to wear a jacket everytime it rains, am I really breaking some kind of law?

11/22/2006 3:19:56 PM

Quote :

"should grown men be allowed to require their daughters to wear burqas, because their religion instructs them to do so?"

The koran says nothing about burqas. They got the idea from the passage about Mohammed's wives wearing veils at the market so that they could recognize each other.

I think that the whole concept is retarded.

11/22/2006 3:21:24 PM

If a woman does choose to do so then I don't see any issue with it. its wrong for a law to be made enforcing that they can't.

Also, equating this situation to the FLDS is a little extreme.

11/22/2006 3:24:28 PM

Quote :

"should grown men be allowed to require their daughters to wear burqas, because their religion instructs them to do so?"

Quote :

"I'd say yes, until the daughters turn 18."

Quote :

"If a woman does choose to do so then I don't see any issue with it. its wrong for a law to be made enforcing that they can't. Also, equating this situation to the FLDS is a little extreme."

[Edited on November 22, 2006 at 4:05 PM. Reason : ;l']

11/22/2006 4:04:28 PM

I wish Islam would just go away.

Hagar was a whore, and Ishmael was a brat so Abraham picked Isaac.

He can do that. He's fucking Abraham.

Get over it.

11/22/2006 4:35:03 PM

Hagar was Horrible.

11/22/2006 4:38:57 PM

Father abraham had seven sons, and seven sons had father abraham...

11/22/2006 4:55:31 PM

Bridget, It is quite alright to wish that Islam would go away. I'm sure many Americans (and others) will agree with you. But I just don't like the idea of trying to force it to go away. People have a fundamental right to be as stupid as they want to be and as religious as they want to be, so long as they aren't infringing the rights of others. (IMO anyhow)

11/22/2006 5:24:56 PM

^Oh, don't get me wrong...I would never support affecting public policy or such to get rid of it.

It's just a wish of mine.

11/22/2006 5:26:48 PM

Oh, ok, fair enough.

11/22/2006 5:29:08 PM

Quote :

" McDanger, whats your deal with Islam?"

It's a barbaric, outdated, piece-of-shit ideology/religion/whatever-the-fuck.

11/23/2006 11:22:42 PM

i personally think it is a good idea from the point of security i know the europeans are big on security cameras and stuff and if people are wearing vails (men or women) these aren't going to work

11/24/2006 4:50:36 PM

Perhaps absolute freedom is really just a ticket to form private oppressive organizations. Legislating against those without creating a slippery slope is not easy, but only a fool would think there are simple answers to anything.

Forcing others to wear burkas should definitely be illegal, but some people want to set arbitrary rules for themselves. They're addicted to serving a greater purpose (whether or not it exists), and would feel too small to operate in society without that. Some people are idiots. It's perfectly within their right.

11/24/2006 10:09:38 PM

Quote :

"The koran says nothing about burqas. They got the idea from the passage about Mohammed's wives wearing veils at the market so that they could recognize each other. I think that the whole concept is retarded. "

It also comes from ancient Sumeria in which the sex priestesses who initiated young men into sex wore veils over their heads.

11/24/2006 11:12:37 PM

^ so as of now everything dealing with Burgas is really old.

sounds good

11/25/2006 3:53:20 AM

Quote :

"I'd say yes, until the daughter's turn 18. I mean, if I want to force my kid to wear a jacket everytime it rains"

So do you think child abuse is OK as long as it has a religious justification?

Am I really supposed to believe a jacket is the same thing as a burqa?

Quote :

" The koran says nothing about burqas."

So what? I didn't say the Koran. I said their religion. That includes the teachings and interpretations of any luminaries they follow.

[/obvious]

Quote :

" Also, equating this situation to the FLDS is a little extreme"

How so? For one thing, burqas themselves are fucking crazy. But for another, don't you think they're the tiniest bit symbolic of all the other shit women go through in fundamentalist Islam?

11/25/2006 1:02:16 PM