Canada Kicks Ass
Muslim group moves to ban burka

REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 ... 10  Next



commanderkai @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 5:30 am

Bodah Bodah:
I see your point, some of them might be submissive, agreed. What about the rest of the women ?


And thus lies the problem. Some women will submit to men willingly. Hell, I have had a few girlfriends who like being submissive. They take pleasure from it, and you know what? It's their choice to do so. Some women like wearing collars or burkas for cultural or religious statements (Goths, for a non-Muslim group) and they have that choice too...The problem is "Forced" submission.

And how can you stop forced submission? You really can't. The burka is just the symbol of the problem. Banning the burka would probably make the problem worse, because then the group might not be as easily identified, much like Communists would be harder to identify without Che shirts. Removing those Che shirts does not change them being Communists. Education, police availability, and a harsher court system would be best. And by police availability, as in, maybe women officers to assist Muslim women. Hell, female Muslim police officers. And a harsher court system to crack down on radical mosques and imams.

   



EyeBrock @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:17 am

The problem is that the burkha/niqab is a symbol, an icon of radical religious beliefs.

Radical beliefs from a religion that has been hijacked by anti-western jihadists.

If this was just about clothing choices it would be a non-issue.

   



leewgrant @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:23 am

The blue swimsuit looks like those I have seen in newsreels circa 1910. Must be coming back in fashion. :P

   



DerbyX @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:27 am

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Hasidic Jews, Amish, and Mennonites are not known for persecuting people who do not adhere to their beliefs nor do they strap on bombs and blow themselves up amongst crowds of innocent people. You're right that they don't wish to fit in with society as a whole but the big difference is that they are not a threat to that same society.


So what? I don't see them invading our country like we did theirs. I might make a connection between what Israel does and then claim that by consequence we ban jews from wearing clothing that sets them apart. Same thing here. You are lumping all muslims in together based on the actions of some and quite frankly most if not all of those actions are because we attacked them not because they hate us. If they want to wear religious apparel then barring certain conditions so be it. That's freedom baby yeah.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:
We've also banned slavery and Muslims in many countries, such as Egypt, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Libya, and etc. openly practice slavery. In California in the past year an Egyptian family was prosecuted for bringing their 10-year-old female slave to Los Angeles and continuing to hold her as chattel. Are you saying we should be more tolerant of their values and allow them to hold slaves while we consider slavery to be repulsive?

http://jezebel.com/5119899/egyptian-gir ... ornia-home


Oh that's a crock. I'm sure when they want to attack the "evils" of our society all they need to do is post any number of incidences concerning our children killing each other in shooting sprees, fathers murdering their entire family, mothers drowning their children, etc. I'm sure the sexualization of our children, something that alarms even our own people is something they point at as a consequence of our moral decay. What we call oppression they see as laws designed to avoid the problems we have such as that associated with drugs, alcohol, etc.

I'll also point out once again that you find fault with burkhas because of the violence you say is associated with it but then it was your country that invaded Iraq despite it being one of the least religiously fundie countries in the region and ended up fighting the very religious fundies Saddam was accused of oppressing. I'd say you should see to your own behaviour first before condeming others because that invasion with heads and shoulders worse then a few religious fanatics holed up in a cave and did more to fuel this fundamentalism then any cartoon ever could.

One last point. You take a very negative view of Canada's hate speech laws and reject the idea of laws that restrict freedom to speak ones mind even if what they are saying is morally repugnant. This is much the same. Even if they wear something that represents a morally repugnant ideology they should be allowed to do so if its their wish.

Happy (Canadian) Thanksgiving. [B-o]

   



BeaverFever @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:50 am

KorbenDeck KorbenDeck:
The HUGE differences between Christianity is and Islam is that Christianity continues to "evolve" so to speak. Where as reinterpreting the Quran is not tolerated or widespread. As should be plain to anyone who has examined the Islamic sources, to take the violence out of Islam would require it to jettison two things: the Quran as the word of Allah and Muhammad as Allah's prophet. In other words, to pacify Islam would require its transformation into something that it is not. There is a new interpretation of the Bible coming out that doesn't even use the word man anymore but people or humans. What the scary thought is the fact that a violent ideology has attracted such a large following.


well, as already pointed out, it is not Christianity that evolved, it was society that evolved and became less concerned with what religious leaders have to say. Churches still call for the abolition of birth control, gay rights, "obscenity" etc but westerners just say "well thats very cute, but "no." The Quran, like the bible, has parts that teach peace and tolerance and others that advocate violence in defence of the faith, and it is up to follower to determine what those passages mean in the real world. "Pacifying" Islam would be no different than pacifying Christianity. Dont forget, the most pacifist parts of the bible come from the story of Jesus, and Jesus is also in the Quran, in fact he is the most quoted prophet in the Quran. The passage you quoted says exactly that, that people will pick and chose what parts of their religion the adhere to and what parts to ignore. In most religions, those who are most devout and literalist are almost by definition more hostile and militant than moderates. And there are all kinds of Islamic sects and denominations, all with their own interpretations. There are mystical or gnostic sects such as Suffis as well as "Schools" of religious thought such as Hannafi and Hambelli, among others that have different philosophical interpretations.

I spent 3 weeks in Egypt just a few years ago, and I can tell you that the vast majority of men there didnt have beards, wear turbans or even "Arab" clothing. Most western-style clothing, short hair and clean shaven. The number of women who even bothered covering their hair was maybe 50-50, and I noticed that among those who did cover their hair, these appeared to be mostly younger women in their teens or early 20's, which I assumed meant they were unmarried and still under daddy's roof. I only remember seeing a small handful of women covered head to toe the whole time I was there and didnt see any women walking behind their man or stooping to keep their head below that of a man or any of those other things we hear about. I went to an upscale mall in Alexandria and there were TONS of young hot Egyptian chicks in skin-tight outfits with sexy make-up and highlights in their hair. In fact, Eyptians didnt seem to have a problem with tight clothing at all, only bare skin. I didnt see any women in shorts or short skits (but it was February and pretty cold), but plenty of clingy outifts.

As to the claim that "slavery is openly practiced" well thats just false. Dont get me wrong, in most under-developed countries, there are of course exploitative labour conditions, some of which might include slavery, but it is not any more openly practised or legal in the middle east than in Vietnam or Nicaragua or anywhere else that has problems with enforcement. We hear similar cases with Filipinos and Mexicans here being forced to work as a "slave" by some host family.

   



Patish @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:04 am

Burka is worn in radical muslim countries.
They live according to sharia law.
Sharia law mean - no freedom, baby. :roll:
Do you want to live according to sharia law ?

   



Patish @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:06 am

leewgrant leewgrant:
The blue swimsuit looks like those I have seen in newsreels circa 1910. Must be coming back in fashion. :P


Are you serious ? :wink:

   



DerbyX @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:07 am

Patish Patish:
Burka is worn in radical muslim countries.
They live according to sharia law.
Sharia law mean - no freedom, baby. :roll:
Do you want to live according to sharia law ?


Do you want to live by rabbinical law? Does not wanting to mean you should ban hasidic jews from wearing their religious apparel?

I thought so. :roll:

BTW, allowing them to wear burkhas doesn't in any way mean they are going to force sharia on all of us nor that they can live under it to the exclusion of Canadian law.

   



ASLplease @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:13 am

I still think the publicity is important. It gets the women thinking about the oppression that they are under.

   



EyeBrock @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:15 am

Oooh look! A bunch of hasidic jews with suicide vests on.....!

Hey, apparently the hasidic jews are on a jihad in Afghanistan and are getting jews from around the world to fight NATO.....

Hey, did you hear about the hasidic jewish plot to blow up parts of Toronto?

   



BeaverFever @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:16 am

Proculation Proculation:
I will be happy only when I see something like "Canadian group moves to ban Islam".


See statements like this are part of the problem. How is a moderate, peaceful muslim supposed to feel when comments like this are constantly being made?

   



DerbyX @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:19 am

EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Oooh look! A bunch of hasidic jews with suicide vests on.....!

Hey, apparently the hasidic jews are on a jihad in Afghanistan and are getting jews from around the world to fight NATO.....

Hey, did you hear about the hasidic jewish plot to blow up parts of Toronto?


Irrelevant. The debate is about not wanting to fit in. I might point out the crimes of Israel or that we invaded the lands of those wearing burkhas but that's besides the point and it would just be a fight.

In Canada we have rights and freedoms and that includes the right to wear religious apparel.

That's the Canada I was born into and the Canada I want to keep and I don't mean this as an immigration thing. No offence intended.

   



ASLplease @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:22 am

We need to balance the right to wear religious apparel with heated debate and criticism for what it represents. Then maybe someday the women will be liberated.

   



ShepherdsDog @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:24 am

EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Oooh look! A bunch of hasidic jews with suicide vests on.....!

Hey, apparently the hasidic jews are on a jihad in Afghanistan and are getting jews from around the world to fight NATO.....

Hey, did you hear about the hasidic jewish plot to blow up parts of Toronto?
Then they were going to redevelop it into shops, delis, some shopping centres and residential towers with a few Jewellry shops thrown in here and there...maybe, apark or two...who knows....oy!

   



leewgrant @ Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:26 am

ASLplease ASLplease:
We need to balance the right to wear religious apparel with heated debate and criticism for what it represents. Then maybe someday the women will be liberated.


Women are such a subordinated group in Islam can you really find out what they prefer. In Afghanistan is gets to 45C during the day. Hard to imagine anyone wearing a burka voluntarily.

   



REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 ... 10  Next