RSSBurka bans
Apr 30
In Europe these days it seems to be all the rage to ban or restrict Islamic face and/or body veils. The latest: Belgian lawmakers pass burka ban that applies anywhere in public.
Here’s the thing, though: proponents claim this is all in the name of ensuring freedom and equality for women. Yet, doesn’t a ban on a few specific kinds of clothing for women restrict their freedom? I don’t like burka’s, myself, but I don’t assume I should be telling anyone else what to wear. I’m also not opposed to defining some limits. Some jobs, that are largely based on personal interaction, would be hampered by a full face and body covering.
Apr 30, 2010 @ 11:49:25
What exactly does religious freedom mean in this case?
It’s one thing to say that people are free to wear burkas.
Its quite another for a father to be free to exercise his religious requirement to beat his daughters for not wearing burkas.
The real question is, when will we have freedom *from* religion?
I think a person should be free to choose a religion, and free to decide not to abide by some or all of its tenets.
The problem is when people demand the religious freedom to spread hate speech about other religions and cultures.
That’s what people are really furious about. The ability of some religions to be free from criticism while they preach that everyone else are infidel dogs. Even in North America, there are people preaching hate while hiding behind freedom of speech and religion.
While the burka ban will not do any good, it does illustrate that by abusing their freedoms, they risk losing them.
May 03, 2010 @ 06:27:22
I agree, and assume, that burkas are often symbolizing repression. I don’t like them at all. But, it’s also true that some people wear them of their own choice. How do we let ourselves be OK with taking away some peoples personal and religious freedom because others are abusing it?
The real answer is to try to solve the root cause, but that will take a long time – probably generations.
May 04, 2010 @ 12:00:31
Ok, now it’s just getting stupid. Some ‘expert’ is claiming that the NY Times Square car bomb was in retaliation for the recent episode of South Park that threatened to, but never did, display an image of the prophet Muhammed.
I thought it was bad enough that Comedy Central censored the episode, bleeping the word “Muhammed”, ostensibly to protect their staff from the vague death threats of some muslim website.
It’s as if everyone is convinced that death threats are an acceptable and appropriate response from muslims. Which is odd because I thought issuing death threats was illegal, regardless of the motive.
The right thing to do is to dare the terrorists to attack, and when they do, arrest them and try them as the common criminals they are! Don’t give into their demands, or they’ll just keep demanding!
I understand the need to be culturally sensitive. As Jesus said, in that South Park episode, “People get very offended when they see religious figures depicted in ways that— Buddha! Don’t do coke in front of the children!”