If you can wear bikni,why can’t I wear burqa?

Belgium votes to ban burqa in public

BRUSSELS: Belgium became Europe’s first country to vote for a ban on the full Islamic veil or burqa, sparking dismay among Muslims and warnings of a dangerous precedent with France set to follow suit.

On Thursday night, barring two abstentions, all 136 legislators of the lower house of the Belgian federal parliament supported a nationwide ban on clothes or veils that do not allow the wearer to be fully identified. But the bill, which makes wearing of the burqa a criminal offence punishable with a fine of $20-34 and/or a jail sentence of up to seven days, will not come into force for weeks and may have to be re-examined if early elections are called as Belgium battles a political crisis.[..........]

Veil a ‘walking prison’ for women, say Belgian MPs

BRUSSELS: Belgium’s ban on the burqa will be imposed in streets, public gardens and sports grounds or buildings ‘‘meant for public use or to provide services’’ to the public, according to the bill.

‘‘We’re the first country to spring the locks that have made a good number of women slaves, and we hope to be followed by France, Switzerland, Italy, and the Netherlands; countries that think,’’ said liberal lawmaker Denis Ducarme.[.........]

In France, forcing women to wear burqa will draw jail term

PARIS: France will jail and impose huge fines on anyone who forces a Muslim woman to wear a full-face veil, according to a leaked version of a proposed law revealed on Friday.

While women will face only a 150-euro penalty if they choose to don a burqa or a niqab, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to slap one-year prison terms and $20,000 fines on those who make others wear them.[.............]

Burqa and naqab have no place in Denmark, says PM

COPENHAGEN: The face-covering burqa and niqab veils worn by some Muslim women have no place in Denmark, Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen said on Wednesday, adding his government was considering restricting them.

Rasmussen stopped short, however, of calling for a ban on the veils, noting “legal and other limits”. “The government’s position is clear: the burqa and the niqab have no place in Danish society. They symbolise a view of women and humanity that we totally oppose and that we want to combat in Danish society,” Rasmussen told reporters.[.............]

It amazes me how they cal llimiting somebody’s freedom as being PROGRESSIVE..and people in the other side of the world,including the majority in my country itself hail such actions as YO YO..Shame on you guys..If it was something against helping women who were forced to do so,I would be the first one to talk for them..But is this what we need? You think you have defeated them..But I am sure that your consious mind will feel guilty if you have atleast a drop of humanity.

I hated burqa or hijab as you call it,till this date.But now I have started loving it and I WILL WEAR IT ONE DAY,not because I endourse its intention,but just to let you know that you all are donkeys who bray at others dumb sanctions.

Even if muslim women,WHO WANT TO WEAR IT, are blocked from doing so,they will meet their Lord ..You can’t stop that.

Duh,I feel disgusted for having wasted my precious time writing against sickos..

What is it that Nuns around the world wear?Why is it that their attire doens’t convey the message of “walking prison”..Because they belong to that religion held by rich developed countires? Why is it that they don’t “symbolise a view of women and humanity that we totally oppose and that we want to combat insociety”


I just hated that black cloak stuff till this day..But trust me,from today I will advocate it to a many people as much as I can..Stop me if you can.. If you can wear bikni,why can’t I wear burqa?

Image copy-pasted from  http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200904/r360385_1662308.jpg

About these ads
  1. I agree with you on this. But the French law punishing a person who forces a woman to wear a burqua is ok don’t you think?

    I think the real reason for this is that some countries are trying to preserve their “look”. Which is why the swiss recently banned the construction of new minarets. The Danish are paranoid about their culture disappearing compared to the sheer size of the rest of the world.

    This is about countries trying to prevent an islamic “invasion”. Saying that it’s protecting women is a handy excuse, but doesn’t hold up to close scrutiny. If sikhs were to migrate to these countries in large numbers, there would surely be a backlash against the turban. But they wouldn’t be able to do anything about it since you can’t justify the ban under the guise of something else.

      • Nimmy
      • May 3rd, 2010

      Bhagwad,yours is the right point,it is not about women,but about fear of Islamic invasion.. Maybe they are trying to preserve their look or culture,but it this how it should be done..You may ask why should i bother about something happening in France..See,now it has happened in Belgium and Denmark too..and it will spread..

      will be back later..

        • Nimmy
        • May 3rd, 2010

        Isn’t it interesting that the burden of culture preservarence falls on women,as usual..But no so-called feminist is seen talking against this ban against personal freedom..This reveals their true colour.. So,what they are bothered is not about women,but about identifying themselves with western so-called liberalism..ha ha…

  2. I wanted to blog about this too.

    I am sure you are fine with, ‘In France, forcing women to wear burqa will draw jail term’?

      • Nimmy
      • May 1st, 2010

      Of course I am,and i’ve mentioned in in post too..

    • Ramchander
    • May 1st, 2010

    It is perfectly in order that the Belgian Parliamentary committee has unanimously voted to ban the wearing of ‘face-covering veils in public’. As being debated in all societies, covering the face without revealing one’s identity while enjoying the right to see everybody cannot be allowed under any circumstances. In these days of uncertainty, one has to be alert and circumspect about people and things around. In a civilized polity, every individual has a right to recognize the person or persons, he/she is encountering; and simultaneously that individual has a duty not to hide or confuse his/her own identity. One has to follow this nicety while enjoying freedom in public places. After all, civil life is not a hide-and-seek game; nor we are living in dark ages. Hence, the practice of face-covering is untenable. To speak against this ban is to display one’s bigotry and ignorance.

    • Your logic might hold water if security was given as the reason for the ban. It wasn’t. As it stands right now, we must debate the ban on the reasons stated by the government.

      In addition, I should have a right to hide my identity in public as long as I don’t have to show photo identification. Suppose I have a disfigured or scarred face, or my eye has been gouged out? I reserve the right to cover whatever part of my body I want, whenever I want. Because it’s my body, and not the government’s.

      “In a civilized polity, every individual has a right to recognize the person or persons, he/she is encountering”

      No they don’t.

      “that individual has a duty not to hide or confuse his/her own identity”

      No they don’t.

      If recognizing someone was such an issue, why not mandate that all helmets be transparent? And why not start limiting the kind of glasses people wear just to make sure they’re recognized? Sorry. I like my privacy and if I don’t want, I won’t show my face to anyone in public.

      • Nimmy
      • May 1st, 2010

      :) Do you have any idea of what the ban is all about? Whether it is about niqab or hijab? Please do your reading before arguing..Ban is on headscarf,not niqab alone… Stare at my face,as much as you want so as to avoid the pain of “covering the face without revealing one’s identity while enjoying the right to see everybody cannot be allowed under any circumstances”..But why do you want to stare at my hair? ha ha,people are silly,they have no idea what are they fighting…

      ” In a civilized polity, every individual has a right to recognize the person or persons, he/she is encountering; ” Really?? what if somebody says that my face isn’t enough of recognition? What else would you ban me from wearing?

      ” To speak against this ban is to display one’s bigotry and ignorance.” Mind your language.. If you can talk for the ban,I have equal right to talk against it.If that makes me bigot and ignorant,how different are you?..

      Ok,I don’t want to speak bad words and make my blog a rotten one…We are talking,not fighting…

      Forget it,I am simply trying to argue for no use..

  3. religion is very personal..to wat degree do we follow what our religion demands of us is also something we decide..or at least we shud be allowed to decide… so its not really fair for governments to pass laws like this… that said i also think its not right to force people to follow a law.. so if inFrance, forcing women to wear burqa can coz u to land in a jail, it doesnt sound all wrong to me…

      • Nimmy
      • May 3rd, 2010

      Hai Mandy.long time since you came here..Glad to hear from you..

      “that said i also think its not right to force people to follow a law.. so if inFrance, forcing women to wear burqa can coz u to land in a jail, it doesnt sound all wrong to me…”

      Of course,without any doubt,it is good and IT MUST REMAIN SO that forcing women is punished. That is what we need..But forcing them not to use,even if they want to,is not fair,isn’t it? If that is fair,what is individual freedom and liberation all about?

  4. If u show it ALL……then it okay.
    No problem.
    If u cover it ALL……then its not okay.Lots of problem.

    Misguided liberalism.

    The fun part:

    If you tell a bikini wearing woman to COVER a little…..YOU WILL BE CALLED A “NARROW MINDED” MORAL POLICE!!!!

    If you tell a burqa wearing woman to SHOW a little…..then YOU ARE A GREAT LIBERAL!!!!

    Very curious case..isn’t it.

      • Nimmy
      • May 3rd, 2010

      :) True Pundit..As people evolve, equality of all people becomes what we move toward not away from. ..

  5. But having said that……IT IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO SEE “AT LEAST” THE FACE OF THE PERSON U ARE TALKING TO.
    THATS A “VERY IMPORTANT PART” OF COMMUNICATION.”

    Cheers!

    Note: This post provides fodder for my next post. LOL :-)

  6. why there is no freedom to wear what they want??? I am with you sister on this….

    there is nothing called freedom in this world… somebody always tries to impose their thoughts and convictions on others… SIGH..

      • Nimmy
      • May 3rd, 2010

      True Kanagu..Interestingly,no group can blame the other and act superior.. If muslims are victimsed,the same muslims in another part of the world,are doing the same thing to others..So my point is not that some are goats are some are foxes,but that,some foxes,pretend to be sheeps…

  7. I personally feel a true liberal and democratic society is one which doesn’t restrict it’s citizens as long as they follow the law… According to me, it’s crossing the line when a government legislates what people can or cannot wear on their body…These laws will only damage relations between Muslim and non-Muslim people by breeding resentment and victimhood amongst Muslims…

    I agree with Bhagwad when he says that these countries are enacting these laws to protect their white Christian culture and look…Which is fine since it is their country…Now, don’t get me wrong, but if people don’t like these laws, they don’t have to live there…Nobody is forcing people to migrate to France or Belgium…If immigrants want to take advantage of their host countries, they need to follow their laws whether they like them or not…

    • I agree with Bhagwad when he says that these countries are enacting these laws to protect their white Christian culture and look…

      That argument is not valid becoz these countries are officially secular.

      Just some info ,
      Muslim Population of france: 6 Million.
      Burqa wearing muslim women population: ONLY 300 to 400.

    • See I’m not sure it’s fine just because it’s their country. I would be fine with it if they had the balls to come out and openly say that they ban is to preserve their white christian population.

      But they don’t have the gumption to say that openly. They want to preserve the image of being secular (which in all fairness, they mostly are) and also ban the burqua. It’s the deception I have a problem with.

      It’s quite understandable they’re scared of their culture being overwhelmed by the vastness of Asia. But you can’t have your cake and eat it at the same time.

      • See, there are two types of secularism…The first type allows for the public visibility of religion…The second kind excludes religion from the public sphere…It demands that the state plays an assertive role in ensuring that religion stays private…France (and Turkey) follows the second type…So, when the French government says it is secular and bans veils and other physical symbols of religion, they are just following what they believe in…

        • I would agree with you wholeheartedly if they applied the principle consistently and banned crosses around the neck, jewish caps, sikh turbans, nun’s habits, priest’s habits etc.

          By picking on just one, they’re exposing their real motives. Consistency. That’s all one can ask for.

        • “It demands that the state plays an assertive role in ensuring that religion stays private…France (and Turkey) follows the second type…”

          Here lies the FUN PART.

          All christian holidays are national holidays in france….so u see france favours one religion MORE.

          • True…But in the US too, Christmas is a holiday and they too are supposed to be secular…I think India is the most ‘secular’ in this sense…

      • Nimmy
      • May 3rd, 2010

      Hi bones..Glad to see you after a long time..

      There is nothing wrong in “What they do in THEIR country”..But then what makes Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan different from France and Belgium? What makes one regressive and another one progressive ? Thatz where my problem lies..And oh well,I am least bothered about Saudi r Afghanistan..But a spade should be called a spade right?

  8. Excellent excellent analogy, Nims.

    A person wearing a bikini (sometimes barely wearing one!) is OK but covering is not? Where is our society heading?

    I’ve said this before and saying it again. If France/Belgium are forcing its population not to wear hijab, then they are not any different from Saudis or Afghans. If one forces it, the other bans it. Both are wrong in my opinion.

    Every person has a right to his/her religious beliefs. What one may find oppressing is a way of life for another. As long as it is not forced and a conscious choice, how does it matter?

    But I guess some countries don’t understand that. Solution is not to live there. There are many countries around to world where they will be welcome.

      • Nimmy
      • May 3rd, 2010

      ” If France/Belgium are forcing its population not to wear hijab, then they are not any different from Saudis or Afghans.”

      Yes Masood.But it is not so,to the majority..For them France is epitome of modern progressive society and they are excused from being criticized for doing this,as they are doing it to preserve their culture..But if Saudi ad Afghan does it,for the very same reasons,it cannot be tolerated..It is against human rights..Bla…

  9. The way I look at it, the moment govt tries to control personal choice, be it France, Belgium or any other country, it can only be wrong.

    After all, what a person chooses to wear(or not) is personal choice. For a country to be passing laws of this sort, just indicates a very intolerant mindset.

  10. Guess who bakes the best baguette in Paris? A Jean Pierre? Non..An Antoine? Non, non…A Djibril Bodian? Oui, oui…Bodian was born in Senegal…

    This is what I have to say to those rabid national identity advocates, “Shove a baguette up your a***!”

  11. Societies with diverse religious backgrounds are bound together partly by informal chance relations between strangers – people being able to acknowledge each other in the street or being able pass the time of day. The anonymity of the burqa takes the uniqueness of face away from the woman. That is my greatest objection to it. Woman choice should be governed by their own will. I don’t have anything against any specific Muslim, hinu or christian individual. I hold my defiance against Islam, hinduism and christianity. And don’t justify anything because its written in the religious books thousand year ago. I don’t see this ban as apart of christian values; We all owe Europe for its secular notion and rational thinking. And they had history of bitter fight with church and few individuals for human rights and freedom. The rational education given to you has led for this ability to question own’s logic. And the right of choice comes through rational thinking. And a person avoiding rationalism due to belief in absolute faith is harmful for society, be it christian or any other religion. Burqa is a symbol of submission in the eyes of progessive religion (progreesive on the basis of mergence of people who questioned its authority over an indiviual); And we all know that Europeans are Islamophobeic because of its interaction with Islamic world is brutal;

  12. I feel any sort of veil defies the freedom to interact.. I also automatically judge the girls in Pune wearing the scarf (in this horrid summer, where I would love to roam out in sleeveless dresses), now unless they come up an talk to me something intelligent, I would take them to be dumb..

    Countries with Islamic/cleric rule can make their women wear anything, but countries like France/Belgium/Italy with equal opportunity/status propaganda are in fact right to impose such a rule.. Veil hide identity. Period. Most women supporting veil do not remove it for the purpose of identification..

    A veiled girl in traveling Mumbai BEST, created a hue-n-cry when the conductor asked her to remove her veil to confirm her photo-bus-pass.. She refused.. How ridiculous is that? Now the veiled women would want a female police officer in every unit of public transport.. Be reasonable!!

    Recent news.. A Tunisian couple was fined in Italy, when an officer asked the woman to remove her veil to identification purposes.. She refused.. Obviously, much more resources were spent to call a lady officer, so that she could just look at the woman’s face and match it with her passport… I’M SURE ALLAH WOULD NOT SEND HER TO HELL FOR SHOWING HER FACE TO AN AUTHORITY WANTED TO CHECK HER PASSPORT!!!

    I thought you would present some reasonable arguments to support your thought.. But your “NUN” point is not valid at all.. NUNS are akin to priest (religious entity).. If Islam allowed female priests, I’m sure they would also be allowed to wear whatever dress code implied…

    I am not sure whether, I want to support the ban or not; I feel veil obstructs your identity/freedom/personality.. I live in India, not in France/Belgium/Italy; Had I lived there, followed their society/culture; I would have a different point of view.. As such I feel sorry for woman living here, who have to bear veil in hot Indian trpoical summer…

    • Rush me,i didn’t reply to you as i didn’t want to have an argument and end in bad terms..

      The incident you quoted in Mumbai is wrong..Such people should be punished,but does that mean you should ban it in all..

      then regarding nuns,well,i am not of high IQ to present a perfect argument..But what you say is irrelevant..Nuns use that dress due to religious reasons..Muslims women too use it for religious reasons..I don’t use it bcoz i am not that religious..My mother use if bcoz she is more religious or rather spiritual..But stating that it makes sense only if she is a ‘priest’ is ridiculous.. Which argument is reasonable? Yours or mine: :)

      ” I’M SURE ALLAH WOULD NOT SEND HER TO HELL FOR SHOWING HER FACE TO AN AUTHORITY WANTED TO CHECK HER PASSPORT!!!”

      Yeah,even i am sure of that. But do you ahve any idea that since last year,muslim women are asked to take photos revealing their ears too,in India,for all identity card purposes..We have been doing so,without any issues.. It is illogical and senseless to point out weird incidents and generalize the whole population..

      “As such I feel sorry for woman living here, who have to bear veil in hot Indian trpoical summer…”

      And i have felt pity for those women who wear least dress,even in winter…

  13. To rush.me,

    Very well said. Though it does not cover every thing , in fact it is not possible to cover every thing here.

    Here there is a article titled terror scare on kingfisher airlines. There I wrote some important points in comments. If you have time you go through them. In fact I am keeping the link below.

    https://nimis540.wordpress.com/2010/04/03/terrorist-dry-run-test-on-kingfisher-and-the-art-of-turning-a-muslim-explosive-to-a-nair-crude-stuff/#comments

    • alice
    • July 14th, 2010

    I think it is disgusting that it has taken this long for this long awaited law to be passed.
    For far too long have countries neglected their own cultures and religions to try and accommodate an others, which I am all in favour for so far as people being able to practice whatever religion they wish in whatever country legally (this is not the middle ages) but when unnecessary customs become obstructive of modern western society’s norms and values then I believe things must be done to protect the public.
    For example a woman who wishes to become a teacher chooses to wear a burqa, how can her class be expected to learn if they are unable to even see their teacher’s face?
    If said lady is a primary teacher the situation is even more serious as we learn language through lip reading to a certain extent and the teacher’s mouth international patterns cannot be seen and copied by her students possibly causing them to be slower in their language development which is a serious matter.
    and I personally think that Rasmussen’s argument is ridicules comparing nuns (a small community of isolated people who have devoted themselves to god and cover themselves but leave their faces showing! who live away from the community in a separate building and have very little in the way of privileges and live by the simplest of means) and might I add are part of the native religions in these countries, who many now where regular clothes and have moved with the times!
    To women who live in the community who wish to live by the same laws as everyone’s else the same privileges, and jobs as well yet refuse to conform to the basic laws and standards of these countries (let their face be seen) I believe this is a most basic safety measure if nothing else.
    i don’t know about you but I certainly wouldn’t be happy receiving a service of any significance off someone whom I could not see the face of.
    And to the ludicrous comment “If you can wear bikini, why can’t I wear burqa?”
    Well as if!
    If someone was walking through the middle of pairs in a bikini I think they would most definitely get some funny looks away from the beach if not a Public order offence! Especially if she then insisted to wear her bikini all year round as well.. plus a bikini is not a security risk ether it does not obstruct the person wear it’s face or identity, and I think if a lady insisted on wearing a bikini as her uniform to work I think she would be told where the door is.. And there would certainly be no court appeal or newspaper article in her favour

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 47 other followers

%d bloggers like this: