What are people's thoughts on the burkini ban in France?

[kaktus]

Women being emancipated is not what fundamental Islam wants

In the area of economic rights in Europe until the 19th century, women did not have the right to own their own property. When they were married, either it would transfer to the husband or she would not be able to dispense of it without permission of her husband. In Britain, perhaps the first country to give women some property rights, laws were passed in the 1860's known as "Married Women Property Act." More than 1300 years ago, that right for women was already and clearly established in Islamic law

One of my favourite teachers in school was a jewish historian, Mr Hingley, who among other topics, taught us about Islamic history to a small extent. From memory, I'm quite sure Islam introduced many women's rights that we take for granted in the West long before the West ever introduced them, if at all.

The oppression you refer, and I'm not saying it doesn't exist is cultural, not religious..

 

[Amp34]

Never seen a nun on a beach, have you?

Never seen a Burkini either...

That doesn't mean neither are ever seen on a beach.

Should they be banned though?

 

[Dis86]

Would you not expect better from the west than to have a ban on burkinis though?

I can understand covering up if you go to those countries. I dont agree with it but you do it to avoid conflict. I would hope that over time, their policies become more moderate. Over here, we have had a culture of religious freedom and expression. This ban just encourages a train of thought in the wrong direction and increases conflict by taking away freedom. The law just makes alienating Muslims seem more acceptable.

Burkinis were never an issue before. The only thing that has changed is that idiots are pushing to alienate Muslims for the sake of it.

See, I'd argue that large parts of muslim society has alienated itself. Take a look at our own country, we've had countless threads on here about how integration has failed and our politicians have even started waking up to the fact.

However on the other hand, as I stated much earlier in the thread i dont support banning them but can appreciate both sides of the argument.
Consider this...they can cover up without religious dress.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

Rather than politicians waking up to it, i would say politicians have abused it as subject of campaigning to obtain new voters. Problem is, all the campaigning and preaching just makes the abrasion between people more acceptable and therefore leads to a worsening local conflict.

I mean politicians and preachers from both sides. It is the people promoting the message of failed integration which contribute to the failure to integrate.

 

[Hambut_Bulge]

More than 1300 years earlier, that right for women was already and clearly established in Islamic law

Yes, except that while classical Islamic civilisation granted women property rights, they were inferior to her male relatives.

 

[RaohNS]

In the area of economic rights in Europe until the 19th century, women did not have the right to own their own property. When they were married, either it would transfer to the husband or she would not be able to dispense of it without permission of her husband. In Britain, perhaps the first country to give women some property rights, laws were passed in the 1860's known as "Married Women Property Act." More than 1300 years earlier, that right for women was already and clearly established in Islamic law

One of my favourite teachers in school was a jewish historian, Mr Hingley, who among other topics, taught us about Islamic history to a small extent. From memory, I'm quite sure Islam introduced many women's rights that we take for granted in the West long before the West ever introduced them, if at all.

The oppression you refer, and I'm not saying it doesn't exist is cultural, not religious..

1860... You assert more than 1300years.... Islam didn't have its inception until 632 and likely solidified under caliphate until the 11th Century. Thus both aspects while may be true do not match with your timeline.

1860-1300=560. Please elaborate how Islam fundamentally did this when it didn't exist as you claim.

I could point you to numerous Koranic quote for you to ignore or try and explain despite people being very literal back then?

 

[Hambut_Bulge]

Rather than politicians waking up to it, i would say politicians have abused it as subject of campaigning to obtain new voters. Problem is, all the campaigning and preaching just makes the abrasion between people more acceptable and therefore leads to a worsening local conflict.

I mean politicians and preachers from both sides. It is the people promoting the message of failed integration which contribute to the failure to integrate.

Absolutely, and particularly in France where there will be immense pressure on the mainstream politicians to talk tough and outflank Marine Le Pen in next year's election.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

Yes, except that while classical Islamic civilisation granted women property rights, they were inferior to her male relatives.

His point still stands. The issue is cultural not religious. Yes culture an religion overlap in many ways but blaming religion over culture does overlook the fact that there are Muslims that have integrated perfectly well and that treating it as a religious issue rather than cultural, will only drive more people to both extremes.

 

[Arazi]

See, I'd argue that large parts of muslim society has alienated itself. Take a look at our own country, we've had countless threads on here about how integration has failed and our politicians have even started waking up to the fact.

However on the other hand, as I stated much earlier in the thread i dont support banning them but can appreciate both sides of the argument.
Consider this...they can cover up without religious dress.

Bingo.

 

[RDM]

His point still stands. The issue is cultural not religious. Yes culture an religion overlap in many ways but blaming religion over culture does overlook the fact that there are Muslims that have integrated perfectly well and that treating it as a religious issue rather than cultural, will only drive more people to both extremes.

Isn't religion just a part of culture though?

Islam might have been a pinnacle of human rights when it was conceived, but that was a long time ago and these days it comes up short.

I don't think banning any item of clothing is a good idea but as a liberal, conservative Islam has some pretty unsavoury characteristics.

 

[The Running Man]

The religious defines the culture in this instance

 

[Amp34]

whoops - yeah didnt fully read all of OP dont have a problem with the burkini by itself just the other religious garments. However i can understand why they (some french authorities) are lumping it in with other islamic dress. ergo the bannage.




Might be controversial but yeah i would ban em all. Religion is a private matter not a public one so no overt display of religious belief allowed...thats how i would have it anyway. They can still wear their gear underneath a long coat of some sort. Sikhs turbans hrmm yeah they would have to go....

Yeah, spite. Pretty much no other reason. It's not going to stop terrorism, or make somewhere more secure. If it's a ban on all religious clothing then it goes back to the nuns/priest question. If they aren't banned then back to spite and revenge (and/or popularism at the expense of a minority, which is potentially worse...). It's an illogical law that only seems to be about punishing innocent people because they happen to follow the same religion as a bunch of murderers.

I can't agree with a ban on any religions attire. As much as I am not religious I have no issue with people wearing whatever they want, whether it has religious connotations or not. It's not like someone is going to convert just by seeing someone in a particular dress/uniform. If you want to be religious so be it, as long as you cause no harm to anyone else. If you start blowing people up, persecuting gays or abusing kids (no matter if the bible or Koran or any other religious text/preaching says so), then you go to jail.

 

[RaohNS]

Isn't religion just a part of culture though?

Islam might have been a pinnacle of human rights when it was conceived, but that was a long time ago and these days it comes up short.

I don't think banning any item of clothing is a good idea but as a liberal, conservative Islam has some pretty unsavoury characteristics.

Pinnacle of human rights?

Death for apostasy
Death for homosexuality
Permitted to beat wives
Permission to take women as sex slaves
Permitted to wage war against the unbeliever
Tax for non-Muslims?

 

[Hambut_Bulge]

His point still stands. The issue is cultural not religious. Yes culture an religion overlap in many ways but blaming religion over culture does overlook the fact that there are Muslims that have integrated perfectly well and that treating it as a religious issue rather than cultural, will only drive more people to both extremes.

And that's a wonderfully secular view of the world. With Islam though it is very hard, if not impossible, to separate the two. One of the five pillars of Islam is to follow Islamic Law. Since that law is defined in the Qur'an, it is the verbatim word of God. And the law (along with other things) is what gives rise to culture.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

Isn't religion just a part of culture though?

Yes just part, that is not the same as Muslims all sharing the same culture. It is because of this that you must treat it as a culture issue.

What does this ban do except further the cause of the extremist religious preachers and the right wing hate groups?

And that's a wonderfully secular view of the world. With Islam though it is very hard, if not impossible, to separate the two. One of the five pillars of Islam is to follow Islamic Law. Since that law is defined in the Qur'an, it is the verbatim word of God. And the law (along with other things) is what gives rise to culture.

Yes you can debate that all day, but the fact of the matter is that there are many, many people that consider themselves Muslim, that do not have ill intent towards westerners, that are integrating well and that carry many western ideals. Including them with the worst of them as well as alienating them does no one any good.

 

[Amp34]

Some quite inflammatory but accurate remarks were doing the rounds on twitter concerning dress in Kingdom nations.

And they are ridiculous arguments, and TBH I don't even understand what people are trying to say by by pointing this out. We aren't Saudi Arabia, or trying to follow the lead of Saudi Arabia, so why should the discussion about wearing certain clothing in Western Europe be about what people in Saudi are forced to wear.

Did their parents never tell them that the "but he/she/they do it" is not an acceptable argument.

We like to pride ourselves on being "better"/free(er) and more liberal (in the literal sense - each to their own - not the US politics sense), so why Saudi does have a bearing on what we do and choose to do?

Just because the US arms everyone to the teeth doesn't mean we shouldn't control guns for example.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

Just because the US arms everyone to the teeth doesn't mean we shouldn't control guns for example.

This statement wont even make sense to some of this crowd xD

inb4 the i'm a badass because guns are okay

 

[kaktus]

1860... You assert more than 1300years.... Islam didn't have its inception until 632 and likely solidified under caliphate until the 11th Century. Thus both aspects while may be true do not match with your timeline.

1860-1300=560. Please elaborate how Islam fundamentally did this when it didn't exist as you claim.

I could point you to numerous Koranic quote for you to ignore or try and explain despite people being very literal back then?

I meant it was introduced 1,300 years back, actually a bit more like 1,400 years ago and it wasn't until the mid 1800's that we caught up in Europe though I suspect you already knew that.

As for pointing me to "numerous Koranic quotes for me to ignore". That's rather presumptuous of you. I'm sure with enough googling I could find plenty of quotes and anecdotal evidence to support the idea that Islam does emancipate women despite the cultural oppression we see everyday. I personally believe, that is the issue, not the religion and in any case we digress from the topic which is regarding the Burkini swimsuit

 

[RaohNS]

And they are ridiculous arguments, and TBH I don't even understand what people are trying to say by by pointing this out. We aren't Saudi Arabia, or trying to follow the lead of Saudi Arabia, so why should the discussion about wearing certain clothing in Western Europe be about what people in Saudi are forced to wear.

Did their parents never tell them that the "but he/she/they do it" is not an acceptable argument.

We like to pride ourselves on being "better"/free(er) and more liberal (in the literal sense - each to their own - not the US politics sense), so why Saudi does have a bearing on what we do and choose to do?

Just because the US arms everyone to the teeth doesn't mean we shouldn't control guns for example.

Its the double standards arguments.

Its like me arguing I would like to visit the prophet Mohammed mosque (this is genuine) but I am forbidden from doing so under pain of what? Prison? Torture? Death?

 

[Amp34]

We should also recognise that some cultures, political beliefs and even religions can be dangerous and represent an existential threat to our way of life.

You are only allowed the right to be free because we enforce those rights, the right to be free should not extend to cultures that do not share those beliefs. You only need to look at what's happening in Turkey right now to see what could happen to any Western country that allows an Islamic belief system to take power.

I think the Burkini issue does seem extreme, but you need to look at the bigger picture.

And someone has probably written a very similar post in Arabic on a hidden discussion board, while sitting in Syria...

No, you're not taking up arms and killing innocent people like them, but your viewpoint is not that different. Do you not see that?