Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

It certainly isn't consistent with the principals of freedom. I'm really quite surprised that ths Dutch cabinet has agreed to back this proposal.... maybe not as many of us are singing from the same hymnsheet as I thought.

This is an outrageous attack on personal freedom. Where does this end ... banning people wearing a cross? Banning people wearing a political emblem? Banning people having a beard for religious reasons? I usually admire holland's liberalism. How appalling.

I'm for freedom. Religious, sexual, political, and lifestyle freedom. The Dutch cabinet's direction leaves me speeechless.

If this ever becomes a law, it will test the EU. It cannot stand.

Lets not forget what this is all about. 5% of the dutch population is muslim. There's an election on the way and the dutch parties are using these issues to win votes from a population that's nervous about an increasing muslim share of the population.

Another question Will could ask is this ... why are white european christians so threatened by muslims?

Of course it's an attack on freedom. A horrendous attack. Why does dress matter to anyone that they should make a political issue out of it. The control-freakery at the heart of most governments leaves me breathless.

That said, before Muslims get all preachy about their freedoms perhaps they should take note of how non-muslims, women, homosexuals, and many others, are treated in the average Islamic state.

SG

Maybe I should point out the arguments in favour of the ban.... for discussion's sake. The Dutch cabinet agree with you about freedom. That's the reason they want to ban the burqa. They feel that Muslim women are oppressed by this dress code imposed upon them by the men in their religion, and feel that it would free them from religious oppression. They feel that the burqa is a symbol of the antithesis of freedom: removal of the burqa is a step forward for their society.

I personally don't feel that you accomplish a more free society by removing freedoms, but obviously the Dutch think differently.

...while we are talking about religious freedom and Islam, why are no non-muslims allowed in Islam's holiest city, Mecca, and why is the Christian faith outlawed in that country [Saudi Arabia]?

...how does SA therefore compare to Holland on the libertarian scale?

PB

PS The Koran does not require women to wear a veil!!!

I don't really have an opinion on this but as far as I know (and I'm not an expert) the image at the top is of a woman wearing a niqab, not a burqa. A burqa covers the eyes too.

ie my point is, if that is how Islam regards others' freedoms in its geographical heart [Mecca], then how should the freedom for Islam be treated elsewhere? Not making a vindictive point, but querying the nature of Islam...it often appears to be theocratic or nothing...I prefer a flexible liberal democracy myself..
PB

Muslim women should have the right to exercise their religious conscience, or for that matter any one who desires to exercise their religious conscience.

When western females go to work in Islamic controlled countries they must adhere to strict Islamic dress code forced upon them, so if Holland brings in dress laws regarding the burqa they are being consistent with tyrannical Islamic controlled governments who discriminate against Christians and westerners, and I can’t understand how Muslims in all sincerity here in Europe can protest when they don’t defend the rights of Christians to practise their religious freedom in Islamic controlled countries, after all it is their Islamic brothers and sisters who persecute Christians.

If they seek freedom of expression they must be consistent and defend freedom of expression in Islamic countries.

But at least Holland are not jailing gospel singers, or closing down churches and schools with bulldozers or jailing believers for owning a Bible or imprisoning Christians for exercising their Christian conscience in practise of their faith or executing converts to Christianity.

Of couse, we could embrace the suggestion, and encourage the state to legislate on clothing. All those teenagers look so cold - we could legally require them to wear warm woolly jumpers, proper coats and sensible shoes. Socks worn under sandals could be banned, as could all T-shirts with amusing slogans on them. [That's probably just me: I hate having to read people.]

John:

I know you were only asking that for the purposes of discussion, and that you disagree with the ban. Here's the contradiction: you point out the Dutch government wants to ban this to free women from religious oppression, but all this does is to exchange religious oppression for political oppression. You can't defend freedom by removing it. Moreover, freedom requires a mature and rational adult population, but all this ban would achieve is the further infantilisation of the population - with the state effectively starting to tell it's citizens what they can and can't wear. How incredibly patronising that is. And how patronising for any state to suggest that it is only doing this for the good of the people themselves.

A quote from CS Lewis is apposite:

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

SG

caridenda,

According to wiki (see my link), the burqa is a type of niqab.

...perhaps a more impartial question might be, how can we ensure that Muslim women in the UK have complete freedom to wear or not wear a veil?

Any freedom to wear it would leave them vulnerable to male muslim pressure to wear it against their will.

Strange how these issues tend to get to the top of the agenda only when it is the UK Government "at fault".

ie liberals have comparatively little criticism for extreme subjugation of women in Islam but reams of it for UK society in which women have more freedoms than almost anywhere else in the world. double standards?

PB

I guess Muslim women should be allowed to wear whatever their conscience requires them to wear--but I don't think they can expect to relate freely to non-Muslims, since we are accustomed to relating to faces, not just eyes. If one culture is OK, and the other is too, we will have to expect some friction and difficulty in relationships at the interface.

Great website and music!

Great website and music!