User Tag List

First 8161718192028 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 312

  1. #171
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Thumbs down Islamist Propaganda

    Quote Originally Posted by stringstheory View Post
    my question to you is: What do you think this ban will solve?
    Well, it is certainly sorting out who are the compradors.

    For they are the one's who keep repeating like parrots Islamist propaganda directed agains liberal democracy.

    At first one might think they are simply naive and don't recognise propaganda when they see it. But as one listens to them, we find they have an agenda of their own.

    Their agenda consists of two parts. The first is personal and the second is social.

    The first is ressentiment. They hate themselves and the society that gave them birth. They hate themselves right down to the bone marrow. And so they naturally ally themselves with those who are determined to destroy their heritage.

    The second is a hatred of liberal democracy and a love of totalitarianism. And Islam is nothing if not totalitarian.

    But the compradors present their fresh scrubbed faces to us in all innocence. "We are only approaching this in good faith", they say, "We are only applying logic to the facts as we see them".

    But the truth is that their 'facts' are pure Islamist propaganda.

  2. #172
    Reason vs Being ragashree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Mine
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    ^ What are your facts then Victor? Care to reference any, and how they relate to anyting in particular?

    Or do you yourself only have propaganda at your disposal?
    Look into my avatar. Look deep into my avatar...

  3. #173
    shadow boxer strawberries's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    ----
    Posts
    950

    Default

    similar laws have been enacted in turkey in modern times and spain, belgium and some parts of italy are considering enacting public burqa / niqab / chadri bans.

    i find the notion of a woman covering herself up in such a way disturbing. it offends my values, as does female genital mutilation. the thing about french republicanism is that it makes demands of its citizens. the french see it important to distinguish secular from religious spaces. as has been mentioned in this thread - in public schools christians cannot wear big crosses and jewish students can’t wear yarmulkes etc.

    i have encountered women in burqas in person a few times in my life and seeing a woman garbed in such a way disturbed me very much. she is dehumanised. you have little sense of her age, you can’t interpret her body language, her voice is smothered by the cloth – she is not there.

    i read an article by yasmin alibhai-brown in the independent who says to deny face to face interaction is to deny our shared humanity. in that article she quotes rahila gupta: ‘This is a cloth that comes soaked in blood. We cannot debate the burqa or the hijab without reference to women in Iran, Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia where the wearing of it is heavily policed and any slippages are met with violence.’ i think in this way the burqa represents more than other forms of religious dress.

    the thing that concerns me about publicly banning the burqa (and similar dress) is that for a woman whose culture includes wearing the burqa, a ban could mean she stays at home more, which further deprives her of interaction with the outside world - instead of being shut inside a cloaked bubble, she is shut inside her home.

    -----------------------------------
    i've enjoyed reading this thread.

  4. #174
    Senior Member Rebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4sop
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,505

    Default

    ^ I agree with the above.

    I read an article in the Times about these two Americanized women from the Middle East who were against burqas all their lives. They attended college and worked full time. One of them even married a non-Middle Eastern person. But the two sisters decided to begin wearing burqas after 9/11 to show their connection to their faith and in support of their culture that had nothing to do with the terrorists. They were, in a way, defending their identity when it was under attack and the entirety of their religion and culture being blamed for one small group of radicals. They also wanted to be closer to God. And one of them mentioned how in the workplace, she was hit on a lot and received somewhat crude comments, but after wearing the burqa, they stopped seeing her as a sexual object. The whole article puzzled me as it probably did the public. I will not pretend to know anything about their culture or religion but culture and religion aside, we are allowed to form judgments of what is or is not a violation of humanity. Just as the argument for the cultural aspect of female genital mutilation is unacceptable.

    Banning the burqa will not resolve the underlying issues and differences between how they view sexuality and freedom and how we see it. It's a representation of their culture and taking away one aspect of it will not necessarily be successful. It also deepens the divide between the West and the Middle East and cause tension/conflict while not resolving much when we should be finding a common ground. On the other hand, sometimes a drastic, radical action is what it takes to slowly change society. France stepped their foot down and issued a secular law which I sort of admire. Instead of being wishy washy about protecting rights and giving 'heartwarming' speeches, they made something happen, made a radical change. They took a risk in resolving a problem. I wish we'd do the same in America.

    Also, as a feminist, I do not see why women have to feel compelled to cover up while men do not, for sexuality or to be closer to their God. It is suggesting that women cannot fend off sexual advances and somehow the female body is more sacred than a man's. Why should we have to change because they can't keep their dirty mouths shut?

  5. #175
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by strawberries View Post
    i have encountered women in burqas in person a few times in my life
    You're lucky. I see them every day in Canberra, Australia. And on one occasion I was intrepid enough to address someone completely covered in a blue burqa at the next table and her bearded Islamist husband threatened me with violence.

    And as I travel around Canberra I see all government buildings are now protected by a low reinforced concrete walls to protect the Australians inside against Islamist car bombs.

    Fortunately our Australian Federal Police and Intelligence are excellent and we keep bringing before our Criminal Courts Islamists preparing to kill Australians in large numbers.

    In the latest trial in Sydney the judge said the Islamists were beyond rehabilitation and gave them twenty-eight years in jail.

    The Marxists have made common cause with the Islamists which is odd because the Marxists are atheists and the Islamists are theists. But they hate us more than they hate each other.

  6. #176
    Senior Member burymecloser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    514

    Default

    I think banning the burqa is a racist and religiously-discriminatory move with understandable appeal to many people who are neither racist nor religious bigots.

    Rather than enacting a law which forbids many people from doing something they feel compelled by their beliefs to do, it seems to me that it would make more sense to focus on other ways to support women's rights and curtail domestic violence, etc. I don't doubt that the burqa is associated with repression of women, but the problems associated with a practice need to be indisputable, clear, and widespread before I'm willing to take action that infringes on liberties, especially those of a spiritual nature. Honor-killings, for instance, are not merely associated with violence or discrimination -- they obviously, indisputably, and invariably harm people, and I fully support their illegal status. The link is much less clear in the case of the burqa.

    Banning all consumption of alcohol would almost certainly decrease violence against women. But if alcohol were banned, and Christians were unable to take communion with real wine, or Jews unable to use it at Passover, many would rightly decry it not only as an infringement on liberty, but an infringement on religious liberty. Denying people the right to fulfill something they regard as a sacred duty is not something to be taken lightly, and I think the benefits of such legislation need to be far, far more clear than they are in this case before action is justified.

    What if France prohibited women from covering their hair, or men from wearing yarmulkes and long beards? What if they prohibited women from wearing skirts, or from wearing anything but skirts? Denying people the right to dress as they please, within reasonable and near-universal standards of modesty, is a slippery slope freedom-loving people should treat with great skepticism. Prohibiting the right to dress modestly is unprecedented.

    Many well-meaning people support this move as a positive step for women's rights, and I understand that to a point, but ultimately I think it values one culture at the expense of another which may be equally valid. This effectively tells many Muslims that they are not welcome in France, and I just don't think that kind of thing can be condemned in strong enough terms.
    Last edited by burymecloser; 07-18-2010 at 06:00 PM. Reason: spelling
    i just want to be a sweetheart

  7. #177
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebe View Post
    On the other hand, sometimes a drastic, radical action is what it takes to slowly change society.
    Several attempts at that haven't proved successful within the Middle East. Like in Turkey, which banned Islamic headscarfs in public as part of Kemal Attaturk's attempts to secularise the country. Same thing happened with the Shah's attempt in Iran.

  8. #178
    Senior Member Rebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4sop
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,505

    Default

    I thought that the failure of the Shah's attempt in Iran to westernize is because of the failure of their economy and poor management and corruption under his rule whether than secularism.

  9. #179
    Listening Oaky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    6,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strawberries View Post
    similar laws have been enacted in turkey in modern times and spain, belgium and some parts of italy are considering enacting public burqa / niqab / chadri bans.

    i find the notion of a woman covering herself up in such a way disturbing. it offends my values, as does female genital mutilation. the thing about french republicanism is that it makes demands of its citizens. the french see it important to distinguish secular from religious spaces. as has been mentioned in this thread - in public schools christians cannot wear big crosses and jewish students can’t wear yarmulkes etc.
    It will indeed offend your values. The same as many others who's values were brought up upon western culture.
    If we look at the other side, you will find that many values of the western culture will offend the values of those who's values offend you. To take this to a personal level shows lack of understanding of the objective side.
    i have encountered women in burqas in person a few times in my life and seeing a woman garbed in such a way disturbed me very much. she is dehumanised. you have little sense of her age, you can’t interpret her body language, her voice is smothered by the cloth – she is not there.
    Yes they do seem that way don't they. Again, you look at this from a subjective perspective. The woman behind the veil may not seem human to you however to themselves they probably feel at home and relaxed.
    Hmmmm, also I have read that women wearing the veil or hijab are fine to take them off as long as the only presence around them are other women.

    i read an article by yasmin alibhai-brown in the independent who says to deny face to face interaction is to deny our shared humanity. in that article she quotes rahila gupta: ‘This is a cloth that comes soaked in blood. We cannot debate the burqa or the hijab without reference to women in Iran, Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia where the wearing of it is heavily policed and any slippages are met with violence.’ i think in this way the burqa represents more than other forms of religious dress.
    And thus corruption of a country and it's laws forcing a woman to do something means that a woman must not do it once she leaves? This is like saying someone will be beaten for not wearing a red t-shirt therefore it will be right for that someone not to wear a red t-shirt once he leaves that place whether he likes wearing it or not.

  10. #180
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebe View Post
    I thought that the failure of the Shah's attempt in Iran to westernize is because of the failure of their economy and poor management and corruption under his rule whether than secularism.
    Yes those were factors as well, nevertheless you can't minimalise the religious factor, not least of which because that became the predominant factor in setting up the Islamist regime. Point being, secularism doesn't have a good record in the Middle East - and why that's so is an interesting topic in of itself, especially because it requires operating under a number of paradigms quite alien to Islamic thinking. And also the legacy of Western colonialism doesn't help either.

Similar Threads

  1. Senate votes to turn down volume on TV commercials
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-03-2010, 06:00 PM
  2. Time to ban taxis in the UK
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-02-2010, 06:09 PM
  3. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 06-14-2009, 06:19 PM
  4. Mississippi wants to ban obese people from dining out!
    By scantilyclad in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-11-2008, 11:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO