The Burka Ban

Wasn't sure whether to put this in politics or religion, but it was quieter in here. Anyway, after the Burka Ban in France...

By Laura Roberts
Published: 8:30AM BST 17 Jul 2010

Philip Hollobone, MP for Kettering, was accused by Muslim groups of "failing in his duty" as MP.
Mr Hollobone is trying to bring in a Private Member's Bill to ban women wearing the burka or niqab in public.

He said he "took the view" that since a constituent was able to see his face he should be able to see theirs.

He argued that he would not be able to satisfy himself of the identity of a person without being able to do so.

Mr Hollobone said that he would "invite" anyone who did not wish to remove their veil to communicate with him in a "different way", such as by letter, rather than face to face.

He said that the burka or niqab was not a religious requirement and that the majority of Muslim women dressed in a way in which their face was visible.

Following France's recent decision to ban the burka in public Mr Hollobone said he hoped that other European nations would "sit up and take notice".

However, Shaista Gohir, executive director of the Muslim Women's Network UK, said his comments would simply exacerbate intolerance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7895995/Conservative-MP-Philip-Hollobone-refuse-to-meet-with-constituents-wearing-a-veil.html

Bunch of racists!


Seriously, i think it's high time that European countries do something about it. Over here, Christians in certain jobs (police, etc) can't wear a crucifix while working. Fair enuff to me. But when a woman is told she has to take the veil off for the drivers license photo, she sues. It's insane.

It is insane. I long for the day when these idiotic ideas of "inclusiveness" disappear.

I'm just going to copy-paste my answer from SP on this issue.

I feel uncomfortable by anybody concealing themselves in this way. As much as you know I despise Zanu Labour, the perfect explanation on this issue came from Jack Straw and I agree with him 100%. In the west, communication is not just about the verbal element, but also the non-verbal. We DO react and can read into body language and facial expressions and it is a vital part of communication. When somebody is voluntarily (or being forced) to remove this vital part of conversation, then understandably it is going to make people uncomfortable. Something is being concealed so you cannot read their body language.

THAT is the thing that Muslims do not understand about western culture. We get bludgeoned with their "values" over this issue and it is about time they listened to what other people are saying.

I feel uncomfortable when confronted with a pair of eyes covered in a big black sheet. I'm not sure it could be enforced, though the litmus test for the next few months will be France.

One thing that people do not realise though is that in several secular Muslim countries, there is already a ban. Turkey is the most prominent.

BecMacFeegle wrote:He said that the burka or niqab was not a religious requirement and that the majority of Muslim women dressed in a way in which their face was visible.

Spot on there. The Koran only says that people should dress with modesty. How the Wahabbists took that to mean "cover the woman in a black sheet so that only her eyes may be seen" is beyond me.

How about this right here in Minnesota?



Somalis win prayer case at Gold'n Plump

In a landmark settlement that could change the way Muslims are treated in the workplace, St. Cloud-based Gold'n Plump Inc. has agreed to allow Somali workers short prayer breaks and the right to refuse handling pork at its poultry processing facilities.

http://www.startribune.com/business/28119524.html

I mean, these people are working in a poultry plant an hour away from me but don't want to handle pork?

I know it sounds like i'm picking on these people but there comes a point where people have to say enough is enough. Don't like it? Don't work there.


The same thing happened at the Minneapolis Airport. Taxi cab drivers refused to carry passengers that they knew had alcohol on them. The airport board finally ruled for the Somali's to stuff it.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN3035513520070613

TexasBlue wrote:I mean, these people are working in a poultry plant an hour away from me but don't want to handle pork?

Question... why are they processing pork at a poultry plant in the first place? I can sort of see the problem here, they thought they would be handling chickens for food products and now they are being presented with pig produce. Pigs are not poultry.

I would have more of a problem with them if they were working in a supermarket warehouse and refused to handle alcohol. Then it would be a case of knowing that they might have to come into contact with alcohol. But when you are working at a poultry plant, you expect to be handling poultry, right?

I mean, am I missing something...?

Yeah, you're missing a little something here...........

In a related case involving an employment agency, The Work Connection, another $150,000 will be paid to 28 people. They refused to sign forms stating they would not refuse to handle pork if they were referred to work at Gold'n plump facilities in Cold Spring, Minn., and Arcadia, Wis.

Those two plants there are pork facilities.

The case in St. Cloud (an hour from me) is about prayer breaks. Now they get a second paid break during the second half of the second shift.

Then.....

The lawsuit also claims that the company was more likely to force Somalis than whites to work the night shift and do the least desirable jobs in the factory.

Whaaaa! When i went to work at the printing plant in 2006, i had to work 3rd shift and got the shitty jobs. It's the way it is here in America. You start at the bottom.

This is the same thing as it was with the Minaret ban in Switzerland. IMO, it's not essential to your religion. You don't need a tower so that somebody can shout prayers off of it at all times of the day... and night... and you also don't need to hide yourself behind a black sheet of fabric. If that's what you're into, then feel free to go back to your developing country, we won't stop you. I can't build a tower and blast Bob Marley out of the speakers there at all kinds of times of the day, then you damn sure can't scream your prayers off of one, especially when the majority of the people that will hear it won't understand it or care about it.
And if you don't want anybody to see your face, wear a ton of make up, don't leave the house, or go back to where you came from. That's not my problem if you want your wife not to be seen by anybody but you and your family.

I don't know about other European countries, but Germany is a Christian country. We have religion classes in school and there's a crucifix in every class room. What do you expect when you came over to a country like that? That we'd put crescents next to the cross and teach Islam in school as well? You're allowed to build your places of worship and nobody has a problem with that, which is more than what I can say about erecting a Catholic church in Saudi Arabia, Syria or other parts of the Middle East.

Now you sound like a right winger.

But seriously, and i don't give a shit, but why can't the Christians have the same thing here that you have in Germany?

I've told you before that I'm not a leftist when it comes to German politics.

Because the US is not a Christian nation. It's that simple.

Oh. You're only a leftist when it comes to American politics, huh?

You know my stance on religion. Now that we got that out of the way....... most people when this country was founded?

Seeing that Europe is "socialist" compared to the US and that European conservatives are committed to upholding the status quo of social democracy, I would say that that would make me a leftist when it comes to economics in the US.

Not quite sure what you're saying with the "most people when this country was founded"... I'm assuming you're asking the religion of most people when this country was founded, but before I go on a rant about that, I'd rather make sure that's what you were saying.

BubbleBliss wrote:
Seeing that Europe is "socialist" compared to the US and that European conservatives are committed to upholding the status quo of social democracy, I would say that that would make me a leftist when it comes to economics in the US.

Not quite sure what you're saying with the "most people when this country was founded"... I'm assuming you're asking the religion of most people when this country was founded, but before I go on a rant about that, I'd rather make sure that's what you were saying.

I messed up on that post and didn't look it over before submitting. What i meant to say was what were most people when this country was founded?

We're not a social democracy here.

No matter what most people were when this country was founded. Look up some of the Founding Father's quotes about religion, and you'll see that they did not want the US to turn into a Christian nation.

You're not a Social Democracy, but adapting some of those principles might do you some good. But the Constitution comes before doing good, of course.

BubbleBliss wrote:I don't know about other European countries, but Germany is a Christian country. We have religion classes in school and there's a crucifix in every class room. What do you expect when you came over to a country like that? That we'd put crescents next to the cross and teach Islam in school as well? You're allowed to build your places of worship and nobody has a problem with that, which is more than what I can say about erecting a Catholic church in Saudi Arabia, Syria or other parts of the Middle East.

We are too. We have a state religion. A few years ago, when the wailing banshees who stand in the minaret and shriek badly enough to curdle fresh milk were banned from making so much noise, they complained bitterly. They were falling foul of EU laws on noise pollution late at night and at 5 am.

They have to like it or leave. The EU has laws on noise pollution and if you have a problem with that, move to a country where they don't mind being woken up in the early hours by a religious calling for a small minority of people.

Church bells at least, are pleasant to listen to and they don't go off at all hours.

BubbleBliss wrote:Because the US is not a Christian nation. It's that simple.

And European politics and religious beliefs are not as polarised as they are in the US.

Exactly. Church bells also have a use, since they tell the time and they've been part of European culture for centuries. You can't compare them to Minaret shrieking.

BubbleBliss wrote:
I can't build a tower and blast Bob Marley out of the speakers there at all kinds of times of the day, then you damn sure can't scream your prayers off of one, especially when the majority of the people that will hear it won't understand it or care about it.

And if you don't want anybody to see your face, wear a ton of make up, don't leave the house, or go back to where you came from. That's not my problem if you want your wife not to be seen by anybody but you and your family.

I gotta tell ya... that sounds very intolerant.

Are you being serious?

Absolutely.

So you think that people should be able to build a tower next to your house and scream prayers off of it at 5 in the morning and all other hours of the day, even though only the minority of the people can understand it?

BubbleBliss wrote:
So you think that people should be able to build a tower next to your house and scream prayers off of it at 5 in the morning and all other hours of the day, even though only the minority of the people can understand it?

That's not the point. I found the whole tone of your post intolerant. Even your use of the word "scream" here is offensive, or at least shows your ignorence regarding the call to prayer.

What do you call this when you hear it at 5 in the morning?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlLaUCAQlQQ

I have no problems with practicing your own religion, but don't disturb other people doing it.

I was stating an opinion -- and it was about more than the call to prayer. This is just something we're not going to agree on.

alland wrote:

BubbleBliss wrote:
So you think that people should be able to build a tower next to your house and scream prayers off of it at 5 in the morning and all other hours of the day, even though only the minority of the people can understand it?

That's not the point. I found the whole tone of your post intolerant. Even your use of the word "scream" here is offensive, or at least shows your ignorence regarding the call to prayer.

But the call to prayer, and the minaret itself, are not vital to Islam. Neither are church bells but at least church bells are pleasant to listen to.