Would you rather look at this:
Or this?:
Posted on 07/07/2009 2:45:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
The French Republic is not blessed or burdened with a First Amendment. So when President Nicolas Sarkozy recently suggested that France ban the wearing of the burqa in all public places, the Chamber of Deputies took it up.
Unlike the headscarf, which covers a woman's hair but leaves her face visible, the burqa is a head-to-toe covering that makes walking draperies of women. Some, like the chador worn in Afghanistan, feature a mesh covering for the face. The Saudi version usually sports a slit for the eyes. Here's an online catalogue's description of one: "Khimar and niqab set made of an all season, buttery soft georgette. Reaches to approximately knee level (depending upon your height) and provides full coverage. Arm openings about half-way down the khimar are a convenient feature with this style. Edges are embellished with matching satin trim. Imported from Saudi Arabia. Available in your choice of Navy Blue, Brown, or Saudi Black." Yes "Saudi black." In a country where summertime temperatures often reach 120 Fahrenheit, the geniuses designed a garment for women that is stifling and black.
In London, which has come to resemble Algiers more than New York, these walking shadows are everywhere. Even in summer, some women who wear the "Saudi black" burqa also wear black gloves and sunglasses over their facemasks. One would no more strike up a conversation with such a specter than with Darth Vader.
You needn't approve of the slatternly attire so often found on Western women to stoutly and angrily resist the encroachment of the burqa -- and everything it represents -- into Western life. Let's be clear. It took guts for Sarkozy to say what did. He called the burqa "a sign of subjugation ... of debasement." Al-Qaida, reliably enough, issued a fulminating statement: "We will not tolerate such provocations and injustices, and we will take our revenge from France ... by every means and wherever we can reach them."
Muslims agree that the faith requires "modest" dress on the part of women. Beyond that, things get disputatious. Some argue that the face must be veiled. Others deny it. Both cite Quranic authority. But there is no doubt that the vast majority of the world's Muslim women do not wear these personality-obliterating shrouds. The burqa's revival in some parts of the Muslim world (Iran, Egypt, Morocco, even Lebanon) is more of a political than a religious expression. Some women insist that they freely choose to swaddle themselves. But in many Muslim nations women are subjected to a variety of coercions, both cultural and political, to erase themselves in public. Also, there must be thousands of Muslim women who, by moving to Western Europe, thought they could shed the oppression of their home countries. Instead, they have found cringing European "multiculturalists" eager to excuse every Third World depredation -- from wife beating to polygamy to the burqa -- as a sign of their broadmindedness.
Europeans are not the only ones cringing. In his Cairo address, President Obama engaged in his by now famous false equivalence: "Among some Muslims, there's a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of somebody else's faith ... Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit -- for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We can't disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism."
Since the president's speech predated Sarkozy's comments on the burqa, Obama must have been referring to France's 2004 decision to ban the headscarf (along with crucifixes and yarmulkes) in public offices and schools. Let's see, in Saudi Arabia it is illegal to build a church (to say nothing of a synagogue) or to carry a Christian Bible on your person. In most Muslim majority nations, alcohol is prohibited to everyone, not just to practicing Muslims. And little girls are subjected to genital mutilation and other forms of torture and abuse on a widespread basis. Well, President Obama explains, both sides need improvement.
The French approach would be constitutionally complicated in America. But as C.C. Colton observed, "The law allows what honor forbids." For all men and women who consider themselves enlightened, fighting off the burqa should be a matter of honor.
i dont think US should go the French route. It run counter to freedom.
You know, it's sort of been a tradition here.
ML/NJ
Those idiot Muslim women want to listen to preachers that order them to be gusseted head to toe with bedsheets and nets, more power to ‘em.
And if the idiot Amish women want to listen to preachers that order them to always do their ironing the hard way, and avoid that English Devil Electricity, what is that to me?
And if a Jehovie refuses a blood transfusion to keep him, or his kid alive, I ain’t gonna tie him down and start poking needles into his hide, or tie him down so I can start poking needles into the kid’s hide. As Billy Currington’s been singing on the country radio stations, God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy. Can’t keep the crazies from their craziness, and shouldn’t often try.
The Burqa:
Brought to you by the worthless moral savages of the
Religion of Pieces.
Abetted by our crypto-muzzie POTUS.
Resisted, hopefully, by President Sarkozy.
(Trying to lighten up) For those of us in the armed forces: the next time you’re on the beach watching beautiful women in bikinis go by, remember that we are literally fighting for their right to dress any way it pleases them! (As it pleases us.)
“Bikini patriotism”, anyone?
;^)
I don't have a problem with harmless Amish minding their own business and religion. They aren't trying to kill me.
The hairy shemales underneath the burqas, that's another story. Its like driving a car. I assume every other driver is trying to kill me. Since 9/11, I assume every muslim is trying to kill me. Its the safest approach to potential danger. You forgive them.
Would you rather look at this:
Or this?:
Is it even possible to see masses of women in burqas in the USA? I don’t recall the tradition going over too well here, because Muslims like to live in big cities rather than cloistered out in the countryside like the Amish. And big cities mean traffic. You can’t be walking around half blind and survive very long.
“there must be thousands of Muslim women who, by moving to Western Europe, thought they could shed the oppression of their home countries. Instead, they have found cringing European “multiculturalists” eager to excuse every Third World depredation — from wife beating to polygamy to the burqa — as a sign of their broadmindedness.”
Sharia courts also come to mind.
Spooky!!!
Doesn’t this terrify young children?
No wonder they’re all NUTS!
I'd agree. Except for the fact that Islam isn't just a religion, its a political system, social system, justice system, and financial system.
The recent story that muslims in america are demanding that women should be allowed to testify in court wearing a full burka, in some cases, only their eyes exposed, is a prime example of how this isn't about "civil rights" or "resonable accommodation", its about Islam creating a parrallel political, social, justice, and financial system in the US.
Although I find the burqa off-putting, and scary, I do not believe it should be banned in America. I do think, however, that it should not be accepted in identification photos, nor do I think women who wear them be allowed to work in Western business or organizations specifically because you cannot see the individual.That causes all kinds of potential problems for the workplace. If they want to walk to the supermarket looking like that, I am fine with it, but these people should be respectful of Western tradition, and just go their own way, quietly.
I was in Costco in Seattle yesterday. There was a muslim family that walked in right after me and whole sections of the store just froze as they walked around. The father had a long beard wearing a white polo shirt and cargo shorts. He would ask employees questions about where stuff was.
His wife and daughter both walked 3 paces behind him the entire time. Both wearing head to toe black burkas with only their eyes visable. He stopped, they stopped. He moved, they moved. He was allowed to speak to the infidels, they were not.
Our Rights are guaranteed only if they do not infringe on the rights of someone else. If the condition for accepting public transport is the positive identification of the traveler then wearing a head-to-toe disguise is contrary to that condition. The the muzzies don’t want to conform then they should go back to sandland.
I don’t see why muzzies insist on disguising their females with the burqa. The muzzies consider their women property, so they should have no problem allowing the airport security people to open them up for inspection.
Then we'll ban the wearing of crossing in public.
And in private.
And in churches (because they're public places).
Burqas SHOULD be banned and these Islamist bastards along with them.
I would support the right for a woman to wear any outfit that covers as much as say a traditional Catholic nun’s garb. That said, they should be no more allowed to cover their whole face for routine public business than one ought to be allowed to dress like Grand Wizard Robert “Sheets” Byrd in his heyday. Banks rightly ask me to remove my hat and sunglasses before I enter, and I oblige. Businesses should be allowed to set such standards without fear of cries of discrimination. Of course, the burqa-clad typically don’t transact such business.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.