France to ban veil

[JTR]

Also, for the muslims, or those knowledgeable about it, I heard today debate that said that the Burka is strictly a cultural item, not mandated by religion, merely by the cultural guises of the religion. Is this accurate?

I am not of Islamic faith, but I have fair knowledge of this topic.

What you heard is correct. There are certain sects within Islam where this practice is completely cultural. As far as I understand, Islam does not mandate women to wear Burkas.

Pakistan is a good example. In Western part of Pakistan, in Punjab region, women and people in general are just as secular as US population. There women do not wear Burkas, not commonly at least.
In Northwest Pakistan, however, only 100 miles from Punjab province, it's as if you traveled back a thousand years. There a much more conservative model of Islam is practiced. There practically all women wear Burkas. NW region pf Pakistan is just as Afghanistan was under Taliban. In fact thats where vast majority of the Taliban is hiding, in NW Pakistan.

[szh]

Also, for the muslims, or those knowledgeable about it, I heard today debate that said that the Burka is strictly a cultural item, not mandated by religion, merely by the cultural guises of the religion. Is this accurate?

I am not of Islamic faith, but I have fair knowledge of this topic.

What you heard is correct. There are certain sects within Islam where this practice is completely cultural. As far as I understand, Islam does not mandate women to wear Burkas.

Correct.

Unfortunately, some ultra-conservative members of the faith have taken it a step way too far in insisting that it is part of the religion. The women in those families tend to get forced into wearing them. However, there are also some women who wear it voluntarily - their choice, of course.

Pakistan is a good example. In Western part of Pakistan, in Punjab region, women and people in general are just as secular as US population. There women do not wear Burkas, not commonly at least.

Also correct. In almost every major and secondary city (regardless of the province, but some more than others), you will see that most women do not wear Burkas. Heck, if you happened to meet up with my female family members over there (in Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad) and told them to put one on, you might end up getting a serious concussion - shoes on the side of the head can hurt!

Z

[AZhitman]

LOL - I love you, Z.

I have to say, I had a very one-sided view of this issue before reading this thread. I am now completely and totally unsure WHAT I believe, although I am leaning towards the side that opposes this ban (then again, IDGAF what France does).

Here's what I *DO* know: I oppose ANY pressure from males of any culture to force or coerce women to dress in a certain manner, especially when they hide behind their OWN veil of "religious piety". F*** that. Meanwhile, I'd bet you a paycheck the majority of them have viewed pornographic material. Hypocritical and ignorant.

As for the DL issue, I concur with Mike - You want a state-issued ID? You gotta show us the grille. Besides, men aren't lusting after DL pictures.

[Cold_Zero]

We will see how this holds up in the EU courts. While I am not a fan of this law, I am a supporter of the Minaret ban in Switzerland.

[IBCoupe]

Why's that, CZ?

[Cold_Zero]

Simple, it seems to me that one ban is a civil liberties issue and another is a zoning issue. Sorry, I dont want Minarets junking up the Alpine landscape in Switzerland. I have a great affection for the country.

[heliochrome85]

I have a great affection for the country.

thats an understatement if ive ever heard one.

[IBCoupe]

Simple, it seems to me that one ban is a civil liberties issue and another is a zoning issue. Sorry, I dont want Minarets junking up the Alpine landscape in Switzerland. I have a great affection for the country.

The zoning issue is a civil liberties issue, too, that functions through zoning laws. It's the same selective targeting.

And are you really supporting targeted religious discrimination on the basis of aesthetics?

[Cold_Zero]

And yet, if I want to build a pink house with Nantucket architecture in Cadiz (sorry my cousin is visiting his children there), no problem! I dont have a problem with the Swiss people deciding what architecture is appropriate for their country or even the individual cantons. Just as, I would not move to Turkey and expect the local zoning board to accommodate Western architecture for a Christian church in a city that has architecture that is centuries old. Just as our local municipality had to approve our church's design and our steeple got nixed. *shrug* Maybe we should have sued the city and created a lot of stink in the press so that we would have put our final permit in jeopardy. We have a Syrian Orthodox church in the next city over that ran into zoning problems over their steeple, they have yet to build the church for more than 3 years. hmmmm.

It is not as if people can't construct Mosques in Switzerland, you just have to do it by their rules. So I dont buy the Civil Liberties bit. I do believe it was a national referendum.

[IBCoupe]

A national referendum on local zoning ordinances? Do you read what you write?

And why, pray tell, was your church's steeple nixed? Is there a law against steeples?

And why don't the French get the same cultural deference by you? Aren't they just saying what kinds of clothing are culturally acceptable in France? You can wear your own ethnically traditional clothing in France; you just have to do it by their rules.

[heliochrome85]

the majority of mosques built in this country dont have a minaret. if it makes any difference.

historically, they are used to broadcast the call to prayer. only in the middle east are they really really a thing.

[IBCoupe]

That's been my understanding of it, too.

So: why ban them? There's no justification that doesn't scream "bigoted xenophobia."

[szh]

Simple, it seems to me that one ban is a civil liberties issue and another is a zoning issue. Sorry, I dont want Minarets junking up the Alpine landscape in Switzerland. I have a great affection for the country.

Are church steeples also explicitly disallowed under this "zoning issue" ban?

Z

[Cold_Zero]

the majority of mosques built in this country dont have a minaret. if it makes any difference.

historically, they are used to broadcast the call to prayer. only in the middle east are they really really a thing.

T-
I want to know if you can Yodel the 'Call to Prayer.' That would be a sight to see.

Most modern churches and mosques dont even look like churches and mosques. They blend into the landscape of office buildings and box store architecture.

[Cold_Zero]

That's been my understanding of it, too.

So: why ban them? There's no justification that doesn't scream "bigoted xenophobia."

I knew there must have been some self hating east coast motive behind your thoughts, IB. Help! A hate crime must have been committed, because this doesn’t fit into your vision of how the world should be! Why dont you rally a bunch of NYC lawyers and travel over to continental Europa and force them to comply with the ACLU's wishes on this matter. See how far that gets you.
I find it ironic that the American media picks out these two issues to paint the portrait, when I think the laws, rules and common perception in Scandinavia go far beyond in regards to immigration and foreign people in their lands. These jokers actually have the gall to select the people that they want immigrating to their country, kick out illegals and *gasp* tell them what language they have to speak and how to conduct themselves. They even publish cartoons because they have, the Freedom of Speech.

[IBCoupe]

...what was that? Psychoanalysis isn't your game.

Go ahead, prove me wrong. Finish this sentence without sounding like a xenophobe:

"We should ban the construction of this particular Muslim structure because _________________."

EDIT:
Keep in mind that there's a follow-up question coming. For example, were you to say, "We should ban the construction of this particular Muslim structure because they are inherently structurally unsound," I would follow up by asking, "Why aren't we just banning structurally unsound buildings in general, then?"

[Cold_Zero]

A national referendum on local zoning ordinances? Do you read what you write?

Wow, welcome to the Confederation of Helvetia. Ironically, a lot of people in the conservative movement are now talking about confederacies. When they throw their ideas out about re-structuring the administration and governance of this country, I am reminded of the Helvetic Confederation.

And why, pray tell, was your church's steeple nixed? Is there a law against steeples?

Local ordinances dictate how high certain types of buildings can be. Even my parent’s church ran into problems with the city when renovating because they wanted to move their steeples over to make room for a new alter area. They got an exemption, we didn’t. *shrug*

And why don't the French get the same cultural deference by you? Aren't they just saying what kinds of clothing are culturally acceptable in France? You can wear your own ethnically traditional clothing in France; you just have to do it by their rules.

The French are trying to combat a problem (lax immigration laws for years), by trying to claim that the ‘Act prohibiting concealment of the face in public space’ is for security reasons.
I wonder if the Groupe d'Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale (GIGN) will have to remove their face coverings in public ?

[Cold_Zero]

Come on IB,
Let's just cut right to the chase. I call you an east coast elitist, you call me a back hill bigot and then we meet up in Baltimore to eat crab cakes and drink arab coffee with Helio.

I really dont see why you are so torqued about the Minaret ban. There are far worse things going on in the East. Like building permits being denied to *gasp* Coptic Christians in Egypt, the destruction of Serbian Orthodox churches in Kosvo (I am sure they deserved it) or the dissolution of property and organizations of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Istanbul. I don’t see you getting torque over these issues. This stuff goes far beyond zoning and is direct obstruction to religious freedom. Or don’t you care about the Eastern Orthodox, because the majority in this country is Western Christians? (I hope you see the distinction I just made.)

[IBCoupe]

A national referendum on local zoning ordinances? Do you read what you write?

Wow, welcome to the Federal Direct Democracy.

What?

And why, pray tell, was your church's steeple nixed? Is there a law against steeples?

Local ordinances dictate how high certain types of buildings can be. Even my parent’s church ran into problems with the city when renovating because they wanted to move their steeples over to make room for a new alter area. They got an exemption, we didn’t. *shrug*

Ah, so it's not an explicit ban on a specific religious building?

And why don't the French get the same cultural deference by you? Aren't they just saying what kinds of clothing are culturally acceptable in France? You can wear your own ethnically traditional clothing in France; you just have to do it by their rules.

The French are trying to combat a problem (lax immigration laws for years), by trying to claim that the ‘Act prohibiting concealment of the face in public space’ is for security reasons.
I wonder if the Groupe d'Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale (GIGN) will have to remove their face coverings in public ?

And what ill are the Swiss addressing?

[Cold_Zero]

Direct Democracy? Did I not say that correctly? Might have to go look up the term to make sure I am using it correctly.

[IBCoupe]

Come on IB,
Let's just cut right to the chase. I call you an east coast elitist, you call me a back hill bigot and then we meet up in Baltimore to eat crab cakes and drink arab coffee with Helio.

Not my style.

I really dont see why you are so torqued about the Minaret ban. There are far worse things going on in the East. Like building permits being denied to *gasp* Coptic Christians in Egypt, the destruction of Serbian Orthodox churches in Kosvo (I am sure they deserved it) or the dissolution of property and organizations of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Istanbul. I don’t see you getting torque over these issues. This stuff goes far beyond zoning and is direct obstruction to religious freedom. Or don’t you care about the Eastern Orthodox, because the majority in this country is Western Christians? (I hope you see the distinction I just made.)

Make some threads about those, and you might just see it. I'm perfectly capable of being outraged at acts of official government bigotry, whatever the target. For now, I'm going to continue to be outraged at these two.

There isn't a legitimate reason to have such a narrow classification. You know it. I know it. The Swiss know it. I'm just the only one who happens to care.

[IBCoupe]

Direct Democracy? Did I not say that correctly? Might have to go look up the term to make sure I am using it correctly.

Direct democracy on the subject of local ordinances is fifty people in a town hall, not a national referendum representing coordinated dislike of a particular subset of the population.

[Cold_Zero]

Fair enough on the last part. Would you still be up for crab cakes at G & M's with helio?

[heliochrome85]

Fair enough on the last part. Would you still be up for crab cakes at G & M's with helio?

g and m's is 3 min from my place. as is timbuktu.

[IBCoupe]

Of course! I need to head south!

[AZhitman]

Go ahead, prove me wrong. Finish this sentence without sounding like a xenophobe:

"We should ban the construction of this particular Muslim structure because we are not America, and we're not bound by their Constitution."

Did I do it right?

Or, maybe they're a little torqued at the long-standing and unfounded aggression towards Christians in the middle east? Maybe a little of that "eye for an eye" action we're all so fond of, perhaps?

p.s. You don't have to have a minaret to worship. Just like I don't have to get my soda pop from a vending machine in a government office.

[IBCoupe]

Haven't said it's illegal, Greg.

And isn't the alternate justification you provide a pretty good illustration of ACTUAL bigoted xenophobia? "Because we don't like what happens in some Muslim countries, we're going to restrict what Muslims can do in THIS country! That'll show them!"

And that was a cute attempt to draw a parallel, but I'm sure you can plainly see the difference between refusing to provide a luxury in a government building and refusing to let people build a particular religious structure on private property. Doesn't matter if they can pray without it: the question I'm asking is why are the Swiss banning it? What's the legitimate purpose served?

[AZhitman]

They're not "refusing to let people build a particular religious structure on private property". They can build a mosque the size of a Wal-Mart if they want. Just without the pointy bits.

When I lived on Cape Cod, you couldn't find a damn McDonald's - They were there, just no arches. Lots of cedar shingles and muted colors. Weird.

The Swiss can do as they please. They ain't Murrica. See, it's kinda like you always point out to me (correctly, whether I like it or not) when I rant about a human rights injustice in a foreign country: Our ways don't apply to them.

Or do you have different expectations of Switzerland because it's predominantly full of White people?

[Cold_Zero]

Sorry, I have taken some time to channel my inner Helvetia.
Let me see if I am tracking with you IB.
The Minaret Ban is bigoted because it specifically spells out one architectural feature that has been long associated with a religion, IE Islam. And that any law has to be applied equally so that all groups have to suffer from it. Using this logic, because the term ‘Jewish’ is a religious term then the policies and laws of Israel dismantling and freezing Jewish Settlements is just as equally offensive as the Minaret Ban? I think not!
What people wear specifically hats, head coverings and veils are not (in my opinion) under the jurisdiction of the government. Even though some could make the point that decency laws that require you to wear clothing in public are just as arbitrary and a front to civil liberties. But building ordinances are within the government’s jurisdiction. And I don’t have a problem with communities dictating what kind of architecture, siding and roofs that has to be employed during construction to preserve the cultural heritage of said community. Likewise, this ban does not prevent the construction of Mosques or the exercise of their religion inside Switzerland.
All this talk about if steeples are banned in Switzerland is kind of irrelevant. Churches with steeples are a part of the architectural and cultural heritage of Switzerland. It doesn’t matter if the mosques are built in Middle Eastern architecture, south Asian or African. Mosques and churches have to be built to comply with these laws.

[IBCoupe]

Greg,
The pointy bits are a particular religious structure. I don't understand how you can dispute that. I chose a pretty vague phrase. You might (and have) disputed the significance of this particular structure, but that they specifically banned a Muslim structure is not up for dispute. What's the legitimate purpose of doing it?

And where have I employed that particular argument? I'm trying to think of it, but I can't in my memory come up with something like that. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I honestly do not recall employing cultural relevance as a defense of government discrimination. It's possible; I just don't recall.