Let me get that straight: An uncovered woman is against social customs inside the Islamic world, so we must respect that.

Yet a woman who has her face covered is against social customs everywhere outside of the Islamic world yet we cannot possibly respect that?

Logic fail.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

well, I want to go around naked but society forces me to wear clothes. is that barbaric? in western countries the governments certainly dictate how little women should expose since generally walking around without with boobs exposed is not allowed. if people can be forced to wear some clothes in secular western countries, I don't see why we cannot outlaw the burka and ask a woman to show at least her face in public (since wearing the burka is not a religious requirement at all, as proven daily by the hundreds of millions of non-burka wearing Muslim women in the world)

Wearing a miniskirt is not a religious requirement either. Can I outlaw that?

I'm guessing from your tone that you don't have the legs for a mini.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

well, I want to go around naked but society forces me to wear clothes. is that barbaric? in western countries the governments certainly dictate how little women should expose since generally walking around without with boobs exposed is not allowed. if people can be forced to wear some clothes in secular western countries, I don't see why we cannot outlaw the burka and ask a woman to show at least her face in public (since wearing the burka is not a religious requirement at all, as proven daily by the hundreds of millions of non-burka wearing Muslim women in the world)

Wearing a miniskirt is not a religious requirement either. Can I outlaw that?

sure you can, but then you are voted out and the law is canceled because today in France miniskirst are accepted. the government in France or the US regulates plenty of stuff, if you can use pot, if you can drink alcohol depending on your age, if you can buy weapons and carry them and so on. laws changes with times and based on how a society evolves. wearing a miniskirt or even a bikini was scandalous and probably not allowed in 1900 in France, while now is allowed and perceived as normal, even though you can go to the beach totally dressed and it is also perfectly ok. so the government can certainly prohibit a garment that totally covers a person and makes the person unrecognizable. while women in France and other western European country dress in the most wide variety of ways, all perfectly acceptable (including wearing a veil on their heads), the burka is totally outside of the current social customs of these countries. it is hard to argue with a straight face that if you are a non Muslim woman in France and you are shy and prefer to dress conservatively you wear a burka. people who wear a burka in France do not want to integrate in French society (even the ones who are born there), they live there but act as if they were in Yemen.

First of all, you don't know what a burka is, so go ahead and look it up before you start looking any more ignorant than you are already. And I never knew integrating into a society is as easy as accepting their dress code. You should tell that to the 9/11 hijackers - all wearing Western garb, you know.

OK. Let's follow your logic. An uncovered woman is totally against current social customs in the Gulf Arab countries. Then let's stop calling these governments oppressive because they tell their citizens how to dress. Congratulations, you've just achieved a dubious honor of parity with Al-Saud.

Also, women living by themselves, dating, making their own decisions and forging an independent path is totally against the customs of these societies. Their governments are perfectly in the right for banning all of these.

Openly practicing religions other than Islam is totally against the social customs in the Gulf Arab states. Their governments are completely in the right for banning any open expressions of Christianity, construction of churches, celebrating religious holidays, etc.

Before you embarrass yourself any longer, here's the answer: certain rights are not and should not be subject to majority decisions. If the majority of people voted to bring slavery back, would it be OK to do it? If the state of Alabama wants to ban interracial marriages and have a reasonable hope of achieving a majority decision on this, should they be allowed to do so?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure if you 'choose to wear it's lovely, but if you are forced to a ball and chain for many. I imagine thats why France banned it - in solidarity with many hundreds of millions of women who have NO choice. And to send a message, that wont be happening even one time in France. Maybe there would be lots who wore it freely in France but then the teen girl whose family bullies her into it. Not worth it it sounds like. Especially since some of their neighborhoods sound so closed to police etc - how would they even investigate? These girls would be swallowed up into silence. We are still looking for that awful taxi driver in Texas who honor killed his lovely teen daughters as he thought they were too western.

It is subjugation - plain and simple. And while many may disagree with me, I've seen my fair share of young girls in the US forced to cover. Many have been angry and resentful, and their feelings have come across very clearly in their writing assignments and artwork.

An educational setting - like a courtroom - should level the playing field. Allowing young women to explore who they are OUTSIDE of their religious belief system is healthy, imo. Religion should not define WHO we are. Unfortunately, this isn't the case with Islam.

Forcing women to uncover is as barbaric as forcing them to cover.

Who is being forced? They are being given choice.

The one thing I would agree with is not having faces covered, because that is an issue of security. There have been many cases of child kidnappings happening by people who had their faces covered, there have been robberies, there have been instances of terror attacks involving men disguised as women with their faces covered, et cetera. This means, suspects cannot be identified. Covering one's face is a security problem.

Banning niqab is taking one choice away.

You just got a bunch people killed in France, with not a single face cover in sight. I don't see the security problems going away, do you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

well, I want to go around naked but society forces me to wear clothes. is that barbaric? in western countries the governments certainly dictate how little women should expose since generally walking around without with boobs exposed is not allowed. if people can be forced to wear some clothes in secular western countries, I don't see why we cannot outlaw the burka and ask a woman to show at least her face in public (since wearing the burka is not a religious requirement at all, as proven daily by the hundreds of millions of non-burka wearing Muslim women in the world)

Wearing a miniskirt is not a religious requirement either. Can I outlaw that?

sure you can, but then you are voted out and the law is canceled because today in France miniskirst are accepted. the government in France or the US regulates plenty of stuff, if you can use pot, if you can drink alcohol depending on your age, if you can buy weapons and carry them and so on. laws changes with times and based on how a society evolves. wearing a miniskirt or even a bikini was scandalous and probably not allowed in 1900 in France, while now is allowed and perceived as normal, even though you can go to the beach totally dressed and it is also perfectly ok. so the government can certainly prohibit a garment that totally covers a person and makes the person unrecognizable. while women in France and other western European country dress in the most wide variety of ways, all perfectly acceptable (including wearing a veil on their heads), the burka is totally outside of the current social customs of these countries. it is hard to argue with a straight face that if you are a non Muslim woman in France and you are shy and prefer to dress conservatively you wear a burka. people who wear a burka in France do not want to integrate in French society (even the ones who are born there), they live there but act as if they were in Yemen.

Covering up from head to toe isn't religious modesty. And thanks to extremists who like to kill innocent people, society has a vested interest in not letting people dress in such a way they can easily conceal bombs or weapons. And if Muslims don't like the fact that public safety might require banning such garb, then they can blame the radicalized terrorists for such changes.

+1000

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure if you 'choose to wear it's lovely, but if you are forced to a ball and chain for many. I imagine thats why France banned it - in solidarity with many hundreds of millions of women who have NO choice. And to send a message, that wont be happening even one time in France. Maybe there would be lots who wore it freely in France but then the teen girl whose family bullies her into it. Not worth it it sounds like. Especially since some of their neighborhoods sound so closed to police etc - how would they even investigate? These girls would be swallowed up into silence. We are still looking for that awful taxi driver in Texas who honor killed his lovely teen daughters as he thought they were too western.

It is subjugation - plain and simple. And while many may disagree with me, I've seen my fair share of young girls in the US forced to cover. Many have been angry and resentful, and their feelings have come across very clearly in their writing assignments and artwork.

An educational setting - like a courtroom - should level the playing field. Allowing young women to explore who they are OUTSIDE of their religious belief system is healthy, imo. Religion should not define WHO we are. Unfortunately, this isn't the case with Islam.

Forcing women to uncover is as barbaric as forcing them to cover.

Who is being forced? They are being given choice.

The one thing I would agree with is not having faces covered, because that is an issue of security. There have been many cases of child kidnappings happening by people who had their faces covered, there have been robberies, there have been instances of terror attacks involving men disguised as women with their faces covered, et cetera. This means, suspects cannot be identified. Covering one's face is a security problem.

Anonymous wrote:

well, I want to go around naked but society forces me to wear clothes. is that barbaric? in western countries the governments certainly dictate how little women should expose since generally walking around without with boobs exposed is not allowed. if people can be forced to wear some clothes in secular western countries, I don't see why we cannot outlaw the burka and ask a woman to show at least her face in public (since wearing the burka is not a religious requirement at all, as proven daily by the hundreds of millions of non-burka wearing Muslim women in the world)

Wearing a miniskirt is not a religious requirement either. Can I outlaw that?

Anonymous wrote:To 14:57 -

Modesty is one thing...it's a law saying you can't walk down the street with your penis exposed.

Covering up from head to toe isn't religious modesty. And thanks to extremists who like to kill innocent people, society has a vested interest in not letting people dress in such a way they can easily conceal bombs or weapons. And if Muslims don't like the fact that public safety might require banning such garb, then they can blame the radicalized terrorists for such changes.

France has banned the niqab, yet people still died.

Anonymous wrote:

See? You don't get it.

their own bodies as owned by men via the Quran . . .

THAT'S barbaric!

They aren't deciding for themselves. They've simply spent years being told how to dress and therefore it's become their reality. You can't understand that?

Simply put, it's brainwashing.

It's quite marvelous that you possess magic powers to understand the reasons of hundreds of millions of women, without as much as meeting them. With these supernatural abilities, what are you doing posting on DCUM? Shouldn't you be out in the world making billions of dollars?

You are as much of an oppressor as Al-Saud.

To 14:57 -

Modesty is one thing...it's a law saying you can't walk down the street with your penis exposed.

Covering up from head to toe isn't religious modesty. And thanks to extremists who like to kill innocent people, society has a vested interest in not letting people dress in such a way they can easily conceal bombs or weapons. And if Muslims don't like the fact that public safety might require banning such garb, then they can blame the radicalized terrorists for such changes.

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad the niqab is outlawed in France. Otherwise this lovely ninja could still be walking around in Paris with impunity with an AK-47 inside her dress.

http://abonnes.lemonde.fr/societe/portfolio/2015/0...te-a-la-main_4552904_3224.html

It's so barbaric to ask them to show their faces...

Outlawing niqab did not prevent the recent Paris attack. I don't see the point of outlawing it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure if you 'choose to wear it's lovely, but if you are forced to a ball and chain for many. I imagine thats why France banned it - in solidarity with many hundreds of millions of women who have NO choice. And to send a message, that wont be happening even one time in France. Maybe there would be lots who wore it freely in France but then the teen girl whose family bullies her into it. Not worth it it sounds like. Especially since some of their neighborhoods sound so closed to police etc - how would they even investigate? These girls would be swallowed up into silence. We are still looking for that awful taxi driver in Texas who honor killed his lovely teen daughters as he thought they were too western.

It is subjugation - plain and simple. And while many may disagree with me, I've seen my fair share of young girls in the US forced to cover. Many have been angry and resentful, and their feelings have come across very clearly in their writing assignments and artwork.

An educational setting - like a courtroom - should level the playing field. Allowing young women to explore who they are OUTSIDE of their religious belief system is healthy, imo. Religion should not define WHO we are. Unfortunately, this isn't the case with Islam.

Forcing women to uncover is as barbaric as forcing them to cover.

Making women aware of freedom is barbaric?

Allowing them to express themselves in other ways is barbaric?

Why are you putting words in my mouth?

Women who live in secular countries know very well of freedoms available to them. If you outlaw a particular type of cover, you are in fact mandating dress codes as much as Al-Saud who dictate covering. It's not your business to decide or dictate how much or how little women should expose. It's not up to you. They own their bodies. Not you. Taking away the freedom to cover is barbaric.

well, I want to go around naked but society forces me to wear clothes. is that barbaric? in western countries the governments certainly dictate how little women should expose since generally walking around without with boobs exposed is not allowed. if people can be forced to wear some clothes in secular western countries, I don't see why we cannot outlaw the burka and ask a woman to show at least her face in public (since wearing the burka is not a religious requirement at all, as proven daily by the hundreds of millions of non-burka wearing Muslim women in the world)

So society can dictate you to act modestly, but religion can't? ummmm this sounds quite hypocritical.
The thing is, and quoting the poster you replied to, 'It's not your business to decide or dictate how much or how little women should expose'. PERIOD!!!!!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure if you 'choose to wear it's lovely, but if you are forced to a ball and chain for many. I imagine thats why France banned it - in solidarity with many hundreds of millions of women who have NO choice. And to send a message, that wont be happening even one time in France. Maybe there would be lots who wore it freely in France but then the teen girl whose family bullies her into it. Not worth it it sounds like. Especially since some of their neighborhoods sound so closed to police etc - how would they even investigate? These girls would be swallowed up into silence. We are still looking for that awful taxi driver in Texas who honor killed his lovely teen daughters as he thought they were too western.

It is subjugation - plain and simple. And while many may disagree with me, I've seen my fair share of young girls in the US forced to cover. Many have been angry and resentful, and their feelings have come across very clearly in their writing assignments and artwork.

An educational setting - like a courtroom - should level the playing field. Allowing young women to explore who they are OUTSIDE of their religious belief system is healthy, imo. Religion should not define WHO we are. Unfortunately, this isn't the case with Islam.

Forcing women to uncover is as barbaric as forcing them to cover.

Making women aware of freedom is barbaric?

Allowing them to express themselves in other ways is barbaric?

Why are you putting words in my mouth?

Women who live in secular countries know very well of freedoms available to them. If you outlaw a particular type of cover, you are in fact mandating dress codes as much as Al-Saud who dictate covering. It's not your business to decide or dictate how much or how little women should expose. It's not up to you. They own their bodies. Not you. Taking away the freedom to cover is barbaric.

well, I want to go around naked but society forces me to wear clothes. is that barbaric? in western countries the governments certainly dictate how little women should expose since generally walking around without with boobs exposed is not allowed. if people can be forced to wear some clothes in secular western countries, I don't see why we cannot outlaw the burka and ask a woman to show at least her face in public (since wearing the burka is not a religious requirement at all, as proven daily by the hundreds of millions of non-burka wearing Muslim women in the world)

I'm glad the niqab is outlawed in France. Otherwise this lovely ninja could still be walking around in Paris with impunity with an AK-47 inside her dress.

http://abonnes.lemonde.fr/societe/portfolio/2015/0...te-a-la-main_4552904_3224.html

It's so barbaric to ask them to show their faces...