…I do know that this trend is growing fast and cannot just be “tolerated” as a minority tendency, just one of many choices people make.Yasmin’ll tell you what can be tolerated, and what can’t. For the tolerance!
They keep apart from fellow Britons by withholding proper human interactions. It’s not right or fair.It's perfectly right - and fair - to withhold 'proper human interaction' if we wish. You are not owed that - if you feel you don't get it, you're free to go elsewhere.
Indeed, if the state simply allows shops and organisations to make their own minds up, free of the looming threat of prosecution on 'discrimination' grounds, then as Longrider points out, we may soon see a sea-change.
But Yaz isn't exactly being honest about why she wants the burkha banned...
We Muslims are already unfairly thought of as the enemy within. Niqabs make us appear more alien, more dangerous and suspicious.Yes. It's all about you, Yaz, isn't it? You, and your plan:
Many others are trying to promote progressive Islam, which fits our times and needs.No. It doesn't. Religion - any religion - has had its day.
22 comments:
If this were any other religion we would not be talking about incessantly it would simply be done.
I'm suffering serious Islam Fatigue.
I remember a time when I had never heard of Islam but I truly believe I'm never again going to see a day when we don't talk about it or hear about it.
I wish Twitter would do a #IslamicFlounce for a day just to see if the world really would implode.
Bunny
Sorry Yazmin but you are the enemy within, you are trying to impose an alien culture upon us, all the time obscuring it as 'progressive'.
Personally, I'm against banning anything. To me, the "banning" of something suggests a wish to control by the most powerful or vocal, and it's rare that you'll hear either of those types banning or calling for a ban on something that they themselves do or enjoy.
I've no problem with muslim women wearing their burkhas, just as I'd have no problem asking them to remove it if they wished to do business with me, or speak to me - equally they have the option to refuse my request, and take their business elsewhere.
I just don't see the issue.
We've been here ourselves in the past; whether it be the Edwardian ankle, the 50's knee or the 1960's... well, lets not go there. Hotpants when you were the height of an 8 year old leaves the kind of mental scaring that lasts a lifetime.
Attitudes, like fashions, change over time and so I wouldn't be surprised if the current obsession with face coverings go the way of other fads. A process that will be hastened when employers, customers and others choose not to deal with faceless black clad ninjas and the various lite versions.
Ban them? What's the point. Why play their game by making them martyrs? This, I believe, is a problem that will go away if ignored.
Alternatively, we might launch websites titled 'Barely Legal Eyeballs' or 'Hot Middle Eastern Iris'... sexualise the eyes and dare them to take the next logical step ;-)
I see the dark age death cult's had an outing in Nairobi. Can't wait for Dhimmi Dave to tell me the true meaning again.
As for the cloth cowling, I only wish the men wore one too.
As I said 40 minutes after your comment on the WoaR site: YAB believes that all women should be allowed to do what they want to do – but only as long as what they want to do is what YAB believes they should want to do. Should any woman want to do what YAB does not want them to do, then that choice should be removed from them.
That makes sense, Yasmin.
I am, like, so totally on your side, JuliaM; the freedoms this country has enjoyed for perhaps more centuries than any other do include the freedom not to associate or mingle with others – that, by doing so, you might be creating barriers between yourself and others remains your problem, and cannot be a problem that you can resolve by forcing it upon the others.
Just remembered a TV commercial that was airing in Malaysia that had me in fits of giggles every time I saw it...
And, thanks to YouTube, you can watch it too: Sunsilk Shampoo Tv Ad
(it's the main video, not the initial YouTube inserted ads)
Shouldn't laugh really, they're only complying with the local laws/customs, but... well, you decide.
Ah but Fidel, you're the racist for demanding equality by asking them to remove their face covering.
The problem with the burka is that it's a statement of faith (in their eyes) that trumps any objections you have, and automatically puts you in the wrong on any interaction that involves them.
Now I have no wish to see anything banned either, but, until islam either gets over itself or reforms, their demands simply will not stop and wearing a burka everywhere no matter the circumstances is one of its demands. That essentially means a visit from the plod with you on a charge of racial or religious aggravation should you refuse to serve a burka clad woman.
I think covering the face is a different issue to choosing to cover everything else in a sack, because it is hiding identity and I don't think anyone has a right to anonymity in a public space. By covering the mouth communication is made extremely difficult. If Muslim women want the rights of citizenship they should be prepared for interaction with the broader community and not wander among us as anonymous bundles of fabric. Otherwise live somewhere else.
@quiet man
Yes, I know - but I'd actually relish the conversation with Plod you see. It would be one of those where they challenge you about the "offence" expecting you to incriminate yourself through a tirade about "the buggers taking over" and "shouldn't be tolerated" etc etc - whereas simply asking them "which woman?" should provide a fair bit of entertainment, because then they would need to describe her, and that's rather tricky as burkhas don't tend to have many individual features, and if they could only describe the burka ... well, things get a bit abstract then don't they?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3918790/Woman-who-disguised-herself-in-burka-jailed-for-murdering-husband.html
" Mahmuda Khatun, 28, stabbed Mohammed Amin Miah through the heart on his 28th birthday in August last year.
Opticians assistant Khatun, who regularly wore Western clothes, wanted to hide her identity from neighbours and CCTV cameras. "
I wonder what his views on the Burka were. He did deserve to live despite his repulsive name - Mohammed.
If a significant minority of Muslims did not behave like 'the enemy within' then they would not be treated as such.
If you do not 'seek the peace of the city*' you are exiled to, or living in, or born in, (and city can mean nation or country as well) then it is only expected that people will dislike your religion, its symbols, its ideology and its adherents.
Every successful and integrated immigrant,has recognised that to live and prosper in Britain then you need to abide by this precept of 'seeking the peace of the nation' see Jeremiah 29:7 for source.
I do not see much of Britain's Islamic community following such a precept. Unfortunately. Which is why they are so unpopular with so many people.
Yasmin is an Ismaili.
I have just been to visit the Ismaili Centre in South Kensington as part of Open House Day. Knowing until now nothing whatever about them, I learned that Ismailis are mystical, prayerful, respectful of the neighbours, given to charity, keen to make a contribution towards the societies in which they live, enthusiastic about education, and definitely not keen on blowing people up, cutting throats, oppressing women (women and men pray in the same prayer hall) or seeking rights that their non-Muslims neighbours don't have.
As such they are an asset to our society and definitely the sort of people our government should be talking to and encouraging.
There's evidently more to Islam than the bearded crazies.
Burkhas, yeah one of my colleagues used to make his wife or she did it out of love for God and wore the outfits.
Khalid the husband wouldn't be seen outside without his Nike or top branded clothing, top of the range phones and sunglasses.
An odd sight in ASDA for sure
"I'm suffering serious Islam Fatigue."
Reading the news this morning, so am I... :/
"Personally, I'm against banning anything. To me, the "banning" of something suggests a wish to control by the most powerful or vocal..."
Agreed.
"Alternatively, we might launch websites titled 'Barely Legal Eyeballs' or 'Hot Middle Eastern Iris'..."
LOL!
"Shouldn't laugh really..."
Ah, well, I'm going to Hell (if it exists) anyway! :)
"...but, until islam either gets over itself or reforms, their demands simply will not stop ..."
Let them demand. We just keep ignoring them. It works with other children...
"...and I don't think anyone has a right to anonymity in a public space."
Then...you're part of the problem.
"If a significant minority of Muslims did not behave like 'the enemy within' then they would not be treated as such. "
Spot on!
"There's evidently more to Islam than the bearded crazies."
Well, maybe when the Ismailis are in the ascendency, and not the Whahhbists, there'll be progress.
But not before then.
There's a simple solution to this - burkhas should be perfectly legal in any open public space, but any private landowner should be perfectly entitled to ban them. And that would include land and property owned by State entities, hospitals/schools/etc.
Thus is someone wants to walk down the street dressed head to toe in black thats their right. But in order to interact with everyone else in shops, offices and suchlike chances are they will have to remove their face mask.
Incidentally, would a shop keeper currently run foul of the law for banning burkhas on his premises? One has the suspicion that the usual suspects would be screaming racism etc. But how could anyone prove that the person(s) so banned were of any particular race (or indeed sex)?
AndrewWS, I agree that the Ismailis are a different kettle of fish. Sadly, they are very much a persecuted minority in Islam and are often treated as heretics. The vast majority of Islamic societies produce people who are very liable to suffer from 'sudden jihad syndrome' or follow paths that are not likely to be peaceful.
If the majority of Islamic theology and the cultures it produces were governed by Ismaili ideas then there would be considerably less problems with Islam.
It's the Islamic Orthodoxy that is the problem not the Islamic Heretics. With Islam the heretics are those looking for a reasonably humane path within Islam. Orthodox Islam is the rest that we see on our screens every day, the killing, the intolerance and the oppression.
@Jim
Incidentally, would a shop keeper currently run foul of the law for banning burkhas on his premises?
I wonder? How many Banks, Petrol Stations and Shops already have a sign on the door requesting the removal of crash helmets before entry
One has the suspicion that the usual suspects would be screaming racism etc.
Natch
But how could anyone prove that the person(s) so banned were of any particular race (or indeed sex)?
Exactly ;)
Jim,
A friend of mine considered opening a little B&B in his town. Knowing of recent events, he wished to ensure he did not fall foul of any minority groups so contacted his local authority for advice. His proposed sign,
"We welcome guests of all persuasions and religions. Especially gays and Muslims",
for some reason was rejected. No sense of humour some people!
Penseivat
Especially gays and Muslims
Would that be in a twin or a double room?
XX John Pickworth said...
Attitudes, like fashions, change over time and so I wouldn't be surprised if the current obsession with face coverings go the way of other fads. XX
1500 years or so is one Hel of a fucking long "fad" laddie.
Post a Comment