Burkini ban in the west discussion

Discussion in 'Self Improvement' started by Abou Sandal, Aug 23, 2016.

?
  1. Yes

    7 vote(s)
    28.0%
  2. No

    11 vote(s)
    44.0%
  3. Mostly Yes

    1 vote(s)
    4.0%
  4. Mostly No

    2 vote(s)
    8.0%
  5. I dont care

    4 vote(s)
    16.0%
  1. Abou Sandal

    Abou Sandal Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    30,189
    Likes Received:
    12,967
    100%
    Lik 7aram Hayda... 7ada Yfasserlo Enno Haydeh El Tenyeh Hiyyeh Emma...lol
     
  2. Indie

    Indie Well-Known Member
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2010
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    4,473
    48%
    A Muslim woman who agrees with me. Nice article. I especially liked the conclusion.

    MARCH 24, 2017
    The Headscarf is Not an Islamic Compulsion

    by AYESHA KHAN

    As the relationship between growing migrant Muslim populations and the western nations that host them grows increasingly complex, the controversy over the dress code for Muslim women has taken on an alarmingly central role. The recent European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision, which has ruled that bans on headscarves (and other religious symbols) in the workplace can be legal, is only one in a series of judgements on this controversial matter.

    While the ECJ has leaned towards religious neutrality and against the display of religious symbols in the workplace (including, for instance, the Christian cross), the United States Supreme Court, recently ruled to the contrary. In the case of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v Abercrombie & Fitch (2015), the US Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in favour of the hijab-clad employee, despite the employer’s claims that her headscarf clashed with the company’s dress policy. Only the dissenting judge, Justice Thomas reasoned as the ECJ has, that the dress code was a neutral policy and could not be the basis for a discrimination lawsuit. Even in the United States, however, the outcome of such cases is not always clear. In 2012, for example, a hijab-wearing employee who had sued Disneyland, did not succeed against her employer.

    Legal decisions aside, the issue of the hijab seems to have become a bone of contention between those in the West who see the increasing number of headscarves around them as a cultural invasion and those among the often young Muslim population who see it as a symbol of resistance. Instead of an essential religious dictate, however, the hijab is more of a desperate attempt to forge an identity that has largely been displaced as a result of migration.

    Women in Muslim-majority countries who veil or cover their hair often do so because of familial, or in the case of Saudi Arabia and Iran, state pressure. Ironically, women who wear the hijab in the West often choose to do so. While women in the Middle East may be wrapping themselves in additional garments to ward off the prying eyes of men dominating the bazaars and workplaces, some Muslim women in the West have told me that they find the hijab liberating and empowering.

    As someone who grew up partially in Saudi Arabia and witnessed firsthand the oppression of women that comes through forcing the veil upon them, that is indeed a strange concept for me to digest. The constant conflation of Muslim women and the headscarf in the western media is therefore something that I find quite disturbing. There are countless observant and pious Muslim women who do not cover their hair. On the other hand, there are also those who wear the hijab but aren’t particularly interested in following some of the more fundamental dictates of Islam.

    For generations we have learned that in order to be true to the Muslim faith one must affirm that there is one God and that Muhammad is his messenger. The Quran repeatedly stresses the importance of being steadfast in prayer and of giving alms to the poor, to feed the needy and to take care of orphans. Not once does the Quran mention the hijab, or headscarf, explicitly as an Islamic necessity.

    There are a few verses in the Quran that advise a modest dress code but to borrow a line from the renowned Pakistani film, Khuda ke liye(For God’s sake), “How can a religion that is meant for all time and all peoples insist on one particular uniform?”

    Certain Islamic scholars from countries as diverse as Pakistan, Egypt and Morocco have affirmed the view that what is modest is subject to interpretation and discretion and does not necessarily include a head-covering.

    Paradoxically, at a time when significant numbers in the West are growing resentful of headscarves and most unfortunately some of this intolerance has manifested itself in the form of hostile Islamophobic attacks on hijab-clad women, the fashion industry is rushing to embrace the hijab. Realising the monetary potential of marketing to brand-conscious hijabi millennials, Nike Pro Hijab, priced at $80, is the latest addition to jump on the “modest fashion” bandwagon. Dolce and Gabbana have gone several steps further, with their ostentatious daisy print hijab and abaya collection, aimed undoubtedly at the residents of the oil-rich Gulf Arab states, they accessorise with statement handbags and sunglasses that could set you back thousands of dollars. Modesty anyone?

    Keeping the controversy alive, a few months ago, Playboy magazine featured its first hijab-wearing Muslim woman. For her supporters, this was a “bold case for modesty” and perhaps another milestone in breaking barriers for those wearing headscarves. But to me, this was akin to turning the entire concept of hijab on its head. Though the Quran does not dictate a precise form of dress for men or women, it does ask both to be discreet and modest and not to draw unnecessary attention to oneself. An often-quoted verse asks both men and women “to lower their gaze and guard their private parts”. Playboy of course has historically been associated with the exact opposite of this philosophy.

    The concept of Islamic modesty therefore is not meant to test boundaries or provoke identity clashes with a wider society but simply to maintain decorum, respect and harmony between men and women. As Muslims in the West, we would be better off focusing on the more basic and uncontested tenets of our religion and finding common ground with other Abrahamic faiths based on shared principles, such as providing for the needy and helping the downtrodden.

    Join the debate on Faceboo
    Ayesha Khan is a lawyer and author of “Rodeo Drive to Raja Bazaar“. Twitter: @ayeshaijazkhan Website: www.ayeshaijazkhan.com
     
  3. manifesto

    manifesto Active Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    287
    58%
    I, too, believe that the hijab and burkini are a symbol of oppression, but if women are wearing them out of personal choice, as is the case in France, then we should defend their right to be oppressed.

    If you respect a nun's choice to cover her head, while monks can get around without any head gear, than you are supposed to extend Burkini-clad women that same courtesy.

    "Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man."

    1 Corinthians 11:3-7
     
  4. kmarthe

    kmarthe Legendary Member
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,913
    Likes Received:
    4,981
    100%
    Look at those two red sentences of yours. You acknowledge that women can chose to be oppressed, and you say that when they make this choice we should support them. Don't you see that it is schizophrenic to simultaneously promote women freedom while supporting them when they chose to be oppressed? That is supporting freedom a la carte :D It is like promoting the beauty of life and supporting those who chose to commit suicide at the same time :)

    Speaking of nuns, again, their head cover is NOT a symbol of oppression since they chose to dedicate their lives to serve the church through integration in a closed religious order (with particular clothing), WITHOUT integrating in the society and accepting the gender inequality that people like you are defending. BTW, do you know that there are civil nuns (not associated with any religious order) who do not cover their heads and who don't have particular vestment ?

    Also and very importantly, who told you monks and priests don't have head coverings? the mere fact that priests and monks do cover their heads discredit the gender inequality issue. I told you if Muslim men wear hijab and burkini I wouldn't have a problem, but restricting the beautiful choice of oppression to women only while their male counterparts don't enjoy this choice is simply hypocrisy.
     
  5. manifesto

    manifesto Active Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    287
    58%
    Big difference. Just because I don't personally agree with someone's lifestyle, doesn't mean I have to ban this lifestyle.
    I believe that a sedentary life and overeating are unhealthy, but who am I to ban to ban overweight people from indulging in junk food?
    This is the very sole definition of individual freedom, which you seem not to fully understand.

    For us non-believers or non-Mulsims, the veil is often seen as a symbol of oppression and sexism.
    But for some veiled woman, particulary those who wear it out of choice, it is seen as a religious obligation, not as an instrument of oppression by their male counterparts. It's the very word of God.
    If you can argue that a nun's head covering is a religious symbol of worship and dedication to convent life, we can argue the same about the hijab.
    Sexist. Maybe? Outdated? Yes. Call it whatever you want. As long as they're not hurting anyone, I don't see why we should impose a ban on their religious attire. Just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of a Christian looking down on the veil.

    Even Muslim Sheikhs wear head coverings, so I don't see how that puts Christianity at an advantage.
    When I said nuns, I meant Orthodox nuns, specifically Eastern Orthodox nuns, whose uniform very much resembles a burka.

    I also gave you an excerpt from the Bible, which clearly exposes the Christianity's sexist and patriarchal attitude towards the female body.
    "Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man."
    1 Corinthians 11:3-7

    So I guess that settles the debate. Next?
     
  6. Ralph N

    Ralph N Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2016
    Messages:
    775
    Likes Received:
    255
    1%


    Quran doesnt teach you to accept others.. It teaches you to accept Muslims Islam and the rest of the world should be put to death...Jizya or hijra or accept Islam...So dont play the I am free game on us no...think again Islam is a Slave Producing machine... it creates Slave to Satan...
     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  7. manifesto

    manifesto Active Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    287
    58%
    What's this got to do with the topic at hand?
    We're debating the concept of freedom of religion in free countries such as France, a nation that every looks up to as a perfect example of democracy.

    You want to discuss the state of minorities in Sharia-governed countries, please feel free to do so in a different thread.
     

Share This Page