The triumph of reason?

[123everton]

http://uk.news.yahoo....veil-ban-ca02f96.html

[jno]

imho, yes. But I know there are many who enjoy imagining themselves as the liberty police, fearlessly ripping women's clothes off to set them free by making them conform to the norms of Newcastle.

[olddutch]

The abolition of Council of Europe human rights watchdog would be a triumph of reason - especially as the Council's resolution has no legal weight against national laws.We could keep it simple and cut waste by deciding these matters ourselves in our own parliament.

[123everton]

I agree jno (just realised you write your name in lower case), it is without doubt the least worst solution, the statement made by the council is one of those rare occasions were I can find nothing to disagree with.

[mollykins]

It's kind of against human rights to make women wear them, so how can it be against human rights to ban them?

But if they were banned, I reckon many muslim men wouldn't let their wives out the house.

[jno]

I think it's because human rights matters have been decided domestically in the past, with occasionally calamitous results, that it's useful to have someone providing guidance, olddutch, even if its only force is legal rather than moral.

[jno]

then the issue is bullying in the home, mollykins, not clothing. But women are already free to leave bullying husbands in this country; don't be too ready to assume that all non-European women are helpless dishrags with no minds of their own.

It can be against human rights to tell women what they must, or must not, wear. You may not like hoodies, but it would be pretty dictatorial to ban them in public. (What people do in private is their own business.)

[123everton]

Molly if a woman is being forced to do anything it's wrong, the trouble is (as perplexing and vexing to many as it is) that lots of women choose to wear it.
It's their statement of who they are, I dislike the veil (make it clear), but a ban is not the answer.
Read your history, in particular Iran circa 1978 to 1979 just before the Islamic revolution and the fall of the Shah.
Takes all sorts to make a world.

[joeluke]

Are women wearing these hoods banned from entering banks, just as motorcyclists wearing crash helmets are?

And if not why not, same principle

[mollykins]

exactly joe, else its discriminating agaisnt the motorcyclists.

[jno]

banks are free to ban burkas on their private property if they wish. They will no doubt do so if there's a surge in robberies by women in burkas, but I don't see any reason why they'd do it before that happens.

[123everton]

Do the ban it merchants understand what their threatening to create?
Imagine, a Muslim woman goes to buy some onions, the police see her and stop her, liberal as we are (ahem), they issue an on the spot fine, she refuses to pay as she's done nothing wrong, now what?
You're going to create prisoners of conscience, do you want that in Britain?

[123everton]

It's just occurred to me, I don't think women in burkhas use banks because of usuary.

[joeluke]

But what about if a helmet wearing motorcyclist goes to buy some onions and the woman serving him/her is wearing a burka?

[anotheoldgit]

jno

/// banks are free to ban burkas on their private property if they wish. They will no doubt do so if there's a surge in robberies by women in burkas, but I don't see any reason why they'd do it before that happens.///

Kinda like closing the stable door after thev'e got away with thousands, isn't it?

[naomi24]

//The resolution said many Muslims in Europe "lack adequate knowledge of Islam, let alone other religions, which can make them vulnerable to 'Islamism' as a religiously disguised form of political extremism."//

THAT is triumph of reason - but something the religious apologists are clearly happy to overlook.

….and ….

//….it called on Muslims in Europe "to abandon any traditional interpretations of Islam which deny gender equality and limit women's rights ... Women are equal to men in all respects and must be treated accordingly.//

THAT is triumph of reason - but since it’s simply not happening, and is highly unlikely to happen within the bounds of hard-line Islam, once again it’s something the religious apologists are clearly happy to ignore.

As for //……… I know there are many who enjoy imagining themselves as the liberty police, fearlessly ripping women's clothes off to set them free ……… // - what a ridiculously ignorant statement.

[123everton]

The resolution said many Muslims in Europe "lack adequate knowledge of Islam, let along other religions, which can make them vulnerable to 'Islamism' as a religiously disguised form of political extremism."

European schools should combat this ignorance by teaching all pupils about Islam, Judaism and Christianity, it said.
Where's the apology in that?
The report offers a solution that removes the need for conflict, what's wrong with that?

[naomi24]

There's nothing wrong with that, but it’s a pity it took someone who isn’t a religious apologist to highlight the fundamental concerns outlined in the report rather than immediately applauding the burqa issue which, coming from an organisation that carries no legal weight, in reality merely pays lip service to Islam and consequently means absolutely nothing.

[123everton]

They're an advisory body we have lots of them in Britain too, they have an influence on policy, but you should tell them how you feel.
I'm sure they'd be very interested ;-))

[naomi24]

Very smart, Everton, but sadly for you really smart people know that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. ;o)

The issue isn’t what I think, but that you in immediately lauding their deliberations on the burqa are completely ignoring the real issues highlighted in the report - but maybe they don't sit so comfortably with you. Perhaps you should read it again - and then really think about what it says.