Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Burqa Banned in France

I'm not sure what I think about this just yet, but France has solidly laid down their opinion. The vote passed their Senate 246 to 1, and will go into effect next Spring. Here is a snippet from CNN News:

The French senate approved Tuesday a law banning any veils that cover the face -- including the burqa, the full-body covering worn by some Muslim women -- making France the first European country to plan such a measure.
The law passed by a vote of 246 to 1, with about 100 abstentions coming essentially from left-leaning politicians.
The legislation was overwhelmingly approved by the lower house of parliament in July and will go into effect next spring.
French people back the ban by a margin of more than four to one, the Pew Global Attitudes Project found in a survey earlier this year.
Some 82 percent of people polled approved of a ban, while 17 percent disapproved. That was the widest support the Washington-based think tank found in any of the five countries it surveyed.
Clear majorities also backed burqa bans in Germany, Britain and Spain, while two out of three Americans opposed it, the survey found.
A panel of French lawmakers recommended a ban last year, and lawmakers unanimously passed a non-binding resolution in May calling the full-face veil contrary to the laws of the nation.
"Given the damage it produces on those rules which allow the life in community, ensure the dignity of the person and equality between sexes, this practice, even if it is voluntary, cannot be tolerated in any public place," the French government said when it sent the measure to parliament in May.
The law imposes a fine of 150 euros ($190) and/or a citizenship course as punishment for wearing a face-covering veil. Forcing a woman to wear a niqab or a burqa will be punishable by a year in prison or a 15,000-euro ($19,000) fine, the government said, calling it "a new form of enslavement that the republic cannot accept on its soil." READ MORE

I'm going to withhold my opinion, and instead pose the questions to you: What ramifications do you think this has on French citizens? Do you think this is fair for the French Muslim woman who believes that donning a veil is necessary to adhere to God's law? Or do you think this is a necessary step to protect the securities of all Frenchmen? Or do you have another view?

I'd love to hear your opinions. I certainly think this is going to be a major issue in the near future, and it would be wise to be familiar this issue.


C said...

Good for France. I wish the whole EU Government would make it an EU wide ban. I live and work in London UK and would welcome a ban. Ten years ago you never saw any of these muslim outfits. Five years ago you saw a few headscarves. Now you cannot enter a shop or walk down any road (even surburban) without running into a muslim woman with her face covered. It is not necessary and being looked at like I am worse than a piece of shit will not be welcome. I saw an advert on a bus stop in East London saying "wear your support" i.e. for palestine and a photo of a niqab. As the number of muslims increases the problems will get worse and I am sick of the victim mentality coming from them. Why should we not be able to see their faces? It is not even part of their religion! If they want to wear it move back to your primitive country and practice your beliefs with people who share them.

Tizita said...

WOOOOOOO!!!!! Good for u France, well done! Fabulous, just fabulous, marvelous, Good for them.

Now, after saying that im ready to hear some frightening news abt Muslim riots, especially the women. I find it funny that the women will protest even though they don't like the burqa, they wear it b/c their male relatives force them to do so.

I do applaud France for standing up & saying NO! This is the way i see it if u don't want to "When in Rome do as the Romans" then there is a whole country dedicated to ur oppressive ways.

Yes, i do believe this is fair for the French muslim women, C'mon why don't they just stick w/ the hijab?

And if they find it necessary to cover from head to toe then why get OUT OF THE HOUSE! After all, isn't ur goal not to be seen by the public?....Then why are u leaving the house in the first place? Uggg!

I just have to say this one more time. WOOOOOO!!!! good for u France!!!!!!!!!

Haecceitas said...

In my opinion, the law that prohibits forcing a woman to wear a niqab or a burqa (or any specific type of clothing she doesn't want to wear herself) is OK but the prohibition of wearing that type of clothing of one's own free choice is wrong.

Jabari said...

All I have to say to this thank Jesus Christ that some elements of Sharia law are being prevented from invading France :D.

forgive_your_enemies said...

Do I understand corretly that the burqa is banned, but not the niqab, if the woman is wearing it of her own choice?

A friend who wears the niqab took me to a conference once where all this was explained - I don't have the references but what they were saying is that according to some scholars, the face and hands of a woman can be seen in public, and according to others, only the eyes. They were saying that both opinions are ok. But I gather many believe that you get more rewards in the afterlife if you wear the niqab.

What this means is that covering the face is not necessary in Islam - even those who argue for it say it is optional. It's thus different from the Jewish kippa which, as far as I know, in Orthodox Judaism, MUST be worn. Therefore, banning burqa and niqab would be fine with me. Of course, I don't know what arguments are used for example in Afghanistan by those who advocate the burqa or other full coverings.

Tom said...

Let me pick up on the message from Tizita: "... if they find it necessary to cover from head to toe then why get OUT OF THE HOUSE!"

And I think the point is "to display their sense of Islamic Supremacy".

No devout Muslim can be a loyal citizen of France. Devout Muslims require the implementation of sharia law and the destruction of the constitution of France.

The full face veil and the naqib are but manifestations of the sickest forms of Islamism and manifestations of the Muslim hatred of a) women and b) any way of life but their own.

These precious women are being used as billboards for a hate-filled ideology of military/political conquest and horrific racial/gender/cultural discrimination.

The naqib advertises: "not only am I a tormented piece of property but I exist to help destroy anything opposed to Islam".

The naqib also says: "my husband/lover is a parasite and he's bleeding dry not only me but also your national treasury".

So, just as the French are expelling the Roma for refusing to integrate, so also must the French expel anyone determined to wear or force the wearing of advertising for racist/misogynist perversion (Islam).

May the Living God in Christ Jesus set free ALL Muslim people from the Hate-filled nightmare of Islam!

Muslims, come to Jesus! Modesty begins with being Crucified with Christ! If you truly want to be modest, let the Only Living God in Christ transform you and clothe you from head to toe in HIS Righteousness!

His Righteousness fits ANY repentant person and His Love is from everlasting to everlasting.


Bartimaeus said...

Tell me am I allowed to walk into a bank or a government building wearing a ski mask or covering my face so that I can not be identified. The Burka and Niqab are forms of dawah. So good for France on this one. At least in the case the French got something right.

The issue should be seen as public safety not one of religious freedom.

Simon said...

this law should be passed on through out north america and europe. u dont knw whos hiding under all that burqa these days. and airports should be more strict with PEOPLE wearing burqas. yes i meant PEOPLE including men. Have u people seen the movie THE KINGDOM? also have u seen them women eat spagetti through their veil? just youtube it. excellent law.


seriously i really dont care if u burn it or not but arent muslims in rage already. burning will piss them off even more. i would feel very bad for our persecuted christian people all over the world. dont people get it? Islamic jihad only has 1 task and that is to kill.

Jim Jordan said...

I don't know if there is a justification for this law. Granted, forcing someone to wear the veil against their will could be a misdemeanor but outlawing it altogether is a bit over the top. However, the law will open up the practice to closer scrutiny, forcing Muslims to rethink this misogynistic tradition. Heck, the worst thing anyone can do is affirm Islam. Challenging it can't be all that bad.

Representative Tom McMillin said...

I think its perfectly reasonable to require the ability to identify all citizens in your country/state.

cosmik said...

How does this different from burning the quran?
I agree that Islam is not correct but still we should not be stumbling block for them... I guess?

Tania said...

Question: Some Muslim women say they wear this face/headgear out of devotion to allah and some say it's not necessary. So, I want to know if there are any verses in the qur'an that orders women to wear this face-covering veil?

Personally, I'm kind of leaning in support of this burqa ban. I can see the security benefits for France to take on this measure.
And it could additionally heighten the safety and dignity of non-Muslim women walking through a Muslim populated area without a veil on.

Rose said...

I am of two minds, on this one.

I strongly dislike the fact that so many Muslim women are expected to wear a burqa. I wish that Muslims would simply abandon that practice, altogether. I do not like to see women with that symbol of oppression on their faces.

On the other hand, I believe that an overbearing government does more harm to its people, than good. Every time a government tightens its control on a people, it takes another step toward the possibility of revolution. I think that imposing federal law regarding the dress of a nation's citizens, is a mistake.

Furius said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Furius said...

Specifically banning the hijab infringes on religious freedom in my opinion. I would support a law that banned any clothing covering the face since this would be a security issue and would encompass all people in France instead of just Muslims. I do however support the law that gives jail time and a fine to those who force women to wear the hijab.

Furius said...

Edit on my previous comment. I seem to have hijab on the brain, I guess because I was discussing them earlier. So just replace everything I said in my previous comment with "Burqa" wherever you read "hijab".

The Fat Man said...

I don't know if it is a good thing or a bad thing. I do know that the state has rights on it's citizens. The State has the right to grant and take away freedoms,the right to tax, the right to imprison, the right to conscript land and labor and the right to even take life.

So yes the state has the right to say you must show your face.

The Fat Man said...

Muslims living in the west want to be included in the western society. But then they exclude themselves. It doesn't make much sense

John Lollard said...

The only reason that I think the burqa ban is even slightly reasonable is because of the risk played in criminal activity. The idea of banning women from covering themselves - doing what they believe is protecting themselves - because the French government thinks it's oppressive is ridiculous and almost makes me mad.

If Muslim women feel that they are being obedient to Allah or protecting themselves from sexual advances, then I can see their reasoning and support it. I think it makes sense.

It's just the thing with criminals wearing burqas and robbing banks, leaving cops in a real awkward position. That's the only sane reason the government has any right in legislating against clothing choice.

If they can find a way to catch and prevent dangerous criminals who commit crimes while wearing the burqa, then this ban needs to be lifted.

Furius said...

Perhaps I should have read more carefully. Jeez...its been a long day. The law specifically states it is banning any "veil that covers the face". Which means all clothing from ski masks to burqas should fall into this same category. This law is for security reasons and isn't just targeting Muslim garb. I support this law.

Tizita said...

Dr. David Wood

I really want to hear ur opinion on this matter (and im sure im not the only one)....So as soon as u have made up ur mind please share it w/ us. Thank you

Traeh said...

Should be banned for at least four reasons.

1. What if everyone wore a mask over the face, so that no one knew for certain who anyone really was? The face should be exposed for the most basic reasons of public security, except in exceptional cases.

2. The burka is in most cases not a choice. Even the women who claim to want it, would in most cases not be permitted to choose otherwise by their husbands and communities. The burka is a most cruel form of oppression of too many women. The women who really do choose the burka are effectively supporting the oppression of those women who don't choose it. The latter should be liberated at the expense of the former.

3. Banning the burka might have the benefit of discouraging the most Islamized Muslims from seeking to emigrate to countries where the ban is enforced.

4. Assuming one sees assimilation of Muslims into Western host societies as something to be preferred over the Islamic tendency to self-segregate until they can assimilate us, the burka prevents Western societies from assimilating Muslims. However, assimilating Muslims has its own, perhaps more insidious, risks for the West.

Christie said...

I am always very leery when I see a gov't stepping into it's citizen's lives more and more. I totally support the idea that anyone who forces someone to wear a burqua should be punished. I think if someone forces a person to wear flip flops and they don't want to that should be wrong.

Perhaps it would have been better to forbid any type of clothing that covers the face for anyone--with the exception for inclement weather--gotta have a scarf there. After-all there is a security risk in that you cannot identify someone committing a crime if you cannot see any of their features. "Yes officer the assailant was shrouded in black from head to foot--No I could not tell if it was a tall woman or a shorter man" that is going to be real helpful.

Some of yall have mentioned scarves--perhaps you mean the burqua but I don't see the same problem with a headscarf. It does not obstruct the facial view and it is quite honestly not limited to Islam. Conservative Jews, very orthodox Christians (as well as Amish and Mennonites), moms with a messy hair days, sometimes you still see Catholic nuns, as well as those with hairloss all often wear a headscarf or a kerchief. So I don't think the two are equally dangerous/distracting.

Personally--as a woman who once wore scarves to hide growing out bangs I can tell you it had 0 to do with religion. I would have been quite upset to have been forbidden my ability to hide my half grown out bangs.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

Nabeel I wrote about that a while back here: ttp://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/04/cry-baby-muslims-complain-about-france.html

Now there are a number of ways to approach the issue.

The issue of women covering the face is a valid opinion within the four schools of jurisprudence of Sunni Islam.

I think that if I am in France or other countries I have to abide by the rules of that nation. If I am in Saudi Arabia I cannot wear a bikini down the road correct?

However, it becomes very important for countries such as France, Belgium, Denmark and others to craft their laws in such a way that does not look religion specific. For example if you put "ban the burqa or ban the niqaab" and as a Muslim I would feel I am being targeted.

I think it would be better to craft the law so it says "your vision cannot be obstructed while driving" or "we need face recognition for passports and entering banks for safety reasons".

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

continued from above...

for example here is something to consider. Those Muslims who believe that women should cover their faces are the exact same Muslims who believe that women should not be traveling without a guardian. So why would they be driving a car on their own to begin with?

Needless to say I disagree with much that is presented in this blog here, yet I think we need to continue to have dialog and energetic discussion.

So for immigrants they should abide by the laws of what ever respective terrority or nation we migrate to.

However, it does create an interesting paradox for the French citizen born and raised in France who decides of her own free will and volition to dawn the burqa or niqaab and feels it is a religious duty.

It is on that last point above where I see things could get a bit sticky.

Yahya Snow said...

For Nabeel Qureshi

Sir, have you seen the following post?


I don't think it has been relayed to you. Please rethink your featuring of "the original burn the Quran day" video based


Yahya Snow

May Allah guide us all. Ameen

minoria said...

Hello Haceitas,Fatman and Christie:
I read your comments and I have the answer to your doubts.OF COURSE the BURKA and the NIKAB should be banned in the West 100%.For SECURITY reasons.Several times already men in burkas have robbed stores in the West.
In Irak men can dress in nikabs and kill American soldiers.I am amazed such a simple reason has not been taken into consideration by politicians,it is so obvious.

hugh watt said...

For some years now there's been a ban on "hoodies" in Britain. Due to certain criminal elements people are banned from entering certain public places with a hood on because of potential crime. Elderly folks have been told to hood-down when entering a bar or shop regardless of (non)religious background.
So what do we have; well, had it not been for "the radical element in Islam" this would not be an issue. Let's face it, had we not been living in such a dangerous world who would care how Muslim women dress. It looks odd to non-Muslims, but so what.
So how does Islam respond to, er... calm our fears, to understand our concerns? Well, sadly, too many couldn't careless.

David Wood said...

I have to confess that I'm against banning the burka. While I believe that the burka is oppressive to women, I also believe that telling a woman what she can't wear is oppressive. This is too much for a Western government that believes in protecting individual liberties. Here's what I would suggest:

(1) Female police officers should have authority to regularly stop a woman in a burka, and require her to remove the burka in private.

(2) Banks, airports, train stations, etc., should have a right to scan women in burkas.

(3) When women in burkas are stopped, they can be asked why they're wearing a burka, whether they really believe it's required or whether they're being forced to wear it.

(4) There should be a heavy penalty for forcing a woman to wear a burka. (France got this part right. But it seems ironic that France is handing out penalties for forcing women to wear burkas, when the government has decided to force women not to wear burkas. France is saying, in effect, "It's wrong to tell a woman what she can wear, but we're going to tell women what they can wear.")

(5) Classes on Muhammad's teachings on women should be given in all schools at all grade levels, and these classes shouldn't be taught by Islamic apologists, but by objective scholars.

If you don't want a woman wearing a burka, you should convince her that Islam is false. Then she won't want to wear a burka. But as things stand in Western society, governments won't dare to challenge whether Islam is true, and instead are forcing women to go against what they believe. If the beliefs are the problem, then the beliefs should be refuted.

hugh watt said...

David, it won't work!

"(1) Female police officers should have authority to regularly stop a woman in a burka, and require her to remove the burka in private."

Female Rastafarian/Sikh wearing head-covering as part of their religion. Apply #1. What do you think they/society would say?

"(3) When women in burkas are stopped, they can be asked why they're wearing a burka, whether they really believe it's required or whether they're being forced to wear it."

Now they can say, with good reason, discrimination.

"(4) There should be a heavy penalty for forcing a woman to wear a burka. (France got this part right. But it seems ironic that France is handing out penalties for forcing women to wear burkas, when the government has decided to force women not to wear burkas. France is saying, in effect, "It's wrong to tell a woman what she can wear, but we're going to tell women what they can wear.")"

You know where I'm going now.

"(5) Classes on Muhammad's teachings on women should be given in all schools at all grade levels, and these classes shouldn't be taught by Islamic apologists, but by objective scholars."

'Your teaching it wrong' I hear.

"If you don't want a woman wearing a burka, you should convince her that Islam is false. Then she won't want to wear a burka. But as things stand in Western society, governments won't dare to challenge whether Islam is true, and instead are forcing women to go against what they believe. If the beliefs are the problem, then the beliefs should be refuted."

Sorry, it would not go down well with any other religion.

Monica said...

I am happy that the French are trying to protect their greatly embattled national identity. For those who say that the government can't tell people what to wear.... in many places, being naked is enough to warrant an arrest. This is a widely accepted example of the government telling people what they can and cannot wear, so I don't really buy into the notion that no law can tell someone what to wear. Let's face it, people walking around completely concealed is a MAJOR security risk. And while I appreciate David's suggestions as to how this could be addressed, they just seem too complicated and hard to execute. I envision a the following: a female police officer tries to stop a burqa clad person and is roughed up by surrounding dissenters as a result.

When women are in the burqa (and most other Islamnic garb) it is a signal that they do not wish to interact with anyone. Many years ago I worked in a women's clothing store. In came a Middle Eastern man with several women who I can only assume were his "wives." I approached the women to ask how I could help them and the man quickly and quite hostilely inserted himself between us and made it clear that all speech would go through him. This experience and others left me to conclude that Islam, as observed in most parts of the Middle East, is utterly incompatible with Western society and our values of openness and freedom. And we "tolerate" it to our own peril.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Jabari said...

I agree with David 100% on this one.

Nabeel Qureshi said...

My take is this: if the government wants to be able to facially identify individuals at all times (as is required in the US, although I've heard halloween is an exception) then they have the right.

I agree (for once :-) with the Grand Verbalizer -- if this is explicitly religio-centric, then I disagree with the move. But if it applies to all people, which it appears to, then I am for it.

Nabeel Qureshi said...


I have seen the narration from Ibn Sad with my own eyes. If someone wants to argue that a Muslim translator made it up and put it into the English version, that makes no sense to me.

On the other hand, if a Muslim publisher wants to take it out of an Arabic publication, that makes all the sense in the world, and is much more likely what happened.

If you can find an ancient MS of Ibn Sa'd (at least a very early one) and show me that the line is missing, then you have an argument.

Clearly you have never studied textual criticism. I suggest you study before speaking up so much. Cheers,


Traeh said...

Chris Christie
Office of the Governor
PO Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625

Dear Governor Christie,
You are on the Board of NJ Transit. Were you in on the recent decision to fire a man for exercising his First Amendment rights? The man burned some pages of the Qu'ran.

Whatever one thinks of the man's action, his firing serves as a message to all of us: "If you exercise your First Amendment rights vis-a-vis Islam, Governor Christie may permit agencies under his authority to trample those rights."

NJ Transit has ripped a hole in the First Amendment not just for that one man, but for all the other employees at New Jersey Transit, and for every NJ government employee. This action helps to chill freedom of speech in the U.S., already chilled by self-censorship, as we saw in the case of the Comedy Channel, which not long ago censored its programming in response to death threats from a Muslim website. See: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/04/28/south_park_and_self_censorship_105331.html

Governor Christie, if the firing is not reversed immediately, and sincere public apologies made to the man by whoever was responsible for taking away his, and our, First Amendment rights, then those responsible for the firing should be immediately removed from office. They are not worthy to be public officials in the future.


Anyone should feel free to use the letter I wrote above, or edit it to suit you.

Governor Chris Christie is on the Board of NJ Transit. The Executive Director is James Weinstein.

For the sake of the First Amendment, we should politely ask Governor Christie to order NJ Transit to apologize to the man who burned the pages, and to reverse his dismissal.

Chris Christie
Office of the Governor
PO Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625

NJ TRANSIT Corporation
James Weinstein, Executive Director
One Penn Plaza East
Newark, NJ 07105-2246
(973) 491-8800 (Board Inquires)
(973) 491-7314 (Fax)

Fernando said...

Dirty old Yahya Snow came here to make some treats: "rethink your featuring of "the original burn the Quran day" video based"... he used a "pleased", butt thate does not take a single evindece from whate his intents are... disgusting as typical with muslims tactics...

aboutte this thread: the law passed in France does not speak about burqas, nikabs or any other muslims dress: it is not discretionary: it speaks generaly off all those vestements thate cover one's face...

Ɓukasz said...

Sorry, for writing off the topic David. I actually asked Nabeel to pass on my message, and he did post it in the youtube account, but maybe either he didn't want to bother (don't blame him ;)), or he just forgot. Either way, I hope that it won't disturb the discussion here much, and you will just make an exception. Here is this message:

Hello David. I have to tell you I love the Jesus Or Muhammad show that I recently discovered on youtube. I am catholic, I was born catholic, so I never "converted", and I know most of the stuff you talk about in the program, but I never knew about the stuff about Islam, and I'm amazed watching your program how much inconsistency and really bothering stuff there is in Islam.

But that's not what why I came. I just wanted to ask you, about your opinion about Catholicsm. We're all Christians, and I'm not attacking you or anything, I'm just interested why you picked being Christian (you're a baptist right?) sticked to it, and not go to Catholicsm, which after all is the only faith that was started by Jesus hmself, while all others (who come through Jesus, so protestand like baptists) were created somewhere along the way by men (correct me if I'm wrong). Again, I'm just interested about your opinion, I'm not calling for you to be killed if you don't convert ;), that is just an innocent question and I'm really interested about your opinion. We are all brothers in Christ so again, I'm not trying to force "something" on anyone.

Again, I love you and Sam on the show, with pastor Joseph. I have to tell you, you three are so entertaining, even in such a "boring" topic as religion and discussing the same things over and over again, but I watched almost all of your shows lately that you guys posted on youtube, and I love it. + I got a lot of knoledge both from Christian point of view, and especialy from Islam point of view.

Great job guys, so I thank you for imforming a lot of people in the world about Islam. I have to tell you, that I never knew almost ANYTHING about Islam my whole life (26 years) prior to your shows that I discovered like a week ago, but I'm in Poland who you know is like 95% catholic, and I never met a muslim in my whole life ;)

Peace be with you guys, I'll try to come by to the site here and there, and lets praise the only God in 3 persons forever.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidnance from their Lord.

Nabeel said,

"I have seen the narration from Ibn Sad with my own eyes. If someone wants to argue that a Muslim translator made it up and put it into the English version, that makes no sense to me."

Out of curiosity would you be willing to share with us the source text in English or Arabic that you saw "with my own eyes"?

Next you are also making a presupposing the facts without evidence.

Next Nabeel you say,

"If you can find an ancient MS of Ibn Sa'd (at least a very early one) and show me that the line is missing, then you have an argument."

Wouldn't this pressupose that such a manuscript exist in the first place? So you are using an argument from silence.

I think Yahya has a point, and the fact that James White endorses your video is telling.

I don't know if he endorsed the acting (which I certainly do) both of you have a career in television without doubt.

If he was endorsing your "amazing discoveries" it just goes to show how shoddy White's scholarship truly is.

WomanForTruth101 said...

I don't really care about the Burka, but I don't think Hijab should have been banned.

Anyways David why I came here was because I heard a former star student at your university was killed. Condolences to her family and friends. Do you know about what happened? I can't find much about her.

GreekAsianPanda said...

I agree somewhat with the ban for security reasons. I don't like that some of their religious expression is being taken from them, but other people's safety is important, too.

Also, I sometimes wonder if burqa-wearers ever trip over stuff. Is it hard to see out of a burqa?

ned said...

I am happy on this one rather on all that curtails the rights to muslims just based on the fact that they treat non muslims like animal in muslim majority countries. In west they use the human freedom to propagate their islamic agenda to the extent that they now dream of sharia in UK and other countries. I am not being hateful to muslims but i think and pray that they get the real taste of their own medicine with which they poison minorities in their own countries. I think France has freedom to make whatever laws they need for their safety. There is nothing in it like forgiving enemies here rather for them it is Matthew 7:12 "Do to others what you would have them do to you" Even today in Pakistan people are suffering and need aid and we should support them if we can but the same people will be burning US flag and abusing west on something insignificant issue. His is in their character to exploit others but it is good that now their agendas are exposed.

The Fat Man said...

After further reflection I am against the Burka Banned. After speaking with Muslim men I have come to realize a few things.

If I had a daughter, wife or even a girlfriend and I was living in say Dearborn MI or any other Islamic country. I as a Christian would want any female loved one BURKAFIED when surrounded by Muslim men.

Bartimaeus said...


You make some good points but again the issue should not be seen as a religious right but rather public safety. I cannot as a free citizen in Canada go into a bank wearing a ski mask or a motor cyle helmet with a visor or I will be stopped by security and asked to identify myself.

Question should woman be allowed to vote in a polling station with a burka and not identify themselves. Or drive a car with their faces covered?

Jabari said...

Fatman said.....
If I had a daughter, wife or even a girlfriend and I was living in say Dearborn MI or any other Islamic country. I as a Christian would want any female loved one BURKAFIED when surrounded by Muslim men.

I understand completely. Your afraid that the men there might rape her, lust after her or assault her in anyway shape or form.

kadegos said...

I have to confess that this is the first time I have to disagree with Dr. David Wood.
First of all, I would like to thank David, Dr. White, Nabeel Qureshi and Mr. Sam Shamoun for giving the real education on both religions (Christianity and Islam). I was born and I'm still Catholic but I love you guys for what you are doing. I am sure it's the work of the Holy Spirit inside you guys. I don't think there's any debate you participated which I haven't seen. So again thank you for that and I have learned a lot from you guys. I come from a country (very special country)where it is almost fifty fifty -Christians and Muslims (population 40mil) and we all leave in peace. I was in one Islamic country 10 years ago and friends there couldn't believe that in my country (which is your homework to find out which one is this) there are a lot of mixed marriages between Christians and Muslims and we leave in peace. We are not strictly. I can marry a Muslim girl or a Muslim man can marry my sister and everything is fine. Kids are free to decide which religion to follow when they grow up. This is paradise on earth. Now let me go back to my disagreement with Mr. David. They say: When in Rome do as the Romans. I ma concerned about security in general. All of us we need to show up our faces,that is our identity. We don’t ban skiing or ski masks, so some might offer to allow burkas in mosques and at home but not while committing a crime. The problem is that, the ski mask can’t hide a sub-machine gun or an explosive device. The burka, if normalised into society, is a perfect disguise and has been used in other countries by suicide bombers and the like - both male & female.
Think about it Dave, sorry it seems as if I have known you for ages. Btw you are my brother in Christ. Chris

Nora said...


"I don't really care about the Burka, but I don't think Hijab should have been banned."

I don't think the bill banned the hijab. I know they had a ban a few years ago against all 'religious' symbols in the French public schools, but I'm don't recall anything written in the articles I've read about the law addressing hijab.

minoria said...

I am glad Yahya is back and I found the exchange between him and Nabeel interesting.And WomanforTruth is back,temporarily.I still stand that 1 life is more important than the right to wear a burka and nikab.
For those interested in avraidire.eu for the last month there has been alot of debate(about various themes,in the COMMENT section)in FRENCH,between atheists and Christians (what proof there is a God exists)and Muslims(about the Koran).
Many seem to go to avraidire.eu more to read the COMMENT SECTION.(on the RIGHT part of the HOME PAGE:there are the words Popular,then Latest,then Comment,then Tags).

For those who don't know FRENCH and want to read an article in FRENCH or read the COMMENTS in French,you can easily COPY and PASTE the article/comment and go to:


There is a BLANK BOX and you PASTE the article/comment in it.On top of it you will see the word FROM,and choose the option FRENCH.

You will also see the word TO and choose ENGLISH and then CLICK on the word TRANSLATE.It will change the article into English.

If you don't know French you can go to TRANSLATE.GOOGLE,write one's ideas in English,have it translated into French and post it in avraidire.eu.
In fact,I, now,in the French articles,give links to great articles in ENGLISH and an explanation to the French-speakers on how they can translate it using translate.google and thus read it.

Menachem Lipkin said...

I don't think banning the burka is the correct approach. People should have religious freedom and believe it or not, I'm sure many of these women don the burqa voluntarily as an expression of their religion...

However, this religious freedom, as all freedoms, must be balanced against the needs of the overall society. And here the "need" is one of security.

So rather than banning the burqa, which unfairly targets one religion, laws should be passed that require one's face to be visible in certain situations, e.g. when driving, when getting a photo ID, when passing through any type of security checkpoint, when stopped by police, etc. So, in other words, you want to cover your face in the privacy of your home fine, but once you step out into the public domain and you want to benefit from the privileges of society then you have to be prepared to compromise for the benefit of everyone. (Whether it be because of security, safety, etc.)

Christie said...

I have been reflecting on this for the past few days and I want to first agree with Fatman...If my daughters and I were living in an area where a multitude of Islamic men who had never been taught self control-- I might veil myself and my daughters out of concern for our safety.

On further thought on the subject of the gov't poking their nose into our wardrobe doors. I realized something. It already does--I can't walk down the street in my birthday suit without being charged with public indecency. And that is for public decency--arguably a much more difficult to define situation than citizes' security. I think a society can require that your face be shown in public, just as they can require that certain parts of a person's anatomy not be shown.

Toll said...

My own opinion is that wearing the Burka is contrary to the teaching of the Bible and so is evil whatever the motives for it. It goes beyond any requirement that God laid down regarding the dress code for women and so can not be justified. Of course the teaching of the Bible is not considered to be definitive for framing the laws of a western pluralistic society but the cultural traditions protected by law have been derived to some extent from Judaeo Christian teaching.

SenatorMark4 said...

I think this law will banning the burkha is a typical European approach to a problem. Demand from above. Rule like a king. The American approach, if it ever comes to it, will be to have your own little burkha mask in your back pocket used as a hankerchief most of the time, but pulled out and worn with it's Harley Davidson designs etc when standing in line behind someone wearing it at a bank. Mockery...the only tool that really works in the long run.

Santos said...

It’s not about few women wearing burqa, Its about European culture. If you see hofsteed model,Women have more respect in Europe than any other continent. So when one start wearing burqa its degrades the culture of Europe. I think everyone who live in Europe should Gel in Europe culture; otherwise there will be a cultural shock as many are facing there right now. One must study about Europe culture and then decide whether you are fit to live in Europe and if you feel you personal value does not fit with European values then sorry to say one should move out. It’s like when a company hires an employee the HR department also make sure that the person value gets fit with Companyvalue. However over the years there is distortion in Values and that’s why France is protecting its value to get distorted. , many argue its about 1000s Muslim, but France is not seeing t few Muslim women, it’s when these 1000s turns into millions then what? Wearing burqa is not wrong but it is not fitting with French culture. By passing this law it is protecting its values from getting distorted in future when the next generation comes in to see women wearing burqa and I think for a small kid to make it understand why few women wear burqa and not all. Kids ask lot of question and sometimes serious questions. French is preparing its ground for the coming generation so that future generation doesn’t curse the past. Why making it a issue of Muslim vs. rest.. Suppose e.g. in a motel people are coming and stayingbut motel has one rule prepare food for yourself and no maid servant. Everyone comply with it, but one day a king comes and say I have maid servant and he is going to do my work and it’s better to change the rule. Then what, should the motel rule be change NO, king should find a motel where his value fits. Lots argue that it’s against human right. But the people who ask these questions don'tknow the core meaning of the word human right. They sometimes find it difficult and find themselves stuck between liberal thought and human right. If one floats a religion and doctrine it that everyone who follows the religion should have right to die means he can decide when he wants to die and committing suicide is okay. Then does the law of land permit me to do so Never.... As we are progressing our thought process should also improve and be more liberal. Liberal means a threshold when you support an act with some good reasoning which value humans. Human right tries to contradict it sometime as in case of burqa. It is human right to decide how to die and even commit suicide but it is not a liberal thought, as it’s degrade human values. I can say the problemarises when one mix culture with religion. Either culture should change to accommodate religion values or religion values should change to accommodate culture. The problem is religion is more rigid with its ideology. However, Christianity has integrated with European culture so they did not find any problem and people do accept it readily. But in case of Islam it very rigid even to integrate with European culture, that is why there is a problem in western countries.

hugh watt said...

"Grozny, the capital of Chechnya, is seeing a growing number of incidents in which paintball guns are fired at women who are not wearing an Islamic headscarf. The attacks come from men in cars who also shout abuse at the women. Chechnya has a strongly Islamic identity, but there is a Christian minority of about 5%. As so often happens, it seems that sharia is being applied not only to Muslims but also to non-Muslims. The paintballing has been praised by the Chechen president."
Source: Barnabasfund.org.

When the president does not condemn such acts but gives his approval for it, now that's serious trouble.

Lothair Of Lorraine said...

As the only Catholic on this page, let me say that I am a little bothered by secular people telling Religious what we can and cannot wear. Apparently, thong underware and porn are 'ok' but covering your hair may be grounds for an arrest.

We have cloistered women, and this law may apply to them too. What is next, closing the convents in Europe?

Christie said...

Though I am not catholic I am pretty sure that this law was referring to the covering of ones' entire face and I am not familiar with any Catholic doctrine requiring that. I am pretty sure that they can still cover their hair and wear their habits, it is just the covering of the face that is at stake here.

As to the existence of convents in Europe. If the birthrate stays as it is then the Islamic citizens of the various European nations will take over anyway in the next 20-40 years. So the existence of convents in Europe is very definitely in danger.

Someone said...

May Allah guide and keep us on the Straight Path.

I have not read all the comments that have been posted on this blog. However, I am shocked by the overwhelming support for the ban of the burqa. Even if I were not a Muslim, simply being a woman, forget a woman--a free-thinking individual--should prevent me from supporting any government for supporting or dictating to me what I can or cannot wear. For all those who believe that burqa ban is needed and somehow preventing the "evils" of Islam, I wonder how far they would in turn be willing to tolerate the government intruding in their own personal lives and interfering with their personal choices.

Islam is not the problem. The burqa is not the problem. But to see those facts in perspective, it requires deep introspection and understanding of what freedom means and what we want the word, which conjures to each of us a precious commodity, to mean in our future. Freedom, you’ll agree I’m sure, at its heart, means choice. And if Muslim women are not going to be given a choice in clothing themselves in what they see as a way of guarding their modesty and chastity, then the French people and all other European countries should feel threatened. Because if your government is not willing to respect the rights of the country’s minority, then that government, you can bet, will at one time or another go after other minority groups' rights as well. Right now, for many of you since this doesn't affect you personally, everything is fine. But when you become a minority on account of something that is important to you and when your own governments say that your want or need doesn't matter, you'll understand. To say that I am disappointed in every one of you for actually supporting something that most of you have no idea of apart from having heard things on the media is to understate the case.

I am not only deeply disappointed. I am very, very, very deeply hurt. And yes, I feel shame that you raise your voices for what you yourselves in your hearts know is prejudice against the Muslim people and against your own idea of what freedom is: CHOICE. You support robbing one group of people of their choice and yet will tout most vociferous defenses of your own liberty and egality in all matters concerning your own personal choices and lifestyle.

You know, on account of my trust in God, even this hurt is awesome for me, for I know that God is witness over what I feel, and I know that God has reason for testing the Muslims in the 21st century on account of fear that has paralyzed you so much that you cannot help but express that fear in compromising the ideals on which the Western world has stood and progressed so far in science, technology, and other academic fields wherein at one time a great mind like Galileo would have had to fear for his life because of his independent thinking and his CHOICE in a belief different from and in opposition to the establishment. I say this because in the West, for Muslim women and reverts, this is a CHOICE that is born after their intellect has been satisfied. Fear compromises you, and I am amazed that you do not even care to see. But it is because I know most of you don't know, don't understand, that I invite you openly and sincerely to learn about Islam. Islam is not the religion of terrorists. Islam is the religion of your brothers and sisters in humanity, only your prejudice has blinded you. The day you realize that the enemy is not Islam but those that would have you fear Islam and Muslims, you will see that therein lays no clash between Islam and the West.

To understand why a woman might choose to wear a burqa, jilab, or niqab, please visit:

Sites of good information on Islam:

But to really understand Islam, please visit your local Islamic Center Insha-Allah.

Thank you for allowing me to visit.

errolsyd said...

Sir Edmund Barton’s ideas on Immigrants and being an Australian in 1907.

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an Australian and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an Australian, and nothing but an Australian... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an Australian, but something else also, isn't an Australian at all. We have room for but one flag, the Australian flag.... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the Australian people.'

Edmund Barton

Every Australian citizen needs to read this! KEEP THIS MOVING