Post Reply
Page 4 of 131  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 131 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Banning the Burqua in France - Is Sarkozy going too far?
5 years ago  ::  Jun 22, 2009 - 10:10PM #31
costrel
Posts: 6,226

Jun 22, 2009 -- 8:08PM, Agnosticspirit wrote:

Adelphe: We're talking about the West--France. Most women if they wear one want to.


Do you have any evidence for this? I'm more inclined to think that social pressure "encourages" women to wear these restrictive tents rather than desire....



I would also like to see some evidence for the "most."


This question of the burqua makes me think of a similar situation concerning Catholic religious women (nuns and sisters). Now, in 1965, Pope Paul VI proclaimed a document known as Perfectae Caritatis, or The Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life. Concerning the traditional monastic habit, section 17 suggests the following changes:


"The religious habit, an outward mark of consecration to God, should be simple and modest, poor and at the same becoming. In addition it must meet the requirements of health and be suited to the circumstances of time and place and to the needs of the ministry involved. The habits of both men and women religious which do not conform to these norms must be changed."


In one of her memoirs, Karen Armstrong writes how surprised she was with how quickly orders of religious women dispensed with the traditional trappings of the habit (the coif, the scapular, the double skirt, etc.), and opted for a much simpler dress or skirt and veil. Of course, all of us are probably aware that many religious orders have done away with any kind of a habit and allow at least the sisters -- though maybe not the nuns -- to wear secular clothes.


Certain Catholics, though, do not agree with this, and note that the Perfectae Caritatis does not state that women can go without a habit, just that the habit should be simpler and more appropriate for the particular work that the women are involved in. In fact, some of these critics even state such things as the following:


"Chances are, if they don't wear the habit, they have modernistic-progressivist-liberal views."


and,


"When sisters give up their identifying clothing they run the risk of becoming of the world and not just in the world."


Yet, many, if not most, of the religious women themselves who do not wear the habit would probably not agree that their secular clothes are a sign of being "modernistic-progressivist-liberal" or "of the world." One could probably also say the same thing about those Catholic and Protestant women who do not continually cover their heads with a scarf, a veil, or a bonnet and who wear pants and other garments instead of ankle-length long dresses (and yes, when I go to Wal-Mart, I almost always see Hutterite, Mennonite, and other Protestant women wearing ankle-length dresses and head-coverings).


(For more info about the habit dilemma, and to see the pro-habit quotes in context, see acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2007/02/nuns-...)


[Edited for clarity.]

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 22, 2009 - 11:37PM #32
jane2
Posts: 14,295

Jun 22, 2009 -- 10:10PM, costrel wrote:


Jun 22, 2009 -- 8:08PM, Agnosticspirit wrote:

Adelphe: We're talking about the West--France. Most women if they wear one want to.


Do you have any evidence for this? I'm more inclined to think that social pressure "encourages" women to wear these restrictive tents rather than desire....



I would also like to see some evidence for the "most."


This question of the burqua makes me think of a similar situation concerning Catholic religious women (nuns and sisters). Now, in 1965, Pope Paul VI proclaimed a document known as Perfectae Caritatis, or The Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life. Concerning the traditional monastic habit, section 17 suggests the following changes:


"The religious habit, an outward mark of consecration to God, should be simple and modest, poor and at the same becoming. In addition it must meet the requirements of health and be suited to the circumstances of time and place and to the needs of the ministry involved. The habits of both men and women religious which do not conform to these norms must be changed."


In one of her memoirs, Karen Armstrong writes how surprised she was with how quickly orders of religious women dispensed with the traditional trappings of the habit (the coif, the scapular, the double skirt, etc.), and opted for a much simpler dress or skirt and veil. Of course, all of us are probably aware that many religious orders have done away with any kind of a habit and allow at least the sisters -- though maybe not the nuns -- to wear secular clothes.


Certain Catholics, though, do not agree with this, and note that the Perfectae Caritatis does not state that women can go without a habit, just that the habit should be simpler and more appropriate for the particular work that the women are involved in. In fact, some of these critics even state such things as the following:


"Chances are, if they don't wear the habit, they have modernistic-progressivist-liberal views."


and,


"When sisters give up their identifying clothing they run the risk of becoming of the world and not just in the world."


Yet, many, if not most, of the religious women themselves who do not wear the habit would probably not agree that their secular clothes are a sign of being "modernistic-progressivist-liberal" or "of the world." One could probably also say the same thing about those Catholic and Protestant women who do not continually cover their heads with a scarf, a veil, or a bonnet and who wear pants and other garments instead of ankle-length long dresses (and yes, when I go to Wal-Mart, I almost always see Hutterite, Mennonite, and other Protestant women wearing ankle-length dresses and head-coverings).


(For more info about the habit dilemma, and to see the pro-habit quotes in context, see acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2007/02/nuns-...)


[Edited for clarity.]




Interesting, costrel


Right now with a visitation of the Vatican of non-cloistered Catholic women religious in the US, considered an inquisition by not a few of us, this discussion of what these women wear is a bit fascinating.


Two of the most outstanding groups of women religious in the US today wear modest everyday clothes: the RSMs and the CSJs. I've known these women almost forever: their leaders were classmates of mine in high school and college in some areas. In the addenda to DOUBT the Sisters of Charity founded by St. Elizabeth Seton do likewise.


Right now the Vatican favors women religious who wear modified habit. So it goes with Rome, which does not favor the highly educated sisters and the way in which they carry out their vowed missions. I've known these women well for over 60 years and admire them: they've long rather snubbed their noses at clergy and hierarchy: they are better educated and brighter.


Guess who educated so many of us more liberal Catholics?



discuss catholicism
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 12:40AM #33
Ebon
Posts: 10,145

Jun 22, 2009 -- 9:29PM, Adelphe wrote:

Taj Mahal, then.


Come on!  Islam gave us more than chick-peas and terrorism.



Advanced mathematics, influential groundwork in the fields of astronomy, chemistry and optics, some very interesting philsophy (mainly from the Sufi branch), fascinating artwork. Islam, like many religions, has a somewhat mixed legacy of both bloodshed and noble discovery.


Incidently, try lightly toasted pita filled with feta cheese, green peppers and pastrami.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 12:50AM #34
Ebon
Posts: 10,145

I tend to think this goes too far. So long as the woman is willing to wear one (and some are), it is no business of anyones how they observe their faith. With regard to willingness, there are other ways to judge than just banning the dress outright. I wonder, will Roma in France next be forbidden to wear jeans or long skirts because the Rominaya forbids us to reveal the lower body to strangers?

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 1:47AM #35
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Jun 23, 2009 -- 12:40AM, Ebon wrote:

Advanced mathematics, influential groundwork in the fields of astronomy, chemistry and optics, some very interesting philsophy (mainly from the Sufi branch), fascinating artwork.



But what have they done since the Middle Ages?

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 1:57AM #36
Ebon
Posts: 10,145

Jun 23, 2009 -- 1:47AM, Ken wrote:

But what have they done since the Middle Ages?



Won at least eight Nobel prizes.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 5:57AM #37
Adelphe
Posts: 28,707

Jun 22, 2009 -- 8:08PM, Agnosticspirit wrote:


A, we've got to get you using the quote feature now that it's working again....

Jun 22, 2009 -- 3:17PM, Adelphe wrote:


AS:  That's a debatable opinion rather than a fact....  Many women wear them because they feel pressured to do so.....  Women in the ME wear them because they're treated pretty terribly if they don't...  Since societal mores in Europe and other free countries expect MEN to control themselves and don't burden WOMEN with a male lack of self control, European and western men are generally better behaved than ME Muslim males. Women shouldn't have to succumb to this aspect of Sharia Law in a Pluralistic society in Europe.


Adelphe: We're talking about the West--France.  Most women if they wear one want to.


Do you have any evidence for this? I'm more inclined to think that social pressure  "encourages" women to wear these  restrictive tents rather than desire....


Jun 22, 2009 -- 3:17PM, Adelphe wrote:


AS: We're not talking about crosses, we're talking about a TENT that restricts the movement of a woman..... We're talking about a PRISON.


Adelphe: It's only a "prison" if the woman in it feels it is one.  And even then, she has options to "get out of jail."


See the above.... if women are pressured in their communities to wear a tent, it's a prison. Why should religious practices be allowed to sidestep secular law? Do you think religious mandates should prevent women from receiving education, force them to walk behind the man, and forced to marry whoever is chosen FOR them? Yes....all of this is a prison and when religion is used to fashion that prison rather than embrace a release, it's all the more awful a cage....


Jun 22, 2009 -- 3:17PM, Adelphe wrote:


After we get rid of the crosses, we can strip the nuns of their habits and priests of their frocks.  Be sure to get rid of the kippah, a ghastly sign of submission to God.  No more saris, either.  And while we're at it, no more S&M type clothing--submissive and unequal dog collars and the like.  How about skirts?  Let's outlaw skirts--they say "woman"--how humiliating!


Come on!  You don't see anything wrong with dictating dress in a democracy or republic?



You're being a little alarmist, Adelphe.... I'm aware of the anti-clerical attitude entrenched in France..... with good reason.... but we're not talking about banning a hajib, which is a scarf that covers the hair ... or a cross, which is a piece of jewelry, or even a nun's habit...... none of these articles of religious clothing impede movement as the full on TENT does...  We're talking about an extremely restrictive garment that prevents freedom of movement, must be horribly hot in the summer, and promotes the extremely unhealthy mentality that women must cover themselves up lest Muslim males become so enflamed by desire they'll not be able to keep their hands to themselves. This is a manifestation of lack of assimilation.


We already DO dictate dress to a certain extent.... Nude beaches are the exception, rather than the rule.... We require people to wear shoes and shirts before heading into a restaurant, a store, and mass transportation... (thankfully!) --- Kids in LA can't wear clothing that could be affiliated with gang membership, etc. etc... Our social mores dictate what clothing should be worn depending upon the occasion and the environment......but the national dress code isn't  dicated by a STATE RELIGION; nor should it be.


Jun 22, 2009 -- 3:17PM, Adelphe wrote:


AS:


Nope, she wasn't denied citizenship because she was wearing a burqua... she was denied citizenship because she refused to accept that women are equal in France. She refused to accept the secular laws in France that grant gender equality. She refused to assimilate to the societal, customary and legal mores of her new country. They were right to deny her citizenship.


Adelphe: First, I would like to see the souce backing up your claim.




 


abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?i...


From Fox News: link offers different opinions from Muslims on this matter:


www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Jul16/0,4670,F...


Jun 22, 2009 -- 3:17PM, Adelphe wrote:


Second, what is "refuse to accept that women are equal in France" supposed to imply?


Third, is it that only women who don't wear burqas can be considered equal and not those who choose to?


The woman denied citizenship practiced an extremely radical form of Islam...  women are supposed to submit to the Muslim male, the denial of gender equality and rights for women. That's completely incompatible with secular law in the west (it's a given that some of the fundamentalist Christian sects that still breed in the US --- um, FLDS---- also use religion as a sheild to deny human rights to women and men that don't fit their mold as well)  The burqas aren't necessary in France --- they're a political statement rather than a religious one....  people who won't assimilate, and would eventually opt to subvert their new home to remake it in their own image if we allow our "tolerance" to become so tolerant that our freedoms be used against us....


Imagine a world dominated by Islamic law... No religious freedom..... no freedom of speech... no representative art of living things..... no unapproved music.... No thank you.....


Jun 22, 2009 -- 3:17PM, Adelphe wrote:


Finally, if refusal to "assimilate to the societal, customary, [and legal mores] of her new country" are criterion for being denied entry, then those that came before us and most of us here now should kiss the US goodbye.



If Muslims who emigrate to the US fail to adopt our secular laws, they shouldn't be granted citizenship either. At the very least, most of us will agree that religious freedom, freedom of speech, and other rights granted in the first 10 Amendments should be honored and respected..... even though the last administration made a hash of the 4th, and many groups on both left and right keep trying to tear down our first.




Before I reply, AS, can you tell me how to use it?


In the text box right now I see [ quote author = xxxxx post = xxxx ] which seems (I say seems) to be closed with [ / quote]


Is that all it takes, again?  [ quote ] and [ / quote ] to set off text?

Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, for to go against conscience would be neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I can do no other.  God help me.  Amen.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 10:52AM #38
docwitchy
Posts: 284

Jun 23, 2009 -- 1:57AM, Ebon wrote:


Jun 23, 2009 -- 1:47AM, Ken wrote:

But what have they (meaning Muslims) done since the Middle Ages?



Won at least eight Nobel prizes.




 


Compare those eight Nobel prizes to the dozens won by Israelis and scores won by Jews! Islam in too many places is anti innovation, anti progress, anti science, anti womens' rights, and anti freedom of expression which is why many of us Muslims are trying our best to change it and bring it into the twenty-first century.


The burqua, ayaba, or as I prefer TENT is restrictive, oppressive, and an admission of subservience. I never have and never will wear one!


Salaam,


Mariah


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 11:11AM #39
Agnosticspirit
Posts: 9,244

Jun 23, 2009 -- 10:52AM, docwitchy wrote:


 


Compare those eight Nobel prizes to the dozens won by Israelis and scores won by Jews! Islam in too many places is anti innovation, anti progress, anti science, anti womens' rights, and anti freedom of expression which is why many of us Muslims are trying our best to change it and bring it into the twenty-first century.


The burqua, ayaba, or as I prefer TENT is restrictive, oppressive, and an admission of subservience. I never have and never will wear one!


Salaam,


Mariah


 



Hallo Mariah, nice to hear from you!  My issue with the burqua is similar to yours --- the wearing of it is a symbol of submission..... this submission is not compatible with the Western world. Given all of this,  do you think the burqua should be banned in France, do you think Sarkozy is a little too hardline?


Not only is the symbolism of submission apparent with the wearing of the tent, but  restriction of this garment prevents the wearer from daily activity. How does one drive in a burqua, how does one ride a bicycle while wearing a burqua, can you run in a burqua, can you swim in a burqua? All of these activities which we take for granted are not possible in such a restrictive garment.... hence, my conclusion that burqua = prison....


 


Hmmmm..... a woman wearing a tent falls into a body of water.... tangled up in her tent, head completely enclosed, the sheer weight of the water preventing her from swimming back to the surface..... She drowns.....  --- Death by Burqua..... I'm not trying to be funny here..... I present this hypothetical scenario as evidence that the burqua is a hazard to one's health...


 

Tribalism, ethnocentricism, racism, nationalism, and FEAR is the Mind Killer... >:(

For user to user support and to look up the latest glitch reports, check the Beliefnet Knowledgebase by clicking on the link below!

 Beliefnet Knowledgebase
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2009 - 11:12AM #40
Ebon
Posts: 10,145

Jun 23, 2009 -- 10:52AM, docwitchy wrote:

Compare those eight Nobel prizes to the dozens won by Israelis and scores won by Jews! Islam in too many places is anti innovation, anti progress, anti science, anti womens' rights, and anti freedom of expression which is why many of us Muslims are trying our best to change it and bring it into the twenty-first century.



And many of us, including myself, will wish you the very best of luck in those efforts.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

Fiat justitia, ruat caelum

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 4 of 131  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 131 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook