France Wants To Ban Full Head Covering On Muslim Women

[Liberalman]

France is at it again and this time they are going after Muslim women that cover their heads because of the demands of their religion.

Sarkozy is using women’s rights as an excuse to do this?

This is the religion and where will it stop will we start to tell Hindus not to wear their turbans because men shouldn’t be forced to do this?

Should we tell the Jewish men not to wear their yamaca?

Should we tell the Catholics not to wear their crosses?

In most religions women have always been subservient to men and only God himself can change this.

We have to remember that this country was founded on religious freedoms and when government tries to interfere with this then our forefathers true meaning of peace will be in vain.

 

[Ron in Regina]

I read this story too, earlier this morning. Seems I read a different story than
you....or at least the story I read had a very different slant on it.

You didn't post a Link, so I will: Burkas 'not welcome' in France: Sarkozy

 

[DurkaDurka]

Good for France.

 

[coldstream]

Frankly the Burka always gave me the creeps. It reminds me of how alien Islam is to Western Culture and mores. There is no reason we have to pander to the paraphenalia of cultures that consider the West infidels. There is no qestion that the most puritanical of Muslim countries, those who have rejected all Western influences and moderation are quite willing to impose strict Sharia Law and Islamic dress codes on all of its citizens, regardless of religion. In fact Islam and Christian societies might be irreconcilable. The fact that our society has lost its sense of being formed and dependent on Christianity has largely been lost to 'modernism'.. but it's still there.. and necessary for our sustenance.. and survival.

 

[pegger]

I have no problem with Burka's. People can wear what they want.

HOWEVER - we should not have to change our practices in some cases such as:

1) to vote - you should have to demonstrate you are who you say you are - so you'll have to show your face.
2) same for driver's licenses
3) same for public pools, etc.. (ok - makes no sense for Burka's - but the whole "can't swim with men in the same pool" thing - too bad - then open a private pool, or don't swim at the public pool)

 

[petros]

What about Jewish women who cover their hair? How about catholic nuns? Them too? How about Hutterites? Slavs and their babooshkas too?

 

[darkbeaver]

Frankly the Burka always gave me the creeps. It reminds me of how alien Islam is to Western Culture and mores. There is no reason we have to pander to the paraphenalia of cultures that consider the West infidels. There is no qestion that the most puritanical of Muslim countries, those who have rejected all Western influences and moderation are quite willing to impose strict Sharia Law and Islamic dress codes on all of its citizens, regardless of religion. In fact Islam and Christian societies might be irreconcilable. The fact that our society has lost its sense of being formed and dependent on Christianity has largely been lost to 'modernism'.. but it's still there.. and necessary for our sustenance.. and survival.

If you carry the Christian Foundation thing to its logical conclusion, so called western civilization and so called western culture then you might want to logically assume that Christianity is suspect. A house rots from its foundations, in the case of the christianized west we know very well the shoddy construction and poor quality materials. For puritanical delivery of ethics the west has no peers. Your suggestion that we continue down this dead end path with new and improved christianity would be funny if it were not so tragic. There are manifold better spiritual practices which are far more reflective of the human condition available at this time. Christ was a good fellow but he sucked at planning and had no forsight, thanks for the mess god.

 

[coldstream]

If you carry the Christian Foundation thing to its logical conclusion, so called western civilization and so called western culture then you might want to logically assume that Christianity is suspect. A house rots from its foundations, in the case of the christianized west we know very well the shoddy construction and poor quality materials. For puritanical delivery of ethics the west has no peers. Your suggestion that we continue down this dead end path with new and improved christianity would be funny if it were not so tragic. There are manifold better spiritual practices which are far more reflective of the human condition available at this time. Christ was a good fellow but he sucked at planning and had no forsight, thanks for the mess god.

Well that's the rap on Christianity, not real Biblical or ecclisiastical Christianity. With Islam there is no such subtlety or interpretation.. no turning the other cheek, not casting the first stone.. no forgiveness, no agape (divine love). There is vengeance.. page after page in the Koran of stonings, whippings, beheadings, hangings, amputations.. for any slight to God or His law. In Christianity, God took all those afflictions on Himself. The difference is.. night and day.

 

[Cannuck]

What about Jewish women who cover their hair? How about catholic nuns? Them too? How about Hutterites? Slavs and their babooshkas too?

The issue is about forcing women to wear them. If these people are forced to do it then it would be just as wrong. Another issue is identification. A woman could wear a babushka when her drivers license picture was taken and it could still be used as a reasonable source of identification.

 

[Niflmir]

I have no problem with Burka's. People can wear what they want.

HOWEVER - we should not have to change our practices in some cases such as:

1) to vote - you should have to demonstrate you are who you say you are - so you'll have to show your face.
2) same for driver's licenses
3) same for public pools, etc.. (ok - makes no sense for Burka's - but the whole "can't swim with men in the same pool" thing - too bad - then open a private pool, or don't swim at the public pool)

I have problems with burkas. I think people should be able to wear what they want.

Not so long ago (end of the 19th century) women were saying they didn't want to vote and that it was perfectly reasonable to be paid less for equal work. Accepting discrimination doesn't make it undiscriminatory.

 

[darkbeaver]

Well that's the rap on Christianity, not real Biblical or ecclisiastical Christianity. With Islam there is no such subtlety or interpretation.. no turning the other cheek, not casting the first stone.. no forgiveness, no agape (divine love). There is vengeance.. page after page in the Koran of stonings, whippings, beheadings, hangings, amputations.. for any slight to God. In Christianity, God took all those afflictions on Himself. The difference is.. night and day.

I know you think you see a difference but they are both just ever so slightly different parts of the same invention. Real christianity ended with the Holy Mother Church and bears not the slightest similarity to any extant christian sect. For the billions who died in agony and poverty and humiliation since christ bore our sins away, I forgive you.

 

[darkbeaver]

Sarkosy is a looser. He'll be wearing feathers and tar soon.

 

[Ron in Regina]

Sarkosy is a looser. He'll be wearing feathers and tar soon.

This Guy? 8O

 

[coldstream]

I know you think you see a difference but they are both just ever so slightly different parts of the same invention. Real christianity ended with the Holy Mother Church and bears not the slightest similarity to any extant christian sect. For the billions who died in agony and poverty and humiliation since christ bore our sins away, I forgive you.

Well the 'Holy Mother Church' was established by Christ on the rock of Peter. There is no 'extant Christian sect' beyond it, and it is the indivisible, organic and mystical Body of Christ on Earth.

They are not 'slightly different parts' of the same invention but polar opposites, in the shade of good and evil.

And as Christ responded to Pilate's charge, "My Kingdom is not of this World". It is not for you to forgive, or to save, that too is of His Kingdom.

 

[Cliffy]

Ah, believers are so thick. There were several christian sects when Constantine decided to put the bible together in his own image and create the Roman catholic church. He left out all the other christian writings of the time to suit his own political motivations (to keep the christians that followed Paul - Paulianity) from tearing his empire apart. He also translated the writings to suit himself so most of the none sense about Peter being the foundation of the church is as nonsensical as the rest. Even Constantine did not become a christian until his death bed. When are you going to stop believing in fairy tales?

 

[coldstream]

Ah, believers are so thick. There were several christian sects when Constantine decided to put the bible together in his own image and create the Roman catholic church. He left out all the other christian writings of the time to suit his own political motivations (to keep the christians that followed Paul - Paulianity) from tearing his empire apart. He also translated the writings to suit himself so most of the none sense about Peter being the foundation of the church is as nonsensical as the rest. Even Constantine did not become a christian until his death bed. When are you going to stop believing in fairy tales?

Constatine had nothing to do with 'putting the Bible together' other than assembling the Council of Nicea, under the auspices of the Magisterium of the Church (its Bishops, Curia, Pontiff and teaching authority) and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which eliminated heretical texts and codified Christian beliefs in the Nicean Creed, in a response to heresies of the time, notably Arianism, which rejected the Divinity of Christ.

Constantine was a Christian, but not baptised until he was on his deathbed. Paul is the seminal theologian, and evangalizer of the Church of Christ, ordained as such by God, after his encounter with Christ, and conversion from its arch persecutor, on the Road to Damascus.

He worked in concert with the Church in Jesualem under James to emancipate the Christian faith, and articulate its moral theology, which was subsequently and fully established under Peter in Rome. The heretical texts eliminated at Nicea fabricated a gnostic, indulgent, pagan based and completely antithetical construct of 'Christianity'.

When, Cliffy, are you going to stop putting your faith in idols and witchcraft.. that which forms the 'secular', liberal 'West'.

 

[EagleSmack]

Ah, believers are so thick. There were several christian sects when Constantine decided to put the bible together in his own image and create the Roman catholic church. He left out all the other christian writings of the time to suit his own political motivations (to keep the christians that followed Paul - Paulianity) from tearing his empire apart. He also translated the writings to suit himself so most of the none sense about Peter being the foundation of the church is as nonsensical as the rest. Even Constantine did not become a christian until his death bed. When are you going to stop believing in fairy tales?

Close but not quite.

Constantine told all of the Catholic sects to get together and decide what it is to be a Catholic.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

The most antisocial form of clothing on women, any man who will demand his wife will never be seen in public with her face exposed is a demented cave man.

France is on the right track, we do no accept this form of attire in our country, wear it in your country that is your business here in France we do not accept that..

 

[El Barto]

I say , "way to go"
Now add a selective screening for the rights to wear a "g" string :lol:

 

[Polygong]

What I find interesting is that those who advocate the banning on burkas because they are demeaning to women never seem to advocate the banning of strip clubs.