PDA

View Full Version : Debate on banning Niqaab/Burka in Britain



Junon
07-17-2010, 11:44 PM
Salaam

Two Radio programmes debating the subject of to the Islamic veil. My purpose on posting this is not to cause bad feeling or stir up trouble, but we (as Muslims) have to be aware of what we are up against.

The first was a debate on the moral maze, on whether the Burka/Niqaab should be banned in the UK?

France is the latest European country to talk of banning the burqa - the full Islamic face veil for women. Belgium has already voted for a ban and there's also been talk of similar laws in Holland and Spain. France has the largest Muslim population in Europe and polls there show overwhelming support for the proposal. It's estimated that around 1900 women in France wear the burqa and most do so because they want to. Those in favour of a ban argue that the burqa is a gateway to extremism and an attack on secularism, a central value of modern-day France. For many this is also an issue of protecting women's rights; the burqa they argue, is a symbol of male oppression and as one French law maker is reported to have said, women who wear them must be liberated, even against their will.

The state banning something as personal as what you chose to wear in public is a tricky issue for liberal Western democracies, but can the rush to uncover Europe's most pious Muslims be explained solely by a newfound desire to protect the rights of women? Or is this more about notions of cultural purity and the darker side of humanity in Europe which raises its head from time to time? The fear of the stranger, of shunning those who look different to ourselves - the attitude which can lead to Islamophobia/racism. How far should we compromise our values to accommodate the cultural norms from different faiths and societies?

Michael Buerk chairs with Claire Fox, Clifford Longley, Anne McElvoy and Matthew Taylor.

Witnesses:
Peter Whittle, Director, The New Culture Forum
Mona Eltahaway, Commentator and public lecturer on Arab and Muslim issues
Khola Hasan, Islamic legal consultant
Dr Salman Sayyid, Reader in Sociology at Leeds.


You can listen to it here, be warned though its (45 minutes long!) and does get heated at points but its well worth listening to because it reveals the thinking of the British establishment in regards to the Islamic veil.

What do you think of the points made in the debate? What are your views, opinions? I think I get the general idea but would not want to be presumptuous.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00t0d19

There was also another programme on Radio 5 Live but its not posted up yet, post it when I get the chance
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
aadil77
07-18-2010, 12:05 AM
There won't be any ban in this country, the immigration minister said its 'unlikely' they're gonna copy the french
Reply

Zafran
07-18-2010, 12:46 AM
salaam

I think the same - it is very unlikely there will be a ban because its non sensical - there have been many threads on this issue but I will repeat what I said anyway

1 - if they ban the burkha because women are actually being forced to wear it then these women will just be forced to sit at home.

2 - if they ban the burkha because women choose to wear it then they are restricting there freedom - it doesnt work one way or another.

peace
Reply

titus
07-18-2010, 03:08 AM
if they ban the burkha because women choose to wear it then they are restricting there freedom - it doesnt work one way or another.
Exactly. If anyone says they are champions of freedom and that they want to ban the burka in public places then they are hypocrites, plain and simple.

Do they want to ban clown costumes and Halloween masks also? People can phrase it any way they want, but if they want to ban such religious dress it is because they fear or despise the followers of that religion.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Rhubarb Tart
07-18-2010, 11:26 PM
Originally Posted by titus
Exactly. If anyone says they are champions of freedom and that they want to ban the burka in public places then they are hypocrites, plain and simple.

Do they want to ban clown costumes and Halloween masks also? People can phrase it any way they want, but if they want to ban such religious dress it is because they fear or despise the followers of that religion.
I agree.

Idiots polluting in daily fail commentary section (like always) don’t seem to understand the consequences of banning the “Burkha” and these idiots don’t know the difference between the Nigab and Burkha.

For example let take the comment below serious:

We aren't asking for a ban on the burka - we are DEMANDING a ban on ALL face coverings in public regardless of gender, ethnicity, age, or the material from which the face covering is made.

I'm tired of being reasonable & tolerant. It's someone else's turn for a change.
- kate, fairwater, cardiff, 18/7/2010 10:20

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0u4skePna
If we do take this idiotic woman seriously:

Goodbye to Halloween mask, or any other costumes that cover the face.

So in this woman’s world: Goodbye to following that would make life less enjoyable for her but hey she DEMANDS a ban on all face covering in public:

http://www.halloweenasylum.com/Produ...zago-m1013.jpg

http://www.funny-potato.com/images/h...oween-mask.jpg

Shame her kids can’t wear the favourite doctor who mask, oh well she would have to explain it to them:
http://www.partybox.co.uk/data/party...hofacemask.jpg
:(

Oh well, I guess the Chinese new year celebration would not be the same huh?

http://media.nowpublic.net/images//9...ffb080814c.jpg

http://www.masksoftheworld.com/image...k%20Lion-a.jpg

Oh no! Thinking about it, my favourite Chinese dragon costume is complete out of the picture. :exhausted

http://www.kidsco.co.uk/Oriental%20I...ostumeHead.gif

http://www.china-cart.com/bookpic/20...0811561253.jpg

**** shame I tell ya... same goes to the Caribbean festival British people like to go to so often.

And how are the British people going to hide their facial expression when they lose again in the world cup 2014 :(

She did in fact say covering one’s face, didn’t she? Painting the England flag on face still constitutes covering one’s face considering that we won’t be able to tell who and who. I can’t, they all look bloody same to me. ;D

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/73/17...82a9dd.jpg?v=0

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...ns_get_416.jpg

The whole argument is stupid and it will never be banned in the UK. I know plenty of non Muslims and some I spoke to other the internet that would happily wear one as a protest if it ever get banned lol!!!:muslimah::bravo::peace:
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
07-18-2010, 11:39 PM
The bigotry comments in daily fail never fails to amuse me.

How dare one man decide on behalf of the British public. If he listened to the British people he would find that the vast majority want it banned. It has no place here.
- Annie, Birmingham, 18/7/2010 9:33
Blimey Annie and the British public give flying donkeys about Burkha? Last time I checked they all preoccupied with their lives and hardly give a thought to minority women who wear it. If in fact the above is true, why isn’t there petition signed by majority of “British public”. Annie and her bigoted friends does not include “majority of British public” nor does the unintelligent and thoughtless comment in daily fail and trolls in other websites either.

Utter losers are anxious by what other people wear.
Reply

ziyad
07-20-2010, 01:55 PM
The problem is, we never appreciated it when we had the right, now when it's being taken away we are up in arms. Next they will ban mosques, then we will all want to run to the mosque. If you don't appreciate the favours of allah he will snatch them one by one. We are to blame.
Reply

ziyad
07-20-2010, 01:57 PM
How many women really do wear the full burka, I would say no more than 5 - 10%. If every muslim women wore the burka in every country they live, almost every country would seem like an Islamic country. Let them try to ban it then.
Reply

Woodrow
07-20-2010, 02:15 PM
Originally Posted by ziyad
How many women really do wear the full burka, I would say no more than 5 - 10%. If every muslim women wore the burka in every country they live, almost every country would seem like an Islamic country. Let them try to ban it then.

That is sadly true. I have not verified the percentages you quote, but personal observations seem to agree. Here in the USA it seems that the only ones who wear full Burkha are recent reverts and NOI. Sadly NOI are not Muslim even though they believe themselves to be.

Perhaps all this hoopla about banning may wake us up and encourage women to wear the full Burkha.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 02:37 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
I think the same - it is very unlikely there will be a ban because its non sensical - there have been many threads on this issue but I will repeat what I said anyway

1 - if they ban the burkha because women are actually being forced to wear it then these women will just be forced to sit at home.
Why will they just sit at home and I note you say FORCED to sit at home, who forces them to do that?

2 - if they ban the burkha because women choose to wear it then they are restricting there freedom - it doesnt work one way or another.
Is this a principle you are expounding here, that anyone can do anything and if it is banned then we are restricting freedom?
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 02:43 PM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
That is sadly true. I have not verified the percentages you quote, but personal observations seem to agree. Here in the USA it seems that the only ones who wear full Burkha are recent reverts and NOI. Sadly NOI are not Muslim even though they believe themselves to be. Perhaps all this hoopla about banning may wake us up and encourage women to wear the full Burkha.
I see from this you are in favour of the burka and I guess you would support women them in that but are you open handed here, will you equally support those who see it as a useless symbol or even as a symbol of oppression? Is it reasonable that God, the God who created the timeless vastness of eternity, the laws of physics, the beauty of the earth would want women to walk around in a kind of tent? I just cannot see God thinking this way?

What is you view of women who don't wear the burka?
Reply

S_87
07-20-2010, 02:43 PM
Why will they just sit at home and I note you say FORCED to sit at home, who forces them to do that?
we will be forced to do that by those who take away our freedom to cover and yes i say FREEDOM
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 02:43 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Why will they just sit at home and I note you say FORCED to sit at home, who forces them to do that?

Those restricting their freedom are those forcing them to stay home

Is this a principle you are expounding here, that anyone can do anything and if it is banned then we are restricting freedom?
putting on clothes isn't 'someone doing anything' there is no harm done when one dons clothes as opposed to say the harm done taking them off!

Again, good to expend sometimes thinking before you write, you won't end up asking so many inane questions and drawing simpleton conclusions!

all the best
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 02:49 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo

I see from this you are in favour of the burka and I guess you would support women them in that but are you open handed here, will you equally support those who see it as a useless symbol or even as a symbol of oppression? Is it reasonable that God, the God who created the timeless vastness of eternity, the laws of physics, the beauty of the earth would want women to walk around in a kind of tent? I just cannot see God thinking this way?

What is you view of women who don't wear the burka?
what do you know of what god thinks? your god died a couple of thousand years ago.. God doesn't give us fruits without cover still modern day, oranges and banana haven't shed their coats for your pleasure and I doubt if their coat were shed if you'd reach for them, so that is nature that God created and dictated to his laws.. a woman's garment grants her, her anonymity, her freedom, and her identity.. you don't like tents then go on and look the other way, surely there is a thousand wh ore that you can look toward and who gyrate and gesticulate around the clock for your 'modern' and with the time carnal and basic pleasures?
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 02:50 PM
Originally Posted by amani
we will be forced to do that by those who take away our freedom to cover and yes i say FREEDOM
I am sorry but I cannot follows this, do you mean we have a law that says women must stay at home? I ask again, suppose I say that genital mutilation is part of my religion, would you allow it or not in the name of freedom? Would you if you could force all women to cover and if so how can that be any kind of expression of freedom?
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 02:52 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I am sorry but I cannot follows this, do you mean we have a law that says women must stay at home? I ask again, suppose I say that genital mutilation is part of my religion, would you allow it or not in the name of freedom? Would you if you could force all women to cover and if so how can that be any kind of expression of freedom?
Genital mutilation isn't putting on clothes is it? also nothing in your religion is to be followed at all, since from its basic tenets to the last ancillary subjects is completely nonsensical and irrelevant...

Do you want to work on how logic should follow from a premise?
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 02:56 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
Those restricting their freedom are those forcing them to stay home
But WHO is forcing them to stay at home, I cannot logically link a law that says no burka in public to being interpreted as a law that says stay at home?
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 02:59 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
But WHO is forcing them to stay at home, I cannot logically link a law that says no burka in public to being interpreted as a law that says stay at home?
you' can't logically think' - I agree with that!

when someone tells you that you all we have for dinner are pigs roasted in urine... or you have the choice to go hungry, who is forcing them to go hungry in this picture? try to think about it for a while, I know it can be daunting but eventually you'll get there!

all the best
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 03:00 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
Genital mutilation isn't putting on clothes is it? also nothing in your religion is to be followed at all, since from its basic tenets to the last ancillary subjects is completely nonsensical and irrelevant... Do you want to work on how logic should follow from a premise?
Logic is not your strong point is it, the argument presented is about freedom for someone to do as they please in the name of religion. If such an argument exists it cannot be just about the burka can it?
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 03:03 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Logic is not your strong point is it,
That is an honest and adequate assessment of yourself.. thanks!
the argument presented is about freedom for someone to do as they please in the name of religion. If such an argument exists it cannot be just about the burka can it?
The topic is about Burka not turning down falafel in the name of religion..
If you don't understand the subject of the topic, then don't partake in it!

all the best
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 03:08 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
when someone tells you that you all we have for dinner are pigs roasted in urine... or you have the choice to go hungry, who is forcing them to go hungry in this picture? try to think about it for a while, I know it can be daunting but eventually you'll get there!
If this analogy works then it works both ways. Suppose a Muslim woman in a Muslim state refuses to wear the Burka, then she is FORCED to stay at home or be pillories or worse in public.
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 03:10 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
If this analogy works then it works both ways. Suppose a Muslim woman in a Muslim state refuses to wear the Burka, then she is FORCED to stay at home or be pillories or worse in public.
We are not debating about a Muslim woman in a 'Muslim state' and the fact of the matter is no muslim woman in a Muslim state is ever forced to wear a Burka (is besides the point) we are debating if Burka is banned in a colonial settler country like England. Again, if you don't understand the topic or the subject matter then don't partake in the topic.
Reply

Woodrow
07-20-2010, 03:13 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo

I see from this you are in favour of the burka and I guess you would support women them in that but are you open handed here, will you equally support those who see it as a useless symbol or even as a symbol of oppression? Is it reasonable that God, the God who created the timeless vastness of eternity, the laws of physics, the beauty of the earth would want women to walk around in a kind of tent? I just cannot see God thinking this way?

What is you view of women who don't wear the burka?

I support a woman's right to wear the Burkha. I believe it should be a woman's own choice to wear it and not because she is forced to by any man. I believe a woman should only wear it because she herself wants to please Allaah(swt) and not because any man has told her to wear it. I also believe no man has the right to forbid her from wearing it if she chooses to wear it.

The Burkha is not unique to Islam, all of the Abrahamic faiths saw it as being a condition of proper worship. Although some of the newer Christian denominations have strayed far from it.

A lovely pearl is indeed an object of beauty enjoyable to look upon, yet Allaah(swt) has chosen it to be hidden in the sea and covered by a thick shell. Is not a woman much more valuable than a pearl?

I double dare you to try to remove the Burkha from my youngest daughter. She did not start wearing it until she was over 30 years old and even her husband has requested her not to wear it in public. But, I assure you if any body ever attempts to remove it from her, they will not have much of an arm left after she gets done with them.

My wife also wears the Burkha in public although when we are out on the prairie alone riding horses she dosen't nor does she in our home. I have no say over her wearing it or not wearing it. Like my daughter, I would not be brave enough to tell her not to wear it. I am pleased to see she wears it, but I have never told her to wear it. She began wearing it at the age of 61, before we met.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 03:18 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
We are not debating about a Muslim woman in a 'Muslim state' and the fact of the matter is no muslim woman in a Muslim state is ever forced to wear a Burka (is besides the point) we are debating if Burka is banned in a colonial settler country like England. Again, if you don't understand the topic or the subject matter then don't partake in the topic.
You do not seem to understand the notion of a principle. To see what I mean perhaps you remember the case in Mecca in 2002 when Saudi Arabia's religious police stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress and many of them died because the guards would not open the gates. So its not besides the point because we can see how destructive it can become and one presumes you see it as a religious duty not just in the West but everywhere.
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 03:24 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
You do not seem to understand the notion of a principle. To see what I mean perhaps you remember the case in Mecca in 2002 when Saudi Arabia's religious police stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress and many of them died because the guards would not open the gates. So its not besides the point because we can see how destructive it can become and one presumes you see it as a religious duty not just in the West but everywhere.
You don't seem to understand the notion of keeping with the topic, further don't seem to understand how Islam works all together or what a 'Muslim state' is or constitutes-- To prove you the despicable hypocrite that you since I have lived in Saudi Arabia, I know that Burqa wasn't imposed on anyone, and if such an incident indeed occurred then it was in Isolation or should I also take it by principal that all western men bed their daughters and father their own grandchildren as we have seen quite the wave of that?

here are pictured of Saudi women without their Burka parading in day light without being persecuted by the religious police ..



and



as they say a picture is worth a thousand words, and you live or have lived in the UAE to mooch off Muslim money, did they force you or anyone to wear anything in there?

get off the western rumor mill, or at least if you are going to peddle in bull do it on a fundie form where they praise the lawd while downing some pork rinds and thumping their hands over people they know absolutely nothing of!
Reply

marwen
07-20-2010, 03:34 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
You do not seem to understand the notion of a principle. To see what I mean perhaps you remember the case in Mecca in 2002 when Saudi Arabia's religious police stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress and many of them died because the guards would not open the gates. So its not besides the point because we can see how destructive it can become and one presumes you see it as a religious duty not just in the West but everywhere.
You're talking about a totally different thing. There is a difference between doing something with good will / freely, and between forcing some one to do the same thing. In this thread we're talking about the first form, so your example is kind of irrelevant here.
For example if you give charity/sadaqa to some one : It's charity. But when someone forced you to give money : that's robbery. You cannot ban charity because robbery exists.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 03:40 PM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
I support a woman's right to wear the Burkha. I believe it should be a woman's own choice to wear it and not because she is forced to by any man. I believe a woman should only wear it because she herself wants to please Allaah(swt) and not because any man has told her to wear it. I also believe no man has the right to forbid her from wearing it if she chooses to wear it.
I find this post very interesting and what you and your family decide is entirely your business as long as it does not infringe on the freedom of others. What though is moot here is your line "..she herself wants to please Allaah.." and that sounds like a bit of pressure is being applied that becomes irresistible, unanswerable so not to wear a burka by implication will not please Allah - though I don't know if you meant it that way?

I suppose what I am saying is that I cannot see why it might please Allah for women to totally cover up in public, cannot see how any merit attaches to it? Without wanting to be provocative, there are said to be 100,000 prostitutes in Tehran and also large numbers in Saudi Arabia - well they don't go out in public dressed in mini skirts and hots pants do they, they dress exactly as is usual for Muslim women.
Reply

S_87
07-20-2010, 03:42 PM
the law is banning something, if a woman has a right taken away-and just so you know- covering is a RIGHT and a FREEDOM and it does no one harm and is no one elses business then yeh you are isolating the women who cover by demanding they are stripped or their right to dress covered up.
Reply

Woodrow
07-20-2010, 03:54 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo

I suppose what I am saying is that I cannot see why it might please Allah for women to totally cover up in public, cannot see how any merit attaches to it? Without wanting to be provocative, there are said to be 100,000 prostitutes in Tehran and also large numbers in Saudi Arabia - well they don't go out in public dressed in mini skirts and hots pants do they, they dress exactly as is usual for Muslim women.

Now if that is true. Does that not sort of go against your belief that Muslim women are brainwashed into wearing the Burkha? Seems that prostitution is a bit more going against Allaah(swt) than refusal to wear the Burkha.
Reply

marwen
07-20-2010, 04:00 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I cannot see why it might please Allah for women to totally cover up in public, cannot see how any merit attaches to it?
If Woodrow don't mind me replying to this :
Well you cannot see why it might please Allah, but muslims do, will you ban them doing something just because you don't believe in what they believe?
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
07-20-2010, 06:03 PM
Salam

Come on Hugo

Comparing genital mutilation to item of clothing that cover one’s face is far fetch!

And don’t you think we would be hypocrites to criticise the Saudi Arabia when they can just turn and say “well you lot also limit women’s choice to wear Burkha and Nigab”. And considering only small number of women wears it in the UK like less than 1%, banning it is no use. I hear arguments made by some British people favouring the banning that Burkha and Nigab limits integration but yet these people seem to forget small number of women that do wear Burkha hardly have impact on their Muslim community let alone other communities.

Basically the Burkha issue is non issue. We honestly have bigger fish to fry.
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
07-20-2010, 06:10 PM
And there is little difference between an oppressive individual (or an oppressive society) that forces a woman to wear something against her will, and an oppressive individual (or an oppressive society) that denies a woman the right to wear something that she has chosen to.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 08:02 PM
Originally Posted by amani
the law is banning something, if a woman has a right taken away-and just so you know- covering is a RIGHT and a FREEDOM and it does no one harm and is no one elses business then yeh you are isolating the women who cover by demanding they are stripped or their right to dress covered up.
I might go along with you if you will stand up in public and feel equally strongly that a woman may therefore dress as she pleases, wear a mini skirt and so on?
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 08:05 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I might go along with you if you will stand up in public and feel equally strongly that a woman may therefore dress as she pleases, wear a mini skirt and so on?
will this reverse the ban decision against the Burka or just appease your own perversions ?
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 08:11 PM
Originally Posted by sweet106
And there is little difference between an oppressive individual (or an oppressive society) that forces a woman to wear something against her will, and an oppressive individual (or an oppressive society) that denies a woman the right to wear something that she has chosen to.
This I can agree with and I take it here you are not just talking about the West? In fact your post reminded me about Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer, who fought as hard as anyone to bring Khomeini to power and the day after he arrived in Tehran she went joyfully to her office looking forward to a brighter world only for the first words she heard was a man demanding to know why her head was not covered. She now lives in exile in London, a nobel peace prize winner. She chose not to wear a head covering, how do you feel about that?
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 08:16 PM
Originally Posted by marwen
Well you cannot see why it might please Allah, but muslims do, will you ban them doing something just because you don't believe in what they believe?
Fine then explain it to us, show us were in the Qu'ran or anywhere it says this is a worthy thing to do?
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 08:19 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Fine then explain it to us, show us were in the Qu'ran or anywhere it says this is a worthy thing to do?
and the point of that being, if you don't believe in the Quran all together? I am amused of your obsession with women's dress, are you that desperate to see people disrobe? You sound really perverted!

all the best
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
07-20-2010, 08:29 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
This I can agree with and I take it here you are not just talking about the West? In fact your post reminded me about Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer, who fought as hard as anyone to bring Khomeini to power and the day after he arrived in Tehran she went joyfully to her office looking forward to a brighter world only for the first words she heard was a man demanding to know why her head was not covered. She now lives in exile in London, a noble peace prize winner. She chose not to wear a head covering, how do you feel about that?
What do you want me to feel?

I have plenty of non Muslim female relatives that don’t cover their head and I don’t have any ill feelings towards them. So why on earth would I have any ill feelings toward a fellow Muslim who chooses not to cover her head?

End of the day it is between her and Allah (swt) and I still consider her as my sister.
:)

Lol @ her being in exile. I wonder why dozen of Muslim women who don’t wear head covering in London are not exiled by still live with their families and part of the community huh?

Noble peace prize is never really given to a Muslim that emphasises how positive her or his life is and how positive the Muslim communities are. The again I can’t take “noble peace prize” serious anyways considering they gave an award to Obama (who did really do anything at the time).
:p
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 08:36 PM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
Now if that is true. Does that not sort of go against your belief that Muslim women are brainwashed into wearing the Burkha? Seems that prostitution is a bit more going against Allaah(swt) than refusal to wear the Burkha.
No that is not the point I was making, the point is that it is largely irrelevant what a person wears as to piety. Perhaps you will see it better if I recount a Biblical story found in Luke 18:10-15 (KJV)

Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

So Piety is shown by an attitude of heart and mind and a realization we are at best poor deluded sinners and when we have that we are driven to acts of sacrificial service out of thankfulness that is why Jesus when asked what is the greatest commandment said to love the Lord they God with all your heart and what is perhaps pertinent here is that we should love our neighbour as ourselves. To a Christian or Jew the very idea that an act earns merit with God is not part of our way of dealing with God. If we do anything it is only for him and by his empowerment.
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 08:43 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
No that is not the point I was making, the point is that it is largely irrelevant what a person wears as to piety. Perhaps you will see it better if I recount a Biblical story found in Luke 18:10-15 (KJV)

Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

So Piety is shown by an attitude of heart and mind and a realization we are at best poor deluded sinners and when we have that we are driven to acts of sacrificial service out of thankfulness that is why Jesus when asked what is the greatest commandment said to love the Lord they God with all your heart and what is perhaps pertinent here is that we should love our neighbour as ourselves. To a Christian or Jew the very idea that an act earns merit with God is not part of our way of dealing with God. If we do anything it is only for him and by his empowerment.
I don't really think Jews share your point of views.. in fact your interior and exterior should match.. a christian (which you are a good Representative of are ugly and sinful on the inside out)

have a look at some Jews:




. [Does the Torah command Jewish women to cover their heads and how does it mandate they do so?]

The Torah states that, like in Islam,when the people came to pray to the Lord they covered their shoulders and head. This is the opinion of most rabbis. Where does it say that it should not be done any longer?

‘‘Make for yourselves tassels [g'dilim] on the four corners of the cloak [k'sut] that covers you'' (Deuteronomy 22:11 MBV). The command noted from Deuteronomy 22:11, is that it is to be a k'sut, or covering, and it is emphasized twice to be a ‘‘cloak [k'sut] that covers [k'sut] you.''

The practice of hair covering amongst Jewish women has its source in the Mishnah. M. Ketubot 7:6 lists going out with unbound hair as one of the ways in which a woman forfeits her divorce settlement. The Talmud (B. Ketubot 72a-b) understood the source of this custom to be even more ancient. In the Bible (Numbers 5:18), a woman suspected of infidelity has her hair exposed as part of her punishment. This biblical passage seems to imply that as a matter of course a Jewish woman kept her hair covered.

The gemara in Ketubot 72a presents two categories of women who can be divorced without receiving the sum of money stipulated in their ketuba (marriage contract). In other words, these are cases where the women are deemed to have violated the terms under which they were married, and thus the contract is considered to be broken. The two categories are referred to as "Dat Moshe" and "Dat Yehudit." The former category includes cases when the woman causes her husband to violate Torah law (the religion of Moshe), while the second category seems to be more focused on issues of personal modesty. The latter category is called "Dat Yehudit" since it includes things that are not explicitly prohibited by the Torah, yet have been accepted by the women of Israel as a binding custom. The first item listed among those things considered to be "Dat Yehudit" is when a woman goes out with her hair uncovered. However, as the gemara notes, this is not simply a law that was accepted over time by Jewish women. Rather, we know from the case of the sotah (a woman suspected by her husband of committing adultery) that Jewish women have to cover their hair, since part of the process of humiliating the sotah in attempts to make her confess her sin is that the kohein uncovers her hair. Obviously, if this was considered to be a potentially effective means of shaming her into confession, it must be that it was the norm for her hair to be covered (see also Bamidbar Rabba 9:16)!

While there is a Halachic disagreement amongst Jewish scholars regarding the law that married women should cover their hair even inside their houses, all seem to agree that it is preferable and highly praiseworthy for a woman to cover her hair even in the privacy of her own home. There is no such thing for Muslim women. The Qu'ran makes clear our hijabs are worn in front of non-maharam men, and for salat. So we have no such confusion.

In the Talmud there is a famous story about a certain woman by the name of Kimchit who was careful that “the walls of her house should not see the hairs of her head.” She was rewarded with seven sons who served as High Priests. We see from this story that a woman’s covering her hair in private is highly praiseworthy. But is it a Torah mandate? Or is it simply a chumrah, a stringency? Must a woman cover her hair at home? King David says, “kol kevudah bat melech p'nimah.” Which Hebrew for "All the glory of the King’s daughter is internal."

One of the expressions of this inner glory is that, in Judaism in general, married women must cover their hair. But is there a halachic difference between going out in public and being at home? In the privacy of their own homes, seemingly, they should be able to “let their hair down.” Muslim women CAN if they are not around non-maharam men. By covering her hair (even with a wig, which may be mistaken for real hair---Muslim women are forbidden to wear wigs maybe because it is an imitation of this Jewish custom) a woman in Judaism is expressing her exclusive devotion, love for, and unique connection to her husband.

In order to fully answer this question, it is important to address two issues at play here: a) why does a Jewish woman need to cover her hair at all? b) Does the Torah expect (and allow) Jewish women to act differently in the privacy of their own homes than when they are outside in public?

Once a woman is married, she enters into a completely unique relationship with her husband. This transformation is alluded to by the Hebrew name for the wedding ceremony, “Kiddushin,” which means sanctification or holiness.

Through this act, the bride and groom are totally and utterly dedicated to each other in a holy coupling. This dedication manifests itself in both an internal and an external form, in many ways, and for both partners.

One of these ways is by a woman covering her hair, which is viewed by Judaism as a sensual and private part of a married woman’s appearance. By covering her hair (even with a wig, which may be mistaken for real hair) a woman is expressing her exclusive devotion, love for, and unique connection to her husband.

Even if others do not realize that she is covering her hair, she has the constant awareness and consciousness that she is one half of a unique and profound relationship, sanctified by God Himself.

Yet, the Torah, as usual, is not content to let the practioner of Judaism just “act natural.” Rather, it exhorts them to keep to high standards, and to maintain a high level of moral and ethical conduct, even when no other human beings are around. Even when a Jewish woman is getting dressed in a dark room, she are enjoined to do so in a modest manner. Similarily the Prophet Mohammed salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam suggested we cover our naked bodies with sheets even while we enjoyed the company of our husbands in the marriage bed, so that Jinn could not watch.

Why is this belief prevalent in Judaism? Because of the concept that God is omnipresent; and human beings are always under His scrutiny. (And in case a person does not have the constant awareness of God’s presence, the Jewish Shulchan Aruch prescribes meditation, in order to arouse feelings of love and awe)

However, the hair of a married woman does not have the same status as other private parts of the body that are usually covered in Judaism. As explained earlier, hair covering is primarily a symbol of marriage, a demonstration of her devotion to her spouse.

So, all that said: May a women uncover her hair in private? Halachah, Jewish law, addresses public, semipublic, and private settings:

Now, normally, the laws of modesty are not loosened in the privacy of home. The Code of Jewish Law, acknowledging human nature, states that it is natural for people to act differently when they are in the privacy of their own home then when they are around a group of people.

Public: The Torah states that a woman must completely cover her hair in a public place. Some opinions state that under a tefach (a handbreadth, about three inches total) of hair may show.

Semipublic: In a semipublic place, one opinion states that even if men are not usually found there, a married woman must cover her hair.

Private: The Biur Halachah writes that although originally it was permitted for married women to uncover their hair in the privacy of their homes, in more recent times “the prevailing custom in all places is for women to cover their hair, even in the privacy of their own homes.... Since our ancestors, in all localities, have adopted this practice, it has taken on the full force of Jewish law and is obligatory....”

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein disagrees with this ruling and writes that “[covering hair when in private] is praiseworthy, but not required.” Sources for these conclusions in Yuma 47a, Psalms 45:14, Beginning of Orach Chaim. With regards to other issues – such as the prohibition of a husband seeing private parts of his wife’s body when she is niddah – there is disagreement between halachic authorities as to the “status” of a married woman’s hair. Rabbi Yosef Shalom Eliashiv (highly respected modern-day Israeli halachic authority) says that a married woman’s hair is in the same category as other private parts of the body, while Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (author of the Igrot Moshe Responsa) writes that hair is not in the same category as other parts of the body that are normally covered. Sources: Halichos Bas Yisrael, by Rabbi Yitzchak Yaacov Fuchs. Targum Press, 1987. Beautiful Within, Modesty In Conduct and Dress As Taught By The Lubavitcher Rebbe. Sichos in English, 1995.

The Jews themselves are often guilty of making a law (such as a woman's hair having to be covered even in the privacy of her home or wearings wigs to do so) Biur Halachah writes that although originally it was permitted for married women to uncover their hair in the privacy of their homes, in more recent times “the prevailing custom in all places is for women to cover their hair, even in the privacy of their own homes.... Since our ancestors, in all localities, have adopted this practice, it has taken on the full force of Jewish law and is obligatory....” which did not originate with Allah subhabhu wa ta'ala, which is, to make something haraam that is halal. The Qu'ran, and even the Torah has remnants, have warnings for this.

Isaiah 30:1 says, "Woe to the rebellious children, saith the Lord, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of My spirit, that they may add sin to sin."

In conclusion, from studies of Jewish historical costume and the Torah, and the opinions of Jewish scholars, a woman's hair must be covered and she must wear modest clothing that covers all of her skin. Nothing in Judaism specified that clothing could not be very decorated, or that the hair HAD to be covered in a certain manner, or that the clothing had to be loose and not see-through, or that an overgarment had to be worn, or that complete veiling (facial) was forbidden. Facial veiling was not a commandment in the Torah, nor was jilbab, nor was covering the neck and the breasts. That is why Jewish women are permitted to wear knee length skirts with tights and this counts as clothing that covers. Facial veiling was neither mustahaab, haraam, or fard for Jewish women but it was a cultural practice that was a symbol of wealth and social status, and the opinion of Jewish scholars is that it is halaal for Jewish women, but not part of their religion.




________________________

didn't I request that an ignoramus such as yourself shouldn't speak on behalf of others?
further the Jews don't recognize you at all, to them you are paganists the same way you are paganists to Muslims..
now go and be all decadent and sinful because god ate your sins when he died!

all the best
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 08:48 PM
Originally Posted by sweet106
What do you want me to feel? I have plenty of non Muslim female relatives that don’t cover their head and I don’t have any ill feelings towards them. So why on earth would I have any ill feelings toward a fellow Muslim who chooses not to cover her head? End of the day it is between her and Allah (swt) and I still consider her as my sister. Noble peace prize is never really given to a Muslim that emphasises how positive her or his life is and how positive the Muslim communities are. The again I can’t take “noble peace prize” serious anyways considering they gave an award to Obama (who did really do anything at the time).
Many Muslim's have won the Nobel prize and the Nobel Prize in Peace 2003 was awarded to Shirin Ebadi "for her efforts for democracy and human rights. She has focused especially on the struggle for the rights of women and children." It is notable then when she arrived back in Tehran after getting the prize she cried out from the aircraft steps "God is Great"

That sounds laudable to me and totally focused on her community where she stood up for its weakest members, suffered abuse and imprisonment and so I would have thought any Muslim who hears that story would feel proud of her persistence, integrity and achievements - but you just see it as a sham. I find that almost impossible to understand.

When Western Media speaks about a Muslim who has done something bad, its anti Isalm and when it celebrates a Muslim who does good or succeeds its just the same
Reply

Salahudeen
07-20-2010, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo

I see from this you are in favour of the burka and I guess you would support women them in that but are you open handed here, will you equally support those who see it as a useless symbol or even as a symbol of oppression? Is it reasonable that God, the God who created the timeless vastness of eternity, the laws of physics, the beauty of the earth would want women to walk around in a kind of tent? I just cannot see God thinking this way?

What is you view of women who don't wear the burka?

Hmm I often see Christian Nuns walking around in my area with these tents on also. Well you can not see God thinking this way, but the man next to you can see God thinking this way. So what is the point in this? Just because you think something of God, doesn't mean it is fact.
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 08:57 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo

When Western Media speaks about a Muslim who has done something bad, its anti Isalm and when it celebrates a Muslim who does good or succeeds its just the same


winning a Nobel prize isn't something to be celebrated by any means...it is a laughable award started by a guilty man and used by wicked people who often reward bad behavior. You should ask them why so few chinese have won Nobel prize .. perhaps in your book Islam is holding them down as well from making the esteemed change that is rewarded by the west!
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 08:59 PM
Originally Posted by squiggle
Hmm I often see Christian Nuns walking around in my area with these tents on also. Well you can not see God thinking this way, but the man next to you can see God thinking this way. So what is the point in this? Just because you think something of God, doesn't mean it is fact.
oh did you mean them:




according to Hugo it is only when you shed your clothes that god loves you because you are coming undone the way the christian god intended!
Reply

Salahudeen
07-20-2010, 09:22 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ


oh did you mean them:




according to Hugo it is only when you shed your clothes that god loves you because you are coming undone the way the christian god intended!


This is how Muslim women dress also. It's virtually the same apart from the colour scheme. Why do these Christian nuns dress this way if God doesn't like it, I'm confused. And why is the Virgin Mary all ways depicted with a head covering and modest clothing.

Is there anything wrong in Muslim women/christian women wanting to emulate her example? If they never had the white bit on their cloaks I'd assume the above were Muslim ladies. Also since the mother of Jesus is highly praised in Islam as one of the few women who perfected her faith I suspect most Muslim women would want to emulate her modest dress.
Reply

Insaanah
07-20-2010, 09:28 PM
Not sure why it's such a strange issue?

To add to Br squiggle's post:

"But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is 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.

For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man."

1 Corinthians 11:5-7

Thankfully the Qur'an doesn't suggest that women should shave their hair off, nor that woman is the glory of man.

Peace.
Reply

Insaanah
07-20-2010, 09:35 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
What though is moot here is your line "..she herself wants to please Allaah.." and that sounds like a bit of pressure is being applied that becomes irresistible, unanswerable so not to wear a burka by implication will not please Allah - though I don't know if you meant it that way?
For Muslims, it is an honour and a pleasure to please Allah. It brings us joy, as well as pleasing Him. Pleasing God may be burdening or a chore in other faiths, but certainly not in Islam.

Peace.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 09:42 PM
Originally Posted by squiggle
Hmm I often see Christian Nuns walking around in my area with these tents on also. Well you can not see God thinking this way, but the man next to you can see God thinking this way. So what is the point in this? Just because you think something of God, doesn't mean it is fact.
I see your point but I suppose what I am asking is in each case why wear such dress - one supposes they don't do it for fun? I know why Nuns do it and it is an act of separation from the world, from family life and submission to God and they do not see it as having merit or demonstrating piety to do that would be destroy the idea of submission.
Reply

جوري
07-20-2010, 09:44 PM
what is piety if not submitting ones will to God and complying with his written word? or do you have a different definition?
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 09:54 PM
Originally Posted by Insane Insaan
For Muslims, it is an honour and a pleasure to please Allah. It brings us joy, as well as pleasing Him. Pleasing God may be burdening or a chore in other faiths, but certainly not in Islam.
I think I see your point but the Bible makes plain we are to love God with all our hearts, and sound and mind and your neighbour as yourself. The idea of pleasing God is expressed quite clearly in the Bible and one such example is Isaiah 66:2 "Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares the LORD. "This is the one I esteem: he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word." So its not primarily about outward things and they can never be a substitute though they may help. So joy is found in what God has done for us not in what we can do for him and anything we do is by his power not our own.
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
07-20-2010, 09:55 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Many Muslim's have won the Nobel prize and the Nobel Prize in Peace 2003 was awarded to Shirin Ebadi "for her efforts for democracy and human rights. She has focused especially on the struggle for the rights of women and children." It is notable then when she arrived back in Tehran after getting the prize she cried out from the aircraft steps "God is Great"

That sounds laudable to me and totally focused on her community where she stood up for its weakest members, suffered abuse and imprisonment and so I would have thought any Muslim who hears that story would feel proud of her persistence, integrity and achievements - but you just see it as a sham. I find that almost impossible to understand.

When Western Media speaks about a Muslim who has done something bad, its anti Isalm and when it celebrates a Muslim who does good or succeeds its just the same
You clearly did not understand my point at all.


I like anyone else praise those that do stand up for minorities that suffering whether it is a Muslims or not. I said the noble peace prize is hardly EVER given to Muslims that write or talk the positive element of their communities.



The book Husseini “honour killings” chapter 10 clearly illustrates my point!

The opportunist mentioned in chapter 10 are given far more attention in the west then someone like the author herself! Why is that? Is it because the sick opportunist only talks and emphasises about the very bad aspect of Jordan society only? She even made the stuff up!



Almost all those Muslims that are awarded the “noble peace prize” emphasise the negative aspect of the Muslim world. Never have I seen noble peace prize given to muslims that emphasise the positive element or even both sometimes.



Btw: no where in my post did I mentioned or suggested that I was ashamed of anyone! :heated:
Reply

marwen
07-20-2010, 09:59 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Fine then explain it to us, show us were in the Qu'ran or anywhere it says this is a worthy thing to do?
Evidences From Qur'an :

Surah Al-Ahzaab, Verse #59
‘O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks ("Jalabib") veils all over their bodies (screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way Tafseer Al-Qurtabi) that is most convenient that they should be known (as such) and not molested: and Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful."

Surah An-Nur, Verses #30 and #31
‘And Say to the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, head cover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)




Evidences From the Hadith :

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282
Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba (Radhiallaahu Ánha) "Aisha (Radhiallaahu Ánha) used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Hadith # 368
Narrated 'Aisha (Radhiallaahu Ánha) Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) used to offer the Fajr prayer and some believing women covered with their veiling sheets used to attend the Fajr prayer with him and then they would return to their homes unrecognized . Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in tafseer of this hadith explains "This hadith makes it clear that the Islamic dress is concealing of the entire body as explained in this hadith. Only with the complete cover including the face and hands can a woman not be recognized. This was the understanding and practice of the Sahaba and they were the best of group, the noblest in the sight of Allah (swt) with the most complete Imaan and noblest of characters. so if the practice of the women of the sahaba was to wear the complete veil then how can we deviate from their path? (Ibn Uthaimin in the book "Hijaab" page # 12 and 13)

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Hadith # 148
Narrated 'Aisha (Radhiallaahu Ánha): The wives of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha' time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab" (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).

Tirmidhi with a SAHIH chain reports...
"Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said “All of a woman is ‘awrah.” (Shaikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid quotes this hadith narrated by Tirmidhi with a sahih isnaad and says this is a direct hadith from Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam ) and has made it clear that a woman must cover everything including the face and hands!)

Abu Dawood Book 14, Hadith # 2482
Narrated Thabit ibn Qays (Radhiallaahu Ánhu): A woman called Umm Khallad came to the Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) while she was veiled. She was searching for her son who had been killed (in the battle) Some of the Companions of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said to her: You have come here asking for your son while veiling your face? She said: If I am afflicted with the loss of my son, I shall not suffer the loss of my modesty. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said: You will get the reward of two martyrs for your son. She asked: Why is that so, oh Prophet of Allah? He replied: Because the people of the Book have killed him.

Abu Dawood Book 32, Hadith # 4090
Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu Ánha): When the verse "That they should cast their outer garments over their persons" was revealed, the women of Ansar came out as if they had crows over their heads by wearing outer garments.

Abu Dawood Book 32, Hadith # 4091
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu Ánha) "May Allah have mercy on the early immigrant women. When the verse "That they should draw their veils over their bosoms" was revealed, they tore their thick outer garments and made veils from them. Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalanee, who is known as Ameer Al-Mu'mineen in the field of Hadith, said that the phrase, "covered themselves", in the above Hadith means that they "covered their faces". [Fath Al-Bari].

Imaam Malik's MUWATTA Book 20 Hadith # 20.5.16
Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham ibn Urwa that Fatima bint al-Mundhir (Radhiallaahu Ánha) said, "We used to veil our faces when we were in Ihram in the company of Asma bint Abi Bakr As-Siddiq (Radhiallaahu Ánha). "This again proves that not only the wives of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) wore the Niqaab and that even though in Ihram women are not supposed to wear Niqaab but if men are there they still have to cover the face.

Abu Dawood Book 10, Hadith # 1829
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: (Radhiallaahu Ánha) who said, "The riders would pass us while we were with the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam). When they got close to us, we would draw our outer cloak from our heads over our faces. When they passed by, we would uncover our faces.
Recorded by Ahmad, Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah, Narrated 'Aisha. [In his work Jilbab al-Marah al-Muslimah, al-Albani states (p. 108) that it is hasan due to corroborating evidence. Also, in a narration from Asma {who was not the wife of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam)}, Asma also covered her face at all times in front of men.] Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in his tafseer of this hadith explains "This hadith indicates the compulsion of the concealing of the faces as an order of Shariah, because during the Ihram it is "wajib" (compulsory) NOT to wear the Niqaab. So if it was only mustahab (recommended) to cover the face then Aisha and Asma (Radhiallaahu Ánha) would have taken the wajib over the mustahab. It is well known by the Ullima that a wajib can only be left because of something that is also wajib or fardh. So Aisha and Asma (Radhiallaahu Ánha) covering the face even in Ihram in the presence of strange (ghairMahraam) men shows that they understood this to be an act that was wajib or fardh or they would not have covered the face in Ihraam.

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 7, Book 72, Hadith # 715
Narrated 'Ikrima (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) narrates "Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil." It is a very long hadith but the point is the women of Sahaba wore the full veil.

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Hadith # 347
Narrated Um 'Atiya (Radhiallaahu Ánha) We were ordered (by Rasulullah '(Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) to bring out our menstruating women and veiled women in the religious gatherings and invocation of Muslims on the two 'Eid festivals. These menstruating women were to keep away from their Musalla. A woman asked, "O Allah's Apostle ' What about one who does not have a veil (the veil is the complete cover with only one eye or two eyes showing)?" He said, "Let her share the veil of her companion." Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in tafseer of this hadith explained "This hadith proves that the general norm amongst the women of the Sahaba (Radhiallaahu Ánhuma) was that no woman would go out of her home without a cloak, fully concealed and if she did not posses a veil, then it was not possible for her to go out. it was for this reason that when Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) ordered them to go to the Place for Eid Salah, they mentioned this hindrance. As a result Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said that someone should lend her a veil, but did not say they could go out without it. If Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) did not allow women to go to a place like the Eid Salah, which has been ordered by Shariah for women and men alike, then how can people let women to out to market places and shopping centers without where there is open intermingling of the sexes, without a veil. (by Shaikh Ibn Uthaimin in the book "Hijaab" page # 11)

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 8, Book 76, Hadith # 572
In the end of this very long hadith it quotes Anas (Radhiallaahu Ánho) rates from Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) "and if one of the women of Paradise looked at the earth, she would fill the whole space between them (the earth and the heaven) with light, and would fill whatever is in between them, with perfume, and the veil of her face is better than the whole world and whatever is in it." This show that even the women of Junnah have veils and the word veil is what covers the face (niqaab).

Abu Dawood Book 33, Hadith # 4154, Agreed upon by Nasai
Aisha(Radhiallaahu Ánha) narrates that on one occasion a female Muslim wanted to give a letter to the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam), the letter was delivered to the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) from behind a curtain.
Note: Quoted in the famous book Mishkaat. Here the Mufasereen of hadith have explained that the hadith where women came up to Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) face to face were before the ayah "And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them from behind a screen, that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts." (Surah Al*Ahzâb ayah # 53) And this hadith proves this order is for the whole Ummah not just for the wives of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam)!

Abu Dawood Book 2, Hadith # 0641
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu Ánha) "Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said "Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a veil."

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Hadith # 293
Narrated 'Aisha (Radhiallaahu Ánha) Utba bin Abi Waqqas said to his brother Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas, "The son of the slave girl of Zam'a is from me, so take him into your custody." So in the year of Conquest of Mecca, Sa'd took him and said. (This is) my brother's son whom my brother has asked me to take into my custody." 'Abd bin Zam'a got up before him and said, (He is) my brother and the son of the slave girl of my father, and was born on my father's bed." So they both submitted their case before Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam). Sa'd said, "O Allah's Apostle! This boy is the son of my brother and he entrusted him to me." 'Abd bin Zam'a said, "This boy is my brother and the son of the slave girl of my father, and was born on the bed of my father." Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said, "The boy is for you, O 'Abd bin Zam'a!" Then Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) further said, "The child is for the owner of the bed, and the stone is for the adulterer," Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) then said to Sauda bint Zam'a, "Veil (screen) yourself before him," when he saw the child's resemblance to 'Utba. The boy did not see her again till he met Allah. note: This hadith proves Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) did infact order the veil to be observed.

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 7, Book 65, Hadith # 375
Narrated Anas (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) I know (about) the Hijab (the order of veiling of women) more than anybody else. Ubai bin Ka'b used to ask me about it. Allah's Apostle became the bridegroom of Zainab bint Jahsh whom he married at Medina. After the sun had risen high in the sky, the Prophet invited the people to a meal. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) remained sitting and some people remained sitting with him after the other guests had left. Then Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) got up and went away, and I too, followed him till he reached the door of 'Aisha's room. Then he thought that the people must have left the place by then, so he returned and I also returned with him. Behold, the people were still sitting at their places. So he went back again for the second time, and I went along with him too. When we reached the door of 'Aisha's room, he returned and I also returned with him to see that the people had left. Thereupon Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) hung a curtain between me and him and the Verse regarding the order for (veiling of women) Hijab was revealed.

Abu Dawood Book 32, hadith # 4100
Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu'minin (Radhiallaahu Ánha): I was with Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) while Maymunah was with him. Then Ibn Umm Maktum came. This happened when we were ordered to observe veil. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said: Observe veil from him. We asked: oh Rasulullah! is he not blind? He can neither see us nor recognize us. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said: Are both of you blind? Do you not see him?
Reply

Salahudeen
07-20-2010, 10:03 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I see your point but I suppose what I am asking is in each case why wear such dress - one supposes they don't do it for fun? I know why Nuns do it and it is an act of separation from the world, from family life and submission to God and they do not see it as having merit or demonstrating piety to do that would be destroy the idea of submission.
Well Hugo you have answered your own question, you stated nuns do it as an act of submission to God and this is exactly the same reason as to why Muslim women do it. And we believe acts that involve submitting yourself to god carry merit.

So Nun's do not see doing an act of submissiveness to God as something that carries merit?

then this is indeed where the difference is, for a Muslim woman, doing an act of submissiveness to God is something that carries Merritt. Just like when a Muslim prays to God 5 time a day out of submissiveness, it is an act of merit.

What is better than submitting yourself to God? Is not such a thing worthy of merit?

Does not the very fact that Nuns do it out of submissiveness to God demonstrate their piety?
Reply

Insaanah
07-20-2010, 10:14 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I think I see your point but the Bible makes plain we are to love God with all our hearts, and sound and mind and your neighbour as yourself. The idea of pleasing God is expressed quite clearly in the Bible and one such example is Isaiah 66:2 "Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares the LORD. "This is the one I esteem: he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word." So its not primarily about outward things and they can never be a substitute though they may help. So joy is found in what God has done for us not in what we can do for him and anything we do is by his power not our own.
In Islam, it is not just about hearts, sound and mind, but we must supplement that with action.

The Qur'an says in many places, "Indeed those who believe and do good deeds..."

It is not the case that we believe and then do what we please. We believe and then practically put that belief into action, by performing good deeds. If your belief is not going to spur you to do that, then there is no point.

It is through the correct belief, good deeds, and Allah's Mercy, that we will get to Paradise if we are so destined for it.

He doesn't "need" our good deeds, Allah, Glorified and Exalted be He, is free of all needs and wants, we are doing them for ourselves.

If you invest money, with the hope and intention of getting some return, are you doing it because the bank/building society "needs" your money? Or are you investing for yourself? Our good deeds are our investment for the hereafter, for which, God willing, we shall receive our just reward.

On the other hand, simply believing that investment will bring you returns, but then not investing, will not bring you any return. What's in your mind is not enough. It must be supplemented by action in order to bring about results.

Peace.
Reply

Zafran
07-20-2010, 10:44 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Why will they just sit at home and I note you say FORCED to sit at home, who forces them to do that?


Is this a principle you are expounding here, that anyone can do anything and if it is banned then we are restricting freedom?
what do the people say that want to ban the burkha - you do know the main reason they give? If you do then you will understand what I'm saying.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 10:47 PM
Originally Posted by sweet106
You clearly did not understand my point at all. I like anyone else praise those that do stand up for minorities that suffering whether it is a Muslims or not. I said the noble peace prize is hardly EVER given to Muslims that write or talk the positive element of their communities. The book Husseini “honour killings” chapter 10 clearly illustrates my point!
The opportunist mentioned in chapter 10 are given far more attention in the west then someone like the author herself! Why is that? Is it because the sick opportunist only talks and emphasises about the very bad aspect of Jordan society only? She even made the stuff up!

Almost all those Muslims that are awarded the “noble peace prize” emphasise the negative aspect of the Muslim world. Never have I seen noble peace prize given to muslims that emphasise the positive element or even both sometimes.
I cannot quite see what you mean, the prize should go to someone who upholds Sharia in every respect as they offer a pure Islam? I assume you are speaking of Rana Hosseini as the author but I cannot understand who you are speaking of as "she made the stuff up" - is this Hosseini or the person in chapter 10? You may be right about what these authors say but are they telling the truth is moot; or are they inventing it? There may be other books that say how wonderful it is to live in Saudi Arabia or Iran but I don't know any - perhaps you can suggest a few titles? Another reason is that Sherin Ebardi's book would NEVER be printed and circulated freely in Iran would it - because one cannot criticize the regime, is that a good or bad thing?

You might be interested to know that Among Muslims, the name that I know best is Abdus-Salam. He was a Pakistani muslim, who won the Nobel prize in Physics in 1979. However, how sad that internal squabbles within Islam (he was not the right kind of Muslim) in Pakistan prevented him from ever really getting the recognition he deserved in the Muslim world. Then there is Ahmed Zewail, a Nobel laureate in chemistry (1997), Naguib Mahfouz, a Nobel laureate in literature from Egypt (1988), Orhan Pamuk, a Turkish novelist who has often been criticized in his home country for highlighting the genocide of the Armenians in the 1st world war period (under the Ottoman empire), Shirin Ebadi, an Iranian human rights activist, won the Nobel Peace prize in 2003, the first Muslim woman to win, Muhammad Yunus of Bangladesh and his Grameen Bank (a brilliant idea). Then then there are Muslims waiting in line like Abdus Sattar Edhi, the Mother Teresa of Pakistan.

I cannot see that any of these were unworthy can you? Who would you suggest?
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 10:52 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
what do the people say that want to ban the burkha - you do know the main reason they give? If you do then you will understand what I'm saying.
Why don't you tell us who 'they' are and what their reason is and then we can asses it here.
Reply

Zafran
07-20-2010, 10:52 PM
I think this thread is going way off topic - we shoudl bring it back to "banning the burkha/niqab in the UK and not some international tangent which frankly this thread has nothing to do with.
Reply

Zafran
07-20-2010, 10:54 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Why don't you tell us who 'they' are and what their reason is and then we can asses it here.
The people that want to ban the burkha in the UK - you do know there reasons - its not rocket science.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 10:55 PM
Originally Posted by sweet106
Hugo does take a clever dig at people and Islam itself sometimes. He jumps to conclusions and fails to address points. Instead he select what he want to address.
I dont mind him being here. He does not bother me much. I dont care if he gets banned or stays. He has made a useful thread in educational issue.
Thanks for the warm endorsement but please show me where I have jumped to conclusions and there is nowhere you can find where I have avoided addressing what is asked.
Reply

Hugo
07-20-2010, 10:57 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
The people that want to ban the burkha in the UK - you do know there reasons - its not rocket science.
It seems to be you mode of working to offer nothing. Tell us what you think the reason is?
Reply

espada
07-20-2010, 10:59 PM
Freedom ... what an overused, played out concept.

Is the following an example of freedom for young women:

Many teens attempt to improve their appearance (and acceptance) by using make-up and wearing the “right” clothes. A small number of teens seek change through cosmetic surgery. According to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, more than 36,800 cosmetic surgery procedures were performed on Americans 18 and under last year.

During the teen years, peer acceptance is a very important goal. Teens that look a little different, or are perceived as “ugly” may be picked on or socially isolated. The desire for attractiveness isn’t just a teen trait. Society as a whole tends to value good looks. Sam Rizk, M.D., F.A.C.S., Facial Plastic Surgeon in New York City, says attractive people tend to do better in school and get better jobs than equally skilled people who are less attractive.
SOURCE

Seems to be that society's bogus expectations has imprisoned these young ladies into devaluing themselves to the point that they will get cut up, or be injected with toxins.

Is this really what freedom is meant to be?

Muslim women are choosing to free themselves from this subtle (but overtly pervasive) form of societal ... slavery(? - for lack of a better term) in the name of Allah.
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
07-20-2010, 11:01 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I cannot quite see what you mean, the prize should go to someone who uphold Sharia in every respect as they offer a pure Islam? I assume you are speaking of Rana Hosseini and I cannot understand who you are speaking of as "she made the stuff up" - is this Hosseini or the person in chapter 10? You may be right about what these authors say but are they telling the truth or not is moot; are they inventing it? There may be other books that say how wonderful it is to live in Saudi Arabia or Iran but I don't know any - perhaps you can suggest a few titles? Another reason is that Sherin Ebardi's book would NEVER be printed and circulated freely in Iran would it - because one cannot criticize the regime, is that a good or bad thing?

Among Muslims, the name that I know best is Abdus-Salam. He was a Pakistani muslim, who won the Nobel prize in Physics in 1979. However, how sad that internal squabbles within Islam (he was not the right kind of Muslim) in Pakistan prevented him from ever really getting the recognition he deserved in the Muslim world. Then there is Ahmed Zewail, a Nobel laureate in chemistry (1997), Naguib Mahfouz, a Nobel laureate in literature from Egypt (1988), Orhan Pamuk, a Turkish novelist who has often been criticized in his home country for highlighting the genocide of the Armenians in the 1st world war period (under the Ottoman empire), Shirin Ebadi, an Iranian human rights activist, won the Nobel Peace prize in 2003, the first Muslim woman to win, Muhammad Yunus of Bangladesh and his Grameen Bank (a brilliant idea). Then then there are Muslims waiting in line like Abdus Sattar Edhi, the Mother Teresa of Pakistan.

I cannot see that any of these were unworthy can you? Who would you suggest?
No not Rana Hussieni, the person in chapter 10 (who made up her whole life).

I didnt say there were "Unworthy", did I?

I clearly said there are no Muslims that talks about “positive” aspect of Muslim world. If Muslims do win noble peace and do happen to talk about Muslim world, it heavily emphasises the obvious negative aspect (Iran and Saudi Arabia). And those that do not emphasise the negative aspect happen to talk about entirely different subject.
I want to hear a Muslim winning a noble peace that heavily emphasises positive element...

The real question is:
Whether you think there is any positive element in Muslim world today or is it that the negative element far outweighs the positive huh?
Reply

Zafran
07-20-2010, 11:01 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
It seems to be you mode of working to offer nothing. Tell us what you think the reason is?
Hugo read the frist post on this thread an you'll see what I am basing my points on -

For many this is also an issue of protecting women's rights; the burqa they argue, is a symbol of male oppression and as one French law maker is reported to have said, women who wear them must be liberated, even against their will.
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
07-20-2010, 11:05 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Thanks for the warm endorsement but please show me where I have jumped to conclusions and there is nowhere you can find where I have avoided addressing what is asked.
No problem. Read through the comparative section "What makes something good?". An example of you jumping to conclusion can be seen here on this topic, where you suggested that I felt those who stood up to minorities were shameful. :)
Reply

marwen
07-20-2010, 11:30 PM
I don't think this talk will take us anywhere. The conclusion I can see is that the ban of niqab is not justifiable and is against personal/religious freedom : what's bothering them when someone wants to cover his face.
If someone has a different opinion, with reasonable arguments, or has something beneficial to say, then let him put it. Otherwise let's ask mods/admins to close this thread.
Reply

Muslimeen
07-21-2010, 07:50 AM
One reason why women should wear the Niqaab.

Attachment 4127
Reply

Hugo
07-21-2010, 10:59 AM
Originally Posted by sweet106
The real question is: Whether you think there is any positive element in Muslim world today or is it that the negative element far outweighs the positive huh?
This is a question worthy of debate but before I say anything, are you of the opinion that everything in the Muslim world is positive?
I will begin by saying that I have spent a lot of my working life with Muslim students from right across the world and in all that time I have only found one who was inhospitable and almost every day Muslim friends from across the world call into see me or contact me in many other ways. So when I visit them (usually accompanied by my wife) they are unstinting in their efforts to ensure we are looked after and honoured as well as appreciated for our faith.

So there are innumerable positive elements in the Muslim world and that is undoubted in my experience. But like everywhere, there are negative elements and just as everyday you can read about some nasty person in London you can read about similar or worse incidents in Lahore. For example, you may have read about two brothers; Rashid Emmanuel and Sajid Emmanuel who were killed at 2pm on 19 July as police were transporting them to jail on a charge of blasphemy which the police said was untrue and they were to be released.

I suppose what I am saying is that hatred and the violence that often goes with it must be absolutely deplored and fought against wherever it occurs if for nothing else than in the name of humanity. One does not have to be religious in any way to know oppression in any form is unacceptable and more so when someone claims they are doing it in God's name. This is not new of course and right through history those who are believers in any faith have been oppressed and then sadly when they themselves gain the ascendency go on to oppress others.

To sum up, we are creatures of faith and reason and we only interfere with faith when it is proportional to how it affects the liberty of others. Rights are a good thing and in England there began a rational articulation in the 17th century in a new way that did not rely on authority from an unseen God. The question was how can people with strongly conflicting religious beliefs live peaceably together - so people stopped saying religious believe is supremely important therefore everyone should have MY faith. Instead they said that everyone should have the right to the faith that they in conscience believe - do you agree with that idea and see how it might impact the banning question?
Reply

Hugo
07-21-2010, 11:03 AM
Originally Posted by sweet106
No problem. Read through the comparative section "What makes something good?". An example of you jumping to conclusion can be seen here on this topic, where you suggested that I felt those who stood up to minorities were shameful. :)
Sorry to be troublesome but can you say exactly which post number you are speaking about as this sound a very odd think to say?
Reply

Zafran
07-21-2010, 12:03 PM
Its best that we all stiick to the topic of burkha and niqab in the UK rather then going off in random tangents and asking and answering random questions which have little to do with this thread.
Reply

Hugo
07-21-2010, 12:53 PM
Originally Posted by marwen
I don't think this talk will take us anywhere. The conclusion I can see is that the ban of niqab is not justifiable and is against personal/religious freedom : what's bothering them when someone wants to cover his face. If someone has a different opinion, with reasonable arguments, or has something beneficial to say, then let him put it. Otherwise let's ask mods/admins to close this thread.
One has to accept that sometimes discussions just end with no positive result and that as Socrates pointed out 3,000 years ago, has the effect of showing that some perceived opinion was untenable and the truth difficult to ascertain. One might note it has taken centuries to persuade even the most enlightened peoples that the liberty to publish one's opinions and discuss them is a good and not a bad thing. The trouble in a way with debate is that it can cast doubt on established beliefs and institutions and for some this may seem evil because it is disagreeable and the person who questions an accepted principle or dogma is seen as a pestilential, impious person who challenges the wrath of some supernatural power.

This perhaps is why this question we have to grapple with, is authority, in this case a claimed God one or our rational powers. In the first case we have not means of verification and in the second case we are only justified if the facts are capable of demonstration or verification. So reason cannot recognize arbitrary prohibitions or barriers without being untrue to itself and cannot surrender those rights - this we usually call rationalism. Any number of propositions can be invented which cannot be disproved and its is open to anyone who posses faith to believe them but no one can maintain they deserve credence so long as their falsehood is not demonstrated.

Now looking through this thread the argument is that the burka should be worn as a sign of piety and submission and indeed if one interprets the Qu'ranic verses presented here that was a command by God made in eternity. But of course this is not a rational argument because it is incapable of falsification. Some have argued there is no principle involved and this is only about the burka but to say that is to ignore that the substance of the argument is that it a religious practice and a duty commanded by God. In that sense from an argument point of view it is no different that a Shia saying that self-mutilation is a religious duty or any other religious practice which relies on you appealing to an unseen deity. No rational government anywhere would accept this general argument because to do so implies they accept an unseen, unknown and unverifiable God's authority.

The only viable argument is one related to freedom on conscience not religious freedom as such. Once there one can consider the practice just as you would look at any practice from football to gardening and ask is it harmful, is it likely to cause offence, is it oppressive and so on and based on that come to a conclusion. If anyone does this for the burka question the range of opinion might be from it being a harmless piece of silly nonsense to a beautiful expression of devotion to being utterly oppressive to women.
Reply

Zafran
07-21-2010, 07:51 PM
the bottom line is that a country that believes in freedom of expression and at the same time wants to ban the burkha - creates many problems - Even the people that call the burkha oppressive - have to realy ask the question will banning the burkha stop the oppression to women? Just banning the cloth wont solve any problems. Taking away rights from people wont help either the banner of "freedom of expression" that the UK likes to chuck around.
Reply

S_87
07-22-2010, 12:00 PM
i dont say a thing to those women, in the UK if they wanna wear it thats non of my business. am i calling for that to be stopped?
ask an average english non muslim person how comfortable THEY would feel if they were waiting to pick up their kids in school and another parent or even teacher was dressed in a mini skirt thats like a headband and a boob tube. its their freedom right?
i honestly dont CARE what other people around me are wearing so why do so many people care what im wearing?

you cant compare what countries like saudi do to uk rules
Reply

Hugo
07-23-2010, 10:49 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
the bottom line is that a country that believes in freedom of expression and at the same time wants to ban the burkha - creates many problems - Even the people that call the burkha oppressive - have to realy ask the question will banning the burkha stop the oppression to women? Just banning the cloth wont solve any problems. Taking away rights from people wont help either the banner of "freedom of expression" that the UK likes to chuck around.
I cannot quite make out what you are saying here. Are you arguing that Muslim Woman are oppressed and banning the Burka will not change that? Of course we are free to express who we are in the UK but freedom is not the same as licence is it so one would not allow everything. The question is perhaps how far can any one go in curtailing the rights of others and there is NOTHING wrong with debating that whether its about Burka or Bikinis.
Reply

جوري
07-23-2010, 11:22 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
the bottom line is that a country that believes in freedom of expression and at the same time wants to ban the burkha - creates many problems - Even the people that call the burkha oppressive - have to realy ask the question will banning the burkha stop the oppression to women? Just banning the cloth wont solve any problems. Taking away rights from people wont help either the banner of "freedom of expression" that the UK likes to chuck around.
Originally Posted by Hugo
I cannot quite make out what you are saying here. Are you arguing that Muslim Woman are oppressed and banning the Burka will not change that? Of course we are free to express who we are in the UK but freedom is not the same as licence is it so one would not allow everything. The question is perhaps how far can any one go in curtailing the rights of others and there is NOTHING wrong with debating that whether its about Burka or Bikinis.
How did you draw such a conclusion from his post-- I notice you have difficulty with what most members here write, you can never 'quite make out what they are saying' - Do you think if you keep having this problem with multiple members that there might be something wrong with the way you process information? Perhaps you can define for us what 'freedom' entails per UK understanding and what it excludes.. the rest of us have simply concluded that if you have a right to take off your clothes you by the same token have the right to put them on unquestioned!
it isn't a topic for law makers who know absolutely nothing of Islam or Muslims save by way of orientalism to ponder what is oppressive .. you can't ponder the lives of others with a linear mindset as it often leads to the wrong conclusions!

all the best
Reply

Hugo
07-23-2010, 11:30 AM
Originally Posted by marwen
Surah Al-Ahzaab, Verse #59 ‘O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks ("Jalabib") veils all over their bodies (screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way Tafseer Al-Qurtabi) that is most convenient that they should be known (as such) and not molested: and Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful."

Surah An-Nur, Verses #30 and #31
‘And Say to the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, head cover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)
Thank you for this but both verses contain interpolations and I think we need to see what the Qu'ran alone says. Q33:59 says nothing about the eyes for example and it sounds almost like a parody to talk about covering up and using just one eye. The verse is oddly placed between admonitions about being led astray and so to me seems out of any context. For Q24:30-32 again we have nothing about covering the eye but simply to avoid temptation though this time set within a suitable context. The part about stamping the feet seems to be extracted from Isaiah 3:16 and 18 although I would say that is a figurative not literal.

Looking at the Hadith one wonders how far one is to take them as guides and how much as interpretations. For example, I doubt anyone would 'cut waist sheets ...'. Else where it seems about covering everything though other time it just seems to imply just the face. There are also some odd lines such as the one that say "Only with a complete covering ... can a women NOT be recognised" well of course that must be true but this feels uncomfortable with what the Qu'ran implies where it suggest that dressing appropriately allows you to recognise them as pious if nothing else though how that can in general be true I cannot say. One wonders what to make of a Woman in paradise looking down and their veils being better than the whole world though how any one could know this I have no idea. I note also we have that prayers are not accepted unless a veil is worn but can anyone say where the Qu'ran might support that?

Well, the Qu'ran seem clear that dressing modestly is enjoined but it also does seem to me that the hadith takes a much harder line almost in my view to the point of absurdity. So my question is can this be re-interpreted or not and can a hadith be regarded as overriding the Qu'ran.
Reply

جوري
07-23-2010, 11:41 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Thank you for this but both verses contain interpolations and I think we need to see what the Qu'ran alone says. Q33:59 says nothing about the eyes for example and it sounds almost like a parody to talk about covering up and using just one eye. The verse is oddly placed between admonitions about being led astray and so to me seems out of any context. For Q24:30-32 again we have nothing about covering the eye but simply to avoid temptation though this time set within a suitable context. The part about stamping the feet seems to be extracted from Isaiah 3:16 and 18 although I would say that is a figurative not literal.
What is this about 'covering one eye'? why is this injected here? further how does the Quran extract from Isiah ''The LORD says, "The women of Zion are haughty, walking along with outstretched necks, flirting with their eyes, tripping along with mincing steps, with ornaments jingling on their ankles'' perhaps you can show us the extraction?
How the verses are placed are a divine wisdom, you have difficulty understanding basic statement by lay folks, so understandably you'd have a very difficult time understanding divine verse.. you are in fact very well suited for the bible, simple things for simpletons!
Looking at the Hadith one wonders how far one is to take them as guides and how much as interpretations. For example, I doubt anyone would 'cut waist sheets ...' and cover everything though else where it seem to imply just the face. There are also some odd lines such as the one that say "Only with a complete covering ... can a women NOT be recognised" well of course that must be true but this feels uncomfortable with what the Qu'ran implies where it suggest that dressing appropriately allows you to recognise them as pious if nothing else though how that can in general be true I cannot say. One wonders what to make of Woman in paradise looking down and their veils being better than the whole world though how any one could know this I have no idea. I note also we have that prayers are not accepted unless a veil is worn but can anyone say where the Qu'ran might support that?
Dr. Zaheer sums it best:

The Qur’an clearly alludes to this fact and ii) The fact that the entire Muslim ummah unanimously follows a set of religious practices which are not clearly mentioned in the Qur’an can only be explained by thefact that the prophet, alaihissalam, himself gave such practices to the entire ummah. Hadith literature was compiled, by and large, in the third century hijrah. Of course, these practices predate the compilation of hadith literature.

If one objectively reads the Qur’an, there is a mention of prayers, Jumu’ah prayers, Zakat, Hajj, Umrah, Fasting etc. but there is no clarification given as to what is really meant by them. The reason why their practical description was not given was that they were already taking place when the Qur’an was being revealed. A reference of then therefore sufficed. The Qur’an, for instance, mentions salatul Fajr and Salatul Isha in a manner as if they were two known prayers at them time when this verse was revealed.

We, therefore, cannot properly understand the Qur’an without acknowledging the sunnah, which is different from hadith. The verses that require Muslims to follow the book of Allah therefore include the need to follow the sunnah as well.

Well, the Qu'ran seem clear that dressing modestly is enjoined but it also does seem to me that the hadith takes a much harder line almost in my view to the point of absurdity. So my question is can this be re-interpreted or not and can a hadith be regarded as overriding the Qu'ran.
See above response -- of course you consider things absurd.. what creed do you follow? you worship a man who died and then come and speak to us of absurdity?
Reply

Hugo
07-23-2010, 12:08 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
it isn't a topic for law makers who know absolutely nothing of Islam or Muslims save by way of orientalism to ponder what is oppressive .. you can't ponder the lives of others with a linear mindset as it often leads to the wrong conclusions!
It may be true that what you believe is not a topic for law makers and that will apply to any religion. However, its practise may rightly be considered by anyone since its effects might be of public concern. It cannot have escaped even you that there are some who will gladly kill others and claim they are doing it for God, Muslims from the Sudan consider Genital mutilation a God given injunction, Hindu's regard cows as sacred and so on. Islam is just a beliefs system and rests entirely on the rationally precarious foundations common to all faiths who speak of an unseen God whose authority cannot be questions.

In terms of freedom the problem you have and indeed many who are uncritical believers is that any novel opinion is felt to be dangerous as well as annoying, and any one who asks an inconvenient question about the why and wherefore of accepted principles is labelled pestilential, a liar and a hater of what is good. This is not new and we can find examples from everywhere and every religion where one is persecuted and even killed because they will not accept a particular dogma because its 'priests' are alarmed and enraged when their power to interpret the supposed divine is menaced.

It is simple really and freedom is in a sense built on it and it is that we are justified only under one condition - the facts which we can safely accept must be capable of demonstration or verification. So I can verify that Calcutta exists but no one can verify as one Hadith quoted in this thread says "that the women of paradise cover their faces and fill the whole earth with light and perfume". Now of course you can believe that and I would in general only feel concern if you try to cast me as a heretic or worse because I don't. This is the rational light that we must see the burka question.
Reply

جوري
07-23-2010, 12:25 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
It may be true that what you believe is not a topic for law makers and that will apply to any religion. However, its practise may rightly be considered by anyone since its effects might be of public concern. It cannot have escaped even you that there are some who will gladly kill others and claim they are doing it for God, Muslims from the Sudan consider Genital mutilation a God given injunction, Hindu's regard cows as sacred and so on. Islam is just a beliefs system and rests entirely on the rationally precarious foundations common to all faiths who speak of an unseen God whose authority cannot be questions.
I have no idea what this drivel means or how it relates to the topic? Genital mutilation goes back to tsarist Russia in fact I have posted a scientific article from uptodate on the matter here, either way I don't see how it relates to the topic?.. freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion. There is nothing precarious about Islamic practices, I think you confuse your dark ages of Christianity to be interchangeable with other ideologies or religions which is clearly not the case since history paints a different picture than that which your understanding affords you!
In terms of freedom the problem you have and indeed many who are uncritical believers is that any novel opinion is felt to be dangerous as well as annoying, and any one who asks an inconvenient question about the why and wherefore of accepted principles is labelled pestilential, a liar and a hater of what is good. This is not new and we can find examples from everywhere and every religion where one is persecuted and even killed because they will not accept a particular dogma because its 'priests' are alarmed and enraged when their power to interpret the supposed divine is menaced.
The problem isn't whether an explanation is offered you, and if has its foundation in sound principles.. the problem is your desire to render your own interpretation which can only be made akin to a quack offering his unsound and un-researched opinion on institutional research and when patience and details are explained in full still reverts to his own beliefs and tantrums as if this mindset is the not only the most knowledgeable but should be made acceptable to the whole..Delusions and personal persuasions have no room in Islamic practices, again, I understand these to be acceptable in Christianity but none of your practices nor your book is ordained by God, so you can't impose what is appropriate for you to other complete and sound systems!
It is simple really and freedom is in a sense built on it and it is that we are justified only under one condition - the facts which we can safely accept must be capable of demonstration or verification. So I can verify that Calcutta exists but no one can verify as one Hadith quoted in this thread says "that the women of paradise cover their faces and fill the whole earth with light and perfume". Now of course you can believe that and I would in general only feel concern if you try to cast me as a heretic or worse because I don't. This is the rational light that we must see the burka question.
The end result of where a Muslim woman ends up for covering or not covering isn't the issue, at least it isn't the issue that is subject to your whimsy. What is however is the principle.. the same principle of freedom that enables strip bars and lap dances of the naked and diseased to spread around their STDs and moral debauchery under the guise of freedom, should like wise render the same freedom to those standing on the chaste end of the spectrum!

by the way we are still waiting for you to show us how Islam has extracted from Isiah..

all the best
Reply

Zafran
07-23-2010, 03:26 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I cannot quite make out what you are saying here. Are you arguing that Muslim Woman are oppressed and banning the Burka will not change that? Of course we are free to express who we are in the UK but freedom is not the same as licence is it so one would not allow everything. The question is perhaps how far can any one go in curtailing the rights of others and there is NOTHING wrong with debating that whether its about Burka or Bikinis.
what I said was very clear - tell me specifically what you didnt understand from my post? Quote it.

the bottom line is that a country that believes in freedom of expression and at the same time wants to ban the burkha - creates many problems - Even the people that call the burkha oppressive - have to realy ask the question will banning the burkha stop the oppression to women? Just banning the cloth wont solve any problems. Taking away rights from people wont help either the banner of "freedom of expression" that the UK likes to chuck around.
I'll also like to remind you that this thread is about the burkha and as one of the posters said before if anyone has a sound argumnet against it then lets hear it. So far there is none.
Reply

Hugo
07-23-2010, 03:37 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
how does the Quran extract from Isiah ''The LORD says, "The women of Zion are haughty, walking along with outstretched necks, flirting with their eyes, tripping along with mincing steps, with ornaments jingling on their ankles'' perhaps you can show us the extraction?
I said it seems to come from Isaiah and any rational person can look at the two verses and decide (as many translators have done). All you have is an unprovable supposition that it is in some ways divine so your position is one of blind faith not reason.

If one objectively reads the Qur’an, there is a mention of prayers, Jumu’ah prayers, Zakat, Hajj, Umrah, Fasting etc. but there is no clarification given as to what is really meant by them. The reason why their practical description was not given was that they were already taking place when the Qur’an was being revealed. A reference of then therefore sufficed. The Qur’an, for instance, mentions salatul Fajr and Salatul Isha in a manner as if they were two known prayers at them time when this verse was revealed.
Have we have Allah in the Qu'ran not it seems being clear because in the impenetrable far reaches of eternity, before time began God decided "I will not add that because they will be doing it already". If you accept this interpretation it seems to me you are forced to concede that the Qu'ran was written for convenience at the time.

I can understand why Muslims treat the Qu'ran as sacred but what this author is saying is that a host of other things are just as sacred and it does not matter how absurd they are to a rational mind. I refer to it again, a proof offered in the Hadith that covering is required was that women in heaven do it and it does this with what is to me a fanciful story about this women bringing light and perfume - how the person who recounted the story could know this not explained.

If one is to take every story as having the same weight of authority and what seems to be no interpretation at all or contextualisation and in this case that every thing these particular group of women did was totally sanctified and binding then there is no place here for reason only total submission. I personally find this intolerable and I take the usual Biblical position which states that to go from the written word to action without interpretation is itself heresy.

So for a Muslim there is no possible argument against the Burka and women must cover entirely even to the extent of only using one eye. No rational state would be able to see that other than as oppression based on an assertion from an authority who is totally inaccessible.
Reply

Zafran
07-23-2010, 03:51 PM
So for a Muslim there is no possible argument against the Burka and women must cover entirely even to the extent of only using one eye. No rational state would be able to see that other than as oppression based on an assertion from an authority who is totally inaccessible.
This is intresting as it actually has something to do with the thread - if a women believes its actually compulsory on her to wear the Burkah/Niqab and as she isnt hurting anyone or restricting anyones rights why should she be restricted of not wearing the burka - any rational state would see that this women is choosing to wear the burkha and as she isnt hurting anyone by wearing it or restricting anyone elses rights she should have the right to wear it.
Reply

جوري
07-23-2010, 03:57 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I said it seems to come from Isaiah and any rational person can look at the two verses and decide (as many translators have done). All you have is an unprovable supposition that it is in some ways divine so your position is one of blind faith not reason.
I asked you to prove it not merely bully people into your beliefs?
I have no blind position as to why the revelations are divine, I have in fact set the criteria based on the Quran itself and asked since you are making the claim to invalidate said points and the burden of proof does lie on your shoulders in such a case, to un-prove if you can, the textual integrity, the logical consistency, the miraculous features, the supernatural eloquence, the scientific statements ahead of its time etc. etc. and we'll be waiting.. I don't enjoy wasting my time on blind man's bluff.. simply put up or shut up as I have personally tired of your antics!


Have we have Allah in the Qu'ran not it seems being clear because in the impenetrable far reaches of eternity, before time began God decided "I will not add that because they will be doing it already". If you accept this interpretation it seems to me you are forced to concede that the Qu'ran was written for convenience at the time.
I don't understand what 'have we have Allah in the Quran' -- you want to make a statement and loan it some credence, then try to work on your thought process and syntax first before asking others to accept your faulty premises!
I can understand why Muslims treat the Qu'ran as sacred but what this author is saying is that a host of other things are just as sacred and it does not matter how absurd they are to a rational mind. I refer to it again, a proof offered in the Hadith that covering is required was that women in heaven do it and it does this with what is to me a fanciful story about this women bringing light and perfume - how the person who recounted the story could know this not explained.
There is no question of logic or science in that statement, it is a matter of faith.
2:2 (Asad) THIS DIVINE WRIT - let there be no doubt about it is [meant to be] a guidance for all the God-conscious. [2] -
2:3 (Asad) Who believe in [the existence of] that which is beyond the reach of human perception, [3] and are constant in prayer, and spend on others out of what We provide for them as sustenance; [4] -

an article of faith requires you as certain signs are manifest unto you for proof, that you should also accept that which is beyond reach of human perception!


If one is to take every story as having the same weight of authority and what seems to be no interpretation at all or contextualisation and in this case that every thing these particular group of women did was totally sanctified and binding then there is no place here for reason only total submission. I personally find this intolerable and I take the usual Biblical position which states that to go from the written word to action without interpretation is itself heresy.
We're not here to cater to what it is you find tolerable or intolerable.. I find everything about you intolerable, yet here you are day in and day out and we still accommodate you .. a woman's right to her veil is the least you can offer unless of course you'd like to join some crusade and swim in Muslim blood as your forefathers have done and continue to do?
So for a Muslim there is no possible argument against the Burka and women must cover entirely even to the extent of only using one eye. No rational state would be able to see that other than as oppression based on an assertion from an authority who is totally inaccessible.
I have no clue where you get the one eye shbeal is all about, whatever the case, you are the last person to decide what is rational, just given what it is you use to cement your arguments of completely irrelevant and unrelated drivel!

all the best
Reply

Hugo
07-23-2010, 04:15 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
This is intresting as it actually has something to do with the thread - if a women believes its actually compulsory on her to wear the Burkah/Niqab and as she isnt hurting anyone or restricting anyones rights why should she be restricted of not wearing the burka - any rational state would see that this women is choosing to wear the burkha and as she isnt hurting anyone by wearing it or restricting anyone elses rights she should have the right to wear it.
But can you not also see that others might see it as oppression because she is 'forced' into it by lets say her society based on an authority of a few stories and claims that they are sacred and to ignore them or even re-interpret them rationally is seen as sin.
Reply

Hugo
07-23-2010, 04:28 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
I asked you to prove it not merely bully people into your beliefs?
I cannot prove it and you cannot disprove it that is the point that is being made. I suggest one looks rationally at it and decides for oneself you cannot even consider that as an option.

I have no blind position as to why the revelations are divine, I have in fact set the criteria based on the Quran itself and asked since you are making the claim to invalidate said points and the burden of proof does lie on your shoulders in such a case, to un-prove if you can, the textual integrity, the logical consistency, the miraculous features, the supernatural eloquence, the scientific statements ahead of its time etc. etc. and we'll be waiting.. I don't enjoy wasting my time on blind man's bluff.. simply put up or shut up as I have personally tired of your antics!
Well start another thread and outline your criteria. All you do is invent criteria that support your case and ignore all others and of course I can create another set of criteria that will show the Qu'ran to be nothing more than a copy of other work. For example, I could suggest a criteria that says "If God provided the Qu'ran it must only contain material that is not found elsewhere". Now you in all likelihood will not accept this but then why should I accept yours?

I have no clue where you get the one eye shbeal is all about, whatever the case, you are the last person to decide what is rational, just given what it is you use to cement your arguments of completely irrelevant and unrelated drive
l!
All this shows is that you have not bothered to read the post that contains about 20 hadith on the issue so you are not fit to join the debate.
Reply

Zafran
07-23-2010, 04:31 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
But can you not also see that others might see it as oppression because she is 'forced' into it by lets say her society based on an authority of a few stories and claims that they are sacred and to ignore them or even re-interpret them rationally is seen as sin.
How can anyone see it as oppression if the women chooses to wear it you just have to ask her? if someone is actuially forcing a women to wear it then its oppression. Just relying on "what ifs" is a waste of time.
Reply

جوري
07-23-2010, 04:40 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I cannot prove it.
I know.. but certainly if you keep whining about it, then you should do something about it?

Well start another thread and outline your criteria. All you do is invent criteria that support your case and ignore all others and of course I can create another set of criteria that will show the Qu'ran to be nothing more than a copy of other work. For example, I could suggest a criteria that says "If God provided the Qu'ran it must only contain material that is not found elsewhere". Now you in all likelihood will not accept this but then why should I accept yours?
I haven't 'invented criteria' in order for you to set out on the painstaking task of proving or disproving anything, you'll have to adhere to a set of principles drawn from the condition itself as a baseline!

l!
All this shows is that you have not bothered to read the post that contains about 20 hadith on the issue so you are not fit to join the debate.
As stated, you are the last person to decide what is rational and what isn't when you keep cementing your arguments with unrelated drivel!

all the best
Reply

Hugo
07-30-2010, 05:00 PM
I wonder if one might consider this issue based on something from Thomas Paine who was looking for a way to define liberty and he suggested a principle:
That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even
This seem valid to me as it is double ended in that you as an individual may do as you please as long as others are not harmed but at the same time others cannot compel you do do something against your will and national laws would be framed in this way. So someone who wants to wear the burka in a free society can do so as long as no one else is harmed and at the same time there should be no penalty from any society or part of a society if one chooses not to do this.

So in this thread we have seen very often that freedom is advocated as a reason to allow this practice but I wonder how many will stand up and reject equally fervently the coercion described below where freedom have been violated - not many I suspect who can look both ways which itself is a principles of freedom.
A female teacher has been prevented from teaching at a Muslim university in Eastern India by students demanding the she wear a burka. Aliah university in Calcutta is the first Muslim university in West Bengal state and has no formal dress code, but its student union has demanded that female teachers cover themselves with a Muslim veil in class. Sirin Middya told Indian Express that she had refused to comply and had been prevented from teaching for three months. Telegraph 30 July 2010 page 18
Reply

أحمد
07-30-2010, 05:25 PM
:sl:

We aren't asking for a ban on the burka - we are DEMANDING a ban on ALL face coverings in public regardless of gender, ethnicity, age, or the material from which the face covering is made.

I'm tired of being reasonable & tolerant. It's someone else's turn for a change.
- kate, fairwater, cardiff, 18/7/2010 10:20

http://www.islamicboard.com/general/...ml#post1349551
For those who demand ban on burqa or niqab (as quoted texts in previous posts); would they demand a ban on sunglasses in public?

Why sunglasses? British law suggests sunglasses cover the eyes and obscure identity; if burqa or niqab makes such a big identity crisis; so do sunglasses.

There are many excuses from people who want a ban; the most popular one is "Islam oppresses women". They fail to realise that "oppresses" isn't a synonym of "respects". Modesty isn't nor ever was oppression; it is and always was a great symbol of respect.

"Ban schools! Education is oppression", now doesn't that sound childish? It is!

:wa:
Reply

Zafran
07-30-2010, 06:05 PM
Salaam

The main problem is that the same people who want "freedom" are the same people who want to ban the burkha. Its ok for them to wear what ever they want but its not ok for someone else to have that choice as well.

peace
Reply

Hugo
07-30-2010, 06:27 PM
Originally Posted by {A}
For those who demand ban on burqa or niqab (as quoted texts in previous posts); would they demand a ban on sunglasses in public? Why sunglasses? British law suggests sunglasses cover the eyes and obscure identity; if burqa or niqab makes such a big identity crisis; so do sunglasses. There are many excuses from people who want a ban; the most popular one is "Islam oppresses women". They fail to realise that "oppresses" isn't a synonym of "respects". Modesty isn't nor ever was oppression; it is and always was a great symbol of respect.
"Ban schools! Education is oppression", now doesn't that sound childish? It is!
I take it you are for no ban at all on anything?
Reply

Hugo
07-30-2010, 06:31 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
The main problem is that the same people who want "freedom" are the same people who want to ban the burkha. Its ok for them to wear what ever they want but its not ok for someone else to have that choice as well.
Yes one sees you point so you would I take it condemn wholeheartedly those Muslim students at Aliah university in Calcutta who are trying to force women teachers to wear the burka - well done! (see post 88)
Reply

أحمد
07-30-2010, 06:35 PM
:sl:

Originally Posted by Hugo
I take it you are for no ban at all on anything?
I'm for don't ban freedom.

Originally Posted by Hugo
Yes one sees you point so you would I take it condemn wholeheartedly those Muslim students at Aliah university in Calcutta who are trying to force women teachers to wear the burka - well done! (see post 88)
Forcing anyone to do anything is wrong; whether its to remove burqa, or to wear it.

:wa:
Reply

Zafran
07-30-2010, 06:36 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Yes one sees you point so you would I take it condemn wholeheartedly those Muslim students at Aliah university in Calcutta who are trying to force women teachers to wear the burka - well done! (see post 88)
where did I say that and what does some random university in india have to do with the UK and the burkha? Thats like bringing up france.
Reply

Hugo
07-30-2010, 06:47 PM
Originally Posted by {A}
I'm for don't ban freedom. Forcing anyone to do anything is wrong; whether its to remove burqa, or to wear it.
I think I am with you but how far will you go on this, do you have any limits? What I mean is for example, that in Muslim majority country I for example would not have the freedom to be critical of Islam or it practices such as the wearing of a burka
Reply

Hugo
07-30-2010, 06:50 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
where did I say that and what does some random university in india have to do with the UK and the burkha? Thats like bringing up france.
Well go and look at post 88 - I am asking you are you only demanding freedom to wear the burka but not freedom to ignore it, would you go to that University and stand up for the rights of that teachers who refuses to wear it? This is not some 'random' thing I am asking you how consistent is your outlook on freedom on dress?
Reply

Zafran
07-30-2010, 06:53 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I think I am with you but how far will you go on this, do you have any limits? What I mean is for example, that in Muslim majority country I for example would not have the freedom to be critical of Islam or it practices such as the wearing of a burka
This is once again off topic - but as your wrong - I'll give you an example of Turkey. But you shouldnt also forget about denying the holocaust is some european country would also be a crime.

but lets get back to the thread of banning the burkha in Britian although I think we all agree as long its not a threat it shouldnt be banned in the UK.
Reply

Zafran
07-30-2010, 06:57 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Well go and look at post 88 - I am asking you are you only demanding freedom to wear the burka but not freedom to ignore it, would you go to that University and stand up for the rights of that teachers who refuses to wear it? This is not some 'random' thing I am asking you how consistent is your outlook on freedom on dress?
Ofcourse its random - its like asking if i would go to austria and stand up for someone who would deny the holocaust? who cares I'm not indian and I'm not austrian. Another thing you have got wrong here is that "I'm demanding the right to wear the burkha" which if you actaully read my posts you would see is false and I havent said anything like that. You should actually read my posts rather then making random things up.
Reply

tw009
07-31-2010, 02:43 AM
This was posted in the Toronto Sun...

Top 10 reasons not to ban the burka: Janes

1. It's against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I can hear people choking on their cereal right now and shouting vehemence with words like "Trudeau," "multiculturalism," "Canadian values" etc. Be that as it may, we "have" a charter and it "is" against it.

2. a) I don't believe that the prime motivator for this ban is women's rights, as some have said. Based on the comments I've read here and in many other sites it comes from a strong anti-Muslim sentiment. I think that if white Canadian women were wearing burkas we wouldn't even be having this debate. And although I'm no fan of the "slippery slope" argument, if we demonstrate that we can ban the burka then every other piece of clothing that smacks of Islam or Islamic culture is up for grabs.

b) A ban would drive both those forced to wear the burka and those who choose to (and they do exist) underground, making them even more invisible than they are now. It would also motivate some women who wouldn't normally wear a burka to wear one in protest. Where would the women's rights issue be then?

3. It is one more government intrusion into private lives and private decisions.

4. It would give a legal standing to "burka bashing" or for people to accost burka-wearing women in parks and malls and try to rip their burkas off. Do we really think anti-Muslim idiots are going to wait around for a cop if they think they have a legal right to confront burka-wearers.

5. It makes religious persecution legal.

6. It's completely unenforceable and would never survive a court challenge.

7. I don't care what Britain and France do, it would make us look like xenophobic idiots.

8. Don't even mention the driving a car thing. We've all seen so many makeup-appliers, sandwich-eaters, map-readers, texters, CD-player-fiddlers-wth, etc., not to mention the countless other just plain bad drivers, to make this a non-issue. The roads aren't exactly teeming with burka-wearing drivers.

9. It actually goes "against" Canada's traditional vales of openness, tolerance, equality, compassion, etc.

10. Women can go topless in Ontario and we want to ban a piece of cloth? Get real.

Having said all that, we should make it mandatory to remove the burka for purposes of identification. If I tell the driver's licence inspectors or the police that I refuse to wear the glasses or contacts that my licence says I must then I will lose my licence, so I have no problem with denying a licence to a woman who refuses to remove her burka for a photo. Same deal for a passport or any government document that requires photo ID. Ditto court proceedings or any institutional situation that requires a proper ID.

Otherwise, leave it alone.

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/20.../14880341.html
Reply

titus
07-31-2010, 04:11 AM
Well go and look at post 88 - I am asking you are you only demanding freedom to wear the burka but not freedom to ignore it, would you go to that University and stand up for the rights of that teachers who refuses to wear it? This is not some 'random' thing I am asking you how consistent is your outlook on freedom on dress?
You are comparing apples to oranges. One is a single institution, the other is the government passing a law.

If the students in a Muslim university want to advocate what they consider to be Muslim attire then I have no problem with that. I look at that the same way I look at someone not allowing anyone to wear a hijab in their own house, or even requiring one in their own house. I think everyone should have that right.

Now if the government were to pass a law saying that people can't wear hijabs in their own houses, or requiring hijabs then I would find that objectionable (to put it mildly).
Reply

sister herb
07-31-2010, 06:24 AM
Forcing by law how people have to dress is called dictatorship. If in my country some politicians drive burkha banning I will start to use burkha at the same day.

I do same also for others. If using jew or christian sign will ban I will use them too.
Reply

Hugo
07-31-2010, 11:07 AM
Originally Posted by tw009
This was posted in the Toronto Sun... 10 reason not to0 ban the burka from that very authoritative source the Toronto Sun
Well in fairness here are 10 reason to ban it taken from several sources
1. The practice is demeaning to women and turns them into objects of derision and no one with a free choice would decide to dress in that manner.

2. It is not generally a free choice and community pressure not personal conscience makes them dress in this way.

3. There is pressure only one way and Muslims cannot or will not be even handed on this issue as is proved in post 88 where NO ONE in this board was willing to stand up for the rights of women who refuse to wear the burka.

4. It is pressure, explicit or implicit from men who want their women to be subservient and submissive and no man who truly loves his wife or daughter would want them to dress in such a ridiculous fashion.

5. The practice is harmful to the self respect of the women as it confirms her position as lower than and subservient to men.

6. It is potentially harmful to the person wearing the burka and those around her as moving and seeing where one is going is heavily restricted and since the dress is typically black at night it may be impossible for other to see them.

7. Wearing this oppressive garment s a sign of extremism. It is not a religious requirement; rather it is worn as a hostile political statement. The idea that God who created the vastness of the Universes with such beauty and precision should demand that women dress like this is totally fatuous.

8. When non-Muslims visit Muslim countries they are expected to conform to local custom by covering up out of respect for the host country. The burka is contrary to British culture and custom. Those who live here should conform in the same way as non-Muslims do abroad.

9. It is desirable that any practice empowers people but this practice does quite the opposite.

10. Immigrant Muslims who came to Britain to get away from Stalinist ayatollahs, mullahs and women-hating fanatic regimes in their home countries must be spitting their teeth out that anyone should endorse this dreadful garment.
Reply

Hugo
07-31-2010, 11:11 AM
Originally Posted by sister harb
Forcing by law how people have to dress is called dictatorship. If in my country some politicians drive burkha banning I will start to use burkha at the same day. I do same also for others. If using jew or christian sign will ban I will use them too.
It may be so but every Muslim majority country typically does so do they not so by your definition they are dictatorships? I like your stance here but of course if you took it is say Saudi Arabia you would be locked up and that in a way is why I find so many posts here confusing.
Reply

Hugo
07-31-2010, 11:17 AM
Originally Posted by titus
You are comparing apples to oranges. One is a single institution, the other is the government passing a law. If the students in a Muslim university want to advocate what they consider to be Muslim attire then I have no problem with that. I look at that the same way I look at someone not allowing anyone to wear a hijab in their own house, or even requiring one in their own house. I think everyone should have that right. Now if the government were to pass a law saying that people can't wear hijabs in their own houses, or requiring hijabs then I would find that objectionable (to put it mildly).
But cannot YOU see how inconsistent your view is, we must not ban the burka but your are happy to let a group insist it is worn and then you say everyone should have rights - what we are speaking of here is a principle and that principle is should a group, large or small be able to impose its will one another group in matters of conscience.
Reply

Hugo
07-31-2010, 11:20 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
Ofcourse its random - its like asking if i would go to austria and stand up for someone who would deny the holocaust? who cares I'm not indian and I'm not austrian. Another thing you have got wrong here is that "I'm demanding the right to wear the burkha" which if you actaully read my posts you would see is false and I havent said anything like that. You should actually read my posts rather then making random things up.
I am trying to find out if your are even handed here - that you would support someone who wants to wear the burka and just as strongly support those who do not based on the principle of freedom of conscience - its very simple just make it clear what your view is?
Reply

sister herb
07-31-2010, 11:27 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
It may be so but every Muslim majority country do so do they not so by your definition they are dictatorships? I like your stance here but of course if you took it is say Saudi Arabia you would be locked up and that in a way is why I find so many posts here confusing.

Yes. Britain is not muslim majority country. Neither France. Or Holland. They all are free western Christian countries.

If I ever visit those countries I will use burkha.
Reply

sister herb
07-31-2010, 11:41 AM
Call it as demonstration!
Reply

Zafran
07-31-2010, 02:18 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I am trying to find out if your are even handed here - that you would support someone who wants to wear the burka and just as strongly support those who do not based on the principle of freedom of conscience - its very simple just make it clear what your view is?
This is part of the problem where in God's earth did I ever base my view on "the principle of freedom of conscience". Its very clear what I'm sayiing in my previous posts - if you dont understand them then quote them and tell me what you dont understand?? By the way it would be great if you could show me where I'm using this so called principle??
Reply

Zafran
07-31-2010, 02:24 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
It may be so but every Muslim majority country do so do they not so by your definition they are dictatorships? I like your stance here but of course if you took it is say Saudi Arabia you would be locked up and that in a way is why I find so many posts here confusing.
Your simply wrong here and its the second time your claiming something which isnt true - Turkey is a majority muslim country does it force people to dress in a specific way?? Your claiming that EVERY muslim majority country does this???
Reply

Hugo
08-04-2010, 07:35 PM
Just a few questions but how do sisters feel when they wear a burka? I have no idea so it could be they feel superior, they feel more righteous/self-righteous, they condemn others, they feel more spiritual, they feel more in tune with God etc.
Reply

aadil77
08-04-2010, 09:39 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Just a few questions but how do sisters feel when they wear a burka? I have no idea so it could be they feel superior, they feel more righteous/self-righteous, they condemn others, they feel more spiritual, they feel more in tune with God etc.
putting on a burkha is not like putting on a crown, it doesn't make you superior nor should you think it does
Reply

Zafran
08-04-2010, 10:16 PM
Is it like wearing a nuns Habit?
Reply

N1LOY
08-04-2010, 10:35 PM
Some wouldn't believe what I saw today...

These teenage girls (around my age) wearing hijaab on top.... wearing tight jeans (exposing back) and t-shirt (exposing their chest)...they don't even look good :giggling:. And there was other girl who was wearing proper clothes. :smile:

I felt really bad for what they are representing for Islam and Muslim women's culture.
If you are reading (and wear these type of clothings) ... there is no reason for you to wear hijaab...remember Allah knows your intention and your inner feelings.


Allah Almighty knows best.
Reply

Zafran
08-04-2010, 11:16 PM
Originally Posted by N1LOY
Some wouldn't believe what I saw today...

These teenage girls (around my age) wearing hijaab on top.... wearing tight jeans (exposing back) and t-shirt (exposing their chest)...they don't even look good :giggling:. And there was other girl who was wearing proper clothes. :smile:

I felt really bad for what they are representing for Islam and Muslim women's culture.
If you are reading (and wear these type of clothings) ... there is no reason for you to wear hijaab...remember Allah knows your intention and your inner feelings.



Allah Almighty knows best.
Salaam

You should be more worried about yourself then being so Judgemental - Yes Allah swt knows there intentions we dont and besides you shouldnt have been looking at them in the first place. Whats this about " dont even look good" for who? you?

peace
Reply

N1LOY
08-04-2010, 11:31 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
Salaam

You should be more worried about yourself then being so Judgemental - Yes Allah swt knows there intentions we dont and besides you shouldnt have been looking at them in the first place. Whats this about " dont even look good" for who? you?

peace
Why should I be worry about myself more?

I have eyes, I have looked once (and turned away) and other human with eyes would have done the same. That is why I am being judgmental, because I have observed them carefully. That is my opinion, and you can't prove me wrong on that.

If you like your daughter to wear a small hijaab and bikini on bottom, how would you feel?
Here are what the Muslimah should fulfill to have a correct Islamic dress code:

1. Clothing must cover the entire body, only the hands and face may remain visible.
2. The material must not be so thin that one can see through it.
3. The clothing must hang loose so that the shape/form of the body is not apparent.
4. The female clothing must not resemble the man's clothing.
5. The design of the clothing must not resemble the clothing of the non-believing women.
6. The design must not consist of bold designs which attract attention.
7. Clothing should not be worn for the sole purpose of gaining reputation or increasing one's status in society.
The reason for this strictness is so that the woman is protected from the lustful gaze of men. She should not attract attention to herself in any way.

So, if you fulfilled these tips, so you will have a correct hijab which Allah will be pleased with.
Peace be with you.
Reply

Zafran
08-04-2010, 11:38 PM
Originally Posted by N1LOY
Why should I be worry about myself more?

I have eyes, I have looked once (and turned away) and other human with eyes would have done the same. That is why I am being judgmental, because I have observed them carefully. That is my opinion, and you can't prove me wrong on that.

If you like your daughter to wear a small hijaab and bikini on bottom, how would you feel?

Peace be with you.
salaam

Then why didnt you go up to the girls and tell them to there face rather then talking about it on the internet if you feel so strongly about it???

One glance and you observed them carefully - whats that about - that doesnt seem like a "glance" to me.

peace
Reply

N1LOY
08-04-2010, 11:46 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
salaam

Ok then why didnt you go up to the girls and tell them to there face rather then talking about it on the internet if you feel so strongly about it???

peace
I don't think it will be a good thing to do. First of all, I do not know them. They can be older than me. And in New York, they can wear hijaab and bikini and we can't do anything to stop it. It's their own rights and wishes.

I am just posting on internet so maybe other parents can read it and get the main idea. I am sorry if I got you angry, it wasn't my intention. You can dress up your child anyway you want to and probably stay away from the knowledge.



Allah is the most merciful. He knows the truth. Peace be with you.
Reply

Zafran
08-04-2010, 11:53 PM
Originally Posted by N1LOY
I don't think it will be a good thing to do. First of all, I do not know them. They can be older than me. And in New York, they can wear hijaab and bikini and we can't do anything to stop it. It's their own rights and wishes.

I am just posting on internet so maybe other parents can read it and get the main idea. I am sorry if I got you angry, it wasn't my intention. You can dress up your child anyway you want to and probably stay away from the knowledge.



Allah is the most merciful. He knows the truth. Peace be with you.
Salaam

You dont know them better reason not to talk about them. Nobody is telling you to stop them and you have no right to do that anyway.

Dressing a child the way I want?? whats that got to do with you talking about women that you dont even know about.

Just becasue you "glanced" at them you seem to think you have the right to Judge them as if your part of there family.

anyway this is going way off topic as this thread is about Niqab/burkha in the UK.

peace
Reply

N1LOY
08-05-2010, 12:06 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
Salaam

You dont know them better reason not to talk about them. Nobody is telling you to stop them and you have no right to do that anyway.

Dressing a child the way I want?? whats that got to do with you talking about women that you dont even know about.

Just becasue you "glanced" at them you seem to think you have the right to Judge them as if your part of there family.

anyway this is going way off topic as this thread is about Niqab/burkha in the UK.

peace
If I knew them I would never share my experience here. Am I trying to stop them? No. All I am trying to state is that a smart Muslim woman should dress properly. If not, then none. Why wear a hijaab if you have intention to display your chest/ass size?

That is an inference. -__- How would you feel if you see your daughter like that?

I thought we are all brothers and sisters. Correct me if I am wrong.
Reply

Zafran
08-05-2010, 12:11 AM
Originally Posted by N1LOY
If I knew them I would never share my experience here. Am I trying to stop them? No. All I am trying to state is that a smart Muslim woman should dress properly. If not, then none. Why wear a hijaab if you have intention to display your chest/ass size?

That is an inference. -__- How would you feel if you see your daughter like that?

I thought we are all brothers and sisters. Correct me if I am wrong.
Salaam

who are you tell muslim women how to dress properly thats my point - especially women that your not related to and dont even know???

brothers and sisters ofcourse - that doesnt give us the right to Judge women that we dont know.

peace
Reply

N1LOY
08-05-2010, 12:18 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
Salaam

who are you tell muslim women how to dress properly thats my point - especially women that your not related to and dont even know???

brothers and sisters ofcourse - that doesnt give us the right to Judge women that we dont know.

peace

I am not judging their inner feelings. -__- I am judging their dress code. I have seen many Muslim women who dress properly, may Allah be pleased with them.

Who am I? I am the speaker of truth, slave of Allah and follower of Muhammad.
Who are you to tell me that it is OK for women to wear tight jeans and shirts?
Reply

Zafran
08-05-2010, 12:21 AM
Salaam

Who am I? I am the speaker of truth, slave of Allah and follower of Muhammad.
Who are you to tell me that it is OK for women to wear tight jeans and shirts
where did I say that? I said

who are you tell muslim women how to dress properly thats my point - especially women that your not related to and dont even know???
So this gives you the right to Judge random muslim women that you dont even know and are not even related to you? because your the speaker of truth and the slave Allah swt, follower of Muhammad pbuh?

peace
Reply

Zafran
08-05-2010, 12:21 AM
Please delete mods double post
Reply

N1LOY
08-05-2010, 12:37 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
Salaam



where did I say that? I said



So this gives you the right to Judge random muslim women that you dont even know and are not even related to?

They represent Islam and Muslim women. I have judged their dress code and not their inside. Can you say if it's alright to wear such clothes or not? You are being reluctant from the decision.

If it smells like a fish, looks like a fish... then it is a fish, right?

Imagine if I was an Atheist and looking for a true religion, if I come up to Muslim teenage girls like this, my idea of Islam would change negatively.

And again... just dress code. Inner-feelings, only Allah (SWT) knows the best.
Reply

nousername
08-05-2010, 12:45 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Well in fairness here are 10 reason to ban it taken from several sources
1. The practice is demeaning to women and turns them into objects of derision and no one with a free choice would decide to dress in that manner.

2. It is not generally a free choice and community pressure not personal conscience makes them dress in this way.

3. There is pressure only one way and Muslims cannot or will not be even handed on this issue as is proved in post 88 where NO ONE in this board was willing to stand up for the rights of women who refuse to wear the burka.

4. It is pressure, explicit or implicit from men who want their women to be subservient and submissive and no man who truly loves his wife or daughter would want them to dress in such a ridiculous fashion.

5. The practice is harmful to the self respect of the women as it confirms her position as lower than and subservient to men.

6. It is potentially harmful to the person wearing the burka and those around her as moving and seeing where one is going is heavily restricted and since the dress is typically black at night it may be impossible for other to see them.

7. Wearing this oppressive garment s a sign of extremism. It is not a religious requirement; rather it is worn as a hostile political statement. The idea that God who created the vastness of the Universes with such beauty and precision should demand that women dress like this is totally fatuous.

8. When non-Muslims visit Muslim countries they are expected to conform to local custom by covering up out of respect for the host country. The burka is contrary to British culture and custom. Those who live here should conform in the same way as non-Muslims do abroad.

9. It is desirable that any practice empowers people but this practice does quite the opposite.

10. Immigrant Muslims who came to Britain to get away from Stalinist ayatollahs, mullahs and women-hating fanatic regimes in their home countries must be spitting their teeth out that anyone should endorse this dreadful garment.
I am sure from this post that you have never had a conversation with a niqabi woman. Same old talking points. Think of something original.
Reply

Zafran
08-05-2010, 12:49 AM
Originally Posted by N1LOY
They represent Islam and Muslim women. I have judged their dress code and not their inside. Can you say if it's alright to wear such clothes or not? You are being reluctant from the decision.

If it smells like a fish, looks like a fish... then it is a fish, right?

Imagine if I was an Atheist and looking for a true religion, if I come up to Muslim teenage girls like this, my idea of Islam would change negatively.

And again... just dress code. Inner-feelings, only Allah (SWT) knows the best.
Salaam

I dont even know them and I havent even seen them so your telling me to Judge them? I dont even have the right to Judge there dress code - do you?

An "Athiest" if he is sincere will be guided by God anyway - thats out of our or any muslim teenage girls control.

peace
Reply

N1LOY
08-05-2010, 01:03 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
Salaam

I dont even know them and I havent even seen them so your telling me to Judge them? I dont even have the right to Judge there dress code - do you?

An "Athiest" if he is sincere will be guided by God anyway - thats out of our or any muslim teenage girls control.

peace
Oh brother... I don't want you to judge their inner feelings and I have already described their dress code, so you can judge them.
I believe you never heard of tight jeans/skinny jeans and tight t-shirts. Yes you do not have right (yet), when you do not know what it is in the first place.

I disagree with your second statement. It is also our responsibilities to show the righteousness and truth, and it is up to them for their decision. We represent Islam.

"Hold to forgiveness, command what is right; but turn away from the ignorant." [Qur'an 7:199]
Reply

Hugo
08-05-2010, 12:18 PM
Originally Posted by nousername
I am sure from this post that you have never had a conversation with a niqabi woman. Same old talking points. Think of something original.
No one is claiming originality only that IF you looked through the posts someone posted 10 reason not to ban, they also were old hat so I posted 10 reason to ban so that we have a kind of balance, that there is NOT a single view. As it happens I have worked with many women students in Universities over many years who cover up entirely except for the eyes. Its better not to judge don't you think when you don't have any facts and know nothing about the person who posts. Is this your way of avoiding the issues?
Reply

aadil77
08-05-2010, 02:44 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Is this your way of avoiding the issues?
what exactly is the issue?
Reply

Hugo
08-05-2010, 07:52 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
what exactly is the issue?
This is a thread about banning the burka - well that is what I think it is about what do you think it is about? If you read the thread the issues seem plain.
Reply

Dagless
08-05-2010, 08:12 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
This is a thread about banning the burka - well that is what I think it is about what do you think it is about? If you read the thread the issues seem plain.
The 10 issues you listed aren't really issues; they are what ignorant islamophobes use to justify their own prejudice.
Reply

aadil77
08-05-2010, 08:35 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
This is a thread about banning the burka - well that is what I think it is about what do you think it is about? If you read the thread the issues seem plain.
The only issue I see is people trying to force women to take off their veils, do you see any others?

same thing is happening in israel where rabbi's are trying prevent jewish women from wearing niqaab
Reply

Hugo
08-05-2010, 09:43 PM
Originally Posted by Dagless
The 10 issues you listed aren't really issues; they are what ignorant islamophobes use to justify their own prejudice.
You simply CANNOT see can you that YOU are just as phobic and prejudiced as the rest of us or if this post is anything to go by worse.
Reply

Hugo
08-05-2010, 09:54 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
The only issue I see is people trying to force women to take off their veils, do you see any others? same thing is happening in israel where rabbi's are trying prevent jewish women from wearing niqaab
Yes I listed 10 of them in an earlier post. That fact that you can only see one issue is perhaps because you have already made up your mind but is it more than that that you just cannot understand that other might hold different views? Do you also NOT think it possible that there are those who are trying to force women to wear the veil - or is that ok by you?

On the Israel issue it was at the insistence of the husbands of some burka-wearing women, a leading rabbinical authority is to issue an edict declaring burka wearing a sexual fetish that is as promiscuous as wearing too little. You also need to be aware that this is not some kind of mass movement but a small group of ultra-orthodox Jews in the town of Beit Shemesh who chose to don the burka, usually associated with women in repressive Islamist regimes, three years ago in a bid to protect their modesty.

Are their husbands wrong? Are the Rabbi's wrong since one would expect them to be experts in Jewish law.
Reply

Dagless
08-05-2010, 10:03 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
You simply CANNOT see can you that YOU are just as phobic and prejudiced as the rest of us or if this post is anything to go by worse.
What am I prejudiced about? I only pointed out the fact that you are propagating falsehood. Yes I am prejudiced against people who bring up the same old inaccurate statements (which have been answered many times before) to hide their underlying bigotry. You got me.
Reply

Hugo
08-05-2010, 10:41 PM
Originally Posted by Dagless
What am I prejudiced about? I only pointed out the fact that you are propagating falsehood. Yes I am prejudiced against people who bring up the same old inaccurate statements (which have been answered many times before) to hide their underlying bigotry. You got me.
Your prejudice is shown clearly because you cannot see another point of view and assume that any answer you give is the end of the matter and everything else is inaccurate as if you possess some kind of infallibility. I made no statements or said I supported one way or the other those 20 point of view but posed them questions but all you can do is call any one who does so ignorant, islamophobes, prejudiced and now bigoted. Dante may have been right when he said "Some have justice in their hearts, thinking before they let their judgements leave the bow, but your people keep it handy on their lips".
Reply

aadil77
08-05-2010, 10:48 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Yes I listed 10 of them in an earlier post. That fact that you can only see one issue is perhaps because you have already made up your mind but is it more than that that you just cannot understand that other might hold different views? Do you also NOT think it possible that there are those who are trying to force women to wear the veil - or is that ok by you?
Its not impossible, but does that mean you go and ban it for everyone? Is it not worse for someone to be forced to take off an item of clothing than to be made to wear one? whats the worst infringement of rights of the two?

Same issue with the rabbi's, key word is the women 'chose' to wear the burka,

this is a picture of the burka:



those rabbi's must be nuts to declare it a 'sexual fetish' and just 'as promiscuous as wearing too little'
Reply

Dagless
08-05-2010, 11:08 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Your prejudice is shown clearly because you cannot see another point of view and assume that any answer you give is the end of the matter and everything else is inaccurate as if you possess some kind of infallibility. I made no statements or said I supported one way or the other those 20 point of view but posed them questions but all you can do is call any one who does so ignorant, islamophobes, prejudiced and now bigoted. Dante may have been right when he said "Some have justice in their hearts, thinking before they let their judgements leave the bow, but your people keep it handy on their lips".
This makes no sense. I called you those things because you stated points which are false. Your list of "points" have been proven many times to be incorrect. It is not only a matter of opinion; the statements are factually wrong about the very people they are about. Twice in this very thread you have been told they are incorrect; yet you persist in stating them. Cookie Monster may have been right when he said "COOKIE!!".
Reply

Hugo
08-06-2010, 08:26 AM
Originally Posted by aadil77
Its not impossible, but does that mean you go and ban it for everyone? Is it not worse for someone to be forced to take off an item of clothing than to be made to wear one? whats the worst infringement of rights of the two?
Who can say for sure but the person involved. As an outsider I would say that the burka is an absurdity and why any one would choose to wear it is beyond my understanding and forcing anyone to wear it is oppression - you might think the opposite.

Same issue with the rabbi's, key word is the women 'chose' to wear the burka, this is a picture of the burka: those rabbi's must be nuts to declare it a 'sexual fetish' and just 'as promiscuous as wearing too little'
But I might say a Muslim cleric who declares the burka a good and right thing to wear is also nuts. Does it occur to you to ask why would the God who created the Universe want or see any pleasure in woman dressing in that fashion, surely you must be able to see it is extreme? Interestingly a recent BBC documentary was shown on prostitution in Iran - now I don't blame those women involved (estimated to be about 100,000) because they seem to be driven to it largely by poverty. But when they walk from client to client they wear the usual Islamic dress including the burka so wearing it may or may not signify much about the person.
Reply

Salahudeen
08-06-2010, 08:42 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Who can say for sure but the person involved. As an outsider I would say that the burka is an absurdity and why any one would choose to wear it is beyond my understanding and forcing anyone to wear it is oppression - you might think the opposite.



But I might say a Muslim cleric who declares the burka a good and right thing to wear is also nuts. Does it occur to you to ask why would the God who created the Universe want or see any pleasure in woman dressing in that fashion, surely you must be able to see it is extreme? Interestingly a recent BBC documentary was shown on prostitution in Iran - now I don't blame those women involved (estimated to be about 100,000) because they seem to be driven to it largely by poverty. But when they walk from client to client they wear the usual Islamic dress including the burka so wearing it may or may not signify much about the person.
The same could be said for nuns. Why do they choose to wear that covering over their head and not display their ornaments? this is extreme is it not? Why do they dress this way? and why is the virgin marry all ways depicted with a covering over her head? surely they have gone to an extreme this should be banned also why would God like them to dress this way as nuns? weird ;D

I explained to you why Muslim women wear it a few posts back, as an act of submission to God, just like Christian nuns wear a head covering as an act of submission to God. I wonder why you keep raising the same questions over and over do you enjoy going in circles?

It's beyond my understand why a nun would choose to dress the way she does.
Reply

Salahudeen
08-06-2010, 08:46 AM
I see your point but I suppose what I am asking is in each case why wear such dress - one supposes they don't do it for fun? I know why Nuns do it and it is an act of separation from the world, from family life and submission to God and they do not see it as having merit or demonstrating piety to do that would be destroy the idea of submission.

Originally Posted by squiggle
Well Hugo you have answered your own question, you stated nuns do it as an act of submission to God and this is exactly the same reason as to why Muslim women do it. And we believe acts that involve submitting yourself to god carry merit.

So Nun's do not see doing an act of submissiveness to God as something that carries merit?

then this is indeed where the difference is, for a Muslim woman, doing an act of submissiveness to God is something that carries Merritt. Just like when a Muslim prays to God 5 time a day out of submissiveness, it is an act of merit.

What is better than submitting yourself to God? Is not such a thing worthy of merit?

Does not the very fact that Nuns do it out of submissiveness to God demonstrate their piety?
There we go.
Reply

Hugo
08-06-2010, 08:50 AM
Originally Posted by squiggle
The same could be said for nuns. Why do they choose to wear that covering over their head and not display their ornaments? this is extreme is it not? Why do they dress this way? and why is the virgin marry all ways depicted with a covering over her head? surely they have gone to an extreme this should be banned also why would got like them to dress this way as nuns? weird ;D
You may well be right but are you agreeing here that indeed in both cases we are dealing with extremes?

I explained to you why Muslim women wear it a few posts back, as an act of submission to God, just like Christian nuns wear a head covering as an act of submission to God. I wonder why you keep raising the same questions over and over do you enjoy going in circles?
I was responding to another post but are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your explanation is final, absolute the end of the story and I or anyone must accept it as a kind of truth. I might just say I have explained it to you many times so why don't you accept my explanation, why do you go in circles. If we take your line then the thread ends before it begins.

I perfectly understand that there may be good and noble reasons for doing anything but in the case of nuns they don't as far as I know cover the face and again as far as I know they don't cover up so people cannot see their 'adornments' but its I think an act of separation from the world and a kind of total devotion to the work of God. But there is no pressure from society for all women to follow their example and nothing in scripture that commands it other than words that commend modesty for all.

What I asked earlier, rhetorically, how do the women who wear it actually feel about it and does it bring a feeling of humility and submission to God and love for the whole community at one end of the scale or a feeling of self-righteousness and arrogance at the other - only the wearers know and its between them and God.
Reply

aadil77
08-06-2010, 08:52 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Who can say for sure but the person involved. As an outsider I would say that the burka is an absurdity and why any one would choose to wear it is beyond my understanding and forcing anyone to wear it is oppression - you might think the opposite.

I'd say the same about many items of western clothing; miniskirts, low tops, skintight clothes, by wearing these items you're walking around nude in public but no seems to make an issue out of it

But I might say a Muslim cleric who declares the burka a good and right thing to wear is also nuts. Does it occur to you to ask why would the God who created the Universe want or see any pleasure in woman dressing in that fashion, surely you must be able to see it is extreme? Interestingly a recent BBC documentary was shown on prostitution in Iran - now I don't blame those women involved (estimated to be about 100,000) because they seem to be driven to it largely by poverty. But when they walk from client to client they wear the usual Islamic dress including the burka so wearing it may or may not signify much about the person.
Do you find that suprising in a country where prostitution is legalised and part of their religion? Yes people may have other intentions, its none of our business and who are we to judge?
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
08-06-2010, 08:56 AM
Hugo, got a huge chip on the ol' shoulder eh?


i cant believe this thread is still actually opened.
Reply

Salahudeen
08-06-2010, 09:00 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
You may well be right but are you agreeing here that indeed in both cases we are dealing with extremes?



I was responding to another post but are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your explanation is final, absolute the end of the story and I or anyone must accept it as a kind of truth. I might just say I have explained it to you many times so why don't you accept my explanation, why do you go in circles. If we take your line then the thread ends before it begins.
No, I'm saying you criticize something as being extreme yet your own religion has the very same idea's. Why criticize something that's apart of your own religion and in your bible. Are you really a Christian? Do you think the virgin Mary was extreme for all ways walking around with a head covering? Why is it extreme to you when God mentions it in the bible? it wasn't extreme in past societies and times.

I am not claiming any kind of infallibility, you just ask the same questions over and over, so I give you the same explanation over and over. Hence we go around in circles because you're asking questions you've all ready been given the answer to. If you don't like the answer then tough deal with it. I mean what are you trying to achieve?

This is a simpler version of a convo with Hugo

Hugo "what color is the sky?"


Other person "blue"


A few posts later


Hugo "what colour is the sky?"


other person "blue"


a few posts later


Hugo "what colour is the sky?"


other person answers "I gave you the answer so many times all ready why do you keep asking what is your motive/goal?"


Hugo: Are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final? there are many ways to look at it, the sky can be grey also or white depending upon your perception or grey and white it could also be red to a colour blind person. The sky could also be black if you're wearing sun glasses. So you see the issue is not as simple as you make out, the topic requires a thorough analysis.


Other person: Well dude I mean that's MY answer the sky is blue at the moment. SO what else do you want to talk about.


Hugo: Well I don't accept the answer, you see the sky might be blue for you, but for me it's grey so how do we reconcile these two views? what is truly the colour of the sky? after all for a person living in a different country the sky might all ways be blue and for a person living in England the sky might be grey the majority of the time so the question is which is correct? how do we determine which is correct?


Other person Hmm ok, right ..... but that doesn't change the fact you've been given the answer so you don't need to ask again.


Hugo: are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final?


Other person: No dude I just gave you the answer on what colour the sky is, I mean what more do you want from me.


Hugo I want the ANSWER!!!! are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final?????


Other person SERIOUSLY WHAT IS UR PROBLEM I TOLD YOU THE ANSWER???? WHAT DO U WANT????


Hugo: I WANT YOU TO AGREE THAT THE SKY IS RED


Other person: But it's BLUE!!


Hugo are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final?


Other person: ooooooooooook right, eerm I so get where you're coming from. *RUNS OFF*


;D such a trickery with words otherwise known as chatting crap.
Reply

Hugo
08-06-2010, 09:09 AM
Originally Posted by aadil77
Do you find that suprising in a country where prostitution is legalised and part of their religion? Yes people may have other intentions, its none of our business and who are we to judge?
NO sadly, I don't find it surprising but if the report are correct it is no that much different in Saudi Arabia
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
08-06-2010, 09:12 AM
^you like talking crap don't you. you're quite good at it too. ever considered taking it up as a profession? im sure you'd get hired in no time.
Reply

Hugo
08-06-2010, 09:13 AM
Originally Posted by Ummu Sufyaan
Hugo, got a huge chip on the ol' shoulder eh? i cant believe this thread is still actually opened.
I doubt it as I work with Muslim students all the time here and in the Middle East including those who cover up so as usual you cannot accept a point of view for what it is, for you there is always something 'wrong' with those who disagree with you..
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
08-06-2010, 09:15 AM
I doubt it as I work with Muslim students all the time here and in the Middle East including those who cover up so as usual you cannot accept a point of view for what it is, for you there is always something 'wrong' with those who disagree with you..
couldn't have put it better myself. im glad it came from you.
Reply

Hugo
08-06-2010, 09:29 AM
Originally Posted by squiggle
No, I'm saying you criticize something as being extreme yet your own religion has the very same idea's. Why criticize something that's apart of your own religion and in your bible. Are you really a Christian? Do you think the virgin Mary was extreme for all ways walking around with a head covering? Why is it extreme to you when God mentions it in the bible? it wasn't extreme in past societies and times.
Whether something is extreme or nor perhaps is a to do with ones view point. The Bible says very little about Mary and there is no description of her and what you must be referring to is paintings where invention is involved not fact - so where does God mention something?

I am not claiming any kind of infallibility, you just ask the same questions over and over, so I give you the same explanation over and over. Hence we go around in circles because you're asking questions you've all ready been given the answer to. If you don't like the answer then tough deal with it. I mean what are you trying to achieve?
I asked the questions once and responded to those who commented just as I am doing now. The point at issues perhaps is you assume you are right, hence your answer and when another factor intrudes as they always will I would say the proper thing is to re-think it - but I guess you can't accept that idea.

Interesting analogy and its a pity that you did not speak of black and white the way you view the world. In University many years ago one professor was demonstrating the principles of light and I like every one else in the lecture was absolutely convinced that he was wearing white gloves but when the lights in the lecture theatre came fully on at the end we were all astounded to see the gloves were in fact black - or were they?

So this is not about a chip on my shoulder its about everyone being able to see that others can and do hold perfectly logical and legitimate points of view and they don't have to be silly or ignorant or hateful to0 do it. The fact that they may be opposites is just a simple fact of the world we live in and no different really than someone liking coffee ice cream and then next person hating it.

Reply

Salahudeen
08-06-2010, 09:47 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Whether something is extreme or nor perhaps is a to do with ones view point. The Bible says very little about Mary and there is no description of her and what you must be referring to is paintings where invention is involved not fact - so where does God mention something?


I asked the questions once and responded to those who commented just as I am doing now. The point at issues perhaps is you assume you are right, hence your answer and when another factor intrudes as they always will I would say the proper thing is to re-think it - but I guess you can't accept that idea.

Interesting analogy and its a pity that you did not speak of black and white the way you view the world. In University many years ago one professor was demonstrating the principles of light and I like every one else in the lecture was absolutely convinced that he was wearing white gloves but when the lights in the lecture theatre came fully on at the end we were all astounded to see the gloves were in fact black - or were they?

So this is not about a chip on my shoulder its about everyone being able to see that others can and do hold perfectly logical and legitimate points of view and they don't have to be silly or ignorant or hateful to0 do it. The fact that they may be opposites is just a simple fact of the world we live in and no different really than someone liking coffee ice cream and then next person hating it.
Hmm so the people who make paintings of Mary all ways draw a head cover on her this is weird and extreme, why do they do this for? it gives girls the wrong idea that covering your head is a good thing to do like the virgin mary. If invention is involved why do they choose to depict her this way? is it because modesty is better? or maybe they're inspired by the following verses where it's clearly commanded in the bible. Confusing indeed.

Originally Posted by Insane Insaan
Not sure why it's such a strange issue?

To add to Br squiggle's post:

"But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is 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.

For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man."

1 Corinthians 11:5-7

Thankfully the Qur'an doesn't suggest that women should shave their hair off, nor that woman is the glory of man.

Peace.
Reply

aadil77
08-06-2010, 10:04 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I doubt it as I work with Muslim students all the time here and in the Middle East including those who cover up so as usual you cannot accept a point of view for what it is, for you there is always something 'wrong' with those who disagree with you..
have you tried speaking to them about what they think?
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
08-06-2010, 07:40 PM
Wow what a discussion :-\
SubhaanAllaah

Anyways i like the Burka and Niqaab, its seen as extreme today but not back then. A load of extremist today who like to think what they say is correct and force it upon others huh and they call it DEMOCRACY :-\

Ps. to those who have no idea who im on bout, am on about the people who wanna bann niqab or burka.

So yeah:-\
Reply

جوري
08-07-2010, 12:38 AM
Originally Posted by squiggle
No, I'm saying you criticize something as being extreme yet your own religion has the very same idea's. Why criticize something that's apart of your own religion and in your bible. Are you really a Christian? Do you think the virgin Mary was extreme for all ways walking around with a head covering? Why is it extreme to you when God mentions it in the bible? it wasn't extreme in past societies and times.

I am not claiming any kind of infallibility, you just ask the same questions over and over, so I give you the same explanation over and over. Hence we go around in circles because you're asking questions you've all ready been given the answer to. If you don't like the answer then tough deal with it. I mean what are you trying to achieve?

This is a simpler version of a convo with Hugo

Hugo "what color is the sky?"


Other person "blue"


A few posts later


Hugo "what colour is the sky?"


other person "blue"


a few posts later


Hugo "what colour is the sky?"


other person answers "I gave you the answer so many times all ready why do you keep asking what is your motive/goal?"


Hugo: Are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final? there are many ways to look at it, the sky can be grey also or white depending upon your perception or grey and white it could also be red to a colour blind person. The sky could also be black if you're wearing sun glasses. So you see the issue is not as simple as you make out, the topic requires a thorough analysis.


Other person: Well dude I mean that's MY answer the sky is blue at the moment. SO what else do you want to talk about.


Hugo: Well I don't accept the answer, you see the sky might be blue for you, but for me it's grey so how do we reconcile these two views? what is truly the colour of the sky? after all for a person living in a different country the sky might all ways be blue and for a person living in England the sky might be grey the majority of the time so the question is which is correct? how do we determine which is correct?


Other person Hmm ok, right ..... but that doesn't change the fact you've been given the answer so you don't need to ask again.


Hugo: are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final?


Other person: No dude I just gave you the answer on what colour the sky is, I mean what more do you want from me.


Hugo I want the ANSWER!!!! are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final?????


Other person SERIOUSLY WHAT IS UR PROBLEM I TOLD YOU THE ANSWER???? WHAT DO U WANT????


Hugo: I WANT YOU TO AGREE THAT THE SKY IS RED


Other person: But it's BLUE!!


Hugo are you claiming some kind of infallibility here that your answer is final?


Other person: ooooooooooook right, eerm I so get where you're coming from. *RUNS OFF*


;D such a trickery with words otherwise known as chatting crap.
I'd need to add to that (if I had the time) but how true..
you forgot to include the laundry list of dead philosophers and ISBN numbers to books he hasn't read by authors who in all likelihood negate any form of concordance he may feel he shares of their opinions ..
Reply

جوري
08-07-2010, 12:46 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I doubt it as I work with Muslim students all the time here and in the Middle East including those who cover up so as usual you cannot accept a point of view for what it is, for you there is always something 'wrong' with those who disagree with you..
Does your work with Muslims preclude you from pursuing your true calling? I imagine it pays better to live off Muslim money, but seeing at how apt you are at dispensing with bull and knowing the full market there is for it, you could make a fortune while being true to yourself at the same time..
Further opinions are like a holes, everyone has one, there is no reason to actually be one. I hope you can distinguish the difference for your sake, for it doesn't seem that only Muslims have problems with what you write, and if more people are coming up with the same conclusion I'd reassess your opinion of yourself rather than what you think ails others..

all the best
Reply

Hugo
08-07-2010, 01:47 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
have you tried speaking to them about what they think?
Interesting you should ask and perhaps a little story will help. In Saudi Arabia after being taken to a class of Woman students who were all fully veiled and the Head of Department left (a man) every single one of those students immediately removed the veil much I must say to my surprise - we then went on with the lecture. As to discussion, yes occasionally they take place but when one works and talks with people face to face the dynamic is different and it is easier to exchange views without rancour. My own experience in the Middle East is that views differ enormously even within the Muslim community and the take a much more open view that one finds here.
Reply

Hugo
08-07-2010, 02:04 PM
Originally Posted by squiggle
Hmm so the people who make paintings of Mary all ways draw a head cover on her this is weird and extreme, why do they do this for? it gives girls the wrong idea that covering your head is a good thing to do like the virgin mary. If invention is involved why do they choose to depict her this way? is it because modesty is better? or maybe they're inspired by the following verses where it's clearly commanded in the bible. Confusing indeed.
I cannot say but the Church is not monolithic in much the same way that Islam is not just one thing - one might just as well ask why do the Shia use paintings (and they are very good at it)? In any case it is not a good idea to use as facts what one sees in a painting is it?

As to the verses you quoted which were written to the Church in Corinth so one has to consider the context (Does not Islam do this?) of a new Christian community living in a pagan society and so understand and interpret these verses properly. At that time the head covering was a sign of maiden chastity and modesty before men. It is also likely that there were women with spiritual gifts including prophesy so this is an injunction about the way these things are to be offered. So there are principles to follow here but not necessarily the letter as they applied in circumstances and with institutions that do not exist today.
Reply

aadil77
08-07-2010, 02:06 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Interesting you should ask and perhaps a little story will help. In Saudi Arabia after being taken to a class of Woman students who were all fully veiled and the Head of Department left (a man) every single one of those students immediately removed the veil much I must say to my surprise - we then went on with the lecture. As to discussion, yes occasionally they take place but when one works and talks with people face to face the dynamic is different and it is easier to exchange views without rancour. My own experience in the Middle East is that views differ enormously even within the Muslim community and the take a much more open view that one finds here.
There you go, there are some who take the veil seriously and use it for religious reasons and there are others who do not,


What I originally meant was; have you asked them what they think about the burka being banned, the ones who wear veils?
Reply

Hugo
08-07-2010, 02:16 PM
Ramadan is just a few days away and I will not be making further posts after this one until after September the 9th though for those of you who use the education threads I will continue to post there and answer any question on research I get.

Reading through the thread we have seen that wearing the Burka is a sign of submission and devotion to God and also there is merit attached to it. Certainly the idea of submission and devotion is something that Christianity would enjoin but the idea of gaining merit is alien and Christians would typically say when we have done all we can we are still no more than unworthy servants. The Christian view is perhaps best expressed as follows; which applies equally to men and women for unless this kind of 'clothing' is present the burka or nuns habit or any other dress is worthless.

Colossians 3:12-14 (The Message). So, chosen by God for this new life of love, dress in the wardrobe God picked out for you: compassion, kindness, humility, quiet strength, discipline. Be even-tempered, content with second place, quick to forgive an offense. Forgive as quickly and completely as the Master forgave you. And regardless of what else you put on, wear love. It's your basic, all-purpose garment. Never be without it.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
08-07-2010, 04:37 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
what i originally meant was; have you asked them what they think about the burka being banned, the ones who wear veils?
exactly!. . .
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!