Honestly, the people who banned this seem like a bunch of perverts. Personally I don't go to beaches and I don't wear the burkini - but what's their problem if some women do? It's amusing how it's regarded as a sign of religious extremism.....usually the more 'moderate' Muslims are the ones wearing burkinis. It comes across as hysterical islamophobia. What else are they going to ban?
French authorities in several cities in towns have banned the burkini, a full-body swimsuit worn by some Muslim women.
The clothing - which combines "burqa" with "bikini" - leaves only the face, hands and feet on show.
A village mayor on the island of Corsica is the latest to outlaw them after a beach brawl between families of North African descent and local youths.
Witnesses say it began when the families didn't want photos taken.
The French cities of Cannes and Villeneuve-Loubet have also banned the burkini, arguing that the swimsuit defies French laws on secularism
Secularism is the idea of strict separation of the government from religious institutions.
The idea is that people of different religions and beliefs are equal before the law.
The most well-known rules on secularism (known as laicite) were introduced back in 1905.
But in the 111 years since things have become pretty complicated.
The French still have certain Catholic public holidays but religious events, such as school nativity plays, are not allowed.
There are also lots of other rules prohibiting religious clothing.
The legal status of headscarves in schools was unclear for years but in 2004 French ministers approved a law banning all obvious religious symbols in schools - including Muslim headwear, Christian crosses and Jewish skullcaps.
In 2010 the French government hit the headlines again when it banned people wearing anything covering the whole face (including niqabs and other veils) in public places.
Critics have accused France of stopping freedom of religious expression and specifically targeting Muslims.
But some moderate Muslim leaders also back the ban as they see it as a stand against hardline versions of Islam
Kind of decisions aren´t very wise. At the same time authorities claim they want to help women to intergate to the society but most of those restrictions of wearing only limit women´s possibility to move and act at the public life. It´s like they would want women either leave their religion or stay only at home. If the first, they have totally forgot one of the basic elements of the European way of life - the individual freedom.
Have they also a ban for using long sleeve shirt and long skirt on the beach? If not, for impartiality they should have.
Whichever of the two (burkini or bikini) is lawful according to God's rule as prescribed in the Quran and Sunnah should be allowed if any of the two are at all lawful, and whichever of the two (burkini or bikini) is unlawful according to God's rule as prescribed in the Quran and Sunnah should be banned, if any are unlawful.
Quite silly and very wrong to force haraam images of semi-naked women into people's minds as a way to sway them, a satanic hack at the most basic instincs of man and a lame attempt at swaying the subconscious mind, even worse than dangling bottles of haraam intoxicating liquors in the face of alcoholics. What a lame excuse to display flesh on the news in a less obviously sleazy way by making it out to be a matter of important discussion. It's not so subtle to people who've had that trick played at them since childhood.
Of course they should ban both if it means having people's mothers daughters and wives walking around amongst shameless women and cuckold men who've lost any sense of self-respect and decency.
They hate Islaam, so they ban it, calling it "extremism". They then water it down, cunningly "allowing" this watered-down version. Later on, this watered-down version becomes "too much", so they hate it and ban it as well. A new, even more diluted version emerges. Short while later, even this diluted joke is now regarded as "extremism" and "religious fanaticism", and thus gets hated and banned. At this point, there's not even 1% of the original Islaam left, and so they successfully remove it.
That is how the Deen eventually gets removed from this Dunyaa; little by little. Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم told us that towards the end of this Dunyaa, before Qiyaamah, nothing will remain from Islaam except its name.
Those who were considered "modernists" and "irreligious" yesterday are considered "extremists" today. If a person today does 10% of what Sahaabah used to do, if he has 10% of the Deen they followed, he will be labelled an extremist, fanatic, zealot, terrorist, Wahhaabi, spreader of hatred, madman, etc. Because the more Islaam gets "watered down", the more people lose the Original Islaam, "the Old Religion" and what it was about.
True, when I began reading salah even some Muslims I knew thought I was being extreme. For them waking up for Fajr means you've past the point of no return. Allahu a'lam. I mean, reading prayer is one of the basic pillars of Islam. It reminds me of that hadith (I think it was), where holding onto your deen will be like holding onto hot coals.
Just struck me as odd how they treat the burqini as a sign of radicalisation - I know plenty of Muslim women who thinks it's quite liberal-thinking to wear a burqini.
No special privileges are given to any belief or faith. And what they wear is personal choice.
So the French interpretation of secularism means there is no freedom to practice personal faith? So it really means that the government determines what you can or can't do with regards to religious practice?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam
Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم told us that towards the end of this Dunyaa, before Qiyaamah, nothing will remain from Islaam except its name.
I agree that they are trying to remove Islam as best as they can. But regarding what I quoted from you above, do you have a reference from the hadith that can back it up? Because this idea seems to contradict the fact that the Quran is and will always be preserved, and also the following verses:
Quran 9:32: They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah refuses except to perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it.
Quran 9:33: It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although they who associate others with Allah dislike it.
format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam
They hate Islaam, so they ban it, calling it "extremism". They then water it down, cunningly "allowing" this watered-down version. Later on, this watered-down version becomes "too much", so they hate it and ban it as well. A new, even more diluted version emerges. Short while later, even this diluted joke is now regarded as "extremism" and "religious fanaticism", and thus gets hated and banned. At this point, there's not even 1% of the original Islaam left, and so they successfully remove it.
Agreed. If the Muslims give in, it will become a race to the bottom.
The value of Islam and its nature as an active ingredient, is exactly that it does not give in.
This is a dreamed opportunity to roll out new anti-Statist measures against these French cities.
I propose:
"The Virtual Association in defense of the Burqini"
We would need lots of Muslims to enroll, by becoming member of some kind of internet forum similar to this one. Next, we can start by notifying these cities that we have taken note of their decision to ban the burqini on their beaches, and that we are discussing counter-veiling measures. Their city has been red-flagged as a priority location for Islamic action.
Of course, we don't know at this point what the Islamic action will be about, because it will first have to be discussed in the Virtual Association. Communes on the blacklist of the Virtual Association are:
It is really important to announce asap that they are on this black list, because nobody knows what it means to be on that blacklist, but it will still discourage other French cities from doing the same. Organized response always instills fear, uncertainty, and doubt.
[*] By the way, I think that Cannes was already on a black list, because why else would that mad truck driver have picked exactly this city to unceremoniously terminate 84 unbelievers?
Last edited by kritikvernunft; 08-18-2016 at 01:13 AM.
Even if Burkini was allowed Muslim women must not swim with other men but still the burkini was better than the bikini or other exposing cloths.
Rich Muslim Entrepreneurs must come with the Idea of Halal swimming pools, tennis court or iow Halal tourism especially in countries like France where our Pious Sisters undergo a lot of trouble in these issues.
Rich Muslim Entrepreneurs must come with the Idea of Halal swimming pools, tennis court or iow Halal tourism especially in countries like France where our Pious Sisters undergo a lot of trouble in these issues.
Yes, the "Virtual Association in defense of the Burqini" must have several ambitions listed in its general mission statement. We already have:
Counter-veiling measures against Statist organizations enforcing a ban on the burqini
Encouraging existing swimming pools to convert their modus operandi and apply for the certification of "halal swimming pool" to be issued by the clergy working in conjunction with the virtual association
Blacklist existing swimming pools that are burqini-unfriendly
Encouraging the construction of new halal swimming pools
Concerning this encouragement, we can obviously assist Muslim enterpreneurs or other ones who see monetary benefits in operating halal swimming pools -- note that a halal swimming pool could just be a profitable business project and that non-Muslim enterpreneurs may also be interested in building them.
Furthermore, we can use crowdfunding methods to reduce the capital needs of such enterpreneurs:
This should allow people from the entire, global Islamic community to help funding this kind of initiatives with their own 50 cents. In the end, there is way more than enough money floating around for this kind of initiatives, if you make it convenient to either donate or invest (in expectation of financial return and profits).
The Virtual Association itself should obviously mostly focus on advocacy, and not operate swimming pools, but rather facilitate for-profit or not-for-profit non-State actors to do so.
Yes, the "Virtual Association in defense of the Burqini" must have several ambitions listed in its general mission statement. We already have:
Counter-veiling measures against Statist organizations enforcing a ban on the burqini
Encouraging existing swimming pools to convert their modus operandi and apply for the certification of "halal swimming pool" to be issued by the clergy working in conjunction with the virtual association
Blacklist existing swimming pools that are burqini-unfriendly
Encouraging the construction of new halal swimming pools
Concerning this encouragement, we can obviously assist Muslim enterpreneurs or other ones who see monetary benefits in operating halal swimming pools -- note that a halal swimming pool could just be a profitable business project and that non-Muslim enterpreneurs may also be interested in building them.
Furthermore, we can use crowdfunding methods to reduce the capital needs of such enterpreneurs:
This should allow people from the entire, global Islamic community to help funding this kind of initiatives with their own 50 cents. In the end, there is way more than enough money floating around for this kind of initiatives, if you make it convenient to either donate or invest (in expectation of financial return and profits).
The Virtual Association itself should obviously mostly focus on advocacy, and not operate swimming pools, but rather facilitate for-profit or not-for-profit non-State actors to do so.
Thanks for your enlightment with Ideas . Yes Allah willingly Muslims, particularly Sisters enjoy their lives within the allowed Islamic Limits ,
I think some people don't quite get the memo of the french and also the western people, So I'll just repeat it for your benefit - YOU'RE NOT WANTED HERE.
Can't you see the hypocrisy by these people? And by people I mean the western leaders who are not here to make decisions in your best interest in the first place anyway.
I'm not surprised by this at all if I'm going to be honest with you. The next law to be passed will probably be to ban your fajr salah, Because waking up at 5 or 4 o'clock in the morning to pray your salah will be considered too "extremist".
And anyway, what is the need for a Muslim to be at a beach in the first place? So much fitnah.
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "There are two expressions which are very easy for the tongue to say, but they are very heavy in the balance and are very dear to The Beneficent (Allah), and they are, 'Subhan Allah Al- `Azim and 'Subhan Allah wa bihamdihi.'"
[Sahih al-Bukhari 6406]
So I'll just repeat it for your benefit - YOU'RE NOT WANTED HERE.
Yes, but who says that what they want, would be relevant in any way?
If you are there, that is because the singular God must have wanted this in one way or another.
I also suspect that you are not particularly suggesting that we should prioritize the desires of the pagans over the will of the singular God.
France is weird they should not band the burkini. Its like how they told women to take off all there clothes so they could feel free years ago centuries ago. But now they have gone to far like how could you ban a women from covering her body thats crazy
The French cities of Cannes and Villeneuve-Loubet have also banned the burkini, arguing that the swimsuit defies French laws on secularism.
It may contravene the laws, but it doesn't seem to me to be an affront to the spirit of secularism in any way. Wearing a burkini doesn't make a person suddenly unequal before the law, nor does it negatively affect others.
People should definitely be allowed to wear clothing like this at the beach if they want. The burkini is not a million miles away from bathing suits worn in Europe in the 19th century so I don't really see what the objection is.
It contravenes man-made laws. However, any behaviour that contravenes man-made law but not Divine Law is an auto-da-fé, an Act of Faith.
There is no point in sidestepping the confrontation. They want to ban it, because they can. So, now we must do something to counter their ban, also just because we can. Hence, it is a question of designing and engineering reprisals that will attach a price tag to their attempts to enforce the man-made law that they invented. I really would not let it go, because confrontation and conflict are simply part of life. It is not permissible to give in or cave it. What we need, is to design and engineer provocations. Since we would be the ones choosing the time and the place, it is always possible to design the confrontation in such a way that they will be unprepared, and lose it. (Tsu Zu, "The art of war"). Make them sweat over this until they give up! ;-)
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Search liked this post
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks