An armed robbery allegedly carried out by a man wearing a burka has sparked a row in Australia on whether the full-face Islamic veil should be banned. Several European countries have also debated banning the veil, notably France and more recently, Belgium.
Source: BBC News
As this debate escalates, I have to wonder if anyone has noticed that a Muslim woman wearing a veil is not so different in appearance to a nun habit? A full burka may hide a little more but apart from covering the face a nun's habit is essentially the same garment. I can remember the first time I saw women wearing full burkas and finding it a little confronting. We are supposed to be a tolerant and accepting society and feeling like this soon pass. If the current bans are based on security concerns; terrorists may wear burkas but why could they not just as easily dress as nuns to the same effect? I can't remember hearing anyone calling for bans on the wearing of nun's habits. By the same token; brides also wear veils; perhaps bridal veils should also be banned?
I also have to wonder whether Sarkosy is aware of the irony of a ban on women covering up too much when his own wife, Carla Bruni has been guilty on several occasions of not covering up enough.
Isn't there enough ill feeling between East and West already? Security may give authorities excuses to restrict a great many things but can't we at least retain the freedom to decide what we wear?
Related articles by Zemanta
- Male Robber Wearing Burka Sparks Debate in Australia Over Banning the Burka (themoderatevoice.com)
- Australia heist sparks burka row (news.bbc.co.uk)
- Burkas should be banned as 'unAustralian', senator claims (telegraph.co.uk)
- German Euro MP urges EU burka ban (news.bbc.co.uk)
- Belgian lawmakers vote to ban wearing of Islamic burqa in public (calgaryherald.com)
- Belgium votes on burka ban (news.bbc.co.uk)
- Men who force women to wear burka would face €15,000 fine in France (telegraph.co.uk)
- Nicolas Sarkozy ally 'received death threats' over Muslim veil ban (telegraph.co.uk)
- Belgium Tries To Ban Muslim Veils In Public (news.sky.com)
- Muslim woman fined £430 for wearing burka in Italy (telegraph.co.uk)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=75fe8aff-de22-4f84-b62a-f87ad6aeaba5)
6 comments:
A nuns habit isnt an oppressive symbol like the burka. Women who become nuns are women who have first chosen to practice Roman Catholic or Anglican faiths then decided to take the next step and become nuns and wear the habit. I have not met a single woman who was forced to become a nun. Could you say the same thing about women wearing the burka?
Women who wear the burka by comparison are almost always women who were born in a Muslim family and forced to wear the burka by her father and/or husband. These women were never allowed to choose their own religion and never allowed to say they wish not to wear the burka. What would happen to a woman in say Saudi Arabia where burkas are prevalent if this woman told her father she wished to follow a different religion and didnt want to wear a burka? What would happen to a woman who told her husband she didnt want to wear a burka? There is a big different in a woman wearing a habit vs one wearing a burka. One wears it by choice, the other by force. You ban oppression not religious freedom.
A nun's habit does represent a repressive symbol to me. It characterises the Christian church's attitude that the only way a woman can be truly good is to cover herself from head to toe, lock herself up in an abbey and remain a virgin for life. You may not have met a woman forced to be a nun; but how many have been pressured by their families? How you see either obviously depends on cultural standpoint.
However, does it really matter if wearing the habit/burka is forced or not? The article questioned banning the burka. No one is seriously considering banning Islam as far as I know. As long as we profess to support religious tolerance, how can we ban certain costumes just because we don't approve of cultural attitudes?
John Doe, tell that to the 500 million or so Muslim women out there.
Most will tell you they wear it by choice. I don't like religious outfits myself, but you can't alienate just the Islamic one and say it should be banned because its forced and repressive and that the women don't want it, when almost every religion is the same.
A Muslim women will say she wants to wear it. A Muslim women might say the Nun habit is "forced" onto Christian women, similar to how a Christian will say a nun wants to wear their habit and the Muslim is forced to wear the burqa.
I personally find the ban to be directed towards Muslims only, and hypocritical, because they feel threatened, not because of 'security' concerns, but because of ethnic/cultural ones.
Should they be allowed to wear the burqa is the face isn't covered? Or no burqa at all, and the nun habit is allowed because "Christian is good"?
I'm an atheist and I think they are all equally dumb.
Dear John Doe, I'm not sure I understand the point you are making. The article was against bans on the burka etc. I tried to point out that there is a strong similarity between nuns' habits and burkas, but no one is suggesting nuns' habit should be banned. I thought I had made that clear.
*While many Muslim women will tell you they wear it from choice, this is not necessarily the case. Women who do not wear a veil (even in supposedly enlightened countries like Australia) risk being ostracised by their communities. Being a social outcast can have devastating consequences.
Linda, only women who chose to be nuns and work for the church are required to wear the habits. It's not a requirement for all Catholic women. The muslim require it of all women. Furthermore, very few nuns wear habits now.
I don't see how Muslims requiring women to be covered has any bearing on the issue. Repression of women may be rife in Islamic communities; does that mean that non-Islamic communities should follow suit?
Post a Comment