obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws. You will also demonstrate respect to and tolerance of all other members of the forum.

I am guilty of being obscene and occasionally vulgar, but sexually-oriented, hateful or threatening- no I don't think so. But here is something that we also need to be aware of ( thanks to Wikipedia of course)

Mulct is to victimize.

I know that we are trying to get his out into the open and discuss it, but some of the posts seem so full of rancour for Islam, when in real life they may have never got to know Islamic people.

I think a lot of the posts are sooo teetering on the edge.

> you take the Burkha thing as "summing up", while the veiling thing (veils, tchadors, burkha) is a side aspect in reality. A ban on these will neither increase nor decrease extremism. It will give more freedom to many women but of course lead some males to keep their wife at home
> there in Switzerland are no "Islamic demands"
> "they" do not superimpose their beliefs
> Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan are extreme examples. Which means that there is no reason to respect "Islamic laws" in most Muslim countries, which have civil law, and where "western" clothing also is the rule among locals
> most Muslims living in Western Europe DO respect local culture and tradition

What Muslim leaders ? Which one exactly ? I have never heard about such a "common message" from a Muslim leader. So again, tell us, who exactly you mean.



Women wearing burkhas (from Afghanistan and the NWFP) or tchadors (from Iran) and different sorts of veils and headscarves (from various areas) do wear that stuff OUTdoors but nothing the like indoors. They at home are not veiled.

"How would such a person integrate in Switzerland?" Perhaps by obeying the laws, paying the taxes and having a go at the language. A bit like anyone else.

This thread is rapidly drawing to a close...

Indeed, time to draw a veil over it.

Sorry.

The pro Burka group is losing. Time to close the thread...

If you can't beat them in a reasoned discussion, well, why debate? Just shut them down.

Uncle Max - you aren't terribly even handed for a moderator.

PRO Burkha ? The only question is whether to tolerate or to prohibit such things. And if yes, to what extent. Let's hope that ski-caps will be excempt from the prohibition. Prof Dr Mörgeli will work out a far-ranging prohibition even above your expectations ! And in view of the present "climate" they will succeed !

I am the same. I have and like to carry a Leatherman pocket tool on my person. It is not concealed as it is carried at my waist on my belt. Yet the neurotics and fear mongers say that a pair of pliers is some how dangerous.

If I can't wear the tool of my trade as a Stage Hand then why should others be allowed to have their symbols of cultural belonging? Plus, if one insists that it is a religious symbol then that is fine. I like to carry a tool as befits my status as an evolved being. It is an expression of my A-religious nature.

Other musings on head coverings:
I don't know the law here in the CH but in the USA wearing a balaclava or any obscuring mode of dress can result in your being waylaid by the local authorities. In other words any mode of dress that can't be easily removed from the face is suspect. So head scarfs and shawls and turbans are not problems as they can be shifted easily or removed quickly without impeding the progress of others and will still meet modesty requirements.

The truth is that burqas are a sign of control and subservience or isolation. If it is legally acceptable for people to be isolated against their will then fine and good, burqas should be legal in public settings.

But we need to come up with better reasons to ban them than we don't like Islam or any other religion. And the language has to be sterile and not respect any religion if we are going to impose our rules on others. Otherwise it will be viewed as bigoted and racist, regardless of the actual intent. Then as others have pointed out it will make things worse and the religious groups we are referring to will be more marginalised and therefor be more dangerous to themselves as well as society in general.

Brian.

We are protecting the rights of women by restricting the rights of cultural expression in a small group that happens to share a religion.

Notice I said cultural as burqas aren't religious any more than a nun's or priest's habit are required by the tenants of Christianity. I believe that for Sikhs head covering in the form of a turban is required, isn't it?

Regardless, the real question which remains is this. Is it acceptable to deny the right of expression to a small cultural minority to assist in empowering a group that is not a minority? Of course this immediately begs the question, "Are we actually aiding the empowerment of women by engaging in this denial?" Or is this just a putative response to the perceived threat of Islam and Muslims in our world view?

Brian.

I think that if you ban Burqas it will backfire. What I think is a much more worthwhile debate is to creating ombudsmen for religion. Friebourg University has a masters course in Islamic study
http://www.swissuniversity.ch/progra...ils?prg_id=826 I hope that these kind of courses will lead to better understanding.

However to me the danger lies in half measures. Tariq Ramadan is a Swiss-born Oxford University professor ranks and one of the most influential thinkers in the Muslim world. He claims that he is a reformist.

He says:

Which makes sense to me,, however he also says

Now there is my sticking point, he can advise but while he does not strongly enough condemn these principles within Islam it allows some to maintain these views within a country where the majority have voted against them. Will those repressed within a religion,who incidentally often also suffer represssion in their own Swiss communities, have to take a back seat for reform in other areas to move ahead?

It kind of reminds me of what is happening in the US at present with the healthcare bill, women's rights are being denied so that reform in other areas can move ahead. the Swiss should respect the rights of Muslims but not if it means contravening thier own laws. Hopefully the work and discussion in universities such as Friebourg will encourage this.

I am confused.
A few questions (sort of related to the Burka) becuase people use the same words to descibe people that wear Burkas.


Is Islam a place?
If Islam is a place, where geographically is it?
Is a Muslim Islamic?
What is the connection between Islam and a Muslim?
Is it Islamics or/and Muslims that wear Burkas?

Check out http://cgi.stanford.edu/group/wais/cgi-bin/?p=1410

This is a very clear/clean definition of the difference between the two.
Basically, Islam = religion, Muslim = practitioner.

As far as I can tell the burqa is a cultural phenomenon. It isn't referred to in the koran as far as I know. It seems to be a way to enforce the provisions of the tenets of the faith in question. Unfortunately it also enforces/controls a lot of other things as well. It seems a bit more than convenient that it is useful for repressing women as well as expressing faith.

Brian.

A lot of people seem to think that there is such a thing as a muslim polulation. As Wollishofener mentioned, an Arab Muslim is different from an Indonesian muslim.

To reject muslims in Europe simply because of the Burkha, honour killings, etc. is wrong simply because then you are rejecting Indonesians and Malaysians too, even though these practices are completely foreign to them.

I went to Malaysia once during the summer months and was surprised to see a number of women in the shopping malls who were covered head to toe, all in black. The locals then told me that they were tourists from Arab countries. Looking at their husbands who were dressed in t-shirts and shorts I can see that they are from the middle east. Even for the locals it was an odd sight because the local ladies would usually wear colourful headscarves and would still show their faces. So even in some muslim countries the burkha or abaya is unusual. We should stop mixing up culture and religion. Is banning the burkha an attack on Islam? No.

My view is that if an issue can't be resolved after 426 posts, the issue will continue to rotate like the Earth around the sun and the same old arguments will be recycled endlessly.

Actually, I think you'll find he's very level, and a credit to EF. Uncle Max could have simply closed this thread, but hasn't.

On the other hand, for the reason given above, I am now closing this thread. It's outlived its usefulness and is becoming a breeding ground for abuse.

Islam is not a place. It is a religion.

A adherent of Islam is a Muslim. This should not be confused with 'Islamist', which normally indicates a proponent of a political system based on the principles of Islam.

A burkha is type of clothing that is worn by women in some Islamic traditions, particularly in NW Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is designed to cloak the entire body.