Ban the burka? (credit: Robert Vos/EPA)You know, it’s one thing to have the wingnut congress over at Little Green Footballs bloviating about the sins, real and imagined, of Muslims. But what do you do when an entire government BECOMES a wingnut Islamophobe congress? That’s what apparently is about to happen in the Netherlands, where a Muslim and immigrant-hating minister has introduced legislation to ban the burka:
THE Netherlands is likely to become the first country in Europe to ban the burka, under government proposals that would bring in some of the toughest curbs on Muslim clothing in the world.
The country’s hardline Integration Minister, Rita Verdonk, known as the Iron Lady for her series of tough anti-immigration measures, told Parliament that she was going to investigate where and when the burka should be banned. The burka, traditional clothing in some Islamic societies, covers a woman’s face and body, leaving only a strip of gauze for the eyes.
Mrs Verdonk gave warning that the “time of cosy tea-drinking” with Muslim groups had passed and that natives and immigrants should have the courage to be critical of each other. She recently cancelled a meeting with Muslim leaders who refused to shake her hand because she was a woman.
The proposals are likely to win the support of Parliament because of the expected backing by right-wing parties. But they have caused outrage among Muslim and human rights groups, who say that the Government is pandering to the far Right.
Not content merely to discriminate against Muslim immigrants in terms of immigration policy, Holland also wishes to discriminate against Muslim citizens and legal residents. Though I’m not expert on European law, I’d guess that it would take about five minutes from the moment the legal challenge arrives before the European Court of Human Rights for the law to be dismissed outright. I know judges aren’t supposed to laugh or sneer at the cases brought before them, but it would be hard for any legal scholar not to do so in the face of the following twisted arguments:
Mrs Verdonk admitted that a complete ban on the garment would be legally tricky because of freedom of religion legislation. However, she said that she would prohibit the garments “in specific situations” on grounds of public safety. The ban is likely to be enforced in shops, public buildings, cinemas, train and bus stations and airports, as well as on trains and buses…
Attention has turned to the burka because police authorities have become concerned that a terrorist could use one for concealment.
A government spokesman said: “We want to investigate when, how, in which places the burka should be banned. It is a safety measure — you don’t see who is in it.” The Government cites as a precedent existing football legislation, which bans people from entering football grounds covering their faces in scarves.
The argument is preposterous on its face. Football fans do not normally mask their faces unless they wish to conceal their identity. The only reason someone would want to do this at a football match is because they have plans to engage in rowdy, hooliganish behavior. Of course, the state has an interest in banning such behavior and so a mask ban is legitimate.
But unlike masked football hooligans, all Muslim women who wear the burka do so for religious reasons not to disturb public order. There have been very few incidents in which a Muslim terrorist used a burka in committing a crime. Therefore the government is discriminating against law-abiding Muslim women in the hopes of possibly exposing a single terrorist who might or might not attempt to exploit such a religious custom. This ought to be laughed out of court.
The local Muslim community is suitably outraged by this stupid prejudice:
Yassim Hertog, a vice-president of the Muslim School Boards Union, said: “Can you prohibit someone from wearing a certain type of dress? They are trying to test what a government can forbid, and how far you can go trampling on people’s rights. They want to show all these Dutch citizens who are sick and tired of all these ‘mutant’ citizens, this is where we draw the line — get normal.”
Muslim groups insist that only a few dozen women in the Netherlands wear the burka, and that the ban is a distraction. The Muslims and Government Contact Body said: “Only a handful of Muslims actually wear burkas. Let us focus our energy on what we have in common. This is not a big problem.”
I’d say that Holland will become the laughingstock of Europe if I didn’t already know that political leaders of other nations will probably look admiringly on this xenophobic mess of a piece of legislation.
Not a proud moment to be Dutch, although the proud moments have been getting less and less anyways over the last several years. Clearly a political grandstanding stunt since there are only a handful of women here who wear one so the time and money which will go into creating and passing the law and enforcing it will only distract from talking about real problems we have concerning integration. And of course it will only serve to further antagonize the ‘moderates’ who are vital discussion partners in solving our real and serious integration problems.
By the way, according to the Dutch site, http://juridischdagblad.nl/content/view/4213/48/ (Dutch judicial newspaper) : ‘De niqaab (foto) valt hoogstwaarschijnlijk niet onder het verbod, omdat de ogen daarbij wel zichtbaar zijn.’ – The niqaab (shown in foto – also in your post Richard) will likely not fall under the restriction because the eyes are visible.’
It kills the Westerners to think that Muslim women actually choose to wear it. Only thing they want to believe is that women are forced to wear it by men.
Look at the countries like Turkey or Tunisia that government banned it and discourage it. But the Muslim women continue to wear it with big numbers. In the BBC news, they said 65% of the all women in Turkey wear veil.
Very, very small percentage of women are forced to wear it by men but nearly all women wear it because they choose to wear it.
We all know why they can’t ban the full Muslim veil or hijab because Nuns wear the same veil for the same reason.
Why is it when nuns wear veil, people consider them holy and pious but when Muslim women wear veil, people consider them ‘submissive and oppressed’?
This is just show that Europeans have no tolerance and oppress women just as European accuses the Muslim of doing. Banning a woman to wear veil is same as forcing a women to wear veil, both are oppressive to women and violates women’s right. Congratulation Dutch people, you guys are just like Taliban.
This just show Europeans don’t care about Freedom, Democracy, Diversity, Torlance, Women’s Right, Religious’ Right, Minority’ Right, Human Rights. Next, time they preach those things, just laugh at them as jokes.
I’m glad you mentioned that Lenny since the Times quote above notes that the burka has “gauze” over the eyes. I noticed that the image had the eyes exposed & I worried that perhaps the Times photo editor had chosen an image that wasn’t actually a burka. I guess I was right & it’s a niqab. My suspicions were further fueled when I went to Google Images looking under “burka” & found images of women with their entire faces covered (which IS a burka) & a few with their eyes exposed like in the image here. Based on that, I wasn’t sure exactly what constituted a burka. Thanks for clearing that up.
Tarikur: THere might be many reasons a woman would choose to wear a veil. Males might force them to as you acknowledge happens sometimes. They might wear it out of religious conviction. Or they might wear it because the prevailing social norms seem to demand it. The later, I’d say, would be a very important consideration for most women. And if I’m right, I wouldn’t exactly say that this means women are doing entirely of their own volition. THough I freely concede that a significant number do it from religious conviction & I believe they should be allowed to do so.
As for nuns wearing veils, you don’t see any nuns wearing veils in the U.S. & I’d guess in Europe as well.
I also agree w. you that if the burka is banned
Precisely right.
Here you’re overreaching. Since when does a single European government or Iron Lady minister represent all of Europe or values of freedom, democracy, diversity, tolerance, etc.? You must acknowledge that just as there are a few Muslim extremists who do not represent the preponderance of Islam, there are also western Islamophobe extremists who do not represent all of the west. These people certainly do not respect any of the values you mention. But that makes them bigots just as those in Al Qaeda are bigots.
What I’m trying to say is that there are fair-minded reasonable people on both sides of this argument. They are the ones who should be held up as representatives of their religion or culture & not the others.
why is this Islamophobic when there is no Islamic imperative to cover your head let alone your face? Some women choose to wear the veil/burka, some are forced to – it doesn’t make any difference if they do it voluntarily or not it’s regarded as disrespectful, anti-social and offensive in the West to cover your face. It doesn’t make any difference if the woman wearing the face covering is a Muslim or an Atheist. As for your argument that Nuns do it – Hmmm, don’t they only cover their heads? I’ve never seen a masked nun! And Nuns have committed themselves to working with the poor and sick etc – I think burkas/niqabs commit themselves to securing welfare benefits. And Islamophobic? Come on – this would be in place no matter what religion you choose to be a part of, or even if you’re atheist – if you walk around in a balaclava that’s not done in the West….wearing the burka/niqab is provocative and meant to be so. Wearing it in the West is calculated to offend.
Why do Westerners when they visit/reside in Islamic countries respect local customs by covering up but when (some) Muslims visit/reside in the West they don’t? If a Western woman insisted on wearing hotpants and a bikini top to go shopping in Syria – would Mark and Tariq be as passionate in defending their human right to do this?
As for your point about ‘very few incidents where terrorists use the burka’ – please, it happens all the time in Afghanistan.
You have so little understanding of the West – but long to live here as we give you respect, opportunities, jobs, benefits and welcome you with free housing, healthcare, schooling, social security – none of your Muslim countries would do that.
Wearing the burka/niqab is incredibly immodest in the West – “Look at me I’m a Muslim – a Muslim who wants to be looked at.” Doesn’t this go against Koranic teachings?
It doesn’t kill Westerners at all that some women choose to wear these garments – but we’re all baffled by their arrogance that local customs don’t apply to them. Why is this? Is it because they’re just soooo important? Local customs are for the little people, right? The little people who pay for their housing, healthcare, schooling etc
Anyway, no doubt some ‘westernphobic’ comments and rantings will follow and general lack of understanding about us – apart from how our social security systems operate. We’re flattered that Muslims want to live here – cos they sure realise that their Muslim countries do nothing for them their families, their dreams or future.
Also it doesn’t matter how small a percentage wear it – that doesn’t matter. Does it matter if only a small percentage of people abuse kids? or sell heroin?
It’s easy to see why Allah isn’t very fond of you lot Tariq – flooding Pakistan AGAIN, couple of devastating earthquakes to Pakistan, to Iran, to Istanbul, tsunami to Banda Aceh, flooding the Haj a couple of years ago – why do you think this is Tariq? It’s pretty clear to everyone else! There is an Islamic imperative to be a good neighbour and to abide by local laws – some Muslims choose to forget this. And re the tsunami to Banda Aceh – it was very telling the response from the Western world as against the response from the Muslim world who plainly – as always – don’t give a damn about their Muslim brothers and sisters.
And re Turkey – I’ve never seen a woman there wear the veil! lots of hijabs – no veils….
Nonsense. And who are you or any westerner to say that something that some Mulims feel is a religious imperative is offensive? And why should it be? And why do you, a non-Muslim have a right to tell any Muslim that one of their beliefs is not a religious imperative. Who died & made you an imam? Gotta tell ya, if you tried to tell me what is or isn’t kosher acc. to Jewish law I’d laugh in yr face if you weren’t Jewish, & prob. even if you were. It’s the ultimate chutzpah for you to step outside yr own faith & tell other faiths which you despise anyway what their true beliefs are.
That’s it. No racism allowed here. Sorry but you’ll have to find another venue to spew yr nonsense Islamophobia.