To be Disturbed by this woman in a Burka? ......

[Gingefringe]

I saw a very strange event in Debenhams make-up counter this week-end which on reflection, I found very disturbing.
A woman in a full burka (including her eyes covered in thin veil) came up to the make-up counter with a man (presumably DH). The man then proceeded to ask about foundation for the woman and had a conversation with the sales assistant which rarely included the woman at all (apart from trying on a sample colour on her hand).
I felt so sorry for the poor woman - not only to be forced to wear this ridiculous veil but she wasn't allowed even to chose her own make-up!
I did give the man my best evil looks but he didn't seem to notice - perhaps because I was a woman!! I was too cowardly to say anything.
On the day that France bans the burka I wonder whether you would have said anything?

[littleducks]

I knew that fuzzy, and thought you were allowed to carry on as normal, ticking 'partner' box on paperwork,as if you were just co-habiting, that your 'partner' had to come to registry office to register the birth of children to be on birth certificate etc.

If it is illegal to have a nikah that isnt registered as opposed to it not being legally binding under British law that is different.

[bemybebe]

kungfu ...just ignore it...

[mama2plusbump]

Hoose what are you in about? Im talking about covering from lesibans and bis!

[bemybebe]

i think there is a misunderstanding about the terminology: illegal nikah are not legally valid.

[bemybebe]

Article from BBC website that discusses illegal nikahs
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8493660.stm

[scaryteacher]

Littleducks

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/jul/08/religion-sharia-marriage-registration-islam

also

www.muslimparliament.org.uk/Documentation/Muslim%20Marriage%20Contract.pdf makes it explicit that it has to be registered to be legal either by marrying at a Mosque which can register marriages or by having the civil ceremony before the religious one.

[mama2plusbump]

The mosque in my local area te marriae is also registered and another mosque you have to be registeted or show intent before the nikkah.

[bemybebe]

kungfupannda "I sometimes think that some of the arguments made about the views of muslim women are actually a bit oppressive in themselves because of the assumptions that are made."

Btw, this statement of yours i cannot understand at all. What is an 'oppressive argument'? If i see someone on the street clad head-to-toe trotting behind her male guardian and I think "poor woman, i wish she could have stopped all this nonsense" (knowing only that she probably believes Koran prescribes her to dress and act in this way) does it constitute oppressive arguments? How an argument can be 'oppressive'?

[ScroobiousPip]

Good posts Mathanxiety and Monty.

To those who say the burkha is about their personal freedom, freedom of choice in England has never been absolute. We have always balanced individual freedom of choice with societal rights, such as the principles of equality, and the rule of law. There are times when personal choice must give way to societal rights - the question is in what circumstances?

Ultimately, there is a tension between the right to religious freedom and the right to freedom from sex discrimination. And, as math has pointed out, there is also a tension between Sharia law and the basic principles of the rule of law in English law, namely i) everyone is equal before the law and subject to the ordinary law of the land (Sharia law treats men and women differently); ii) no one can be punished except for a distinct breach of the law of the land as paid down by Parliament and via the courts of the land (Sharia law provides a separate system of laws and punishments which are not approved by Parliament and are therefore not consistent with the sovereignty of Parliament, as well as being via a different court system); and iii) an unwritten constitution whereby all actions can be pursued via the law courts (the binding nature of Sharia arbitrations is concerning here, given that they may not be entered into by individuals without legal advice - usually arbitration is reserved for commercial parties who can afford legal advice).

Personally, I believe that the rule of law and freedom from sex discrimination are more important than religious freedom and so I would not support the right to wear a burkha, or the widespread availability of Sharia law.

[bemybebe]

Scroo thank you for putting down something i struggled to formulate myself so succinctly.

[montysma1]

Absolutely

[nailak]

I just want to point out that I follow sharing law as long as it doesn't go.against.British law.

I don't understand how you can ban it. Would you ban religious marriages swell as religious divorces would this only apply to Muslims so other faiths could have religious marriages. Would you ban hall meat. How about Muslim prayers. Or would it be illegal to write your will according to Islamic guidelines. Would it becom illegal for Christian and jew to get their religious divorces too. Would it be illegal for men to covers themselves between navel and knee. What exactly Is it u want to ban

[fuzzywuzzy]

Ld, Islamic marriages aren't illegal, a couple who have only performed a nikah are seen as cohabiting, not as married.

I dont think there is any law in the UK which says a couple cannot perform a religious ceremony.

so long as you're aware that your Islamic marriage does not make you legally married in British law, that's fine if thats what you're happy with.

[montysma1]

Why would you think religious marriages would be banned? nobody has said that.

No faith marriage is recognised in law unless it is also legally registered under the British system. (in fact, faith marriage is irrelevant in law, as it the "registering" of it that renders it valid in law)

Similarly, if a person, with a legally recognised marriage is granted a "religious separation", they are still considered legally married until they have obtained a legitimate British divorce. Any attemp to remarry in those circumstances would be bigamous and therefore illegal.

Note the use of ANY FAITH. Must you always cry discrimination?

[TandB]

I think an argument is oppressive if it continually ignores the views of those being talked about. It is forcing opinions on someone who is repeatedly asserting that they are wrong. By failing to acknowledge that not everyone has exactly the same thoughts and feelings I think some people are being high-handed and implying, perhaps unintentionally, that those being discussed are in some way less capable of holding a valid opinion.

[AyeRobot]

That's what I always thought, fuzzywuzzy. It's not true, though. Read scaryteacher's links.

[bemybebe]

Nailak Btw, the Dutch will vote to ban the slaughter of animals by halal or kosher methods sometime in April or May. Part of my family is Dutch and they were discussing it last time I visited them. The overwhelming feeling is that the suffering is unacceptable and most in my family (not all) will probably vote in favour.

[bemybebe]

kungfupannda ah, i see. That is can happen in a democratic voting you know, some views can be listened to and ignored in the end if majority does not support it. Does not make it necessarily oppressive.

[montysma1]

Oh dear, we are going to need a new thread if we get onto hala and kosher killing.

[bemybebe]

Please don't. I need to get some work done today

[littleducks]

Thanks for the links scaryteacher looks like I will have to look into this further, I always thought it was 'not legally valid' as other posters did and was fine with that. But for it to be actually illlegal with prison term attached it totally different to me.

[TandB]

I know people are entitled to their opinions, but I still think that words and arguments can oppress, in a manner of speaking, if one party is continually ignored or told that they don't know their own mind. I wonder how many of the muslim ladies on this thread have said time and time again in discussions like this that they are making a choice, not being forced into it, and been consistently told that they are wrong about that, or simply ignored.

Not everyone on this thread has done that by any means, but there are some posters who go down that line of argument and I think it does create a situation where one group of people is forced into a lower position in the discussion when it keeps happening.

If we couldn't oppress with our words and views then the view that some woman are forced into conforming just by the pressure of their community's disapproval.

[TandB]

I know people are entitled to their opinions, but I still think that words and arguments can oppress, in a manner of speaking, if one party is continually ignored or told that they don't know their own mind. I wonder how many of the muslim ladies on this thread have said time and time again in discussions like this that they are making a choice, not being forced into it, and been consistently told that they are wrong about that, or simply ignored.

Not everyone on this thread has done that by any means, but there are some posters who go down that line of argument and I think it does create a situation where one group of people is forced into a lower position in the discussion when it keeps happening.

If we couldn't oppress with our words and views then the view that some woman are forced into conforming just by the pressure of their community's disapproval would be nonsensical.

[TandB]

Oops. Wasn't trying to get the last word there!

[ScroobiousPip]

Nailak, I don't think it's possible to take a blanket approach to any religion or any religious value. For each one, you have to ask whether that particular value is in conflict with the rule of law, or whether there are conflicts with other fundamental freedoms which are valued in English society. If the latter, than society has to exercise a judgement as to which is more important.

FWIW, my personal thoughts on those questions are:

• religious wedding celebrations of all denominations are a valid expression of religious freedom and should be protected, as long as people are informed that such a ceremony alone does not confer the legal status of a marriage unless it is either registered or there is an accompanying civil ceremony. I do believe there should be support from religious leaders for civil registration of all marriages. I don't believe that CoE weddings should have special status.
  

• no, I support the right to pray. All other religions have the right to practice their faith in so far as that faith does not conflict with the law of the land (as set down or signed up to - as in the case of the ECHR - by a democratically elected Parliament).
  

• Halal and Kosher meat. This is another tricky area because, again, different values conflict. Personally, I would vote for a ban on the ground of inhumane treatment of animals. But I don't speak for society as a whole.
  

• wills - you are free to write your will however you want to, provided it doesn't conflict with English law. If it does, then it should be set aside, just the same as any other will which does not comply.
  

• men covering themselves. If there was a religion out there that required men to cover themselves but gave women the freedom to dress however they liked - particularly if coupled with other limitations on men's rights - then I would not support that religious code, no.
  

I am very nervous about Sharia tribunals because (and I admit I don't know a lot about this area of law) i) they appear to limit access to justice in that they are binding on the parties concerned without those parties necessarily having legal advice or a qualified judge; ii) Sharia law departs from English law by, fir example, treating men and women differently. Therefore insofar as any matter involves women, I do not see how it can be consistent with English law (eg lesser weight on a woman's testimony, different rules for divorce); iii) the rules imposed by Sharia tribunals have not received the approval of society via Parliament. If other religions have similar tribunals then I disagree with those equally.

Kungfu - not sure if that is directed at me? I think all views are valid and should be heard. But ultimately society decides which views it values the most and we all abide by them. I completely accept, for example, that many women may choose to wear the burka by choice or to abide by Sharia law. But, it is still open to society to say that it places so high a value on freedom from sex discrimination or the rule of law etc that it will no longer permit these things. Maybe I have misunderstood?