Burkini banned in France

[LifeIsGoodish]

Instead of teaching people to behave with respect to each other.

Burkini banned in France

Pangurban

Islam has very strict rules on warfare, all of which ISIS breaks.

Suicide is also very clearly forbidden in Islam.

Pang well the examples of the yazidis and Shia Muslims doesn't contradict what in saying about dehumanising others. They target them for a different reason to the reason why they target western civilians but it's still the same sort of attitude of don't agree with me, threaten me and I will retaliate against all of you regardless of what you think as an individual. That's why it is laughable when I read comments by some posters here linking the wearing of burkini to an affiliation with groups like Isis or even to wahhabism. For Isis these women wearing burkini would be regarded as highly immodest and punished severely. They have an intolerance for any Muslims - Shia or sunni - who don't support their state and consider them apostates. Muslims - sunni and Shia- are the biggest victims of these radical groups so to say that they share the same ideology because they superficially profess to follow the same religion is like saying the extreme far right and fundamentalist christians share the same ideology as ordinary Christians.
Check out the following link to see that it's not just Muslims who have these nut jobs in their religion.

aattp.org/here-are-8-christian-terrorist-organizations-that-equal-isis/

It is easier for us to detach the actions of these groups with mainstream Christianity because we are familiar with the teachings of Christianity so can see how these groups deviate from core principles. However as we are less familiar with islam some it is easier to convince some that these heinous actions are somehow representative of general Muslim beliefs and core teachings.

Islam is not a monolithic religion. There have always been different interpretations and opinions about almost any matter you can think of. Isis and Co do not follow the most literal opinion they have just collated all the extreme opinions many of which have been rejected by mainstream muslims for centuries and present that as their vision of what islam truly is. They are intolerant of other Muslims who have different opinions such as shias, sufis, other sunnis. Didnt they recently carry out an attack in Medina close to the second holiest mosque to muslims. Does that seem like a group that has any reverence for their own religious symbols and holy sites. So to lump every Muslim with these groups as if they all think the same is grossly unjust and dangerous.

I just want to point out that a scary amount of terrorism is stopped at a grassroots level by the police. Sadly, some slip by a lot doesn't. You'd be shocked how much, actually. (DH is a police)

TBH I think it's really odd to say Islam has nothing to do with ISIS terrorism. I wouldn't say the crazies who blow up abortion clinics are Christian, but pretending it has nothing to do with the religion at hand, helps no one.

I've been thinking quite a lot about the burkini ban, I live in a very poor area with a large amount of Muslim women. They don't really 'integrate,' there's very little mixing, even of children and quite lot of the Muslim men are fucking horrible. Not 'arguably' horrible - Harass you horrible. So eared the title.
But I'd much rather they were out and about then stuck at home, with no one for company but these scary men. I cannot stress enough I am talking specifically the men I know are horrid, and use their religion to be misogynistic. I, personally now after a thread on here where I chatted to a lovely woman who where's the Burqua, always smile at the women wearing niquab, whereas before I would have looked away. I don't like the burqua, around here it's very common and I find it dehumanising. But some of these women, when you see them at the pool are so very happy. If they get to spend time with other women, who cares what they wear? I'd never even considered fining it offensive tbh. But I can understand why France banned it. France is under siege, there is increasing pressure to Do Something. Except there's nothing politicians can do about terrorism. So this makes it look like they're Doing Something.

Plus, look at the fear and suspicion? That article about women being sent out too offend everyone I doubt it's true, but if that's what people are thinking, the government has to try and defuse the fear. Banning the burkini seemed to be the lesser of many evil choices.

So I don't like it, but I do not envy the policy makers atm!

Also, the woman who had to take it off - Please do not blame the plice officers. They did not make the law.

Do ISIS even want any woman around? Their stance on women isn't as clear cut, no one ever talks about it. It does not seem many of us fit their standards, so if they took over the world (obviously, they won't) I always just assumed we'd all be executed. But that would end the human race.

I don't think they 'represent' Muslims is what I said. Only a racist would think that. But you cannot exactly completely ignore the link between the religion and the terrorism, any more than Christians who kill abortion doctors.

And sadly, yes, no one ever comments on the fact something like 96% (It was above 95, but cannot remember exact stat) of ISIS' victims are in fact, Muslim.

Sorry, meant to say as far as I'm concerned, any form of terrorism, any power group, is about power hungry men. Religion is just an excuse to obtain supremacy. If it weren't religion, it'd be something else.

The tolerant West is becoming intolerant of religion, and this is one (small) example of it. The quicker everyone gets behind this, the better for everyone.

Behind intolerance for religion?

I'm not religious. Sort of woo and Agnostic, but I live in an immigrant heavy area with a huge Muslim population. there are changes to be made. In my ideal world, religion would fuck off. But that would hurt a lot of people. religion does help a lot of people. Who am i to be the 'thought police?'

The 'tolerant West' reserves its liberal freedoms for itself, while selling arms to authoritarian regimes especially Saudi and joining them in wars on their neighbours bombing schools, hospitals and civilian areas with impunity while the Western public politely ignore it. Worse is when they talk about liberating women as they do so as if they care beyond using them as political leverage.

Worse is when they talk about liberating women as they do so as if they care beyond using them as political leverage.

I have a serious issue with hugely misogynistic male politicians who suddenly are 'so worried' about Muslim women. Pfft. piss off, no one's buying it.

I think when you look back to the puritan age you can see how England, Wales (and Scotland to a lesser extent) got fed up of puritans in the ascendency. We put religion in its box subsequently and breathed easier. Since the English Civil War religious tolerance has had limits.

Warmastoast Please don't blame me as a citizen of the so called west for the hellish regime that is Saudi Arabia..

Don't think this French ban serves any practical purpose however.

I agree, no practical purpose. It's to look like Something Is Being Done. Never mind what is actually being done could simply never be released to the media.

I don't care, but I think poster's here have raised very good points also. So I'm struggling. I guess I'd say put on a swim cap and understand how this came to be, but I don't agree with policing what women wear. But I also understand the fear. But it's men who attack. But France is secular and people find it insulting.

Again - no envy for policy amakers!!

Well actually bakewell if some posters are going to link wearing of burkini to supporting Isis and other radical ideologies then we can actually link western civilians to the Saudi regime through similar reasoning. If you research the history of the region Britain in particular played a major role in the establishment of the Saudi state (see Lawrence of Arabia). France as well which controlled Syria/Levant for a time deliberately armed and put power in the hands of the minority Alawites to counteract the sunni majority which has sowed the seeds for the current conflict there. And Isis well the Iraq war was not that long ago and many commentators have stated that Isis sprung up as an unholy alliance between generals from the former baathist regime of Sadaam Hussein and the Al qaeda supporters made whilst they were in prisons run by the western coalition.

I'm not saying this because I agree with this view but I'm just pointing out the similarity between that view and blaming all Muslims for groups like Isis just because they happen to share the same religion. I attended the protests against the Iraq war so I can hardly be held to account for that but that is how these type of people think. Just because you live here you have some measure of responsibility. Just because you wear burkini or even headscarf means you support totalitarian laws imposing dress codes on women in Saudi and Iran.

Special I think that there is undeniably a religious factor in the actions of these groups with these fanatical groups but religion doesn't explain why 95% of their victims are Muslims. What religion would encourage you to kill fellow believers. There is a toxic mix going on here of things I don't completely understand.

Having seen all these lovely burkinis I have now ordered one. The range has really increased since they first came onto the market.

I am not Muslim, I am albino, so full body protection makes a big difference to me. I really hate gallons of suncream and it never gives me as much protection as UV clothing does. I have owned various UV items over the years but the problem with them is that they are tight fitting and very unflattering. They were fine when I was 20, but I'm nearly 50 so skin tight is really not for me anymore!

I normally wear a hat on the beach, but it's a nightmare trying to swim in it as they keep coming off, so the head covering is a real bonus.

This really is the perfect solution for me.

Warmtoast The 'tolerant West' reserves its liberal freedoms for itself, while selling arms to authoritarian regimes especially Saudi and joining them in wars on their neighbours bombing schools, hospitals and civilian areas with impunity while the Western public politely ignore it. Worse is when they talk about liberating women as they do so as if they care beyond using them as political leverage.

I agree with this. Actually, the more I read and think about this, the more obvious it becomes that 'diversity' is an uneasy concept for humans and society's cohesion is best served without diversity. 'Diversity' seems to be artificial for humanity, as we see played out daily.

That's basically what i said too need, just in different words. There's a link, but the people at the very top aren't religious, they're power hungry. The foot soldiers are brainwashed and I sorta feel something akin to pity for them. Nothing but pity for child soldiers, who at some point become the abuser.Not so much the ones that grew up with all the privilege of the West and decided to plant a bomb or go on a shooting spree. But yes, it's not about religion - but the link is there, religion is the excuse, if not the reason.

Fourmy husband is BME and my DC are mixed race. Are you saying my family is 'artificial?'

I genuinely am not sure I understood your comment, that wasn't some sort of trick question btw.

I agree special that religion is an excuse not the reason just like talk of secularism and women's rights is the excuse not the real reason for the passing of these laws against Muslim women.

I think they passed it as to seen To Be Doing Something.

Do you think it was passed by hateful politicians? I know very little about France, my family's cultural heritage has nothing to do with it.

But France is a secular country. All religious symbols are banned and have been since 2004.

You know that, you choose to live there, you obey the law.

Obeying the law of your land is a tenet of Islam.

Covering is a choice.

I cannot see why anyone would wear a banned garment unless it was a political statement or protest.

And in a country in a state of emergency, that is provocative and unhelpful.

Special - no, I'm saying that there's a paradox regarding diversity. While we need diversity genetically, culturally it is an incredibly difficult concept for humans to navigate. We come back to it again and again. Some cultures are too diverse from one another for them to live comfortably side by side (some aren't). Some obviously manage it; others don't - as we see currently. So, genetically we need diversity but culturally, it appears to be very difficult in some cases, and when imposed through whatever mechanisms including meddling in other cultures' affairs (what Warmtoast said), problems arise. I focus on religion because I genuinely believe that religion is dishonest in that it allows people to believe things that are very obviously untrue and even harmful. We are allowing the perpetuation of problems by allowing people to believe these things. We all need to be on the same page in order for society to be cohesive. My answer is to not allow religion to enter into public life. I do believe that this will solve many problems - eventually (but we may need to go through quite a lot of pain in order to emerge on the other side). We are seeing moves towards this now here in Western cultures. What some people call 'racism' or 'Little Englander' perspectives are actually the emergence of the cessation of tolerance towards religion - and it's a good thing.

Interesting four I largely agree with you on the religious front.

Don't you wonder though, if it becomes illegal, say; that people will go underground, it will be attractive because it is not legal? Those sorts of things?

No one has worn it since it was banned, have they? the woman in the picture - it doesn't look like the burkinis I've seen, like the one Nigella wore?

Are you suggesting a positive discrimination type approach to religion? Like Mandela did, in that one generation of white people suffered but things were better for everyone of the second gen?

I think that smacks too much of religious persecution four. We have a much longer history of intolerance towards religious diversity then tolerance. Whether it is killing of catholics, killing of protestants, persecution and killing of Jews, killing Muslims (inquisition). This is not a new idea but a very old and poisonous one to erase a different religion from public view. Why would you advocate going back to a time of deep intolerance and hatred of others? How is it going to be implemented just targeting one religion or all religions? Do you think other religious groups will just accept restricting religious freedoms? I don't. Again it will be a case of punishing everyone for the actions of a few. I just don't believe that the ends justifies the means. Also I think it is unrealistic to expect that everyone can share the same world view even if they live in the same society. Some of the deepest divisions we see in Europe particularly in the UK is between the left and right wing politicians. This is even more pronounced in the US. Who is to decide what differences we can accept and which we should eliminate?