Holland proposes burka ban

I’m assuming that there will be posts to follow with the usual chorus of ‘oh, poor Islam, why is everyone oppressing the Muslims’, but I personally think this legislation is a step in the right direction.

It’s called integration. Maybe a little common sense too, which seems hard to come by in some other parts of the world. Nice to see the Dutch taking a stand.

[quote]November 17, 2006
Holland proposes burka ban

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) - The Dutch government said Friday it would outlaw full-length veils like the Muslim burka and other face-concealing apparel in public places, marking this once-tolerant country’s latest about-face on questions of culture and assimilation in Europe.

The Netherlands, once considered one of Europe’s most welcoming countries for immigrants and asylum seekers, is deeply divided over government moves to stem the tide of new arrivals and compel them to adopt Dutch ways.

A Muslim leader denounced the proposal as “a big law for a small problem,” in a country where as few as 30 women wear burkas, and the mayor of Amsterdam warned that giving the issue too much attention could backfire.

Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk said the ban was to promote security.

“The cabinet finds it undesirable that face-covering clothing, including the burka, is worn in public places for reasons of public order, security and protection of citizens,” Verdonk said in a statement.

“From a security standpoint, people should always be recognizable and from the standpoint of integration, we think people should be able to communicate with one another,” Verdonk told national broadcaster NOS.

She said the ban would include not only the tent-like burka but full-face helmets and ski masks.

The announcement came after the final meeting of Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende’s cabinet before national elections Wednesday.

It appeared meant to stake a claim for the right-wing vote and to consolidate the alliance between Balkenende’s Christian Democrats and the free-market Liberal party, which has taken the lead on tightening immigration laws.

If it is re-elected and keeps its promise, a new centre-right Dutch government would go farther than any other in Europe in legislating restrictions on traditional Muslim dress.

The issue has resonance throughout Europe. Former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw recently caused a stir by saying he wants Muslim women to abandon the full-face veil, a view endorsed by Prime Minister Tony Blair. In France, the centre-right’s leading presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy has championed tougher immigration laws that critics say amount to an appeal to far-right voters.

Germany, which has a large Muslim immigrant community, bans teachers in public schools from wearing head scarves. In Belgium, one mayor banned burkas, but there is no general ban in force across the country.

The Netherlands’ opposition Labour party called the announcement a political ploy.

“A general ban is way out of line, and I’m very much worried that in the Muslim community many people will see this as Islam-bashing,” Labour legislator Jeroen Dijsselbloem told The Associated Press.

Ayhan Tonca, who heads a Dutch Muslim organization, dismissed the proposal as an overreaction. “This is a big law for a small problem,” he said, adding that as few as 30 women in the Netherlands wear burkas.

He also said the security argument did not stand up. “I do not think people who have bad things in their minds would wear a burka,” he said.

Amsterdam Mayor Job Cohen, also of the Liberal party, agreed the burka was bad for integration and communication, but he did not advocate a ban.

“You can’t speak with each other if you can’t see each other,” he said. But, “in practice, it’s rarely seen,” and the longer the discussion goes on, the more people will wear it.

A burka ban has long been on the political agenda. Last December, in a parliament debate it became clear a majority of the 150-member legislature would support a ban. But an advisory panel warned any law targeting Muslim dress would violate the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom.

The proposal was the latest move by mainstream parties to co-opt what were once the policies of the nationalist fringe.

In the last three years, the Netherlands has tightened immigration requirements, deported thousands of asylum-seekers and opened detention centres for those being processed. It also has given more muscle to the police and intelligence services to act against suspected Islamic extremists.

Everyone must learn to speak Dutch, and Muslim clerics must mind what they say in their Friday sermons for fear of deportation.

A look at legislation and the debate over wearing veils in Europe

(AP) - Legislation and the debate over the wearing of veils and burkas in European countries:

Netherlands - The government has announced plans for legislation banning full-length veils in public places and other clothing that covers the face. It based the order on security concerns, saying people should be recognizable. Muslim leaders said the proposed ban could be unconstitutional.

Britain - Former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw recently caused a stir by saying he wants Muslim women to abandon the full-face veil, a view endorsed by Prime Minister Tony Blair. A Muslim teaching assistant in England was later suspended from her job for refusing to remove a veil that left only her eyes visible.

France - Home to the largest population of Muslims in western Europe, France passed a law in 2004 banning Islamic head scarves, as well as Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses, in public schools. The government said it wanted to uphold its secular foundations.

Italy - Has a law requiring people to keep their faces visible in public, dating to Italy’s crackdown on domestic terrorism decades ago. A Vatican official this week cited Italy’s law in arguing that immigrants must follow the laws of their host countries, including any bans on face-covering.

Belgium - The mayor of Maaseik banned burkas in 2004, but there is no general ban across the country. The Maaseik mayor, Jan Creemers, said it “scared many people” when six women in the town of 24,000 started wearing burkas in public years before.

Germany - The country, with a large Muslim immigrant community, has a law banning teachers in public schools from wearing head scarves. Last month, a Turkish-born legislator urged Muslim women in Germany to take off their head scarves; her party said she later received death threats.
[/quote]

Three points:

[quote=“Mer”]I’m assuming that there will be posts to follow with the usual chorus of ‘oh, poor Islam, why is everyone oppressing the Muslims’, but I personally think this legislation is a step in the right direction.

It’s called integration. Maybe 1.a little common sense too, which seems hard to come by in some other parts of the world. Nice to see the Dutch taking a stand.

[quote]2.The Netherlands, once considered one of Europe’s most welcoming countries for immigrants and asylum seekers, is deeply divided over government moves to stem the tide of new arrivals and compel them to adopt Dutch ways.

A Muslim leader denounced the proposal as 3.“a big law for a small problem,” in a country where as few as 30 women wear burkas, and the mayor of Amsterdam warned that giving the issue too much attention could backfire.[/quote][/quote]

  1. Common sense: always good.
  2. If the country is deeply divided over gov’t steps in this direction, the sense isn’t entirely common, is it?
  3. If only 30 people in the country are wearing unpopular clothing, isn’t this a bit much?

Mer, Holland is not a Catholic country either. Would you agree if they outlawed nuns from wearing the full habit (with face covering)? I agree with Jaboney, this is a foolish law to deal with a non-existent problem. It will likely only make things worse.

How can you teach people to intergrate into a free society by limiting their freedoms? Europeans have to stop treating Muslim immigrants as if they were second class citizens, outsiders, who can never fully integrate because they are simply not, well, Europeans.

Muslims go home – and take Batman and Spiderman with you!

[quote=“Jaboney”]Three points:

[quote=“Mer”]I’m assuming that there will be posts to follow with the usual chorus of ‘oh, poor Islam, why is everyone oppressing the Muslims’, but I personally think this legislation is a step in the right direction.

It’s called integration. Maybe 1.a little common sense too, which seems hard to come by in some other parts of the world. Nice to see the Dutch taking a stand.

[quote]2.The Netherlands, once considered one of Europe’s most welcoming countries for immigrants and asylum seekers, is deeply divided over government moves to stem the tide of new arrivals and compel them to adopt Dutch ways.

A Muslim leader denounced the proposal as 3.“a big law for a small problem,” in a country where as few as 30 women wear burkas, and the mayor of Amsterdam warned that giving the issue too much attention could backfire.[/quote][/quote]

  1. Common sense: always good.
  2. If the country is deeply divided over gov’t steps in this direction, the sense isn’t entirely common, is it?
  3. If only 30 people in the country are wearing unpopular clothing, isn’t this a bit much?[/quote]

At this point, it’s only proposed legislation. I don’t suppose it’s solely aimed at only the 30 odd people in the country that might be affected by it. It’s obviously more of a move for the future.

I don’t agree with the wording ‘unpopular clothing’ either. I think that is only an attempt to trivialize what this debate is all about, which IMO is Muslims being able to merge with the rest of the world and modern times.

I think the French got it right in banning Islamic head scarves in public schools because it wanted to “uphold it’s secular foundations”. And yes, that 2004 law includes Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses as well.

With the same circumstances and conditions that are being applied to the debate over the banning of the burka, absolutely. Of course I would. Catholics don’t have a problem with this though. Italy, for example, already has a law requiring people to keep their faces visible in public. The Vatican backs that up. It’s in the news story.

[quote]
How can you teach people to intergrate into a free society by limiting their freedoms?[/quote]

I don’t think it’s too much to ask that when you immigrate, you follow the laws of your host country. If you can’t handle that, then don’t move there.

Its good legislation and hopefully it will pass.

Europe is in danger of losing its culture. This isn’t racism or cultural insensitivity. If you don’t like the culture of the place, why immigrate to the place? Some Moslem nations in the ME don’t allow Christians to carry Bibles into their territories, and they force foreign women to conform to their customs of dress, etc… Why should they expect any different in Europe?

Personally, I enjoy going to visit a European Europe. I like a tolerant Holland. But, its ridiculous to argue that to be tolerant one must accept intolerance.

Tolerance does not require toleration of intolerance. IMO, the opposite is true.

[quote=“Mer”]I don’t agree with the wording ‘unpopular clothing’ either. I think that is only an attempt to trivialize what this debate is all about, which IMO is Muslims being able to merge with the rest of the world and modern times. [/quote]No, it’s an attempt to demonstrate that, in this context, this is a trivial matter. Unless you want to take this as symbolic of all sorts of other issues. That’s a whole other debate.

Given your stance, I suspect that you’re less interested in “Muslims being able to merge with the rest of the world and modern times” and more concerned with conservative Muslims being assimilated into contemporary, secular society. Is that fair?

[quote=“Mer”]I think the French got it right in banning Islamic head scarves in public schools because it wanted to “uphold it’s secular foundations”.[/quote]There’s a good argument to be made for the secular state tradition in France. I disagree with the position because I don’t see how clothing or accessories signifying religious identity threatened the secular state in France. I’m curious how a similarly strong argument for the secular state tradition would be received in America.

With the same circumstances and conditions that are being applied to the debate over the banning of the burka, absolutely. Of course I would. Catholics don’t have a problem with this though. Italy, for example, already has a law requiring people to keep their faces visible in public. The Vatican backs that up. It’s in the news story.[/quote] Certainly the Vatican has no problem supporting that legislation: there’s no prohibition against nuns exposing their faces. Consider an analogous situation… something acceptable to some, but not all, or the more conservative Catholics: what if the legislation required that one’s legs be exposed from mid-thigh to ankle? That would be considered immodest and unacceptable.

[quote=“Mer”]I don’t think it’s too much to ask that when you immigrate, you follow the laws of your host country. If you can’t handle that, then don’t move there.[/quote]Setting aside other issues with that position for the moment, do you see a problem with the host country writing new laws targeting legal immigrants who have already arrived in the country?

[quote=“Tigerman”]Europe is in danger of losing its culture.[/quote]How do you figure? How fragile do you think European culture is? In various regions, it’s in danger of losing apparent homogeneity, but not its culture. The Netherlands was famously divided between Catholic and Protestant regions (houses were painted either white or yellow to declare religious allegiance at one point), and Frieslanders are still widely disparaged and discriminated against. Religious, ethnic and cultural tensions are nothing new to the Dutch; I’m sure that they can work it out.

[quote=“Tigerman”]This isn’t racism or cultural insensitivity. If you don’t like the culture of the place, why immigrate to the place?[/quote]Initially, I came to Taiwan to see something new. I discovered that I don’t much like it here and left, but I came back for my sweetie’s sake. Is that reason enough? I’m not asking that any changes be made to accommodate me, but then no laws are being passed to interfere in my self-expression. Should that happen, I may suddenly become much more interested and active in Taiwanese politics. Knowing how poorly my obviously foreign opinions are likely to be received if I went through official channels, I might even consider more creative avenues for action.

[quote=“Tigerman”]Some Moslem nations in the ME don’t allow Christians to carry Bibles into their territories, and they force foreign women to conform to their customs of dress, etc… Why should they expect any different in Europe?[/quote]Why should the West lower its standards?

[quote=“Tigerman”]Tolerance does not require toleration of intolerance. IMO, the opposite is true.[/quote]I agree. Which is why I oppose this legislation, and that in France, but support the same in Turkey. In Holland and France, where’s the intolerance? Where’s the power lie? No one at large is compelling women to wear these outfits, and if someone at home is doing so, those women have options. In Turkey, intolerance abounds and safeguarding individual rights and security makes legislation infringing on personal liberty truly necessary.

This law was just imposed, was it not?

But in any case, reading the article now (yes, I should have done that before commenting) I find the argument is both persuasive and bogus.

I am confused though, as you seem to be saying this is for integration, and the article is saying it is for security. I accept the security point to a degree, but not the integration one. School bans, and bans in offices, yes, acceptable at least for teachers and employees who need to present a face to the public, but when one is walking down the street? What’s going to happen during festivals? Are pantomines now banned too? Or street-performing clowns.

I’m all for this ban and am happy to see the notoriously nonconformist Dutch taking a stand for conformity. I’m not for this ban because of what Muslims are wearing though. I’m more concerned about what’s in their heads – Muslim ideas – so we’ve got to stamp out all symbols of Muslim culture and make them as uncomfortable, disoriented and unwelcome as we can. Hopefully they’ll just go back where they belong before their Muslim ideas begin to infect our society.

Anybody who can’t see the difference between Halloween and wearing a burka in public ought to have their head examined because they can’t tell the difference between a harmless cultural tradition and a malignant one.

Personally, if I want to see women wearing burkas, I’ll just go to the Middle East or Africa. Is that so much to ask? Everybody just stay in their place?

Okay, Spook, now just take a deep breath. No one is equating the two. But in the article, the Dutch government has said that the law is for security reasons. Therefore, for the law to be applied fairly, there will be no more masked public balls in Holland, no street performers whose faces are covered. Or is it okay for white Dutch to cover their faces but not brown?

Now matter how you slice it, this law is bound to fail because it is not addressing the issue it is trying to solve. In addition, for it to be applied fairly, and not be so discrimintory that it causes a backlash, all kinds of ridiculous results are going to happen (such as banning masks).

None of which is to say that I don’t think Europe has a very messy problem on its hands now.

This is very much symbolic of the other issues of this debate. It’s very par for the course. On the surface you might choose to find it trivial, but it strikes at the very core of the debate that is going on about Islam and the rest of the world. I don’t think it is a whole other debate as you suggest.

[quote=“Jaboney”]
Given your stance, I suspect that you’re less interested in “Muslims being able to merge with the rest of the world and modern times” and more concerned with conservative Muslims being assimilated into contemporary, secular society.[/quote]

No. I’m most interested in Muslims being able to merge with the rest of the world and modern times for their safety and prosperity, and ours. No need to twist my words.
And please don’t forget we are talking about all this in the context of Muslims immigrating to Europe or elsewhere, not what they choose to do in their homelands.

[quote=“Mer”]
With the same circumstances and conditions that are being applied to the debate over the banning of the burka, absolutely. Of course I would. Catholics don’t have a problem with this though. Italy, for example, already has a law requiring people to keep their faces visible in public. The Vatican backs that up. It’s in the news story.[/quote] Certainly the Vatican has no problem supporting that legislation: there’s no prohibition against nuns exposing their faces. Consider an analogous situation… something acceptable to some, but not all, or the more conservative Catholics: what if the legislation required that one’s legs be exposed from mid-thigh to ankle? That would be considered immodest and unacceptable.[/quote]

Hey, the question of a nun wearing a full habit was brought up…and so I replied pointing out that Catholics have to abide by the same rules Muslims do in Italy, and that the Vatican doesn’t have a problem with it. They aren’t crying out religious oppression. There is no argument there.
And your follow up point to my reply now is irrational and silly. I’m not going to indulge you.

Setting aside other issues with that position for the moment, do you see a problem with the host country writing new laws targeting legal immigrants who have already arrived in the country?[/quote]

We’re not going to agree on this one. You see it as the government targeting certain immigrants, and being unfair with regards to their religious code. I see it as the government enforcing acceptable legislation, to any and all immigrants, as well as everyone else in the country, that you must abide by if you wish to continue living there. I don’t think that is too much to ask. They are not out to ‘get the Muslims’ IMO. So, no, I don’t see a problem with that.

The article stresses the security angle. I think it’s also about integration, which is why I said what I did.

There are, IMO, certain requirements and responsibilities of an immigrant to their host country. I think it’s one’s responsibility to fit in with the country you wish to call home. If what you are all about and what you bring with you doesn’t function with the place you want to live, I don’t think the country should be the one to accommodate you. It’s just common sense, another point of my original post.

Look at the immigration and at birth rats of Moslems vs. Europeans in European nations. Then look at what many Moslems in those European nations are advocating/demanding. Then think about what will happen when the Moslems are the majority of the population.

Doesn’t seem to be that difficult to figure.

If immigrants were integrating, there would be no matter at all. However, those immigrating are not integrating. As such, when the immigrants become the majority, the heterogenous nature of the population could very well spell the end of European culture.

Sorry, but the catholics and Protestants have apparently sorted things out between them in The Netherlands. Moreover, there is a big difference, IMO, between the distiction between Catholics and protestants and that between Christians and Moslems. Finally, the Dutch, whether catholic or Protestant, were Dutch. The Moslem immigrants are not Dutch, and do not seem to desire to become Dutch. I would have thought that this all would have been obvious.

Sorry again. Don’t see the relevance of your circumstances here in Taiwan to the immigrant situation in Holland.

How is legalizing tolerance a lowering of standards?

IMO, the forcing of women to wear Burqas is all wrapped up together with Moslem law. I hate to employ a slippery slope argument, but, the writing is clearly on the wall.

Deal with it now or deal with it later. Not a difficult choice, IMO.

:blush: Double post…

No. I’m most interested in Muslims being able to merge with the rest of the world and modern times for their safety and prosperity, and ours. No need to twist my words.
And please don’t forget we are talking about all this in the context of Muslims immigrating to Europe or elsewhere, not what they choose to do in their homelands.[/quote]Mer, please, play nice. I did not attempt to twist your words. To ensure that I did not, I asked, “Is that fair?” If you feel that this symbolic of a larger debate, fine. But then the issues should be differently framed and addressed. In the interests of clarity, can you explain what “being able to merge with the rest of the world and modern times” means to you?

[quote=“Mer”][quote=“Jaboney”]Certainly the Vatican has no problem supporting that legislation: there’s no prohibition against nuns exposing their faces. Consider an analogous situation… something acceptable to some, but not all, or the more conservative Catholics: what if the legislation required that one’s legs be exposed from mid-thigh to ankle? That would be considered immodest and unacceptable.[/quote][T]he question of a nun wearing a full habit was brought up…and so I replied pointing out that Catholics have to abide by the same rules Muslims do in Italy, and that the Vatican doesn’t have a problem with it. They aren’t crying out religious oppression. There is no argument there.
And your follow up point to my reply now is irrational and silly. I’m not going to indulge you. [/quote]Not at all. It’s directly on point. If you don’t want to address it, that’s fine.

We’re not going to agree on this one. You see it as the government targeting certain immigrants, and being unfair with regards to their religious code. I see it as the government enforcing acceptable legislation, to any and all immigrants, as well as everyone else in the country, that you must abide by if you wish to continue living there. I don’t think that is too much to ask. They are not out to ‘get the Muslims’ IMO. So, no, I don’t see a problem with that.[/quote]Again, for the sake of clarity, set aside the question of acceptability; do you think that this legislation is not targeting certain immigrants, specifically Muslims? (See, I think that while the legislation might be universally applicable–mimes, clowns and all–it’s intended to address a particular section of society.)

Of course it targeting “certain” immigrants.
Ones that insist on wearing burkhas. What is unclear about this?
Until I start seeing news stories about suicide nuns wearing a belt of C-4 or Semtex under a vest of ball bearing and nuts & bolts…I’m just gonna have to say this is a burkha problem.
And your comment to Mer about “playing nice” is insulting and derogatory. But thats just my opinion.

That is just fucked right the way up. Ban Muslims from wearing burq’ua if you must, but don’t try dressing it up like some kind of across-the-board thing as if it has nothing to do with the fact that they’re targeting solely Muslims.
Will you be allowed to sue the pants off the Dutch government if you get your jaw torn off your face because of this stupid shite?

[quote=“Tigerman”]Europe is in danger of losing its culture.
[…]
Look at the immigration and at birth rates of Moslems vs. Europeans in European nations. Then look at what many Moslems in those European nations are advocating/demanding. Then think about what will happen when the Moslems are the majority of the population.[/quote]Another population bomb argument? In BC, the great fear was the Yellow Peril. Jokes about “Hongcouver” aside, I think that one has largely been put to rest. Why? Europe isn’t enjoying the same success, but are there reasons why it can’t? (Goes to your concerns re: integration.)

A look at birth rates over the past fifty years offers another way of putting that fear to rest: make sure that those immigrants-male and female-can succeed economically, and that they’re very well educated. Birthrates will quickly plummet, and many of those cultural concerns will evaporate.

Doesn’t seem to be that difficult to figure. :wink:

Sorry, but the catholics and Protestants have apparently sorted things out between them in The Netherlands. Moreover, there is a big difference, IMO, between the distiction between Catholics and protestants and that between Christians and Moslems. Finally, the Dutch, whether catholic or Protestant, were Dutch. The Moslem immigrants are not Dutch, and do not seem to desire to become Dutch. I would have thought that this all would have been obvious.[/quote]The Catholics and Protestants have sorted things out between them. For a very long while, they hadn’t, and the violence and upheaval of that period makes this era look like a picnic in the park. Why paper over the differences (or hammer down on the different) rather than put in the hard work of sorting it out? Ah yes, the Dutch, whether Catholic or Protestant, were Very Differently Dutch, living under Spanish occupation, and had little desire to live side-by-side in tolerance. I would have thought that this all would have been obvious. :wink:

[quote=“Tigerman”]This isn’t racism or cultural insensitivity. If you don’t like the culture of the place, why immigrate to the place?
[…]
Sorry again. Don’t see the relevance of your circumstances here in Taiwan to the immigrant situation in Holland.[/quote]
Sorry, I thought your point was generally applicable.

IMO, the forcing of women to wear Burqas is all wrapped up together with Moslem law.[/quote]What is the relevance of Muslim law to Dutch society and law?
Who is suggesting that these Dutch immigrants are being forced to wear the Burqa? Bizarre and distasteful IMHO, but it may be their choice.
I don’t see how this proposed law legalizes tolerance. Nor the French law. With the Turkish law, I understand how it promotes tolerance and support it.

TainanCowboy, until you can [url=The Morgue 2006 - #221 by TainanCowboy them up[/url] with either fact, argument, or both, I’m little interested in your opinions. You’re entitled to them, but they don’t mean much to me.
(But I’m happy to entertain intuitions and feelings.)