Should the Burqa be banned in Australia

[nero_bolt]

Should the Burqa and Niqab be banned in Australia?

[azureline**]

Some people need to decide on a reason to ban it, they can't continually change the reasons..........................

Is it a terrorist threat?

does it affront you?

does it intimidate you?

Australia is a hot country

Women who wear it are oppressed

beaten? stoned?

can't tell their gender?

can't wear a full face helmet or balaclava to the bank or servo?

can't identify them?

For me, none of the above.

[graem-frede]

Mine is not made up.I went to Pakistan and stayed there for a holiday.I travelled around Punjab.I stayed is Wazirabad,I went to Lahore,Islamabad,Kashmir etc.You stated something about Pakistan that I never saw once.I had a Muslim interpret in a Christian Church for me.There was a Christian Revival Crusade there.Women came to my bedroom without face coverings and sat on the edge of the bed and talked to me alone without males present. I never saw fundamentalism.I do not say it does not happen there but it is not overly widespread.Devout people yes but not a lot of fundamentalism.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@legarlu wrote:

The above pic of people dressed in the niqab,  unsure if they are male or female.  This dress is not suitable to our

Australian way of life  and our culture.   I've seen people dressed like this at the beach at  Brighten Le Sands, NSW in the middle of summer.  It should be banned in all public places IMO.   

---

---

I am at Brighton pretty much every day and it is now my local beach. And whilst there are many cultures enjoying the beach and cafes there, I have never seen a full burqa there. In fact, I have never seen one in the suburb where I live which is predominantly muslim. 

Regardless of whether I have seen it or not, what terrorist threat does a Burqa pose in Brighton? What problem does a woman in a burqa strolling along the promenade or watching her kids paddle in the water pose to those around her?

And what does wearing one in summer have to do with anything?

[cherry*135]

---

@micasheen wrote:

Not all acts of barbarism is acted out by isil. This graphic picture of a woman being prepared for stoning by being buried to the chest because she had a cell phone.

There is a huge question about the killing and abuse of women in islam, it can never be denied.

The burqa is just one of the tools used to subjugate and control women

---

Why do you never provide links to the information you post on here? If you did (from a reliable source) you might be able to actually post some correct information for a change.

1.because she had a cell phone. That is not true

2. Her cause of death was by shooting (after the stoning).

3. She wasn't the only one killed in this incident. The other was male

4. What country did this occur in? What country had they fled to before this event?

Still a tragic end of lives. But the post quoted above is misleading and incorrect...not cell phone related, a male was punished/killed in same way.

If you are concerned about a woman being stoned, why not the same concern for the man who died over the same issue (not a cell phone).

I have a link (msm)

[i-need-a-martini]

Der Am! It's because she is wearing a burqa!!! The man was NOT wearing the burqa so he is of no interest to us. Follow the topic please lol...

[village_person]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

Frankly, it surprises me how so many ppl here who staunchly stand up for women's rights think the burqa is ok. It's a repressive garment which orthodox muslim men require their women to wear in public so they may not incite lustful urges in men. 

---

That's correct and I am thankful that they do cover up in public. Believe it or not muslim women have hair so hot it's capable of starting a bushfire let alone turning men into slobbering sex predators. I would advise all males who spot a female muslim (if it is a female under all that black material) to avert your eyes. Just one glimpse of that hair is enough to set men on a course of carnal pursuits. 

Could it be that Abbott want MPs voting on important legislation rather than casting lustful glances at women in the parliament house public gallery? 

[cherry*135]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@debra9275 wrote:

I cannot defend it, no self respecting woman could, no woman could defend what this garment represents.

the garment represents freedom of choice within this country

---

This country gives them freedom of choice but there's Austalian law, and then there's the word of the Prophet, Islam law. Which does not give devout Muslim women the choice to go into public places uncovered.

The country they happen to be residing in is immaterial.

If the burqa is used to conceal weapons or identity in this country, then it should be banned to be worn in public in this country.

---

So you support a ban on wearing burqa/niqab in the whole of Australia only because of an IF?

To enter Parliament public have to go through security first. If they have any weapons on them, they would be detected before they enter. Not sure what the exact security procedures they have there but they will be tightened up now anyway.

As others have posted, a long heavy coat would conceal a weapon, don't need to wear a burqa. If a member of the public did go into Parliament and shoot at the Parliamentarians... they wouldn't get escape with out being captured by security. It wouldn't matter whether their face was covered or not, they would be detained, arrested, locked up.

There are frequent shootings and killings in Sydney, none of them by persons wearing burqa's/niqabs.

There are laws, in NSW (2011)  for one State at least, that require a person with a face covering to remove it for identification purposes if required to do so.

Banning the Burqa's for security reasons to identify persons isn't necessary. Just a new law that requires face coverings to be removed if requested by authorities.

[cherry*135]

---

@micasheen wrote:

Your, and others support for this garment is misplaced and wrong.

---

 No, it isn't. You are out of order to suggest it is. If someone has a different view/perspective to yours, that doesn't make their views wrong and yours correct.

This thread has been progressing along for quite awhile,with little intervention from moderators, because others are respecting opposing views from other posters, even if they don't agree with them.

[debra9275]

As we have now commenced military action against Iraq, a predominantly Muslim country, special considerations against internal terrorism apply

Icy we are not at war with Iraq

we are figthing Isis, an extreme terrorist group, we are actually fighting for and with Iraqui and Syrian  muslims in their countries against Isis

[karliandjacko]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

Can someone please explain why the laws of another country (laws that go beyond religion) are brought in as an argument against a garment of clothing women can choose to wear in Australia?

There are no laws requiring women to wear coverings in this country. We do not have stonings in this country.

It's just irrelevent to bring in the subjugation of women in some other country as somehow a reason to bring in laws in this country.

True. The proposed banning of wearing burqas in this country is not because we don't want Muslim women to wear them. It's because we don't want radicals or terrorists to enter or leave this country by concealing their identitly underneath them.

Particularly when we are tallking about so few women who actually wear something as 'confronting' as a burqa. What can it possibley be? 2000 women as an over estimate?

---

---

Really?  You truly believe people can hide their identity on entering or leaving the country by wearing a burqa?

No, sadly this whole argument is to create a greater us vs them divide.  It has nothing to do with the liberation of the arab women from the beastly garments and everything to do with demonising those who we deem to be on the nose this season.  

If we want muslim women to give up the burqa we need to get to know them as people so they feel welcome and confident in our society not demand it in the name of oppression.