(May 23, 2012 at 4:59 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Yes Tiberius...men have had "Freedom of expression" for over 2000 years dear.... No More!
The point being is that the insistence of the use of the "Burqa" robs women OF the 'Freedom of Expression' That is the whole point of the "burqa" ...woman=Non thing/ Possession.
With all due respect, that is not the "whole" point of the burqa. You've read the Wikipedia article (I hope), so you should know better. Further, I've already stated I do not support someone forcing the burqa onto a women who is unwilling to wear it. That is oppression, and I agree it should be illegal. However, there are plenty of cases where Muslim women wear the burqa out of choice, or who submit to their husbands and are required to wear it. Neither of those situations are oppressive, and you in fact rob them of their freedom of expression by demanding they not wear it.
(May 23, 2012 at 5:49 am)Jinkies Wrote: I'm not really seeing the "it's just an article of clothing" argument here. The burqa is a tool of oppression. I admit that it's only a small part of a much larger disease, but I still thinking banning the burqa would be a positive. Any step away from a culture that denigrates and systematically oppresses women is a good step.
No, the burqa is not a tool of oppression. It can be used as such, but if you actually look at the history of it, you will see that it is never intended to be oppressive in the Islamic faith. This argument also fails (as I noted above) when you consider the number of Islamic women who choose to wear the burqa.
Quote:I saw an argument upthread about how customs and religion should be respected. Honor killings fit into both of those categories, and I'm pretty sure very few people here respect those. I have no respect for customs and religion except where they provide a solid argument as to why they are worthwhile. (Since people always tend to completely miss the point of things like this, I'm only pointing out faulty logic, not saying that the burqa is as bad as honor killings.)
The only faulty logic is your own. If you read my actual arguments, rather than making a strawman out of them, you'll see that I made exceptions for customs and religious acts that violated another's freedom
against their will. To clarify in lieu of your example: honor killings should only be tolerated if the person being killed agrees to it. They have a right to life, but only they have the right to choose how and when to end it.
