"It is important for children to learn that proper communication requires being able to look the other person in the eye"
"Dutch to ban burkas when picking children up from school," Bruno Waterfield for the Telegraph, September 9:
Ronald Plasterk, the Dutch education minister, announced that the ban would apply to all schools, including private Muslim religious establishments, and their immediate surroundings.Not only teachers, but parents and all visitors to schools, including suppliers making deliveries, will be forbidden the burka, even though only 100 women in the Netherlands, out of a population of 16.5 million, are estimated to wear it.
Legislation is expected to be agreed by the Dutch parliament next year.
Mr Plasterk has cited security concerns and the need for teachers and schoolchildren to be able to communicate properly with each other.
"It is important for children to learn that proper communication requires being able to look the other person in the eye," he said to Dutch MPs.
The legendary tolerance of the Dutch has been tested by years of controversy over the burka and radical Islam in the Netherlands.
Local authorities are now expected to follow the government ban by extending restrictions on Islamic dress to council buildings and public transport.
The burka, also known as a Niqab, is a wide dress covering the entire body, hair and neck face of a woman, leaving only a slit for the eyes.
The Dutch ban will not apply to the more common Hijab headscarf, where a woman's face is clearly visible.
Obviously, if this ban was about harassing Muslims -- and not the security-related need to see the faces of people going in and out of schools -- the hijab would've been banned too.
I see no religious value in forcing women to wear large, black, cotton Hefty bags. Ban the Burka world wide.
They're just re-arranging deckchairs on the Titanic. When the demographics kick in, any such laws will be repealed.
I see no religious value in forcing women to wear large, black, cotton Hefty bags. Ban the Burka world wide.
Posted by: tanstaafl
The value is to the women's husbands, whose "religion" teaches them that they can beat their wives as long as they leave no visible marks. Even a "modestly" dressed Western woman would expose her: neck and head, arms, and lower legs. Moslem women in hijabs leave only the face, hands, and maybe feet exposed, giving hubby more room to work. With the burka, even most of the face is hidden, so hubby is free to give her a bloody nose or split lip when she burns his dinner or complains about his taking a ten-year-old for a second wife.
Banning the head-sack is pointless.
They should be banning the mohammedans.
ebonystone - I said what "religious" value. I know that there is a value to Muslim males, but as to that serving a religious purpose, I just don't think so.
I think it's a great step. Even if there are only 100 wearing them, and even if it doesn't send them packing away, it at least sends the message that "yes you still have to answer to the laws of this government" and "no you can't do whatever you want here." I say Bravo to the Dutch.
Somewhat OT
But does anyone else consider our Princess Mary of Denmark and her consort as quiet counter-jihadis?
THeir kids' names are "Christian" and "Isabella'
It is perfectly reasonable that for SECURITY CONCERNS
"not only teachers, but parents and all visitors to schools, including suppliers making deliveries, will be forbidden the burka".
Security concerns alone should be sufficient reason for kafir countries also placing a flat ban on the wearing of Muslim female face coverings - as on the wearing of any other sort of face covering - in "council buildings and public transport". Motor cyclists wear their helmets while on their bikes, but are required to take them off everywhere else, such as when entering a bank or a shop.
The entire non-Muslim world - not just 'the West' but Russia, India, [insert name here] should now, stating security concerns, institute and enforce a complete ban on the wearing of the burqa in all public places - schools, public buildings and public transport; anywhere where a person's concealment of their identity poses a security risk.
Though it's will not have much of an effect with only 100 women in the country estimated to wear the bee suit, but it will send a clear message that the DUTCH have been pushed to far by bending over backwards to islam.
Islam is not only a religion, but a total Political doctrine & so needs to be treat as such. It needs to be treated as it preaches....SUBMISSION to all muslims.
Obviously, if this ban was about harassing Muslims -- and not the security-related need to see the faces of people going in and out of schools -- the hijab would've been banned too.
Posted by Raymond
I would not consider a ban on the hijab harassment either and I'd defend my position on two counts.
The ability to see the shape of the head and the cut, style and color of the hair is, like the ability to see one's facial features, a matter of establishing identity. One who covers up the head in that way conceals an important distinguishing feature of her (or his) appearance and this, apart from obvious cases of necesity such as protection from the elements, could reasonably be seen as evading lawful surveillance.
More importantly, according a guest editorial in some online newspaper by a Muslim American psychiatrist I read a year or two ago who was discussing causes of depression among Muslim immigrants or some such thing (I wish I'd bookmarked the site, but I didn't bother at the time, so if anyone else recalls this and can tell me who he was I'd be grateful) many Muslim women born outside the West don't bother with the hijab in their countries of origin. They only begin to wear it once they take up residence in the new world, as a means of asserting their ("superior") Muslim identity against a non-Muslim society. This is perilously close to, if not altogether over the line of, militancy and supremacism.
Given that, social equality can also be considered a reason for a ban on the hijab alongside a ban on the niqab. Every western country should have such a ban at least until three conditions are met: the considerations of recognition and public security are obviated by a permanent end to political Islam and its Jihad against the non-Muslim world, the use of the hijab as a supremacist symbol of Islamic superiority an hegemony is ended, and it is established beyond all reasonable doubt that wearing of the hijab is always voluntary.
None of these are likely to happen soon in Islam without help from non-Muslims, so I say: ban all distinctive Islamic dress. Period.
I will write to my congressman asking no Dutch be allow entry to america for any reason, end all Dutch
spying posts in america(Diplmant post are spying post). That all item with the word be rename like calling Dutch Elm tree Hijab Elm tree. No dutch goods can be sold in america untril the Dutch government end they illegal action.
There is no such thing as a 'Dutch Elm tree'. You must be thinking of 'Dutch Elm Disease', a fungus that spreads rapidly and destroys the trees it lives on.
I can see how it reminded you of Islam, though.
Great post, Aardvark! One of the best yet.