| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| Islamic face-veil part of 'British way of life' |
| 2010-10-16 |
| Opponents of the veil claim it oppresses women and presents a barrier between those who wear traditional dress and the rest of society. But in a new report from think-tank Civitas, Alveena Malik, a former faith adviser to the last Labour government, said the test of whether religious symbols are appropriate should be based on whether they are practical. Politicians in France and Belgium have voted in favour of banning the full veil, or “niqab”, and other European countries are thought to be considering similar action. In a new report, Women, Islam and Western Liberalism, Mrs Malik said: “We in Britain need to take a different direction from others in Europe and to accept the veil as part of a modern British way of life.” She continued: “The wearing of religious symbols, including the full veil, should be a fundamental human right of an individual in both the public and private sphere. “The real test for religious symbols in the public sphere should always be: ‘Does the wearing of a symbol (such as the kirpan, turban, yarmulke, crucifix and the veil) hinder a citizen’s ability to perform their public civic duties?’” Britain is in a "unique" position to embrace such a public display of faith because of the role the church plays in the affairs of the state and its "multicultural diversity". Mrs Malik was appointed by last government to a panel of faith advisers for the Department for Communities. She has overseen British Council guidance on “intercultural dialogue”. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #5 Walking past one of the ICUs this week on my way to see a patient, I saw a woman in a black burqa in the hallway. It didn't bother me in the least. If a woman believes that wearing a headscarf, chador or burqa in public is a proper way for her to show her reverence to God, fine, I have no problem. If a woman is afraid that if she doesn't wear a headscarf, chador or burqa in public that she'll be beaten by her family or the neighborhood hard boys, then I have a problem. If a woman wears a headscarf, chador or burqa in public as a way to put a stick in the eye of the secular state, then I have a problem. Ms. Malik proposed a test for the wearing of religious symbols. I just explained mine. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2010-10-16 19:50 |
| #4 She has overseen British Council guidance on "intercultural dialogue". So I take it smiley face multiculty bullshit like this falls under that category? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2010-10-16 19:38 |
| #3 I'd suggest that a bunch of non-moslem women in normal clothes, but also wearing the head-and-face covering, go into some banks and the Post Office to transact business, go for their driver's license picture, etc. If they're challenged and told to remove their face Hilarity (and probably, in Britain, in few arrests) would ensue. Might need to officially start the "religion" first. Not sure what to name it - "Church of the Sub-Genius" is already taken. "Church of the BurstMaize" perhaps? |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2010-10-16 18:07 |
| #2 Thieves disguised under full veiling? There's your practicality right there. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-10-16 18:05 |
| #1 what is Mrs. Malik doing speaking? Her husband should speak for her. Temptress! Whore! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2010-10-16 17:15 |