Niqab wearer asked to leave restaurant in Germany

the niqab is a symbol for religious freedom, it is not banned in Germany. It is a woman's right to choose what she wears. you cannot dictate over somebody's choice of clothing. It is simply anti-democratic, against individual liberty and religious freedom.

Because if a man or woman wish to follow their religious beliefs which instruct them to be modest they have every right to do so. You cannot dictate their religion to them, you can claim it is oppressive, blah. But at the end of the day, it is their choice, their views, and their rights. The niqab does not pose a security threat because every woman who wears a niqab is not a terrorist. You cannot say the niqab poses a major security threat because there's no sufficient evidence.

The niqab is banned in some places in Germany. Several other clothes are also banned because the Germans think that they promote an extremist ideology. The niqab/burka also falls in that category.

Religious freedom can not be absolute, otherwise we should have to accept any sectarian practise in that name. Since the niqab and burka originate from what was still considered Islamist sects a few decades ago and that they are neither necessary for the practice of Islam, nor even mentioned in the Quran, it is perfectly fine to ban them if a majority of people find these clothes to be offensive to them and a direct threat to their values.

A good comparison would be a democratic Muslim country (an hypothetical example, I know) banning people from drawing Mohammed. Although it prevents people from expressing their freedom of expression to the fullest extent, it is not that outstanding to ask people not to draw Mohammed as the overwhelming majority of people would be offended by it. Foreigners and non-Muslims that go and/or live there would know that and abstain from offending the rest of the population by drawing Mohammed.

Unfortunately, Muslims do not understand that when they go and live in kaafir countries, and expect people there to accept their lifestyle, whilst also demanding some exemptions for them (many Muslims said that people shouldn't draw Mohammed after the Charlie Hebdo attacks).

the niqab is a symbol for religious freedom, it is not banned in Germany. It is a woman's right to choose what she wears. you cannot dictate over somebody's choice of clothing. It is simply anti-democratic, against individual liberty and religious freedom.

Sometimes looks can be deceiving and not always there might be a woman under it. If I put a niqab on, I might look like a woman, so how will you know that I'm a man?

Its not to accept committing murder, crimes etc. It is freedom to wear religious clothing. The boundary is committing a crime, wearing religious clothes are Not a threat to the population. And no, the burka and niqab did not originate from some sects, it is simply clothing for a women to cover up and conceal her body. And please don't tell Muslims what is in and not part of their religion. Many Muslims follow different opinions and guidance. It is not up to non-Muslims uneducated in Islam to 'educate' Muslims. the majority of Muslim women who wear the more conservative clothes are not terrorists or want to kill you, they are normal people who condemn the atrocities around the world. Many Muslims base the burka and niqab on hadith, stories of what the women wore around the prophet (saw). And no the majority should not dictate what a minority should wear, should the white majority stop black women from wearing their hair in the natural form? In Switzerland the majority found minarets threatening, which is ridiculous. Minarets are not going to explode and transform into rockets. And 'values', again this is supposed to be a democracy which should work for everyone, not just the white majority. The colonial west has a history of invading other countries and forcing the native populations to assimilate into the colonialists 'culture'. Again, you cannot dictate what a women can wear. The problem is with people not tolerating others religious freedoms. And again, Germany, Britain are secular democracies, where one should be able to practice their religion and dress as wished without harming others. If someone walked outside in a astronaut costume, and if I were afraid of astronauts I cannot force a ban on it just because of my fear. This is what democracy is supposed to be about. Not transforming into Saudi Arabia but the ability to dress however you want, freedom of speech etc. The very values you talk of but want to ban for certain people. Muslims are allowed to exercise their freedom of speech just like you are. It is not illegal for anarchists to protest for anarchy is it? There are many British and German Muslims as well as those who were born in the lands, so they have a right to contribute to the politics.

I'll bet you are the type of person who doesn't like CCTV on our streets and doesn't believe we should all carry ID, because it infringes your civil liberties. Typical of the loonie left!

Personally I think you are in cloud cuckoo land if you think that wearing a niqab is not a security threat.

The laws of a country comes well above any religious preference. For example, Sikhs are not allowed to carry the kirpan outside their own home, although for them it is a religious requirement but under the laws of this country carrying knives is illegal. Why should Muslims get preferential treatment?

Make paragraphs, or I won't read.

Make paragraphs, or I won't read.

Because if a man or woman wish to follow their religious beliefs which instruct them to be modest they have every right to do so. You cannot dictate their religion to them, you can claim it is oppressive, blah. But at the end of the day, it is their choice, their views, and their rights. The niqab does not pose a security threat because every woman who wears a niqab is not a terrorist. You cannot say the niqab poses a major security threat because there's no sufficient evidence.

I don't disagree with CCTV, you are just like the narrow minded right who put words in others mouths. And why are you so against civil liberties? Because you dislike anyone but the white majority having some?
That is a ridiculous argument, the niqab or burka is not a knife, not a weapon. It is simply a piece of clothing.

Its not to accept committing murder, crimes etc. It is freedom to wear religious clothing. The boundary is committing a crime, wearing religious clothes are Not a threat to the population.

And no, the burka and niqab did not originate from some sects, it is simply clothing for a women to cover up and conceal her body.

And please don't tell Muslims what is in and not part of their religion. Many Muslims follow different opinions and guidance. It is not up to non-Muslims uneducated in Islam to 'educate' Muslims. the majority of Muslim women who wear the more conservative clothes are not terrorists or want to kill you, they are normal people who condemn the atrocities around the world. Many Muslims base the burka and niqab on hadith, stories of what the women wore around the prophet (saw).

And no the majority should not dictate what a minority should wear,

should the white majority stop black women from wearing their hair in the natural form? In Switzerland the majority found minarets threatening, which is ridiculous. Minarets are not going to explode and transform into rockets. And 'values', again this is supposed to be a democracy which should work for everyone, not just the white majority.

The colonial west has a history of invading other countries and forcing the native populations to assimilate into the colonialists 'culture'.

Again, you cannot dictate what a women can wear. The problem is with people not tolerating others religious freedoms.

And again, Germany, Britain are secular democracies, where one should be able to practice their religion and dress as wished without harming others. If someone walked outside in a astronaut costume, and if I were afraid of astronauts I cannot force a ban on it just because of my fear.

This is what democracy is supposed to be about. Not transforming into Saudi Arabia but the ability to dress however you want, freedom of speech etc. The very values you talk of but want to ban for certain people.

Muslims are allowed to exercise their freedom of speech just like you are. It is not illegal for anarchists to protest for anarchy is it? There are many British and German Muslims as well as those who were born in the lands, so they have a right to contribute to the politics.

Its not going to make you so different from Saudi Arabia if you dictate what women can or cannot wear is it?

Lmao why don't you do your research on the niqab? It's not even obligatory in Islam and neither is the burka. Both of them sprung out of Wahhabism. So don't go saying that you shouldn't dictate religion. It isn't religion.

Yes I know what the niqab is thankyou, and no it did not spring out of Wahhabism, which was a movement to stop people worshipping graves. And yes, many many muslims think of burka and some, niqab as part of religion. Again, many muslims follow different opinions and seek guidance from different scholars, so it is not up to you to dictate religion to anyone.

Hahahaha you just keep making me laugh. You should read on the news more often. Even Islamic State have banned the niqab /burka because they view it as a security threat (irony at its finest). Egypt (a Muslim country) had a law drafted banning it. There were two suicide bombings in Chad and surprise surprise they were both commited by people wearing niqabs.
That's funny, the burka and niqab is forced upon women by isis, so God knows where you get your sources from. Isis is not going to let women out in underwear are they now? Egypt (controlled by a non-Islamic dictator) is not much of a democracy, not much of a muslim country either. And if your going to ban niqabs just because there were two suicide bombings by people who wore them, then I suggest you ban every single clothing that a terrorist wears when committing a terrorist attack. That would include western clothes.

Niqab campaigner was found to have terrorist links- http://www.therebel.media/niqab_campaigner_zunera_ishaq_s_terror_ties
Terrorist and murderer used burkas as disguises to escape the country-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10438195/The-runaway-terrorist-his-burka-disguise-and-a-compensation-bid.html

That's nice so now every women who wears a niqab is thought to follow this one niqab campaigner? And -
'pro-Taliban terrorist group/political party Jamaat-e-Islami' I know numerous people who are part of this group, none of whom agree with the Taliban. Infact I am pretty sure this group originated in colonial india.
And for your second source, I would suggest you actually read the source and see it was multiple faults of the police and security agency.
So don't go saying BS about how the niqab and burkas aren't a security threat. They are and they always will be and I wholeheartedly support any country that bans it.

The problem with civil liberties is that they can be abused and are countless times in this country. Disagree with anything pertaining to Islam and you are called racist.

You talk about being narrow minded yet how many Muslim countries are narrow minded towards Christians or any other religion. Look at countries like Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iran now and then look at how they were in the 1960s before the fundamentalists too over. The niqab/burka is not freedom, it is obeying the fundamentalists. It is the opposite of what you say it is.

civil liberties cant be abused, their civil liberties. Everyone is entitled to have them. And no, people who are called racist or islamaphobic are not disagreeing with islam, they are not making a civilised comment about which part of Islam they disagree with etc, they group all muslims together, think they are all brown, terrorists etc. When you target a whole group of people that is when you will be called islamaphobic or racist.

And how did the fundamentalists they over? none other then western and Russian imperialism and wars. And actually the niqab and burka did exist before these times, the more conservative women wore them. That is a ridiculous argument to make, anyone who wears the burka or niqab is a fundamentalist? You cannot dictate someones religion to them, they will look at their religion and perceive what is right.

Nope, women who choose to wear a burka are not a security threat, the majority of women wearing the burka are not al-Qaida members or planning to join isis.

It's your opinion, many disagree. Nazi uniforms are forbidden in Germany. Do you think they should be allowed?

Nazi uniforms have a history of racism, mass murder etc. The niqab and burka is just religious clothing worn by some muslim women. Everyone who wears the niqab and burka is not a extremist, while the Nazis were.

Wahhabism was considered a sect until recently.
You don't even know what Wahhabism is. You should infact read the book by wahhab. It is just another opinion in islam.

I don't need to be "educated in Islam". I just use logic. If your almighty god had wanted women to conceal their head, he would have made it clear in the Quran.
Oh he did, for women to dress modestly. Most muslims use hadith to understand context of quran. I suggest you actually go to some real research, not from some anti-muslim uneducated website.


It's not "dictating what the minority should wear"; it's banning some clothes that are considered promoting extremist ideologies.
except the burka and niqab does not promote extremists ideologies, it is worn and has been worn by women for a very long time, women who do not agree with the fundamentalists, but women who believe in covering up and dressing modestly.



Why are you bringing race into this? I never mentioned race.
It is an example of how white people think they can dictate what minority communities can or cant do.


It was a century ago. The overwhelming majority of the West now think that colonisation was terribly wrong. MOVE ON.
You still don't understand the ideas remain the same, the white people dictating to minorities.

Again, I don't see the link with a ban on burqa in the West.


I will not tolerate your "freedom of religion" if it means forced marriages, FGM, Sharia, burqa, etc.
Forced marriages, FGM is a cultural problem. I detest those things as the majority of muslims do. Sharia is based mostly on one spiritually, aswell as financially. Again, most muslims do not agree with the extreme version of sharia. Sharia has numerous interpretations.

Freedom of religion cannot be absolute. Otherwise we would have to accept any sectarian practice.
Like what? I have said the boundary is when it means conflicting harm on others.

You alone, no, but if a majority of people agree with, then yes. If an astronaut uniform was the distinctive sign of an extremist ideology, then I would also support its ban in public.
Again majority is not always right, especially when the minority is under attack. all communities deserve the same rights.
Again the burka and niqab is not a sign of a extremist ideology, simply because most of the women who wear it are not extremists.


I don't want to ban clothes for certain people, but for certain ideologies.

And again, you wish to ban muslim women from wearing their religious clothing while most do not even follow this ideology.
I never mentioned freedom of speech. You can campaign for the promotion of the niqab, or against the laws banning it, but expect harsh criticism.



There is no freedom of the press, no free election, no freedom of association, no freedom of opinion in Saudi Arabia. Laws enacted there have no value by western standards.
But you want to ban extreme ideas, certain opinions, dress, etc. I see a lot of similarities,
Moreover, their laws on women's clothes only allow the niqab; western laws on clothing ban the niqab, and allow everything else. I hope you understand the difference.

If she wanted to eat there, she could have taken off the niqab. I wouldn't walk into a cafe with a T-shirt with a picture of people shagging on it and be surprised if someone told me to leave, because I respect the fact that some people are offended by stuff like that. There are restaurants where you can't even wear trainers. The Ritz doesn't let you in if you aren't wearing a suit. It's pretty understandable why a restaurant wouldn't want someone wearing a niqab in there, as many people see that it represents antiquated values which support the subjugation of women. Guess they just don't want that kind of thing in their restaurant, in the same way they probably don't want someone to come in with their wife on a leash, which really isn't far off the niqab.

There is no difference whether you choose to ban or force clothing. It is simply the same. Dictating what a women can or cannot wear.

Brainwashed by the western media, what a surprise



Posted from TSR Mobile