Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Niqab wearer asked to leave restaurant in Germany

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tresspasser)
    You are not obliged to accept it, you're not living their lifestyle. Grow up past your assumptions and actually have first hand interactions with them. The amount of fear and paranoia the West breeds is ridiculous!, half of you haven't even spoken to a woman in a Niqab and you apparently know all of her strife and struggles.
    Women in niqab do not want to interact with non-mahrams.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Angry Bird)
    so you're a vegan?
    I believe his point is that halal slaughter causes unnecessary additional suffering to the animal in that it is forced to be fully conscious when slaughtered whereas I believe most non-halal meat is stunned prior to this.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tresspasser)
    In plain English then, have you worn the veil?
    Yes (I have worn an item of clothing that covers my face, in public. On several occasions)

    Have you interacted person to person with a woman in a Niqab?
    Yes, several times.

    A minority of men FORCE women to wear the veil and yet a majority of women in CHOOSE to wear the veil,
    Could you link to the evidence you base this assertion on. Thanks.

    Also, if a woman absolutely believes in Allah and his ability to punish her for not following his rules, is following these rules really "choice"?

    but you'd much rather focus on the minority of men then the majority of muslim women? goes to show how much significance you pay to women and their own decisions.
    A tiny minority of men commit serious crimes, but the police would much rather focus on the minority than on the majority who don't.

    The Niqab is how you choose to see it, same goes for any garment of clothing religious or not. If you see the Niqab as a symbol of oppression etc etc then the problem is with your own mentality than the Niqab itself.
    This make no sense whatsoever.
    It is beyons argument that the niqab/burqa is sometimes forced on women, sometimes with threats of violence. Are you claiming that this does not make it a symbol of oppression - at least in those cases?
    And if it is a symbol of oppression for some women, then it is quite appalling that other women will glibly claim they choose to wear it. They are essentially saying "your suffering and oppression means nothing to me".

    BTW, are you aware that in societies run under strict adherence to Islamic doctrine and sharia, it is a punishable offence for women to be in public without the prescribed covering?
    Is that a problem with "my mentality" as well?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tresspasser)
    You are not obliged to accept it, you're not living their lifestyle. Grow up past your assumptions and actually have first hand interactions with them. The amount of fear and paranoia the West breeds is ridiculous!, half of you haven't even spoken to a woman in a Niqab and you apparently know all of her strife and struggles.
    You seem to be getting issues mixed up here.
    We all know that reasons for wearing the full-face veil vary - some women in the west may actually wear it without any form of coercion, most, especially in many Muslim majority countries and communities, wear it because it is basically unthinkable not to, whether through tradition or physical enforcement. And because of the physical enforcement an punishment for not complying - it is a universal symbol of oppression to those not wearing it, regardless of the individual reasons.

    However, that doesn't change the fact that anyone should be allowed to wear it (except in those situations and locations where any face covering is prohibited).

    In simple english:
    Every rational person sees it as a symbol of anachronistic, partiarchal misogyny (regardless of the individual's reason for wearing it).
    Every rational person opposes banning it, because of our essential freedoms.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Angry Bird)
    so you're a vegan?
    What made you assume that?

    I notice that you avoided explaining why killing a moth is considered unacceptable, but inflicting avoidable suffering on a lamb is not only acceptable, but something to be celebrated.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    I believe his point is that halal slaughter causes unnecessary additional suffering to the animal in that it is forced to be fully conscious when slaughtered whereas I believe most non-halal meat is stunned prior to this.
    My specific point was to ask why Angry Bird finds killing a moth unacceptable, but is happy to celebrate a lamb having its throat slit and bleeding to death whilst fully conscious.
    I just found it hard to understand.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ForgetMe)
    This means a woman with a short skirt and clear cleavage can enter a restaurant in an Islamic country and not be judged too, right?
    there are numerous islamic countries, not only Saudi arabia ad UAE. and Germany is not a religious country but a democracy. where a women can wear anything she likes.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous9753)
    there are numerous islamic countries, not only Saudi arabia ad UAE. and Germany is not a religious country but a democracy. where a women can wear anything she likes.
    No. Some clothes are banned in Germany and business owners have also the right to ban some brands of clothes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Women in niqab do not want to interact with non-mahrams.
    Is there not more than one way to interact with a person? use your imagination! Or is it an excuse to live in your own bubble by assuming everyone else wants to remain in theirs?
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    My specific point was to ask why Angry Bird finds killing a moth unacceptable, but is happy to celebrate a lamb having its throat slit and bleeding to death whilst fully conscious.
    I just found it hard to understand.
    when did I say killing a moth is unacceptable lmao? you must be talking about someone else mate
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    I believe his point is that halal slaughter causes unnecessary additional suffering to the animal in that it is forced to be fully conscious when slaughtered whereas I believe most non-halal meat is stunned prior to this.
    halal is still stunned prior to killing. I don't think that was his point at all otherwise he would have said so before. He clearly lost at his own game @QE2
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Yes (I have worn an item of clothing that covers my face, in public. On several occasions)
    Well let me rephrase myself, have you ever worn anything with a religious significance in the form of a face covering? plainly a Niqab. Masks,helmets etc do not count.

    (Original post by QE2)
    Also, if a woman absolutely believes in Allah and his ability to punish her for not following his rules, is following these rules really "choice"?
    The Niqab is optional.
    You really show no understanding or knowledge of Islam when it comes to a personal relationship with Allah;
    When Allah decreed the creation, he wrote in his book with him on his throne: My mercy prevails over my wrath.”Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī3022, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2751


    (Original post by QE2)
    A tiny minority of men commit serious crimes, but the police would much rather focus on the minority than on the majority who don't
    You're kidding! It's like suggesting we ban knives because SOME people misuse it because by doing so many more harmless people are sanctioned than those who are deserving of punishment.

    The knife for instance is fairly innocent until its applied incorrectly, You can feed someone by preparing a meal with the use of a knife or you can hurt someone with it. The ratio of people who use the knife to commit a crime and those who use it for beneficial purposes isn't clear to see because we only know of the incidences when the knife has been misapplied and never otherwise. Same goes for the Niqab, when people choose to misinterpret and exploit it, than that is the only time its given any precedence.

    (Original post by QE2)
    This make no sense whatsoever.
    It is beyons argument that the niqab/burqa is sometimes forced on women, sometimes with threats of violence. Are you claiming that this does not make it a symbol of oppression - at least in those cases?
    And if it is a symbol of oppression for some women, then it is quite appalling that other women will glibly claim they choose to wear it. They are essentially saying "your suffering and oppression means nothing to me".
    Prescription drugs are credit worthy when they are put to use correctly, you for instance and many other people could read the instructions and be very responsible as to how you consume the drugs. Others however could overdose and harm themselves with the same prescription of drugs. Tell me are the drugs a symbol of danger? etc etc.The Niqab is and should always be a symbol of personal discipline and choice irrelevant of how wrongfully it may be applied. A weak mind is one that forms a staunch opinion or idea of something based on other peoples interpretation of something. Symbols are most usually interpretations.


    (Original post by QE2)
    BTW, are you aware that in societies run under strict adherence to Islamic doctrine and sharia, it is a punishable offence for women to be in public without the prescribed covering?
    Is that a problem with "my mentality" as well?
    Which strict 'sharia adherent Islamic' societies do you speak of? Dont humor me with Saudi Arabia or which ever middle eastern country you have to showcase. I suggest you study the principles of Shariah from reputable Muslim scholars before you adhere to any foreign, majority Muslim populated country's idea of what it is. And whatever they have to do with the governing of their country has very little to do with Islam and its teachings. Do 'Christian' countries truly govern by the laws of the Bible?

    Tell me if you struggle to understand the use of words.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Angry Bird)
    halal is still stunned prior to killing. I don't think that was his point at all otherwise he would have said so before. He clearly lost at his own game @QE2
    I thought it was otherwise, can you provide evidence for this ?
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HanSoloLuck)
    I thought it was otherwise, can you provide evidence for this ?
    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...ughter-involve
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    First, Islam doesn't demand that women cover their face.

    Second, it just means that there is a possibility that you won't be able to use certain venues if you refuse to remove your mask. It is a personal choice that has certain repercussions, like so many things in life.
    That's ostracisation to forbid them from places like that. For them it is a religious practice, which is protected by human rights and which we have to show tolerance towards.

    But if the sacrifice is willing, then who are you to stop them from practicing their religion? That was your argument.
    Or is it only some religions that have these rights.
    To repeat: because human sacrifice causes real physical harm, whereas the veil does not.

    And I'm sure that there are psychologists who would argue that wearing the veil does harm. After all, most Muslim women who wear it are coerced to some degree, in some way.
    You can't be sure so you would be banning women who also choose to wear it out of religious deference.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So you'd be happy for me to walk around the prayer room in your local mosque with my shoes on?
    (Original post by MiszShortee786)
    Of course not. What sort of question is that?
    One that clearly shows you are a hypocrite. You talk about tolerance when in fact Islam is the most intolerant religion on this planet. We cannot take our habits, our views, our religion to a Muslim country without fear of imprisonment or death.

    Call it what you will but a niqab is a mask. It hides the true identity of that person. It is a security risk in the same way as any face covering. Anyone could be behind that mask planning anything. Personally I would ban the niqab. If you want to wear it in a Muslim country, go there and wear it but when you are in a Christian country you abide by their laws which outweigh your religion!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    To begin with, it's a Guardian article, a left wing newspaper renowned for bias reporting on issues surrounding immigration and Muslims, but if I take it for what it is and assume for the sake of argument that everything said there is true.

    This accounts for a very small percentage of the Muslim population operating Halal abattoirs in a country where it is somewhat illegal to practice the type of Halal slaughter being talked about in this thread, in a Muslim country where Muslims answer only to their interpretation of Islam would we expect to see them stunning animals ?

    In all honesty, I doubt it.

    What I would need to see, and you are under no obligation to provide it, is halal certification authorities operating outside Western countries and maintaining the same adherence to the minimization of animal suffering.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    No. Some clothes are banned in Germany and business owners have also the right to ban some brands of clothes.
    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.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous9753)
    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.
    Please explain to me how covering yourself up is a symbol of religious freedom and how its anti democratic to ban clothing that poses as a security risk.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MiszShortee786)
    Exactly I wear it out of my OWN choice. Why is that so HARD to comprehend? Honestly.
    Your logic is flawed on so many levels. Why don't you think about your reasoning before making statements that completely contradict what you said before?
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply
Updated: September 25, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Do you have exam superstitions?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.