This site is for all Atheists, especially new Atheists, black Atheists, ex-Muslim, former Jehovah Witnesses, and any Atheists who are struggling with revealing their rejection of a belief in God.

Monday, October 11, 2010

Monday Morning Moron: Burqas in Bourbon (When Secular States Get It Wrong)

Today's Monday Morning Moron has been brought to you by Mel Gibson













Remind men all over the world that Muslim men aren't the only guys with self-esteem so bad that they have to treat their women like shit.


Let's get er done.








Last month, the French Senate approved the ban on burqas in public. President Sarkozy referred to women who wear them as "prisoners behind a screen".
On September 14 2010, The French Senate overwhelmingly approved a ban on burqas in public. The law will be effective beginning on spring 2011. When the measure was sent in May to the parliament they said "Given the damage it produces on those rules which allow the life in community, ensure the dignity of the person and equality between sexes, this practice, even if it is voluntary, cannot be tolerated in any public place". [15][16]
This is clearly racism. Like all places in Europe, France is full of white people. All of a sudden, when a country begins to get a little darker, you have to focus on the non-white people and break them down. We have the same problem with "illegal immigration" in the United States. In our border states (states that are closest to Mexico), politicians want to do everything they can to the Mexicans. They don't care that these people have been through hell and consider a housekeeping job the cream of the crop compared to the employment in their native country. American politicians would like to blame these immigrants for two of the biggest problem our country is facing; employment and drugs. I don't want to get sidetracked (this tends to happen when I rant), but you would have to be an idiot for blaming immigrants for all or even most of the drugs in this country. You are even dumberER if you think that our employment rate would magically rise if we kicked all the brown people out. Let me stop right now. You were supposed to not let me get sidetracked. The point is, white supremacy can rear it's ugly head in more ways than one.

So what is a burqa anyway? Please tell us ehow.com
A burqa (burka or burkha, according to some transliterations) is a loose cloak-like garment worn by Muslim women. The burqa is made of either light cotton or crepe and most often comes in black. It covers the woman's entire body, with the exception of her hands, feet and eyes. A panel of veil-like or mesh material situated on the top portion of the face reveals the woman's eyes, allowing her to see and breathe. The cap that holds the fabric is often embellished with stitching.
Not to be confused with the hijab. I think Wikipedia can handle this one.

The word "hijab" or "ḥijāb" (Arabic: حجاب, (he-zjab)pronounced [ħiˈʒæːb] / [ħiˈɡæːb]) refers to both the head covering traditionally worn by Muslim women and modest Muslim styles of dress in general.
The Arabic word literally means curtain or cover (noun). Most Islamic legal systems define this type of modest dressing as covering everything except the face and hands in public.[1][2] According to Islamic scholarship, hijab is given the wider meaning of modesty, privacy, and morality;[3] the word for a headscarf or veil used in the Qur'an is khimār (خمار) and not hijab. Still another definition is metaphysical, where al-hijab refers to "the veil which separates man or the world from God."[2]






There are about three other issues I have with this law.


First is the effectiveness. I cannot imagine that this would make Muslim women feel liberated. The argument was that they were forced to wear something and that's bad. So now you want to force them to not wear it? Where the fuck is the freedom of choice there? There is none. I don't think you are helping. I think we have forgotten what type of religion Islam really is. The founder of the religion fucked a little fourth grader. That's right. He consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was about nine years old. That gives you an indication of the value that they place on their women in general. I grew up around Muslims and from my experience, a teenage boy has more authority in the household than his mother. I am not saying that this is the norm or the majority. However, in a city with tens of thousands of Muslims, for me to see it on a regular basis indicates that the practice is not uncommon. Furthermore, a chauvinist man will definitely take this as an insult to his religion and his pride. Whether it is justified or sexist, I know one thing. You should consider every single option before making these sorry excuses for men feel slighted in any way. How do you legislate what occurs in the houses of people who practice such an archaic and restrictive religion? What makes the French government think that a fashion restriction will help. These women suffer in unimaginable ways all over the world. It should be the responsibility of so called secular countries to stop all forms of abuse. This is not a good start, it's the conclusion of half ass law making.


My second biggest issue is the hypocrisy. You mean to tell me this is the biggest issue that you are facing in the country? Really France? No churches running around fucking kids? I think you might be forgetting a certain church founded by one Paul of Tarsus. I think they call it the Catholic Church. Apparently they have been fucking boys for years like their assholes have winning lottery numbers inside. I have yet to see a country be so bold and so brave to forbid a child to be alone in the same room as a priest. That's probably because the majority of Frenchmen and women claim allegiance to the Catholic Church.  What about Jehovah's witnesses? They don't allow their children to get blood transfusions. Not only is that potentially dangerous, it can lead to death. I don't see the French government outlawing those assholes. They used to be smart enough to consider The Jehovah's Witnesses a cult until a court overruled that decision back in 2000. I don't see the difference between Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientology - which is considered a cult.

Third is the Islamization of French society. These are people who believe that their country can be taken over by Muslims. This is once again racism, but more specifically xenophobia and ignorance. If your country is so weak minded that the citizens can be swayed into converting from a largely secular country , to a Islamic state, you deserve to be ruled by an Imam. If your country had any balls, it would not be worried in the least about head scarfs, veils, funny hats or any of that bullshit. France is supposed to be a template for a secular society. Now they pull this fear mongering bullshit. I always figured that they were smarter than that.


Finally what I am about to say may surprise you. I agree with the decision to ban all of those silly hats. They are another example of male domination of women and placing them in an inferior position.  However, if you are looking at the hijab as the foundation for ignorance, sexism, and oppression; you seriously don't have your priorities in order. Let's eliminate all forms of religious symbols in public. The Clerical Collar, Magic Underwear, Habits, Rosary beads, crosses, tattoos, religious robes or anything that can be viewed as faith oriented. But you won't do that France. Instead you deny people religious freedom. It should be all inclusive or full elimination. I would rather go for the latter. Atheism for all.

5 comments:

  1. "First is the effectiveness. I cannot imagine that this would make Muslim women feel liberated. The argument was that they were forced to wear something and that's bad. So now you want to force them to not wear it? Where the fuck is the freedom of choice there? "

    This circular reasoning echoes loudly in American culture as well. Similar to the war on drugs. In order to free the people from addiction and black market criminal organization, it is illegalized and our freedom to experiment becomes absent, along with the ironic creation of the worlds largest black market.

    "The founder of the religion fucked a little fourth grader. That's right. He consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was about nine years old."

    Wait a minute what religion are we talking about here? Any specifics sects?

    "Third is the Islamization of French society. These are people who believe that their country can be taken over by Muslims. This is once again racism, but more specifically xenophobia and ignorance."

    I think that this is the issue at hand. No one can obviously believe that by banning a religious wardrobe you are freeing a group of people (woman). That would be a form of bigotry that I think is absent in the case, only existent as a curtain. The real issue it Islamic faith and its threat to the rule and dominance of the catholic church and Christianity.


    Wiki - Roman Catholicism in France

    "Prior to the French Revolution, the Catholic Church had been the official state religion."

    "Thus, the 1905 French law on the separation of Church and State removed the special status of the four state religions (although by the Briand-Ceretti Agreement the state subsequently regained a role in the procedure for nominating bishops), except in Alsace-Moselle, at the time part of Germany, but left to them the use without fee of the churches that they used prior to 1905. However, Emile Combes, a member of the Radical-Socialist Party strictly enforced these laws, leading to clashes between the Congregationists and the authorities. Anti-clericalism slowly declined among the French left-wing throughout France in the twentieth century, while the question of religion and of freedom of thought seemed to have been resolved. However, it is still present as a defining trait of the left-wing, while most right-wing Frenchmen describe themselves as Catholics (although not necessarily practicing)."

    I am highly drawn to the conclude that the politics behind the Burqa ban is tainted with catholic/christian interest.


    I completely disagree with you on banning any form of religious ornament, clothing, and symbols in public. That is the complete opposite of freedom of expression and closer to socialist order. Hmmmm, its almost a form of circular logic as well on your part, why would you even suppose this? Instead of stripping away a religious persons freedom to wear whatever they want in public (be it they don't come in conflict with someone else's freedom. ie: The Dingambar follow a practice of wearing no cloth, or the pledge of allegiance in American classes that force In God We Trust mantras) we should let people be free without oppression of mandated religious policy, either from the state or from the church.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "It should be all inclusive or full elimination."
    That means that we should eliminate religious expression or allow people to worship as they please. The choice is based on the country. If you allow Clerical Collars, it's totally hypocritical and racist to ban the hijab. If we can eliminate it all, that would be a more atheist and free thinking society.I think race and religion is what separates us. I would not be a true atheist if i wanted a country to have freedom of religion. Freedom FROM religion is the goal. No religion is what I dream in the next few centuries. We are at the forefront. We can be pioneers if the total rejection of faith.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hmmmm.

    No I still disagree. People have the right to choose to be stupid. The idea in my perspective is to enlighten the masses to think critically and therefore people can choose for themselves not to be stupid.

    I would never support suppression of stupidity. I am a freedom fighter and stupid ideas are part of individual freedom.


    LOL@ my nonchalant exchange of religion with stupid.


    Hey you still didn't tell me who you were referring to when you said the founder of the religion fucker a fourth grader????

    ReplyDelete
  4. You disapoint me Eric, LOL.

    I was talking about Islam. For dramatic purposes, I will not tell you story. Click the link below.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for the link, quite enlightening!

    Came across this while looking into the subject.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad%27s_wives

    ReplyDelete