Will self on the hijab

[Maz3]

 

So would you ban it?

 

I would ban it being worn by employees, in all places of work, because it's incompatible with equality.

[boyfriday]

I would ban it being worn by employees, in all places of work, because it's incompatible with equality.

 

Could you explain why it's incompatible with equality?

 

By the way I'd ban it for certain occupations, but for different reasons.

 

---------- Post added 16-11-2013 at 21:17 ----------

 

I can't, so the next best thing is to ask the people that believe it is Gods law that says women should cover their faces, but men don't have to. God must have told them why men are exempt from this rule.

 

Well I've already quoted a passage from the Bible above, which they believe to be the word of 'God'.

[angos]

Could you explain why it's incompatible with equality?

 

By the way I'd ban it for certain occupations, but for different reasons.

 

---------- Post added 16-11-2013 at 21:17 ----------

 

 

Well I've already quoted a passage from the Bible above, which they believe to be the word of 'God'.

 

The Bible isn't claimed to be the word of God.

[Maz3]

Could you explain why it's incompatible with equality?

 

Because men don't have to go round with a piece of cloth over their faces to protect their 'modesty', only women. Because it's very difficult to treat someone who is hiding behind a curtain as an individual person, never mind see them as an equal.

[boyfriday]

Because men don't have to go round with a piece of cloth over their faces to protect their 'modesty', only women.

You're making the assumption that it's a choice not freely entered into or it's something women do reluctantly.

 

To use an analogy would you ban breast enhancements because men (generally) don't have them and they're often done for the pleasure of men?

 

Because it's very difficult to treat someone who is hiding behind a curtain as an individual person, never mind see them as an equal.

That would also be my reasoning, but Im not convinced it's an equality issue.

[angos]

You're making the assumption that it's a choice not freely entered into or it's something women do reluctantly.

 

To use an analogy would you ban breast enhancements because men (generally) don't have them and they're often done for the pleasure of men?

 

That would also be my reasoning, but Im not convinced it's an equality issue.

 

You do live in a strange realty.

[Amadeus]

There's a tradition in all Abrahamic religions (including Christianity) that women cover their heads. As well as Muslim women, Catholic and Jewish women continue to follow that custom to varying degrees.

 

This is what Corinthians says

 

Seem like there's a tradition on Sheffield Forum for Mellthebell to start fire stoking threads and the same old loonies to humour him with the same old rubbish over and over again.

Enough already.

 

Mellthebell, end it.

[Maz3]

You're making the assumption that it's a choice not freely entered into or it's something women do reluctantly.

 

That would also be my reasoning, but Im not convinced it's an equality issue.

 

I don't think it is a choice freely entered into, in parts of Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan etc. it's a bit different here - I think some women wear the veil because it's a bit controversial and to draw attention to themselves - nothing to do with modesty really!

[skinz]

You do live in a strange realty.

 

I've just read one of your entries in another thread, be careful with what reality comes back and bites you in the bum. I don't think you're the one to be throwing "strange reality" statements as an insult abaht.

 

---------- Post added 16-11-2013 at 22:26 ----------

 

I don't think it is a choice freely entered into, in parts of Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan etc. it's a bit different here - I think some women wear the veil because it's a bit controversial and to draw attention to themselves - nothing to do with modesty really!

 

Women do that all the time, as do men.

[Plain Talker]

My understanding is that the garment is worn for the sake of modesty, because some bloke told them that their face and hair should be covered, why doesn't that rule apply to men?

 

IN fact the Qur'an DOES tell men that they should be covered, modestly. Both men and women are instructed to cover that which is precious, (ie what you would not normally "display", so for women, the bosom and private area, and for men, their private area. for men it's navel to knee, at least, and for women, bosom to knee)

 

It's not actually mandatory that the face be covered, it's the head/ hair that is meant to be covered. And, as Boyfriday has said, above, the three Abrahamic religions all have instruction that the woman's hair be covered. Most frohm (observant) Jewish women wear a scarf or wig ( a "Shteitl"), and the Christian woman is also told to cover her head.

 

Yes, I understand what was written in books by men, but why would a God want a women to cover her face, but not a man.

Again, we aren't told to cover our faces.

 

The rules about performing the Muslim Pilgrimage, or "Hajj" are that the woman cannot wear niqaab (face veil)whiclst performing Hajj.

I may stand to be corrected here, but also the requirement for prayer is that the woman praying must cover herself except for her face and hands (Some schools also permit bare feet) the man must be covered from neck to ankle to wrist, some also wear the prayer cap.

 

Because men don't have to go round with a piece of cloth over their faces to protect their 'modesty', only women. Because it's very difficult to treat someone who is hiding behind a curtain as an individual person, never mind see them as an equal.

 

Some women do take the concept of covering to a further degree, by covering the face. Here in the west, thankfully, it's usually by choice, and not something forced on them.

 

Something that made me chuckle with a little irony, regarding the "wearing the veil in a court of law" issue, was this:-

 

Many have said "Ah but... You need to SEE the person who is speaking, to observe their body language, and to ascertain whether they are being truthful...

 

So, does this mean, then, that no-one who is blind, or partially sighted, could be trusted to sit on a jury? Do you absolutely need the power of sight to ascertain whether someone is truthful? of course not, that would be a ridiculous supposition, and highly insulting towards someone who is blind, denigrating their ability to adjudge between evidence presented to them as being genuine or false.