Muslim headscarves (2 Viewers)

[SGS05]

I haven't read the 12 pages or whatever of this thread. I don't see what the big fuss is about banning head scarves or any religious adornments. Private schools have been doing it for ages and yet our school still have Hindus and BUddists etc attending. Its not that big of a deal. Uniforms were designed in the first place to make everyone the same so you couldn't tell between a poor child and a rich one and it should be kept that way so that you cant tell the difference between religions. Otherwise it might lead to gang mentality and racial tensions.

 

[malkin86]

It's just assimilation wrapped up with aribbon and called 'multicuturalism'.

In all societies, there is a need for a 'baseline culture' - a shared set of ideas about the important things - like when a child stops being a child and becomes an adult, what are crimes and what are the appropriate punishments for those crimes, etc. Without a 'baseline culture' there stands a very real possiblity of anarchy, I believe. So it is neccessary that there should be some degree of assimilation into, or melding of the baseline culture.

I would say that not all aspects of cultures are positive/desirable/worth nuturing/keep-worthy. (eg. the practice of slavery) So it's important to be critical of even one's own cultural practices.

 

[Generator]

Of course, malkin, but by banning headscarves you're essentially assimilating people by denying them their culture. We supposedly pride ourselves on being "one of the most multicultural societies in the world" and that assimilation of other cultures has been phased out, but then we go and try to do this, making everything about multiculturalism a lie. We're not multicultural, just a loose consortium of nationalities living on the same patch of land.

Multiculturalism in practice is nothing more than tokenistic expressions of cultural identity that do not actively conflict with the baseline society (that baseline being Anglo-Celtic in nature). It's soft, in other words, and to expect anything more at this stage is to hope for too much, especially when we are just one of the few nation-states to even accept the notion of soft-multiculturalism as being valid.

I should add to that the headscarf isn't going to be banned in schools (and I doubt that Bronwyn or Sophie expected their comments to be taken as being worthy of party-room consideration). We aren't as militant as the French, and that's to be expected given the structures of our political systems.

 

[Kaiser Zero]

Wake up. 'Multiculturalism' is destroying our national identity. Tourists visiting parts of sydney would think our population is predominantly muslims or lebs - I'm embarrassed.

 

[malkin86]

Argo, so banning the headscarf would be a step backwards, by forcing them to change, one would only alienate them more, yes? I don't fully get what your point is.
Generator - could there ever be anything more than 'soft-multiculturalism'? Like incorporating non Anglo-Celtic ideas into the baseline society?

Kaiser, is it really 'destroying' our national identity? Pre- WWII, our national archetypes were the bushman, the digger, and the surf lifesaver. How many of those kinds of people do you know today? A lecturer of mine reckoned that why we don't have a single figure any more, and we've moved towards multiculturalism, is partially to separate ourselves from the eugenics movement of Hitler, etc. I reckon it's a bit of a stretch, myself, but I can sort of see where he's coming from.

 

[Generator]

Generator - could there ever be anything more than 'soft-multiculturalism'? Like incorporating non Anglo-Celtic ideas into the baseline society?

In time, perhaps, but that would require a society that is largely liberal in nature and accepting of the fact that our humanity, not our religion or socio-political system, is something that may act as a common focus upon which we may form a constructive multicultural society... We'll need the help of the odd alien and the odd war or two, and we will have to hope that the liberals (or at least the secularists) prevail over the religious warriors when such a time comes, but that's not asking for too much .

In all seriousness, multiculturalism was never intended to be anything more than what it is now, a soft form of cultural integration. To criticise it for being so doesn't make much sense when it's essentially acting as it should by providing an environment in which people may (in part) express their cultural identity within the well-established framework of our anglo-celtic society.

 

[malkin86]

No, not too much at all... I like the way you think.

 

[googooloo]

Argo, so banning the headscarf would be a step backwards, by forcing them to change, one would only alienate them more, yes?

Yes this is true.even tho i aint argo it is.

 

[googooloo]

Wake up. 'Multiculturalism' is destroying our national identity. Tourists visiting parts of sydney would think our population is predominantly muslims or lebs - I'm embarrassed.

If they went only to the area of sydney where this cultural group is predominent then yes this may be so. But remember the stereotype overseas isnt this anyway. it is bush, outback, dirt, kangeroos adn we all talk like steve erwin (that's why he's so successful cuse he's the stereotype).

 

[Guzak]

Why should we ban the headscarf?, it is a show of religion, i am not religious at all and belive they are all false, but wearing a headscarf is the same as wearing a cross, or carrying prayer beads, it should definitely be alowed

Interesting fact ive just learnt: the headscarf is worn because supposedly whenever you see a picture of mary her head is covered, and since muslims belive that she is a part of them they do the same.

 

[veterandoggy]

- If it is not banned we'll still have feminist groups angry about its symbolic representation of gender oppression, like what is seen in the article.

yeh, only that is what feminists think...
you see, the hijab is a optional thing for the women, as in theyre not forced to wear it, but they still must wear it.

it also prevents alot of desire from arising towards women, so a hijab is a deterrent for rape, or so i think

 

[veterandoggy]

Why should we ban the headscarf?, it is a show of religion, i am not religious at all and belive they are all false, but wearing a headscarf is the same as wearing a cross, or carrying prayer beads, it should definitely be alowed

Interesting fact ive just learnt: the headscarf is worn because supposedly whenever you see a picture of mary her head is covered, and since muslims belive that she is a part of them they do the same.

yes, ironic how we love mary more than most christians...

 

[physician]

Why should we ban the headscarf?, it is a show of religion, i am not religious at all and belive they are all false, but wearing a headscarf is the same as wearing a cross, or carrying prayer beads, it should definitely be alowed

Interesting fact ive just learnt: the headscarf is worn because supposedly whenever you see a picture of mary her head is covered, and since muslims belive that she is a part of them they do the same.

yeh, Maryam ( Mary) is very very important in Islam

The Quran speaks of Maryam's birth:


Remember when the wife of 'Imran said:My Lord, I have vowed to You whatever is in my womb, to be devoted [to Your service]. Please accept it from me. You are the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing." When she gave birth, she said: "My Lord! I have given birth to a girl"-and Allah knew very well what she had given birth to, male and female are not the same-"and I have named her Maryam and placed her and her children in Your safekeeping from Satan, the accursed." (Surah Al 'Imran: 35-36)

Allah also exalted Maryam in the Quran over all women!

And when the angels said: "Maryam, Allah has chosen you and purified you. He has chosen you over all other women. Maryam, obey your Lord and prostrate and bow with those who bow." (Surah Al 'Imran: 42-43)

She's also described as being very obedient towards Allah:

And Maryam, the daughter of 'Imran, who guarded her chastity-We breathed Our Spirit into her. She confirmed the Words of her Lord and His Book, and was one of the obedient. (Surat at-Tahrim: 12)

… and she who guarded her chastity. We breathed into her some of Our Spirit and made her and her son a Sign for all the worlds. (Surat al-Anbiya': 91)

The birth of Jesus (peace be upon him).

Jibril introduces himself saying the following... "I am only your Lord's messenger [an angel] so that He can give you a pure boy" (Surah Maryam: 19).

When the angels said: "Maryam, your Lord gives you good news of a Word from Him. His name is the Messiah, 'Isa, son of Maryam, of high esteem in this world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near." (Surah Al 'Imran: 45)

Maryam replied: "How can I have a boy when no man has touched me and I am not an unchaste woman?" (Surah Maryam: 20), thereby indicating her chastity. Jibril told her that:

He [Jibril] said: "It will be so." Allah creates whatever He wills. When He decides on something, He just says to it, "Be!" and it is. (Surah Al 'Imran: 47)

He said: "It will be so." Your Lord says: "That is easy for Me. It is so that We can make him a Sign for humanity and a mercy from Us. It is a matter already decreed." So she conceived him and withdrew with him to a distant place. (Surah Maryam: 21-22)

so yeh!...those are jut some of the verses on Maryam and Jesus (Isa) from the Quran!...

Im pritty sure the Hijab was even passed down from judaism ... Im not 100% sure, so dont take my word for it!

 

[phemale_souljah]

First of all, if the hijab were to be banned ( which I find to be extremely unnecessary and inconsiderate) to what extent is religion to be denied to people?

From what I know Islamic women are increasingly becoming the determinants of whether or not they wear the headscarf, am I right? And if that is in fact the case, then it is to little or no avail to argue that it is oppressive to women.

It is stipulated in our Constitution that we are free to express our religion, and that is what I see in the wearing of the hijab by muslim women, as with the collar worn by priests, the crucifix by Christians and even the turban by Hindus.

Banning it will not only be futile, but a step backwards for what we have worked so hard to achieve, a pluralist and multiculturalist society.

 

[ugly14]

First of all, if the hijab were to be banned ( which I find to be extremely unnecessary and inconsiderate) to what extent is religion to be denied to people?

From what I know Islamic women are increasingly becoming the determinants of whether or not they wear the headscarf, am I right? And if that is in fact the case, then it is to little or no avail to argue that it is oppressive to women.

It is stipulated in our Constitution that we are free to express our religion, and that is what I see in the wearing of the hijab by muslim women, as with the collar worn by priests, the crucifix by Christians and even the turban by Hindus.

Banning it will not only be futile, but a step backwards for what we have worked so hard to achieve, a pluralist and multiculturalist society.

totally agree with u phemale_souljah!!
these ppl out there who have no lives and want to ban the scarves... i say they should get a life because im 100% sure that the scarf on muslim women does not effect them in any way... australia is suppose to be a multicultural country, accepting everyone no matter wat their religion on background is...
so stop arguing and get a life!

 

[MoonlightSonata]

It is stipulated in our Constitution that we are free to express our religion, and that is what I see in the wearing of the hijab by muslim women, as with the collar worn by priests, the crucifix by Christians and even the turban by Hindus.

That only applies to the Commonwealth, not to the states.

 

[SashatheMan]

totally agree with u phemale_souljah!!
these ppl out there who have no lives and want to ban the scarves... i say they should get a life because im 100% sure that the scarf on muslim women does not effect them in any way... australia is suppose to be a multicultural country, accepting everyone no matter wat their religion on background is...
so stop arguing and get a life!

so being in an argument and on a side you consider is wrong, means the person has no life? i wanna argue that point.

 

[ugly14]

so being in an argument and on a side you consider is wrong, means the person has no life? i wanna argue that point.

i was merely expressing a point of view which i strongly believe in, u don't have to agree to it. and about having no life, that was not to be taken literaly.... wat i meant was that ppl who want to ban the scarfs should find something else to fill up their time, because its not gonna happen! (so stop arguing about it)

 

[phemale_souljah]

That only applies to the Commonwealth, not to the states.

don't get pedantic, as if the States of Australia aren't under the bloomin Commonwealth.

 

[Generator]

don't get pedantic, as if the States of Australia aren't under the bloomin Commonwealth.

116. The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

He's not being pedantic. The constitution states the Commonwealth shall note make any laws with regards to the enforcement of religious practice, not that it is explicitly forbidden within Australia.