Ban The Burkha

[Harmeet Singh]

It was Guru Amar Das who abolished the practice of Purdah, so why should sikhs support burka?

Burka is not also islamic according to many muslims.

Muslim nations ban non muslims from practicing there daily life, let alone religion.

Muslims is west should fight against such political system.

[mann_kaum_layee_qurbaan]

hey if you want to promote the suppression of women in full burqa go ahead, take your kirpans with you, by the way why not fight for sati as well, women should be allowed to burn themselves on the funeral pyre right? Come one yeah sikhs are dharam de rakhwaale but there is a thing called common sense. Sikhs fight so people can practice their faith, if their faith involves some outright inhumane or suppressing requirements(what if someone says dowry is their faith?) then i think the khalsa should not fight for it. I honestly in the history of sikhi have never heard of the khalsa fight for women to stay in burqa or other cultural things of the kind. burqa banning is not stopping muslim women from wearing a hijab...the last time i checked women in afghanistan were forced to wear burqas by the taliban and i don't think we should serve as the radical muslims' foot soldiers.

anyways my belief...

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

A good part of the Asa Di Vaar is to basically condemn the Brahmins about their useless practices. However, we see Guru Tegh Bahadur sacrifice his life at the request of the Brahmins. Sikhs do not believe in Brahminism or the Burqa, but they do believe in the right for every person to live according to their own beliefs. It is the spirit of freedom that is at question, not whether someone's belief is in line for yours. If this was the case, what was the reason for saving all those Hindu women from the Mughals and Afghans...they were not Sikhs, nor did they believe in the same things Sikhs do...right?

[N30S1NGH]

Sat Sri Akal:

A good part of the Asa Di Vaar is to basically condemn the Brahmins about their useless practices.  However, we see Guru Tegh Bahadur sacrifice his life at the request of the Brahmins.  Sikhs do not believe in Brahminism or the Burqa, but they do believe in the right for every person to live according to their own beliefs.  It is the spirit of freedom that is at question, not whether someone's belief is in line for yours.  If this was the case, what was the reason for saving all those Hindu women from the Mughals and Afghans...they were not Sikhs, nor did they believe in the same things Sikhs do...right?

126260[/snapback]

good post ms bhaji

[>Bikramjit Singh<]

Some points.

1. The ban of burkha is because the Dutch have basically had enough of pandering to Muslims in the last few decades. They have tried their multi-cultural approach and whereas the Dutch have been accommodating the Muslim beliefs all they have received in return is the islamification of their society. A few years ago a Dutch film maker was killed for making a film about the suppression of Muslim women within Islam. A Somali MP who helped him is now living under police protection and another minister had to go into hiding. The Dutch were the most tolerant people in Europe and now due to the Muslims they have become one of the least tolerant. The ban is a way for the Dutch to literally take back their society from Muslim encroachment

2. There is a fear amongst the security forces that Muslim terrorists will use the burkha to bypass security and commit a terrorist act. Nothing is safe in this war and as Mohammed himself is supposed to have said "war is deceit" so the Dutch cannot expect Muslim terrorists to not take advantage of the burkha to bypass security. They are aware that there would be the usual outrage if women in burkha are searched thoroughly. So by banning the burkha they can deal with this security fear. We need to understand the pressures that the security forces are under. They face terrorists that as jehadis under their religion can take alcohol, gamble, womanise in fact do everything that is not allowed under their religion in order to fool the security forces.

3. The burkha which is a form of jilbab has a lot of support from Islamic scholars. The hijab is a recent development, the Muslims know that apart from a few women no one will want to wear a covering that covers them completely. So that's why the hijab has been made mandatory instead of the burkha-jilbab

4. After 7/7 one Muslim scholar said that it was religiously permissible for Muslim women to take off their Muslim clothing if there was any danger of attacks on them. Not only does this cover burkha but also hijab. So if the Dutch govt perceive that the burkha could be used by terrorists then surely the Muslims should understand this and make sure they cooperate with the ban. But as the Muslims are a big minority of 15-20% in the Netherlands their actions are coloured by this. In UK they are only 2.5% so they know that they are weak at the moment and need to compromise. Incidentally given the large number of Martyrs in Sikhi we get no such similar number of Martyrs in Islam. When Sikhs were offered conversion to Islam and giving up their 5 kakaars they chose to give up their lives instead. A Muslim offered such a deal can in all good conscience fake a conversion to another religion and is still deemed a Muslim as long as he believes in Islam in his heart. This is why the only Martyrs you get in Islam are those who blow themselves up to kill non-Muslims and not those who remain true to their beliefs under oppression.

5. The Sikhs are caught in the catch 22 situation here. Once again the Sikhs will suffer do to Muslim actions just as after 9/11 and then again being caught in the religious symbols ban in France. The bigger danger is if we protest against the burkha ban. This means that not only are we as Sikhs aligning ourselves with the oppression of women through forcing them to wear burkha but also in the minds of the public we will be associated with Muslims. As is usual with Muslim leaders and organisations they have a tendency to make outrageous statements and we Sikhs will get associated with these views.

6. To those who cite the Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur, we need to use our common sense here. Did Guruji give Shaheedi to protect the Brahmins from being forcibly converted to Islam or to protect their religion in toto with all the beliefs such as caste, sati etc? MKLQ bhaji gave a good reason why we should be careful not to rush in feet first into supporting the Muslims. What if someone says dowry is their religion and the government bans it, will we then also take part in protests against a dowry ban. How about if Muslims start to kill apostates from Islam as they are entitled to do according to their religion? The govt takes actions against them, do we then start to protest for the killers because their religious rights are being infringed? Who has more human rights? The one who will be killed for leaving Islam or the Muslims who only want to follow their religion and kill the apostate? Who will we support? These examples may appear extreme but rest assured they will come up one day.

[buddasingh]

hey if you want to promote the suppression of women in full burqa go ahead, take your kirpans with you, by the way why not fight for sati as well, women should be allowed to burn themselves on the funeral pyre right?  Come one yeah sikhs are dharam de rakhwaale but there is a thing called common sense.  Sikhs fight so people can practice their faith, if their faith involves some outright inhumane or suppressing requirements(what if someone says dowry is their faith?) then i think the khalsa should not fight for it.  I honestly in the history of sikhi have never heard of the khalsa fight for women to stay in burqa or other cultural things of the kind.  burqa banning is not stopping muslim women from wearing a hijab...the last time i checked women in afghanistan were forced to wear burqas by the taliban and i don't think we should serve as the radical muslims' foot soldiers.

anyways my belief...

126249[/snapback]

Interesting thoughts, but here's the flipside.

I wonder if the most important aspect of what you are saying is "being forced". It is wrong to force to wear a burqa and wrong to force not to wear a burqa. Whether it's male Taliban going one way or male/largely male Dutch lawmakers going the other way, who are simpleton men in either place to say what is mandatory for women.

Perhaps banning the burqa in a free society like the Netherlands is the equivalent of mandating its wearing in an authoritarian Taliban society. I think when our guruji's defended the rights of others, it was thier right to "self-determination".

Whatever ones opinion may be on the burqa itself, I have trouble with the western lens and motivation for the move. If the Netherlands had some deep rooted commitment to a universal respect for women and this was part of it, I could more easily support it. However, it is ignorance and racism that is the driving force. Does being racist effectively counter any sexism? I say no, and in fact it can be a very hypocritical and dangerous proposition.

This is not about the burqa as France was not about the hijab. Is it simply racism? ...Ugly despicable short sited hate?

[SSM]

Waheguru ji ka khalsa waheguru ji ki fateh

well it cant be racism if we look at the reason why they want to ban the burqa- its to save themselves from the extremists- understandable.

Sati and all that is a bit extreme and I really don' t think we should be considering all that because this is just about a woman wanting to cover herself up not burn herself.

But looking at the reasons for the ban, really agree we shouldnt be protesting about keeping it especially cos of point 5 of Bikramjit veerji's post.

But if it was not hurting anyone, i mean no security threat, then I would not hesitate to support the muslims but this time I think we need to leave out any protesting

Waheguru ji ka khalsa waheguru ji ki fateh

[gupt_paapi]

true.. i stand corrected

[>Bikramjit Singh<]

This is not about the burqa as France was not about the hijab. Is it simply racism? ...Ugly despicable short sited hate?

126273[/snapback]

Bro I find it hard to believe that these countries have suddenly become racist in the last few years. You need to look deeper at the reasons why they now want to ban the burkha. It's not hate, it's a desire to stop their societies being overwhelmed through Muslim immigration and highbirth rates and 2000 years of Romano-Christian civilisation being subsumed by Islamic totalitarianism. The Dutch are proud of their country's long history of tolerance and it is a sad fact of life that they have to limit this tolerance due to the actions of Muslims.

Whatever the imperfections of the West may be the freedoms of the West are much closer to the Sikh ideal than the Sharia law societies of the Muslim world.

In future more and more western countries will have to try control their Muslim populations and you will see more and more anti-Muslim laws. Tony Blair's govt is going the complete opposite to what the other European countries are doing. He is trying to placate the Muslims by giving them concessions thinking that this will somehow calm them down. I think after a while when you get more bombs in London he or his successor Gordon Brown will realise that they need to be tough and not molly coddle Muslims.

[mann_kaum_layee_qurbaan]

Sat Sri Akal:

A good part of the Asa Di Vaar is to basically condemn the Brahmins about their useless practices.  However, we see Guru Tegh Bahadur sacrifice his life at the request of the Brahmins.  Sikhs do not believe in Brahminism or the Burqa, but they do believe in the right for every person to live according to their own beliefs.  It is the spirit of freedom that is at question, not whether someone's belief is in line for yours.  If this was the case, what was the reason for saving all those Hindu women from the Mughals and Afghans...they were not Sikhs, nor did they believe in the same things Sikhs do...right?

126260[/snapback]

Hinduism is a faith, guru sahib sacrificed for the right to worship waaheguru any way people want, the burqa is a suppressive clothing, not a faith. Your comparing apples and oranges. Sikhs uphold people's right to freedom of religion, not peoples' right to suppress low-castes or women. I personally don't support the burqa as it oppresses women. Look at the whyichosesikhism site. That is what you want to fight for? Yasmin, who was a mulsim frequently posted on this forum said that the burqa is really extreme islam, which the gov't is trying to halt in their nation.