dwg "A Burqa/Burkha covers the face ...hence illegal to wear it in Banks, Courts and etc
I have no problems with the head being covered or all the body for that matter ....but the face must be shown simple as it is "

So are you suggesting that the face should be required to be visible in all public places or just in places where the owners/management/law require it?

We should ensure that the law protects owners of property used by the public are able to insist on "credible" standards without risk of penalty on the basis of discrimination and leave it at that. Of course if it's vital to see a muslim woman's face then I have to wonder about men with full beard's.

R0bert

In relation to this storm in an egg-cup, I wonder what proportion of Muslim women wear the burqa (0.1 % ?), the nikab (1 % ?) and what we all agree is the inoffensive (and beautiful) hijab (40-60 % ?) ? But that's about 1.1 %.

In my limited experience of the world, I don't think I've ever seen a woman in a burqa in real-life, and only two or three in a nikab. And forgive my presumption but those 1.1 % would usually be accompanied in the streets and shops by a male relative ? And since the men would have control of their money, isn't it unlikely that women in burqas or nikabs would do banking transactions on their own, without a male relative ? Wouldn't the men do all of that ?

So could any reader who has ever seen an unaccompanied Muslim woman in either a burqa or a nikab, in a bank, please improve my education ?

Most of us agree that wearing such restrictive clothing is oppressive to women, whether Koranic or not (feminists, working so hard to improve the lot of their sisters, must be heartened by the enthusiasm of so many male supporters on this thread) but this is hardly going to be ameliorated by banning, and keeping women indoors. And surely there are more fundamental evils to crack down on, such as arranged marriages and female mutilation, which certainly do infringe on the real human rights of Muslim women ?

Loudmouth - I'll go one better than seeing one out unaccompanied -I've seen one behind the wheel driving slowly and erratically on a main road in my home town and as I approached was thinking this is a drunk, drugged or ill driver. No - it was a black tent who either was a totally inept motorist or sight impaired by the get-up or possibly both. She had three children in the car - all very young and all unrestrained. Obviously the finer points of road rules did not apply either - probably not a cultural obligation where she came from ....

You are correct in that these women are usually not allowed anywhere without the guardian/jailer male but it happens occasionally. More so with the slighter less 'modest' niqab wearers (eyes exposed).

I would like to ask you though since you believe in total freedom of expression - how'd it be if I wore a KKK robe down town? Or does your version only extend to the 'opressed minority migrant' demographic?

divine_msn,
The KKK have nothing on Islam.
Islam is responsible for the brutal deaths of an estimated 250,000,000+ people.
http://www.politicalislam.com/tears/pages/tears-of-jihad/
How many deaths are the KKK responsible for?

Proxy - I used the example of KKK robes as that outfit is on the same paradigm as the burqa and niqab.

Both styles of garb conceal the wearers identity completely.

The proponents of KKK robes offer explanation that this is a costume associated with their friendly organisation which is based on mutual political and wait for it, Christian beliefs. Members wear their hoods to participate in brotherhood rituals and as a sign of belonging to the Ku Klux Klan. Sure, some of those good ole boys & girls might be involved in unsavoury activities but the majority are mostly law abiding citizens.

The proponents of the burqa/niqab offer explanation that the costume is a symbol of religious duty, worn in order to fulfil the requirements of Koranic law. Members wear their hoods as a sign of obligation to and belonging to the Islamic faith. Sure, some of these good ole fundie muzzies might be involved in unsavoury activities but the majority are mostly law abiding citizens.

Of course both lots of 'justification' are total BS. However I bet there will be no CJ Morgans, jjplugs or any of the other apologists stepping forth in the forum to uphold the Klansman's cultural and sartorial rights?

No, those who believe that, as a so-called Multi-cultural nation, we should accept almost anything that immigrants claim to be a cultural 'norm' - provided the group is NOT caucasian, english speaking and Christian will, I wager, be uncharacteristicly silent. Mmmm?

Actually divine_msn, I think you'll find that there's no law against walking down the street in KKK garb in Australia - but you probably wouldn't be allowed in a bank or anywhere much else.

If you'd been keeping up, you'd have already read my argument that there's no need to "ban" silly garments like the burqa, niqab or KKK robe. The reason you don't see people wearing KKK robes about the place is probably because it'd be very inconvenient and people would disapprove of you wearing them.

The burqa will undoubtedly go the same way in time, except for a few fundamentalist nutters. No need to get hysterical about it.