Tony Abbott is quoted (today's Australian) as saying: "the government will not tell people what they can wear in a free society."

Really?

So I can wear a bikini into a law court, a balaclava into a bank, and walk naked down to the shops on a warm sunny day?

Maybe 'the government' has not told me I can't wear (or not wear) these things, but I suspect the police would act pretty fast to stop me.

After all, if you able in a free society to totally cover your body and face, surely you should also be able to totally uncover it.

Joe,
You'd have to have a death wish or be off your rocker to harass Islamic women in the street, around here it'd be nothing more than an experiment to see how many broken bones and ruptured organs you'd receive at the hands of Muslim men before the Police arrived to rescue you.

Apart from repeating that I don't want to live in the type of society which bans clothing one thing is noticeable on both the pro and con side.
Everyone takes veiled women seriously, which is predictable because being taken seriously is the whole point of covering up, it's a known fact that the more modest a person's dress the more seriously people take them, that goes for men and women.

My first post on this topic was directed solely at the several posters who filled their posts with the language of fear, paranoia, intolerance and hate. I should have made that more clear.

Jayb, nuns most certainly did NOT lose their habits in the 70s. There's still orders today that wear full, traditional head and body coverings. The only part of the body that's on display is a little bit of the front of the face. My sister was one such nun until her death a few years ago. Only the "majority" of orders don't wear full traditional garb.

Foxy, if you support the banning of the burqa/nikab/hijab and other such headgear in Parliament House purely on security grounds, it follows that using the same logic you would also support the banning of traditional Christian nun garb in Parliament House as well. Do you?

Loudmouth, you mention that a Muslim man might "report" a woman who is found sitting next to a man on a bus who is not her husband. This is unfortunately a "stereotype" that a lot of people in Australia believe. Just as there are a tiny minority of strict, irrational, dominating and fundamentalist Christians in Australia, the same also applies to Muslims. It also applies that not ALL Christians are like this, and exactly the same applies to Muslims ... they are not ALL like that. The dozens of Muslims I know wouldn't give a damn if their wives sat next to a man on a bus. They are no different to the average Ausie bloke, just like most Christian men are no different to the average Ausie bloke.

But the less enlightened Ausies like to believe everything that Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt and the Daily Telegraph preaches to them. It feeds their fear and paranoia, and provides lots of income for this backward branch of the media.

Hey May May,

" Muslims ... they are not ALL like that."

I'm certainly not saying that they are, but I wouldn't want to put a Muslim woman in an awkward position, so just in case, I'll give up my seat. It usually is rewarded by a smile, and even a conversation. It's a lovely way to pass the time on a bus. And free too, for old farts like me !

Joe

Actually it's quite interesting - with the new rules in Parliament.

That even though a Muslim woman with a facial covering will go through a comprehensive security scan at the entrance of Parliament - and allowed in, she will then be forced to sit "behind glass"...even though security has passed her to be in that place.

Poirot,

I haven't seen the guidelines, but do such restriction apply ONLY to Muslim women with nikabs ? With hijabs ? Not to motor-cyclists and their helmets ? Not to balaklavas ? To Sikhs with turbans ? To Muslim women in Western dress ? Or just to Muslim women, per se ?

I would be grateful for a fuller description of the new rules.

Cheers,

Joe