It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


France Sets $185 Fine in Muslim Veil Ban

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on May, 20 2010 @ 09:07 AM

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by InfaRedMan

So, a couple of men claiming to be Muslim are raping women.

1. These are not claims. They ARE muslim. Check the facts!
2. There were far more than a couple of men. Check the facts!

Read the articles! Deny Ignorance!

What about the many more rapes occuring by men claiming to be Christian?

Classic deflection. Not the issue here! This is about islamic men raping women for being uncovered.

What about the Catholic Priests molesting the children, basically encouraged by the church?

They are heinous animals! The pope should be removed!

The point here, is that you can't blame a whole group of people based upon a few who claim to have an identifying connection, such as religion.

A mufti is more than just someone claiming to have an identifying connection. He influences the minds of the islamic community. In this particular case. Young islamic men.

Show me where I blamed a whole community in my post? I'm sorry but you're creating your own subtext here.

Overtly downplaying does not change the fact, nor does it successfully deflect. All you're really showing is an aversion to addressing the facts in this particular case.


posted on May, 20 2010 @ 09:09 AM
Here we go again. The sensitive apologists jump onto the bandwagon to attack this ban. I wish they would worry more about the ignorant laws in countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia than about reasonable legislation like this.

Approximately 2000 women will be affected by this ban and I, for one, am happy that it has passed both houses of parliament. These women, either voluntarily or forcefully, refuse to integrate into our societies and therefore have no reason to reside here. They are living isolated in small communities and have no chance of finding work. Consequentially to their total unwillingness to participate in our communities, they exploit welfare benefits. That alone should be reason enough to ban this.

If you can't live with it, what holds you back from moving to countries where it common sense to wear the burqa? Unfortunately, in countries such as Afghanistan the welfare benefits are not so abundant as in our Western societies, and then we get to the real reason why this particular group of people resides here, rather than in countries such as Afghanistan: exploitation of our prosperity.

I would welcome such a ban throughout the entire European Union and I'm sure I'm not alone.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by Mdv2]

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 09:15 AM

Originally posted by airspoon

So, a couple of men claiming to be Muslim are raping women. What about the many more rapes occuring by men claiming to be Christian? What about the Catholic Priests molesting the children, basically encouraged by the church? The point here, is that you can't blame a whole group of people based upon a few who claim to have an identifying connection, such as religion.


Noone is saying that there are no rapes being done by other men, including Catholic, and other Christian priests, but it is not what Jesus said, or did. In the case of Muhammed he did everything that Muslim fundamentalists/extremists do, which gives a green light to Muslim fundamentalists/extremists to do these horrible things.

Robert Spencer on rape and jihad

What does rape, then, have to do with these religious conflicts? Unfortunately, everything. The Islamic legal manual ‘Umdat al-Salik, which carries the endorsement of Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, stipulates: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.” Why? So that they are free to become the concubines of their captors. The Qur’an permits Muslim men to have intercourse with their wives and their slave girls: “Forbidden to you are ... married women, except those whom you own as slaves” (Sura 4:23-24).

After one successful battle, Muhammad tells his men, “Go and take any slave girl.” He took one for himself also. After the notorious massacre of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe, he did it again. According to his earliest biographer, Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad “went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for [the men of Banu Qurayza] and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches.” After killing “600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900,” the Prophet of Islam took one of the widows he had just made, Rayhana bint Amr, as another concubine.

Emerging victorious in another battle, according to a generally accepted Islamic tradition, Muhammad’s men present him with an ethical question: “We took women captives, and we wanted to do ‘azl [coitus interruptus] with them.” Muhammad told them: “It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection.’” When Muhammad says “it is better that you should not do it,” he’s referring to coitus interruptus, not to raping their captives. He takes that for granted.

Here's what Vice Director of Jihad Watch, Hugh Fitzgerald, whom I rate in league with Ali Sina and Ibn Warraq as among the best commentators of Islam in this age, has to say about the issue (scroll down):

'For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct'

For non-Muslim women, they are in every respect -- the way they walk, the way they talk, those bedroom eyes we all know so well -- simply asking for it, and Muslim men have every right to do what they wish.

It is not understood that Western women are not so much regarded by most Muslims as individuals, but as "their women," the women who "belong" to hostile Infidels. They are booty, to be taken, just as the land of the Infidels someday will drop, it is believed, into Muslim hands -- by demographic conquest rather than military conquest. It has worked in many parts of Africa; and if Muslims fail to reproduce even faster than they do, there is always the expedient of killing the remaining Infidels.

All over France there are cases of rapes, by Muslim gangs, of French girls. In Australia, in 2000, Bankstown and Greenacre (in Sydney) had a succession of gang-rapes, in which the victims testified to the particularly gruesome details of being assaulted by a dozen or more men at a time, screaming at them for being "Aussies" or "Christians." It made a big splash in Sydney, when the cases came to trial in 2002. Alan Jones, an Australian commentator, noted: "Let's not mince words here -- these are racist attacks against ordinary Australian girls carried out by out of control Muslim Lebanese...." The girls themselves all testified to the fact that the attacks were full of observations about, not race, but religion -- and the confusion of Jones here is understandable. The Western world is still groping to understand something of which it had been so remarkably and indeed, in some ways so fortunately unaware; it is the attitudes engendered toward Infidels -- a Frenchman who is beaten to death for trying to retrieve his daughter's stolen bicycle, a mother and her year-old-child assaulted on an RER train near Louvres, the thousands of assaults which are a modern version of the rape and pillage that Muslim conquerors were permitted whenever they conquered Infidel lands. This is not mere crime, but ideologically-justified crime or rather, in Muslim eyes, attacks on Infidels scarcely qualify as crime.

Have we forgotten the mass rapes, at the hands of Muslims (Turks, Kurds, and in the Syrian Desert, Arabs) of the Armenian women, those helpless "giavours," in the first full-scale massacres in modern times, those of 1894-1895, and then the genocidal campaign that began in 1915 and went on for years? Have we all forgotten what happened to the Assyrian Christian women during the Assyrian massacres of 1933, when -- just a few months after the British left -- Muslim Iraqis had a high old time with their helpless Christian population? What about the rapes of the Christian women, kidnapped in Ramadi, Iraq last year -- never to be returned to their husbands, and now the permanent property of the Muslims who kidnapped them? Shall one recall what happened to the Christian Maronites in Damur, at the hands of the PLO? What about the Copts, in Egypt? Or, during the Algerian War the mass rape of Christian and Jewish women by the FLN (scarcely given enough attention in Alastair Horne's reticent "A Savage War of Peace" but given much more by such writers as Jacques Soustelle, the great ethnographer of Mexican culture, and a perceptive analyst of the Algerian situation and the real nature of Islam -- akin, in his way, to Andre Servier).

The figures on Muslim rape of Western women in Europe are astounding. In Denmark and Norway, between 65% and 70% of all rapes are committed by Muslims, who as yet still less than 5% of the population. One local judge in Norway actually exonerated one rapist by accepting his defense that the victims dress was taken by him to mean that she was egging him on. Her dress was nothing special to Norwegians, but the judge found it to be unbearably provocative to this poor Muslim immigrant. A curious argument, is it not? Even if she had been dressed a la Gisele Bundchen doing a shoot for Victoria's Secret -- and she of course was not -- rape is not an acceptable response.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:09 AM
reply to post by airspoon

Its funny when it comes to Arizona and its laws everything is fine and dandy..but then these French monsters come up with their intolerant laws discriminating women[sarcasm off]...
I invite you to come to the banlieues of Paris and Marseille, look at the situations and the supression of these women. And if they choose for it? When Islam is indoctrinated from early age i think you don't really have lots of choices left in your life[style]..

[edit on 20-5-2010 by Foppezao]

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:16 AM
Hopefully the rest of the world follows this example and bans the burqa, and the hijab as well.

Next they need to crack down on young girls being married to their much older cousins.

It is criminal the way these people treat their women.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:20 AM

Originally posted by skajkingdom

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

The problem is Shariah law

NOWHERE in the Sharia Law does it say that a woman MUST wear a burqa.

N O W H E R E.

You are absolutely correct. I saw a History Channel program on the subject of islam, and one professor (a women who also happens to be a Muslim) said exactly that.

Covering of ALL of the body is a very narrow interpretation of a passage which says "they should cover their adornments". So some islamo-nuts decided that ALL of the female body is an adornment.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:48 AM
I hear people on ATS say, "It's their country and they should be allowed to do whatever they want." This is usually said by people defending Islamic countries and their Islamic laws.

And I agree.

But why don't you guys have the same feeling towards France? They are their own country, their laws are exactly that... their laws.

America and Americans expect everyone in this world to see things from their P.O.V. Why? Why can't you understand, that some countries have a totally different P.O.V.?

(I'm not trying to bash America or Americans, I love America and said Americans. I just don't think that many of you understand that it's not exactly the same everywhere around this world. Things are always different.)

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:54 AM
reply to post by buddhasystem

There are many apologists of the bad things in the Quran, and other texts which describe the deeds of Muhammed, just like there are Muslim women who continue the barbaric mutilations of small girls because in Muhammed's eyes women are sinful.

Here is the response from Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid to the question from a Muslim woman as to what is the punishement in the Quran to a woman not wearing a hijaab.

From Islam-QA


Question :

If a girl doesn't wear hijab, does that mean she will go to hell? But what if she reads Salat, Quran regualrly, acts decently, doesn't look at boys, doesn't gossip/babckbite etc, will not wearing hijab condem her to hell despite all her good attributes?

Answer :

Praise be to Allaah.

First of all it is essential to know that Muslim men and Muslim women are obliged to follow the commands of Allaah and His Messenger, no matter how difficult that may be for people and without feeling shy of other people. The believer who is sincere in his faith is the one who is sincere in carrying out his duty towards his Lord and obeying His commands and avoiding that which He has forbidden. No believer, man or woman, has the right to hesitate or delay with regard to commands; rather he or she should hear and obey immediately, in accordance with words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):

“It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allaah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision” [al-Ahzaab 33:36]
A sin may appear insignificant in the eyes of a person when before Allaah it is serious, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

you counted it a little thing, while with Allaah it was very great

[al-Noor 24:15]
Based on the above, we cannot say for certain whether a woman who does not wear hijaab will enter Hell, but she deserves the punishment of Allaah because she has disobeyed His command to her. With regard to her specific fate, Allaah knows best what it will be. We cannot speak about things of which we have no knowledge, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And follow not (O man, i.e., say not, or do not, or witness not) that of which you have no knowledge. Verily, the hearing, and the sight, and the heart of each of those ones will be questioned (by Allaah)” [al-Israa’ 17:36]

It is sufficient deterrent for the Muslim whose heart is aware to know that if he does a certain action he will be exposed to the punishment of his Lord, because His punishment is severe and painful, and His Fire is hot indeed.

“The Fire of Allaah, kindled,

Which leaps up over the hearts” [al-Humazah 104:6-7]

On the other hand, for the woman who obeys her Lords commands – including observing complete hijaab – we hope that she will enter Paradise and attain the victory of salvation from the Fire and its torments.

It is strange indeed that a woman whose character is good, and who prays and fasts and does not look at boys, and avoids gossip and backbiting, does not wear hijaab. If a person really achieves these righteous deeds, this is a strong indication that she loves goodness and hates evil. Let us not forget that prayer prevents immorality and evil, and that good deeds bring more of the same. Whoever fears Allaah concerning his nafs, Allaah will support him and help him against his nafs. It seems that there is much goodness in this Muslim woman, and she is close to the path of righteousness. So she should strive to wear hijaab as her Lord has commanded her. She should ignore the specious arguments and resist the pressures of her family. She should not listen to the words of those who criticize her, and she should ignore the specious arguments of those sinful women who want to make a display of themselves according to fashion, and she should resist the desires of her own self which may tempt her to show off her beauty and feel proud of it. She should adhere to that which will afford her protection and modesty, and rise above being a mere commodity to be enjoyed by every evil person who comes and goes. She should refuse to be a source of temptation to the slaves of Allaah. We appeal to her faith and her love for Allaah and His Messenger, and we urge her to observe the hijaab enjoined by Allaah and to obey the commands of Allaah (interpretation if the meanings):

and not to show off their adornment” [al-Noor 24:31]

and do not display yourselves like that of the times of ignorance, and perform As Salaah (Iqamat as Salaah), and give Zakaah and obey Allaah and His Messenger”[al-Ahzaab 33:33]

And Allaah is the Source of strength and the Guide to the Straight Path.

Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:55 AM
This is GREAT news.

I am all for this good and RIGHT step forward.

Lets push for this ruling to be included in all EU countries.

Infact this should only be the BEGINNING!!

I am disgusted that people of the 21st century are so weak and peculiar to
still hold belief to a "religion". Especially when there is some very good talk and proof that life else where could be responsible for this "god" disease a lot of you suffer from.

BAN religion!!! ALL religion!!

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 12:00 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

Yeah sure, I guess that's why so many Americans are so ''enthusiastic'' about the large influx of Hispanic people and especially about the demographic forecast of that particular group.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 12:03 PM
reply to post by C11H17N2NaO2S

Atheism has also brought much suffering and death around the world, as an example Communism, which is an atheist belief, has caused more murders of civilians and more inprisonments for people's beliefs than all world wars, and all other conflicts put together... The world total is around 110 million people having been murdered by Communism.

Religion, not even all religions put together, are not the worse cause of suffering and death in the world.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 12:09 PM
reply to post by Ong Bak

I never realized how common consanguinity was among the Islamic population, and it seems it is even more common among European Muslims.

The effects on intelligence of the children of consanguineous couples is very significant. One can only wonder how much effect this has when it has been going on for several generations.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 12:19 PM
Does France have any sort of document like the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing their citizens the right to freedom of religion?

If not then this is really simple. If you live in the country, you adapt and become one of the countrymen. You don't expect that the country will bend over backward to accomodate you.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 12:33 PM
Another "LOL" article completely.
I'll be honest I'm not here to tell you what my opinion would be, but instead just point out some things.
#1 Anyone who says, "How could you trade liberties for security?"
We already have, how many things does the Govt shield from us with the intentions of "looking out for us". We lost our liberty along time ago here in north America. The day the govt started telling people what things they could grow and which they could not, liberty was lost, for that was a freedom. The day the Goct decided what pets we could legally obtain and which ones we couldn't we lost liberty. HERE IN CANADA I cant even goto a mall with my hood on, but a burka can be worn? whaaa? equality? liberty? huh?

#2 "its degrading to the woman and is barbaric!"
Have you ever turned on MTV? Have you ever watched 5 ad's consecutively? Are you telling me we dont already degrade our women? Oh wait they are liberated? Thats why they are always half naked. Right forgot about that one...

Personally, I think if thats what the french feel they need and the majority agree, there is no problem.
NOT A single problem. If they dont like it they have every right to leave, just like every dope toker has the right to leave for Amsterdam.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 01:20 PM
reply to post by sos37

How is allowing someone to wear a piece of cloathing, "bending over backwards to accomidate them"? Some of these French citizens have lived their entire life in the country, why should they now all of the sudden be banned from practicing a part of their religion or culture? Again, it's hardly "bending over backwards to accomidate them".


posted on May, 20 2010 @ 02:45 PM

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by sos37

How is allowing someone to wear a piece of cloathing, "bending over backwards to accomidate them"? Some of these French citizens have lived their entire life in the country, why should they now all of the sudden be banned from practicing a part of their religion or culture? Again, it's hardly "bending over backwards to accomidate them".


Want to know what they do to people who refuse to dress in accordance with their laws?

Or the risk you are taking if you refuse to dress Islamic dress codes in other countries:

Christian in Somalia Who Refused to Wear Veil is Killed
Female Pakistani minister shot dead for 'breaking Islamic dress code'
Women broadcasters told to wear hijab or face death

How dare these Frenchies to implement such an evil law, they are such an intolerant people, especially in comparison to many Islamic states.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by Mdv2]

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 02:58 PM
reply to post by Mdv2

Half of the source material you post is simply propaganda and the other half, while terrible, is just made up of isolated cases. I have been to the Middle East, several+ countries in the Middle East and I can assure you that this is not the "norm", so to speak. Just as it is not the "norm" for Catholic Priests to molest all of those children, which in fact is far more prevalent. What I have experienced in the Middle East, is the enormous respect for women that Islamic culture provides, though in a different way than we in the west respect women. Does what you speak of happen? Sure it happens and it sucks that it does. The people who do it should be banished to depths of hell, however it also happens in the west too. Maybe not in the same way, but it does happen and most likely, far more often. Women are constantly beat up by their spouses, Christian men. Women are also raped here in the states, at a much higher rate than anywhere else in the world. The point is that women are abused here in the states just as much, if not more so than in the Muslim slice of the world. You can't pin women's abuse on Islam, just as you can't pin it on Christianity. Also, no, Muhammad did not teach people to rape women, that is just another piece of propaganda.


Edited to add: Before I first traveled to the Middle East and experienced first hand the Islamic culture, I too bought into all of the anti-Muslim hype that is bombarded onto us through various types of propaganda. It wasn't until I actually experienced these people, in their habitat so to speak and gradually, my mind changed, though I was stubborn at first. Most of the things that I heard about Islam were just flat out lies. For instance, we hear all of the time about how they hate westerners or infidels and how they want to turn everyone in the world, into Muslims. For one, I was hard pressed to find anyone who hated Americans though many are upset with US foreign policy. In fact, I found far more people in Europe that hate Americans. For the most part, people were interested and patient with my views. Also, they could care less whether you convert to Islam or not. In fact, unlike Christianity, Muslims don't believe that they need to convert people to Islam, though they won't turn anyone down who comes to Islam on their own. They feel and Islam teaches that you have to come to Islam on your own. Christians on the other hand (I am Jewish myself), feel the need and are taught that they need to try and convert everyone they come across.


[edit on 20-5-2010 by airspoon]

[edit on 20-5-2010 by airspoon]

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 03:31 PM

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by Mdv2

Half of the source material you post is simply propaganda and the other half, while terrible, is just made up of isolated cases.

What the hell are you talking about? It is forbidden to walk down the streets of Tehran without a headscarf. Tell me why countries such as Iran, Saudi-Arabia, Kuwait and many others can force its citizens to obey an Islamic dress code (by for instance forbidding women to have their hair uncovered), but when a Western nation imposes a law that forbids women to wear a veil, it suddenly becomes a big deal.

I have lived for three years in Lebanon and visited many Arab countries and therefore know that these examples are not the norm; I was merely pointing out the difference in tolerance that exists, or are you going to tell me women have been killed in France for wearing a burqa? And regarding your claim that I've posted propaganda, I've heard that so often from apologists on here that I hardly take it serious. Not even once was such an accusation backed up by sources that proved otherwise.

An Iranian friend of mine confirmed that many women would not wear a headscarf if only they would not face such heavy consequences, with the example in the video being an example. In France 2000 women face a cash fine if they wear a veil, in Iran millions of women are forced to wear a headscarf. Why aren't you upset about that?

[edit on 20-5-2010 by Mdv2]

[edit on 20-5-2010 by Mdv2]

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:35 PM
I wonder why they make men and women cover their genitalia in France? They don't make women cover their breasts. Funny how different cultures assign different values to body parts. Will they make African women expose their legs next? France has always lead the way in nudity.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 05:04 PM
A little light here is in order.

The wives of the Prophet Muhammad, nor the wives of his followers known as the companions, ever wore veils. This practice is a Middle Eastern cultural innovation.

The fundamentalist known in Islam as Salfis and or Wahhabi Muslims, primarily out of Saudi Arabia and parts of Pakistan attach to this custom without any foundation in legitimate Islamic law to base it on.

In mainstream Islam it has always been an internal dispute whether the head covering on woman is obligatory in Islam. As far as the veil over the face, it has always been understood in the mainstream of Islam that it was and is an innovation . . . a Middle Eastern custom out of Persia having nothing to do with Islam.

Another thing the vast majority of people don’t know, including Muslims, is that the Prophet Muhammad forbade any priesthood in Islam, therefore all these modern “Imams’ have no legitimacy in reality.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in