• If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread
  • Check out Tickling.com - the most innovative tickling site of the year.
  • The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us.
  • >>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
    Don't forget to include your username

Why a Closed Mind is dangerous and frightening

Biggles of 266

1st Level Red Feather
Joined
Apr 26, 2001
Messages
1,126
Points
36
First story:

PM's veiled comments on how Muslim women dress
By Mark Riley, Kelly Burke and AAP
November 22 2002

Prime Minister John Howard said yesterday it would "obviously" be better if Muslim women were less conspicuous, but would not say whether he supported or opposed a call by the Rev Fred Nile to ban the Islamic headdress, the chador, for national security reasons.

"I don't have a clear response to what Fred has put," Mr Howard said. "I mean, I like Fred and I don't always agree with him, but you know Fred speaks for the views of a lot of people."

Asked in an interview if it would be better if Muslim women "were less conspicuous at this time" by not wearing their traditional clothing, Mr Howard replied: "Well obviously, consistent with their religious beliefs."

The lack of precision in Mr Howard's answers sparked immediate debate over whether he was adding momentum to Mr Nile's campaign by declining to rule out a ban. In what his office later described as "a discursive conversation" on radio with John Laws, Mr Howard said: "Sometimes you don't have a flat yes or no on something like this. Different people of goodwill will have a different view."

Several hours later, his press office issued a statement, saying it would be "absurd to suggest Mr Howard had implied that Muslim women could be banned from wearing the chador in public".

AAP then reported a spokeswoman saying he had ruled out his support for the ban. However, the spokeswoman said her clarifying comments had themselves been misinterpreted. Mr Howard had neither ruled in his support nor ruled it out, she said.

However, the Opposition Leader, Simon Crean, said Mr Nile's comments were "silly and inappropriate".

Mr Nile, a Christian Democrat member of the State upper house, called for a ban on the chador, which covers the hair and entire body.

He claimed the shawl could be used by terrorists to conceal weapons and explosives. "Will the Government, in view of the terrorist threat, as part of our new Australian security precautions, consider a prohibition on the wearing of the chador in public places, especially railway stations, city streets and shopping centres?" he asked during Question Time.

Mr Nile stressed yesterday it was only the chador he was concerned about, because of its supposed potential use by terrorists. However, two weeks ago he called for an inquiry into the impact of female Muslim students wearing the hijab, a head scarf, in state schools, suggesting it should be banned in the interests of "discouraging divisiveness and promoting unity and tolerance".

The Premier, Bob Carr, said Mr Nile's comments risked creating a breeding ground for extremism.

"We've got a lot of loyal Australians ... who happen to be of the Islamic faith, and there should be no finger-pointing or vilification or stereotyping of them as we go through this difficult period," he said.

The Opposition Leader, John Brogden, joined religious leaders in rejecting Mr Nile's comments.

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils' chief executive officer, Amjad Mehboob, said Muslim women were already being singled out for harassment.

"I can understand [Mr Nile's] concerns and we all are concerned about issues of terrorism and security but I guess people can hide weapons in many things - in bags and briefcases - there are many ways of dealing with that so I think that's totally irrelevant," he said.
 
Last year, a Muslim woman in these parts wanted to wear a blue mail sack (chador? burqua?) when her driver license photo was taken. Such a photo would be worthless for its intended purpose of identification. Furthermore, wearing a sack over her head while driving would make her a highway menace by obstructing her vision.

She sued the licensing bureau when they refused to issue a license to her. I don't know whether the case has been resolved, but I have some hope that reason will prevail. You see, in most Southern states it is illegal to wear a mask in public. The law had a secular purpose when enacted: it's an anti-Ku Klux Klan law. Since it applies to everyone and has a secular purpose, charges of religious bias probably won't stick.

Strelnikov
 
What's New

2/7/2025
The Gathering forums are there to help you find who is meeting, when and where!
Door 44
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1701 ***
The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Back
Top