In light of laws which have recently come into effect France banning the wearing of the niqab and burqa, and WA Minister for Women’s Interests Robyn McSweeney’s recent comments that she finds the burqa to be ‘a very oppressive garment’, Senator Michaelia Cash, opposition spokesperson for the Status of Women, outlines her thoughts on the veiled women in Australia.

Women wearing niqab veils at a demonstration against the ban in France. Pic: Getty Images

Much has been made of the debate over whether women living in Australia should wear a burqa.

As a Liberal, I believe in a free, fair, open and democratic society where people have the right to make their own choices about the way they live their lives.

It is my opinion however that the wearing of not only the burqa, but any apparel that completely covers a person’s face, is alien to our Australian culture and our values.

I support the comment made by WA Minister for Women’s Interests Robyn McSweeney who noted that we, as Australians, communicate through the spoken word and through body language, and it is fair to say that the burqa does prohibit that open communication.

In my view this is not about telling women what to do or what to wear, what religion to practice or about dictating to them how to live and it is not about taking away their rights.

It is certainly not a slight on the huge Muslim diaspora that live as happy and active members of Australian society.

Rather, it is about living and being a fully functioning member on a daily basis in a country whose values are predicated on social interaction.

Much of our social capital is built on those face-to-face interactions that we have when we pass through a checkout while doing our grocery shopping, when we buy a coffee in the morning or when we take our children to the playground and have a chat to the other mums and dads there.

I share the view that the wearing of a burqa, by nature, excludes some women in some part from the ability to be full and active participants in society, which is what the Liberal Party encourages every Australian to do.

The concept of Australia as a multicultural country has had bipartisan support for decades now and Australians have traditionally shown newcomers to this country a great willingness to allow them to adapt to living here in their own way and at their own pace.

What we do not wish to do, as a Coalition, is to discourage new migrants from adopting parts of the Australian way of life into their own identities.

Anyone living in this country should be free and able to make choices about the way they live their lives, but must recognise that with freedom comes a responsibility to respect the history, to respect the culture and respect the values Australia was built on, and everyone who lives here, regardless of who they are and where they or their parents were born, should be mindful of that.

There are many and varied reasons why women in Australia choose to wear a burqa, but the argument that it is mandated by religion is false.

As Islamic Council of WA spokesman Rahim Ghauri told The West Australian, the Koran calls for women and men to wear loose-fitting clothes to hide the outline of their bodies.

Religion does not dictate that a woman’s face must be covered, he said. The implementation of the practice of Islam is open to interpretation, and that includes the extent to which women cover themselves. As New York-based academic and columnist Mona Eltahawy pointed out: ‘Islam is not monolithic. It, like other major religions, has strains and sects’.

Recently the SBS World News radio program ran with a line saying that I had called the wearing of the burqa ‘un-Australian’.

This is, unequivocally, untrue. What I said was that in any case where a woman is being forced to cover her face, where it is not done by choice, I believe that is an espousal of something that is ‘un-Australian’, because that critical element of choice is denied to these women. SBS’s reporting of my comment in the way it did serves only to drive a divide between Muslims and other Australians and is, in my view, irresponsible.

I do not support a situation where a woman is forced under threat of coercion to wear a burqa as I strongly believe in the active promotion of equality between the sexes and of equality of opportunity in the community more generally.

What I think is most important is that when women come to our shores and settle in to live in our country, that they have a full understanding that freedom of choice is part of our culture and that they have the agency to make meaningful decisions for themselves.

I do not support a legislative ban on the burqa. I believe in the principal of government non-interference in the lives of private individuals insofar as that is possible.

Even the current Prime Minister has recognised that there are times when public interest trumps personal choice and that in certain cases the veil should be removed.

I agree that in some instances - for example, airport security screening and entering a bank, that not just a burqa but any item of face covering that prohibits identification should be banned.

It is interesting to note that some of the countries that have banned the wearing of the burqa are traditionally some of the most liberal countries in the world.  It is also interesting to note that President of the Muslim Women’s National Network, Aziza Abdel-Halim, last year said she would endorse a ban as long as women were still permitted to wear veils and headscarves.

A public discourse on wearing the burqa in Australia is a discussion we should be having if we are genuinely interested in preserving and enhancing multiculturalism in Australia. As Ms Eltahawy said in a column in The Washington Post last year on the Swiss move to ban minarets and the French burqa ban:

Underlying both bans is a dangerous silence: liberal refusal to robustly discuss what it means to be European, what it means to be Muslim, and racism and immigration.

This is a debate that needs to be had in Australia.

As Australians, we must not be silent on those issues which could diminish our culture and our values.  As Australians we are entitled to protect our culture and values.  We must put our core values front and centre and should not accept any attempt to diminish those values.

When people immigrate to a new country, they should embrace their adopted country’s core values. One of the core values in our society is that of the recognition of equality of women and in addition to that of communication by means of facial expression. 

I am not opposed to a woman wishing to cover her body in public: However, in my personal opinion, I am opposed to women in Australia covering their faces in public particularly if this is not of their choosing or if it is imposed on them.

As the fabric of society changes over time, as it constantly has through waves of immigrants to this sensational country of ours, we simply need to remember who we are and where we came from. One of our society’s core values is the recognition of the equal place of men and women in society.

The Egyptian feminist Huda Shaarawi removed her veil in 1923, saying it was a thing of the past. I encourage Muslim women in Australia to consider how they reconcile their Muslim identity with their Australian one, and urge women who hide their faces to reconsider their decision to do so. 

379 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • PJ says:

      04:56am | 14/04/11

      Cue the racists, this is my country, people should do as I say, wear what I determine they should wear, fuel my beliefs on hatred and if they don’t like it should go back to where they came from…someone just opened the gate on the xenophobic paddock.

    • Erick says:

      05:44am | 14/04/11

      The only hatred I see here is the mindless name-calling in your comment, PJ. Do you have any intelligent contributions to this discussion?

    • PJ says:

      06:12am | 14/04/11

      Thanks Erick, for highlighting my point…watch it unfold throughout the day…

    • PJ says:

      06:14am | 14/04/11

      Oh look Erick…there’s the first one right there (points down)...

    • Vaunted says:

      06:24am | 14/04/11

      Yeah, that’s it PJ, anyone who doesn’t agree with your world-view is a racist. Oh it must be such a burden to be so much more elevated than the rest of us.

    • TChong says:

      07:29am | 14/04/11

      Yes, but Vaunted the equal reaction on Punch is to accuse others of having sympathy with terrorists etc.
      Dare to suggest that the islamic world is just as varied as the western world is too compex for some.
      ( no , I’m not referring to regular Punches,whos POV may be different to mine, but atleast appears genuine, and can be respected, even if not agreed with)
      These push button issues are good for site hits, but the level of debate soon sinks.
      Not all the bloggers, specially those “one of “posters using strange names are here for any rational discussion, but just to push a hate message. They are drawn to these articles. Watch.

    • PJ says:

      07:36am | 14/04/11

      Vaunted,

      From now on you WILL only wear what I tell you to wear.

      Your response will be what exactly?

    • Erick says:

      07:51am | 14/04/11

      O rly, PJ?

      Please explain exactly what is “racist” about the comment below. Prove you’re not just name-calling.

    • Joan says:

      08:02am | 14/04/11

      Our right to see the face of the person we speak to…. open faced society, face to face society we always have been it should stay that way. They can wear their burqa at home. Show a bit of respect to our society .... just good manners.

    • PJ says:

      08:15am | 14/04/11

      Erick,

      ‘I find the garment a strong symbol of open rejection of the Australian culture.’

      Explain how wearing clothes is an open rejection of Australian culture?

      ‘...then they must adopt the Australian values and recognise the culture and history of Australia.’

      Erick, just what are Australian values?

      ‘The government needs to stop namby-pambying around trying to appease all and sundry, leading to a vasty divided society with pockets of non-assimilation, and instead focus of setting a clear picture for Australia’s citizens and what is expected of them.’

      Erick, who determines what Australian culture is in this country?  Is white culture the only acceptable culture?  If so, why does it have to be the ‘white culture’.

      Who says we can’t accept people are different?

      Try and address the issues rather than (a) accusing me of hatred (b) commenting on my level of intelligence - whilst making no intelligent comment yourself (c) providing some random link which supposedly justifies your worldly view.

      By the way since you provided a link espousing how tolerant we all are, you demonstrate why we wouldn’t have a problem with anything anyone wears, with anyone wearing a burqa…we are ‘tolerant’ after all, the second most ‘tolerant’ country in the world…by your OWN link you suggest we SHOULD accept burqa’s openly.  We are SO tolerant after all.

      Fascinating really!

    • DS says:

      08:28am | 14/04/11

      Joan, ‘good manners’ (it is debatable whether wearing the burqa is or isn’t good manners) isn’t everything. Certainly, you can’t and shouldn’t enforce it legally. Most would agree, for instance, that eating with your mouth full is rude. Should we ban that?

      You say ‘show a bit of respect to our society’, well, people can show respect in different ways. One way is to exercise their freedoms.

      As for having’ the right to see the face of the person we speak to’, sorry, but you don’t have that right. Not at the expense of violating people’s freedoms.

    • PJ says:

      08:39am | 14/04/11

      Joan,

      Just where do we get this ‘right’ to see someone’s face?

      Is it a legal right, in legislation, what justifies it as a ‘right’?

    • Erick says:

      08:42am | 14/04/11

      PJ, you didn’t answer my question.

      Exactly what is “racist” about that comment?

    • CJ Morgan says:

      09:12am | 14/04/11

      PJ’s right.  The burqa debate’s just a dog-whistle.  If it didn’t derive from xenophobia they’d be calling for banning hoodies and reflective sunnies etc. 

      Strangely, nobody seems to be.

    • Vaunted says:

      09:30am | 14/04/11

      @ PJ, having worn a school, military and pilot’s uniform for nearly thirty years, I now mostly wear a suit and tie to work. If the majority of us, and I suspect even you, turned up at our place of employment wearing bib-and-brace overalls, no shirt, a raffia hat and a Lone Ranger mask, we’d be sent home, or at very least afforded little or no respect. How we present ourselves amounts to nothing more sinister than presenting ourselves to conform with society’s expectations; the society that employs, feeds and nurtures us, and of which we’re hopefully all contributing members. Masking our faces is not part of our European or Australian culture, nor that of any other free society that I know of. Moreover, as I suspect you are well aware, the practice has nothing to do with the preservation of feminine modesty and everything to do with the systematic disempowerment and identity-suppression of the unfortunate individuals obliged to affect it. So on that basis I’m not ordering anyone wear anything - quite the opposite. I merely respectfully urge those who once felt obliged to wear a veil, to celebrate their entry to free and equal society by throwing off what amounts to an outlandish impediment to us relating with each other, both as human beings and as equals.

    • Ryan says:

      09:35am | 14/04/11

      @PJ: religion isn’t a race, calling people racists for having an opinion on something that has less than nothing to do with race is just pathetic and deserves mockery.

    • Rosie says:

      10:22am | 14/04/11

      Yes PJ if you are going to take Erick’s spot, the least you could do is add intelligent contribution to the discussion.

      If this Govt is going to bring in laws that interferes with our civil rights eg pokies, tobacco, etc why not the burqa?

      Australia shouldn’t go down the path France has taken, instead look into the fact that covering up one’s body with only the eyes showing can be likened to a person wearing a balaclava with a secret plan to either do harm or rob other innocent people.

      Allow them to wear whatever they want but it is only sensible to have them screened for weapons when entering buildings that service the public eg banks as a precaution. We do it at the airports, why not in other places? This is called living in the 21st century!

      Is Gillard desperately trying to please any of the Independents or the Greens on this one? Would like to know if she is!

    • Ish says:

      10:28am | 14/04/11

      What about ninja’s? Should we ban them too?

      Seriously though, I agree with PJ, it doesn’t affect you how someone dresses. Fat chicks in short skirts offend me, but I don’t see a ban on them, same with guys in budgie smugglers.

      The Australian culture has been built on borrowing from the culture and vaules of those who come here, if it does no harm why make an issue out of it? In day to day life how often do you see a woman in a burqa anyway?

      On that note though, I took my daughter to the park yesterday and there were a group of muslim women, some with burqa’s some with hijabs and they were all speaking english very well and having a gossip session just like any other group of mothers. My daughter happily played with their hijab clad daughters and the other children at the playground, none of the kids cared what the girls were wearing they all got along fine. Maybe we can learn from those kids.

    • PJ says:

      10:29am | 14/04/11

      Erick,

      I did answer your question, you just didn’t understand my answer.

      If we accept racism is ‘a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.’ (dictionary.com)

      There is an inference from those statements that foreigners must adhere to our beliefs, value our culture, accept our way of life.  This would adopt the position the belief that the Australian way of life (race) is superior and has the right to rule others.

      This is racism.

      On what grounds, do we have the right to tell other people who come here how they are to live their lives, apart from obeying our laws, how they are to dress, what they are allowed to do, who they are allow to associate with and what they can believe.

      To assert we have those rights, is racism.  If to quote you, we are so tolerant, then people should be able to wear whatever they want in this country. We don’t have that right.

      I answered your question, you answer mine.

    • PJ says:

      10:35am | 14/04/11

      Vaunted,

      So if I don’t dress how you require, I don’t have your respect?

      Why is it that you determine how I am to be dressed?  Why is it the you determine whether I am to be respected or not?  What makes you think your respect is worthwhile or somehow deserving?

      Who says your version of culture has to be abided by and what authority do you have or rely on for it to be the accepted culture?

      It’s not your business to be telling others how they are to be dressed in society.  Why do you feel your values have to be accepted by others?

    • PJ says:

      10:38am | 14/04/11

      Ryan,

      Where did I mention religion?

      Making up what people say in your own head and then believing that is what someone else said is ‘just pathetic and deserves mockery.’

    • Joan says:

      10:51am | 14/04/11

      PJ ... the majority of Australians accept that Australians relate to each other face to face ....it is only minority like you who want to enforce something that is unacceptable and alien to our way of relating with each other. No burqa in Australia ....that`s what majority want, take it to a referendum and make it law…. it`s one referendum that would win hands down

    • PJ says:

      11:08am | 14/04/11

      Rosie,

      What is Erick’s spot?

      You say to me ‘the least you could do is add intelligent contribution to the discussion’...yet you don’t…

    • PJ says:

      11:16am | 14/04/11

      Joan,

      So you can enforce something unacceptable to others, so long as it’s not you? A wonderful argument.

      I challenge your ability to determine referendums prior to them being conducted.

      What would you do if you lost?

    • Bonestar says:

      11:27am | 14/04/11

      PJ,  you are the racist, white women can wear Burqa’s too. It is a religious symbol and since no gods of any type have ever existed (except Shane Warne) let’s just ban it. Ever tried to walk into a bank or servo wearing a motorcycle helmet? It is not allowed and i’m guessing against some law but maybe not.

    • Rosie says:

      11:28am | 14/04/11

      PJ

      Everyone knows that Erick usually gets his comments posted first! “Tongue in Cheek” Sorry you didn’t get it!

      As for my contribution, read my comments, I think it is a great contribution on how Govts should look into the problem. What I said about you was based on your first posting which doesn’t help those that want to wear the burqa and those that are protecting the lifestyle that we are lucky enough to have without being intimidated by a religious code of dressing to have their bodies covered except their eyes!

    • Michael says:

      11:35am | 14/04/11

      PJ? you wouldn’t be a certain PJ Jackson? wannabe politician tried to start your own party PJ would you? lol

    • Muttley says:

      11:39am | 14/04/11

      PJ, You deadset goose. No one is dictating what they wear, just stating that face coverings are not acceptable. But i see you are the “everyone should be free to do everything type. Lol. I also know these words are wasted on one such as yourself. Because everyone who doesnt agree with you are redneck inbreds.

    • Vaunted says:

      11:41am | 14/04/11

      PJ, imagine you’re my surgeon and you turn up to give me the good/bad news dressed as Darth Vadar and refuse to remove your helmet. Sorry pal, that’s right, no hatred whatsoever;  just your unwillingness to connect with me as a fellow and equal human boils down to no empathy on your part, no confidence on my part and no desire to continue the conversation. May I have a second opinion please.

    • Erick says:

      11:42am | 14/04/11

      PJ - No, you didn’t answer my question.

      Islam is a religion, not a race. A burkha is a garment, not a race.

    • Joan says:

      11:53am | 14/04/11

      PJ…. Australians don’t go for burqa that`s not our way .... bring on a referedum and prove me wrong.  When in Australia do as Australians do… wear sunnies, beard, mo… wear a hat ...that`s all they have to do the Ozie way for coverup.  No way the the burqa way

    • PJ says:

      11:54am | 14/04/11

      Erick,

      I accept you want to avoid the racism issue because if you avoid it, you can pretend your argument has merit.  To tell another race how they have to dress in your country is racist.

      Show me where I mentioned religion?

      You are very good at misquoting people to suited your agenda.

    • PJ says:

      11:58am | 14/04/11

      Vaunted,

      I see surgeons on television all the time not removing their masks when they talk to people?  Any distrust there on the part of the people hearing the news of their loved one’s surgery?  No?  Why not, obviously the surgeon is up to know good, may even be evil?  This is obvious his face is covered.  We can only see his eyes!!!

      If you don’t want a surgeon dressed as Darth Vader, don’t go to that surgeon.  You can’t tell him he can’t dress like Darth Vader can you?

    • Vince says:

      12:00pm | 14/04/11

      You know, I think PJ is winning the debate. 

      Nicely done, PJ.

    • fml says:

      12:04pm | 14/04/11

      @Muttley,

      You deadset clown, Dictating what they wear is exactly what they are suggesting.

    • Erick says:

      12:06pm | 14/04/11

      PJ, I am not avoiding the racism issue - I am concentrating on it.

      I have clearly demonstrated that you are flinging about accusations of racism without any basis in fact. Not one of your arguments justifies the claim that the comment in question was racist.

      You are avoiding the racism issue by bringing up multiple topics that have nothing to do with racism. You simply cannot justify your accusation - it’s nothing but a smear.

    • james milton says:

      12:14pm | 14/04/11

      @Vince

      PJ claims Muslim is a race, and according to you she is ‘winning’?

      Who are you, Charlie Sheen?

    • Mahhrat says:

      12:14pm | 14/04/11

      @PJ, Pull your damn head in.

      Three times in 7 days it’s been:

      “Cue the <lowest-common-denominator> comments from people dumber than me,” and then responding with curiously double-edged questions and labelling anyone who dares disagree with you with the same lowest-common-denominator stereotype.

      Christ mate, I’ve pulled some debating stunts in my time too, but that takes not just the cake, but the pav and the trifle.

      It’s a crap formula, you’ve been wrong every time, and the fact that you can’t seem to accept that makes YOU the lowest-common-denominator stereotype - the troll.

    • Ryan says:

      12:23pm | 14/04/11

      @PJ: yeah nice try to back out of calling people racists for having an opinion on the subject to which you posted the remark, the burqua.
      You lefties are pure comedy.

    • Adam says:

      12:33pm | 14/04/11

      @ PJ - Even if a burqa ban was racist, as you purport, if it was supported by the majority of Australians why should it not be legislated?

    • PJ says:

      12:38pm | 14/04/11

      Erick,

      I will get my BIG crayon out since you seem to be missing (avoiding) the point:

      To tell another race how they have to dress in your country is racist.

    • Vaunted says:

      12:44pm | 14/04/11

      @ PJ, your surgeon would never talk to you about something important while wearing a mask and you know it. To imply otherwise is like the rest of your arguments; heavy on invective, light on candour. Kind of figures I suppose.

    • PJ says:

      12:44pm | 14/04/11

      james milton,

      Please show me where I said ‘Muslim is a race’

      People here just make shit up.

    • PJ says:

      12:46pm | 14/04/11

      Mahhrat,

      Who appointed you moderator?  No one?  Then stfu.

    • Ash says:

      12:54pm | 14/04/11

      PJ Erick is right. You mis-read the dictionary. This issue has nothing to do with race.
      Your posts also prove that you did not understand the article either PJ. The Koran does not state anywhere that women need to cover their faces just wear loose fitting clothing.
      You need to understand that this argument has a very fine line and the burqua and niquab symbolise to an Australian oppression of women as in some instances (I’m not saying all) the woman is forced to wear this garment by her husband. The garment was originally a Bedouin design to keep out the sand and flies although somehow evolved into a tool to oppress women. Covering up one’s identity is suppression and dehumanising.
      PJ by associating the Burqua or Niquab with racism you are inspiring hatred and xenophobia yourself. What the author has tried to do here is separate these themes but your ignorance has prevailed!

    • Hank says:

      01:03pm | 14/04/11

      I think a lot of you are missing the point.  The burqa is a symbol of the oppression of women in certain Islamic societies and an example of how Muslim women are kept ‘in line’ with the wishes of their domineering husbands and religion.  It amazes me that the femimist movement, which is often so outspoken, interestingly goes quiet when it comes to Muslim women who often are not afforded the same freedoms and rights as others in our country. 
      Yes we all know it’s every perons right to wear what they want but what if a person is forced to wear a garment to hide her face because her husband does not want anyone else to look at her?  What would the feminists say if I as a white male forced my wife to wear one due to my jealousy?

    • mahhrat says:

      01:07pm | 14/04/11

      I appoint myself, buddy, and I say so because obvious troll is obvious. You’re wrong, you know you’re wrong, but you can’t admit you’re wrong. Stop trying to win arguments by labelling anyone who doesn’t agree with you an extremist, and I’ll afford you the same courtesy.

      Until then, I’ll say as I Damned well please. Erickson, as much as I disagree with many of his views, is all over you on this one. It’s time to move on mate.

    • mahhrat says:

      01:07pm | 14/04/11

      I appoint myself, buddy, and I say so because obvious troll is obvious. You’re wrong, you know you’re wrong, but you can’t admit you’re wrong. Stop trying to win arguments by labelling anyone who doesn’t agree with you an extremist, and I’ll afford you the same courtesy.

      Until then, I’ll say as I Damned well please. Erickson, as much as I disagree with many of his views, is all over you on this one. It’s time to move on mate.

    • fml says:

      01:19pm | 14/04/11

      @Hank,

      If my wife forced me to drink beer, and i, as an individual in a relationship, compromised with my wife to continue letting her force me to drink beer, would that be ok?

      We are so certain that muslim women are forced to wear it we are not listening, nay, even asking, whether they wish to wear it.

    • PJ says:

      01:33pm | 14/04/11

      Adam,

      If the majority decide they don’t want it banned what then?  What if the majority in the future tell you, you can’t wear a t-shirt or that your wife now has to wear a burqa?  How will you feel then?  Like your rights have been infringed?

    • PJ says:

      01:36pm | 14/04/11

      Vaunted you obviously don’t watch the surgey shows…they do it all the time.  Feel free to attack me personally.  It means you have little substantive ground to hang your hat on.

    • CD says:

      01:48pm | 14/04/11

      PJ winning? Gotta be PJ replying to himself. Burkhas are about religion not race. Please explain how you do not comprehend that? Your last post.

      You have seen plenty of surgeons not removing their masks on telly when speaking to a patient or other people? Where? On Grey’s Anatomy? If not tell us which respectable show you watched that even one surgeon refused to remove his mask out of courtesy?

      I have had 38 operations not including more procedures that I would like to forget along with supporting more people undergoing surgery procedures and not once, not once in all those occasions over 3 states and close to 50 years and innumerable private and public hospitals has a surgeon or practitioner ever kept a mask on while speaking to me or the person involved with them.

      You are simply a troll who refuses to reply to repeated requests for answers and I’m calling you a flat out liar trying to incite hatred when there was none in the first instance by using a vivid imagination as opposed to a
      factual and honest debate.

      You couldn’t even be bothered to wait for someone to post what you would consider a negative comment before you had to get in first to stir people up.

    • mickijo says:

      02:32pm | 14/04/11

      No one is saying that the burq/niqab should not be worn, the muslim women have the right to wear it————-in their own countries-not ours!Just as the sight of nude immigrants or those from islands who wear the penis sheath would not be exactly acceptable, nor is that horrible black bag acceptable. And given today’s world wide terrorism,it should be legally banned in countries that make it very plain that it is an unwanted style of dress. We have been brainwashed enough, this goes too far.

    • Adam says:

      02:55pm | 14/04/11

      @ PJ - Please answer my original question and I’ll be happy to respond to your questions in turn. The question was “Even if a burqa ban was racist, as you purport, if it was supported by the majority of Australians why should it not be legislated?”

    • trentyn says:

      03:07pm | 14/04/11

      PJ, Erick, all,

      2 things:
      1. Just because it is not racist, doesn’t make it non-discrimination.
      2. Sometimes (including this time) discrimination is a good thing.

    • PJ says:

      03:09pm | 14/04/11

      Adam,

      Because you are infringing on civil rights.

    • PJ says:

      03:15pm | 14/04/11

      Anyone able to show the law saying helmets must be removed?  As in actual law?

    • Tom says:

      04:00pm | 14/04/11

      PJ, your shrieking toxic blogs have convinced me. You are particularly strident, unreasoning shrew with a chip on your shoulder against your own countrymen. You probably are making a lot of money out of multiculturalism.

    • JulesG says:

      04:12pm | 14/04/11

      PJ: I find your comments offensive, boorish and against all free spirit of discussion.

      Who is being more racist? Those that reject the Burqa’s use in a western style, secular country like Australia or those that insist in wearing it in our country, in contravention of our culture? I put it to you that the latter is the case and they are bloody rude as well for treating our citizens and values with such contempt.

    • PJ says:

      04:12pm | 14/04/11

      Vaunted,

      While we are at it, let’s ban clowns too, clearly they too are evil people, hiding their face.  When I see a clown, I want to be able to SEE his face.

    • PJ says:

      04:26pm | 14/04/11

      Tom (like Mahhrat),

      If I valued your opinion, I might care what you have to say.

    • PJ says:

      04:43pm | 14/04/11

      JulesG

      Does it make you feel important to critique my comments and pass your omnipotent views?  I couldn’t care less what you think of my comments

      Interesting to note you are a proponent of ‘free spirit of discussion’, but if it doesn’t accord with your views you feel compelled to comment against anyone else exercising that right.

      Unfortunately for you ‘contravention of our culture’ has no legal standing.  You aren’t entitled to place your cultural beliefs on those who choose to wear burqa’s anymore than they would be able to force other women to them.

      Just as ‘our citizens’ can wear what they like, so too can they. 

      In case you hadn’t noticed Australia is multicultural, people can wear what they like.  Freedom is the tenet our country holds most sacred.

    • Tom says:

      05:21pm | 14/04/11

      PJ, “Australia is multicultural, people can wear what they like.” Are you supportive of people wearing swastikas? I think I will puke.

    • JulesG says:

      06:09pm | 14/04/11

      PJ says: 04:43pm | 14/04/11

      ‘Unfortunately for you ‘contravention of our culture’ has no legal standing.  You aren’t entitled to place your cultural beliefs on those who choose to wear burqa’s anymore than they would be able to force other women to them.

      Just as ‘our citizens’ can wear what they like, so too can they.’

      This is my whole point PJ; we can’t dress how we like and we can’t do as we please, we have to abide by certain rules and laws and those laws are born out of convention and local values. To say that convention has no legal basis is just plain silly.

      This discussion is nothing whatever to do with racism. It’s to do with the fact there is no place for a burqa in Australian society.

      To have and express opinions is fine but to do it in a way that is disrespectful and bombastic as you have done is what I object to. It appears that I’m not the only one objecting to your rough shod style.

      PS: the word you wanted was - Omniscient!

    • B says:

      09:06pm | 14/04/11

      Ah I can see it now.  PJ is a racist.  Or is it not racist when it is against ‘whites’.

      There is such thing as a white australian culture.  It has had a MUCH LARGER IMPACT on this country THAN ANY OTHER CULTURE to migrate here.  Sorry for the Caps, but I have met people like you before.  Ignorant and arrogant bastards who think they actually have a clue on anything that happens in this world.  Oh and in case you missed it, since you discriminate against whites, you are a racist!!

    • B says:

      09:13pm | 14/04/11

      Hey PJ.  Try an actual definition.  Not one from a disputed website.

      “the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race , especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. ”
      )http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/racism)

      I fail to see how it is racism still??  Or are you just too Arrogant to admit you are wrong??

    • B says:

      09:19pm | 14/04/11

      God PJ is dumb.

      At 10:35AM you said: “Who says your version of culture has to be abided by and what authority do you have or rely on for it to be the accepted culture?”
      Well your answer is:  The sovereign Governing
      right over this land gives us the authority.  A world you are proposing is Anarchy.  Who is to say that their dressing doesn’t cause dissent among the resident CURRENT population. 

      Why can we not say NO when it is offensive???? You don’t deserve to live in the country you are in.  My family has fought in every war for this country since WWI. So that gives me certain rights to dictate what happens in my own country.

    • Adam says:

      11:25pm | 14/04/11

      @ PJ - “Because you are infringing on civil rights.”

      This is the price we pay for living in a democracy. Our individual rights are sometimes subverted because the majority deems it in their interest to do so for whatever reason. Whether we as an individual deem this to be right or wrong is irrelevant because in a democracy the majority always has the final say and we are forced to abide by it.

      I promised to answer your questions in turn so I will do that now. Yes, I may feel my rights had been violated, but I realise that I only have such rights because they exist in the rule of law. As such I respect the laws of the land I am in, whether it be Australia or overseas. I may not agree with them all (and there are some I don’t) but I still abide by them because I know they represent what the majority wants and I expect others to do the same.

    • Anonyme says:

      05:05am | 14/04/11

      Having lived in Canberra where there are many burqa-wearing women, I find the garment a strong symbol of open rejection of the Australian culture. It is a clear demonstration of a desire to NOT integrate, to NOT become Australian, to NOT share in the Australia values. It is a symbol of oppression and a rejection of equality between men and women. It is not a requirement in the Koran. This is demonstrated by the many Muslim countries that do not require women to wear burqa or niquab (for example, Azerbaijani - 99.9% muslim; nary a burqa to be found). France has the right idea, particularly given their national symbol - Marianne - is strong woman with her face exposed. Australia should follow suite. If people wish to live in Australia - including both Australian-born and those who migrate to Australia - then they must adopt the Australian values and recognise the culture and history of Australia. The government needs to stop namby-pambying around trying to appease all and sundry, leading to a vasty divided society with pockets of non-assimilation, and instead focus of setting a clear picture for Australia’s citizens and what is expected of them. If you live in Australia, first and foremost, you are Australian.

    • ian m says:

      06:56am | 14/04/11

      same goes i totally agree. And i suspect the number wearing face coverings is significantly larger than the 2000 or so that are apparently wearing the covering in France. I only go to the Australia Fair shopping centre once a week and nearly always see at least 1 burqa wearing women (and no its not the same day every week). This weeks the lady had dark glasses and black gloves, no skin was visible at all, her partner was very well dressed, gold chains and cap on backwards.

    • Tedd says:

      07:20am | 14/04/11

      ” .. adopt the Australian values and recognise the culture ..”

      Budgie-smugglers and Bikinis as compulsory ‘mall-wear’?

      Why do all the fashion statements start with B?

    • DS says:

      07:59am | 14/04/11

      Australian values, Australian culture. What exactly are these Australian values? Do they include the right to tell women what they should and should not wear? Do they include the removal of freedom? Especially that of freedoms which don’t affect anyone else? If so, I don’t share these Australian values. Both you and Cash talk about Australian values as if they are objective, when they absolutely are not. I could easily argue that neither you or her respect Australian values.

      As for Australian culture, part of the culture, or at least my culture, includes not forcing women to wear or not to wear particular clothing items.

      Women who wear the burqa are not rejecting anything; they are simply utilising their right to choose. They have no obligation to be the ‘Australian’ that you want them to be, and they don’t have any obligations to share your values or culture.

      Furthermore, saying that it is ‘a symbol of oppression and a rejection of equality between men and women’ is subjective, but regardless, just because you don’t like it, does not mean it should be banned. Thankfully the government believes in freedom of choice, tolerance and respect, and will not be sinking to your level.

    • Tubesteak says:

      08:58am | 14/04/11

      What utter twaddle.

      There is no such thing as Australian culture or Australian values that all “us” Australians dogmatically adhere.

      What someone else does or wears is of little concern to you. I doubt you interact with these people or have any reason or need to do so. What does it matter?

      I don’t know any of my neighbours and have no reason to do so, therefore, I don’t care what they wear or what they do. Same for some person I see crossing the street or someone who lives in a suburb that I’ll never visit. They’re not interfering with anything you do.

      I bet you’re one of those people who carries on about freedom of speech and expression, too.

    • Simon says:

      09:23am | 14/04/11

      @DS
      Totally agree. The suggestion of “Australian values” being objective is ridiculous. The hypocrisy in spouting a love of Australia’s multicultural heritage while at the same time demanding new-comers conform to an Australian dress standard is laughable.

      It’s articles like this that wedge the divide between Islam and the rest of society deeper. Stop trying to regulate the world! This may be an appropriate time to mention how frustrating it is that the “L” in LNP stands for “Liberal”...

    • Adam Diver says:

      09:50am | 14/04/11

      Before I hear too many stupid post about individual rights in this country such as:

      “Do they include the right to tell women what they should and should not wear?” which is what happens when women wear the burqa, no sane person would choose to wear it.

      I would like to point out that almost all laws infringe on our individual rights, and as a society we deem it neccessary to trump individual rights with collective rights.

      Further on this we ban things all the time (and I am no advocate of bans) because individuals make stupid decisions. Drugs and RSA laws are 2 examples.

      With regards to the Burqa I would categorise this as a poor individual choice at best, or a manevolent oppression at worse.  Either way, the garment infringes on many social rights, to see the person you are talking to, and seems to have no discernible benefits besides being invisible at night.

      I would imagine if a person started walking around under a bed sheet, we as a society would be pretty quick to conclude some sort of mental affliction, but as soon as you attach centuries of oppression to something, we become somewhat PC. I will continue to hold this opinion until someone can explain the benefit of a Burqa for either the individual or the family that they wear it for.

      As for austraila values, they are reflected in our laws. Whilst the individuals in the country differ, we collectively agree to abide by the laws of the nation and thus our values are reflected in these. To say we have no

    • Tubesteak says:

      10:26am | 14/04/11

      Adam Diver

      Please tell me where we derive a right to see someone’s face?

      Is it in a UN Declaration that Australia has ratified as part of our law? Is it in our Constitution?

      What happens when you are talking to someone on the phone who is in a call centre and you can’t see their face? Are your rights being violated then?

    • DS says:

      10:30am | 14/04/11

      Adam Diver, I don’t really care if you think my post was stupid. I think the post I responded to was incredibly dumb, and I don’t think yours was so intelligent, but each to their own.

      ” “Do they include the right to tell women what they should and should not wear?” which is what happens when women wear the burqa, no sane person would choose to wear it.”

      So because in your ignorant view, no sane women would choose to wear it, it’s a stupid question to ask? Right.

      “I would like to point out that almost all laws infringe on our individual rights, and as a society we deem it neccessary to trump individual rights with collective rights.”

      Yes, but we need a darn good reason to pass a law that infringes on our individual rights. I don’t think there is a good reason to ban the burqa.

      “With regards to the Burqa I would categorise this as a poor individual choice at best, or a manevolent oppression at worse.”

      That is completely subjective. Many women who wear it would disagree.

      “Either way, the garment infringes on many social rights, to see the person you are talking to,”

      People don’t have any social ‘right’ to see the person they are talking to, and certainly you can’t ban something because it violates social ‘rights’.

      “and seems to have no discernible benefits besides being invisible at night.”

      How about speaking to some of the women who wear it? One woman who was quoted in the article linked to this thread said it makes her feel closer to God.

      “I would imagine if a person started walking around under a bed sheet, we as a society would be pretty quick to conclude some sort of mental affliction, but as soon as you attach centuries of oppression to something, we become somewhat PC.”

      It’s not illegal to walk around under a bed sheet. There aren’t calls to ban people from doing it, so why the burqa?

      BTW, I hope you do realise that the line about centuries of oppression is purely subjective.

      “I will continue to hold this opinion until someone can explain the benefit of a Burqa for either the individual or the family that they wear it for.”

      That’s your right, however you don’t have the right to force your opinions onto others.

      “As for austraila values, they are reflected in our laws.”

      Yes and no. However I think you will find that the laws which do reflect our values also reflect the values of most other nations.

    • DS says:

      10:38am | 14/04/11

      Simon, thanks. :D I think it’s disgusting, and then what happens is that it encourages the racist/Islamophobic/bigoted/xenophobic nutters (SSR, DH, Jon, Erick etc….) to appear and vent their spleen.

    • James1 says:

      10:50am | 14/04/11

      Please note, most of the burka and niqab wearers in Canberra are not Australian, and have no intention of becoming Australian at any point.  For the majority they either work at or are married to someone who works at an embassy, or are involved in higher education in some way.

    • skepdad says:

      11:54am | 14/04/11

      @DS and others similar:

      Can Australians walk around naked in public?  Can women go topless in a shopping mall?  Can I expect to stand outside a primary school wearing an explicity sloganed t-shirt and a hat made of adult sexual aids without being questioned or moved along?  Can I wear a full-face motorcycle helmet or a balaclava in a bank?  Can I ride a bicycle without a helmet outside a police station without fear of interference?

      Our society tells us what we can wear all the time.  Why should the burqua get an exception, especially when it is so clearly a symbol of misogyny and repression?

    • Erick says:

      11:58am | 14/04/11

      @DS - “As for Australian culture, part of the culture, or at least my culture, includes not forcing women to wear or not to wear particular clothing items.”

      Women are not allowed to be naked in most public places. Women are not allowed to wear motorcycle helmets in banks.

      It is not legal in Australia for men or women to wear or not wear whatever they please. Society has always set limits on what is acceptable.

    • Tubesteak says:

      01:25pm | 14/04/11

      Good to see people have had to resort to reductio ad absurdum just to make an argument.

      Many of those examples skepdad are for your own safety or the safety of others. The burqa or niqab has no such issue. There is nothing wrong with it except that it may offend some people’s prejudices.

    • DS says:

      01:28pm | 14/04/11

      skepdad; there are good reasons why many of those things you mention are banned. However I am yet to encounter a good reason why the burqa should be banned.

      “Why should the burqua get an exception, especially when it is so clearly a symbol of misogyny and repression?”

      Well, because not everyone agrees with you! It may be clear to you, but it is still subjective.

    • Adam Diver says:

      01:35pm | 14/04/11

      So nudity is a saftey concern tubesteak?

      Also why would anyone want to wear the Burqa? If no-one provides a discernable benefit I will continue to assume male domination is involved, which is probably not condusive to a strong equal society.

    • mickijo says:

      02:46pm | 14/04/11

      Anonyme, I wish you were prime minister and we should,at last, have some bloody common sense where it matters. The burq is used to point out the division in this land, it is aparthied personified, it is the middle finger raised instead of an Australian salute. It is a deadly refusal to accept or allow any form of integration into Australian culture.And if anyone wishes to regard me as being redneck, racist or bigoted, you have my blessing.

    • skepdad says:

      02:47pm | 14/04/11

      @DS: re “It may be clear to you, but it is still subjective.”
      Quite so.  As is public nudity.  Society has ruled on that, as it will on the burqa.

      @tubesteak re: “Many of those examples skepdad are for your own safety or the safety of others.”
      Only one of my examples had any safety connotation.

      There’s no difference between a full-face burqua and a balaclava, other than the former’s tenuous association with a religion. Yet again we have special pleading on religious or “cultural” grounds for sociopathic activities.

    • fml says:

      03:20pm | 14/04/11

      @mickijo

      “it is aparthied personified” ITS THE TOTAL OPPOSITE! Its you thats creating the apartheid, your telling a coloured person that they cant do something in a democratic society! your creating the division!.
      You rednecks really need to read a few history books.

    • Chris L says:

      04:28pm | 14/04/11

      @Adam - Why would anyone wear a tie?

    • AdamC says:

      04:44pm | 14/04/11

      Chris L, because business shirts look better when worn with a tie.

    • Bruce says:

      04:54pm | 14/04/11

      Chris L. The reason you wear a tie is to cover your obscene and offensive buttons on your shirt.

    • Nick Buick says:

      05:58pm | 14/04/11

      @Simon & Tubespeak

      “There is no such thing as Australian culture or Australian values that all “us” Australians dogmatically adhere.”

      Your argument is based on the claim there is no such thing as a national culture in this country… and therefore we should mindlessly import and accept any foreign culture and values unquestioningly… But you can’t have it both ways. Either there is no such thing as national culture and values or there is. But to claim there is no such thing as culture or values, and therefore we cannot protect our culture and values from the culture and values of foreigners is a total paradox.

    • DS says:

      08:13pm | 14/04/11

      skepdad says: “@DS: re “It may be clear to you, but it is still subjective.”

      “Quite so.  As is public nudity.  Society has ruled on that, as it will on the burqa.”

      Doubt that. You may have to wait a while before the burqa is banned here.

            Nick Buick says:  “But to claim there is no such thing as culture or values, and therefore we cannot protect our culture and values from the culture and values of foreigners is a total paradox.”

      How about this for Australian values? We believe in freedom and tolerance, and we do not believe in telling women what they should or should not wear. We also do not make the mistake of believing that our culture and values are superior to foreign values or cultures.

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      05:52am | 14/04/11

      Hi Michaelia,

      I really do appreciate your soft and intelligent attitude towards the women who are forced to wear the niqab and burqa.  I guess most countries like France thinking of banning it, all seem to have their reasons for it & that is alright by some!!  However, treating these women as some kind of outcasts does not help the situation at all!!  What is forbidden to us human beings goes against all those rights we all like to discuss so much these days!!

      For me personally, sadly some of these women are being forced to wear it, some are actually trying to make a political statement which happens to be so wrong on so many levels.  Because if wearing the burqa will not allow basic rights to education and employment, these women will only be living on the outskirts of our society.  A century ago almost all women relied on their partners and fathers for their lively hood, however we can not say the same thing for our life styles or expectations for right now!!

      I strongly believe, if anyone feels isolated and different from the rest of the general population, then we may begin to see a pattern of anti social behavior, whether they happen to be strict Muslims or other things, whether we like it or not!!  Best regards to your editors.

    • Rebecca says:

      07:14am | 14/04/11

      Read the article again. This is not a feminist piece. Feminism is about choices and opportunities. This is a xenophobic piece.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      09:07am | 14/04/11

      Rebecca
       
      I disagree. I found it well reasoned. She pointed out it was possible to keep the Muslim identity and that they would be in accord with the Koran should *they* decide to uncover their faces. Granted, I am one of those who find the wearing of them in Australia offensive, but it was not a xenophobic rant. 
       
      I’d add one more argument in favour of the banning of the niqab. Use your favourite search engine to check the increasing number of Muslim women in Australia presenting with severe Vitamin D deficiency. this in a country where sitting in front of a window for half an hour in a t-shirt will get you all the Vitamin D you need. There is a case in Melbourne where the woman told her doctor that she is not allowed to uncover outside at all and is not allowed to sit uncovered where she can be seen through a window. She became quite ill and while the doctor has reported it in accordance with the law, nothing has been done because it is ‘‘culturally sensitive’’ and it would be un-PC to interefere in someone else’s culture. In Australia.

    • Jade (the other one) says:

      12:22pm | 14/04/11

      Tony, if that woman chooses to suffer the consequences of her clothing choices what right does society have to tell her she shouldn’t?

      We don’t force Jehovah’s Witnesses to take blood transfusions, or Christian scientists to go to the doctor and take medication, why do we have a right to tell a Muslim woman she should go out in the sun, rather than take a supplement?

    • James1 says:

      12:39pm | 14/04/11

      I agree with Tony, despite disagreeing with him on the potential ban.

      There was nothing offensive or xenophobic in the article, and the author even states that she would not support a ban.  Indeed, it is one the most balanced, considered and philosophically consistent articles on this subject I have ever read.

    • S.L says:

      05:56am | 14/04/11

      Nicholas Sarkozy has shown he has what politicians (of both genders) in this country don’t have ............balls!
      To agree or disagree with this law is irrelevent. He said he would do it and he did!

    • bleD says:

      08:44am | 14/04/11

      Our politicians here are totally gutless—Bar Bernardi—to do anything. They always avoid the issue altogether.

    • fml says:

      11:09am | 14/04/11

      Nicholas Sarkozy when elected pledged to “revive the work ethic, promote new initiatives and fight intolerance, including racism.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3673102.stm

      so he won the election platform on fighting intolerance (obviously to get the ethnic vote), then broke his pledge by banning the burka. doesnt sound like balls to me, sounds like a typical politician flip flopping around pandering to the fickle demands of an intolerant public.

    • S.L says:

      06:12pm | 14/04/11

      Mr Sarkozy made no secret of this new law and with all the publicity both for and against he still went with it.
      That in my opinion is balls!

    • Anonyme says:

      12:20am | 15/04/11

      France has the highest population of Muslim persons in the EU. With the open borders, migrants flood in, searching for work. Nicholas Sarkozy is ensuring that new migrants adopt the French way of life - liberty, egality and fraternity. All must be free, all must be equal, all must be brothers. Wearing a burqa is none of these. It is oppressive to women. It is not a requirment of Islamic law. It is offensive to the freedoms of French people. In banning the burqa (and all other symbols of religion; not that despite being a Catholic country, France has total separation of state and church - you can only be legally married by the Mayor, not a priest - that is a symbolic wedding) Nicholas Sarkozy is indeed promoting a new initiative and fighting intolerance and racism. He is ensuring all people who live in France adopt the French way of life - liberty, egality, fraternity.

    • Erick says:

      06:12am | 14/04/11

      On a related note, here is a fascinating short study by the OECD (PDF).

      It seems that far from being racist, Australia is the second-most tolerant country in the world as far as ethnic minorities are concerned. Scroll down to the second page for a comparison of all the countries.

      Yes, those opinion writers calling us “racists” have been wrong the whole time.

    • PJ says:

      07:50am | 14/04/11

      On a related note, here is a fascinating short study by the University of Western Sydney.

      http://www.uws.edu.au/social_sciences/soss/research/challenging_racism/findings_by_region

      It seems that far from being tolerant 84.4% of Australians surveyed believe their is racial prejudice in the country.

      The data also indicate that most Australians recognise that racism is a problem in society.

      Too many Australians (41%) have a narrow view of who belongs in Australia.

      About one-in-ten Australians have very problematic views on diversity and on ethnic difference. They believe that some races are naturally inferior or superior, and they believe in the need to keep groups separated. These separatists and supremacists are a destructive minority.

      Yes, those opinion writers calling us “racists” have been right the whole time.

    • Erick says:

      08:46am | 14/04/11

      PJ, you cite a survey which claims that “about one-in-ten Australians have very problematic views on diversity and on ethnic difference”.

      On the basis of the alleged views of just ten per cent of Australians, you say “those opinion writers calling us “racists” have been right the whole time.”

      So you’re condemning a whole nation of diverse people on the basis of what just one in ten thinks? That seems just a little bigoted.

    • PJ says:

      10:47am | 14/04/11

      Erick,

      Any reason you completely ignored the other compelling statistics mentioned?  I know why you avoided them.  You know why you avoided them.  I just want to see if you are able to man up and admit it?

      Selectively picking out one statistic is nothing short of a poor effort.

      Interesting you decry ‘name- calling’ and then come out with it yourself?

      You are hardly one to denounce other people’s arguments based on statistics when all you do is provide one link (from randomsupportinglink.com) and make no attempt to highlight the key points of the link (because you know most people what read it and not reading it means not finding the flaws in the link) nor provide any counter balancing viewpoints to acknowledge other body of evidence might exist.

      Ignoring the other two immediate statistics, which are far more telling suggests you realise your argument is crumbling.

      Don’t suggest I am bigoted, be more tolerant, like in the link you posted.

    • The Original Oz says:

      10:48am | 14/04/11

      @Erick - about PJ’s ranting that Australian’s are racist. I think that PJ very certainly satisfies the guidelines of the Dopeler Effect - say it often enough, say it fast enough and you will get the Dopes to believe it.

      The big problem with arguing with an idiot like PJ is that it brings you down to their level where they have a chance to succeed because of their greater experience at being an idiot.

    • fml says:

      11:17am | 14/04/11

      Thing is Erick, a racist never considers himself a rascist, They hide under the veil of patriotism (insert Samuel Johnson Quote).

      “So you’re condemning a whole nation of diverse people on the basis of what just one in ten thinks? That seems just a little bigoted.”

      Oooh i like this one, you obviously support the ban of the burka? because you are afraid of the small minority that might be using it to rob a bank (coincidently most probably not a muslim woman, but a man of any description, why not just ban men from buying the burka?) , or the small minority that allegedly dont integrate into society?

    • Muttley says:

      11:44am | 14/04/11

      Original Oz, Brilliant. Well written. Couldnt agree more.

    • PJ says:

      11:50am | 14/04/11

      I guess you being so supportive of our tolerant nation, Erick, you would fully support the banning of racists?  I mean ban them like the burqa, as in gotten rid of completely.  After all racists aren’t conforming with our general society.  Are they?

    • Tezza says:

      12:57pm | 14/04/11

      Why is the argument about the wearing of the burkha couched in terms of “racism”?
      - I take it that to be “racist” is is to have a dislike of persons because of their racial group or skin colour. The wearing of the burkha is a moslem thing, and I wasn’t aware that “moslem” was a racist category. Being a Moslem certainly says nothing about a person’s skin colour, nor about their racial background. Moslems come from many racial groups and skin colours; indeed there are quite a few Moslems these days of anglo descent. So “racism” doesn’t come into it.
      - The wearing of a burkha is a strong statement by the wearer of having a rather strongly held adherence to her religion, and an attitude wanting to be seen as separated from the rest of society. I rather suspect that many people consider that it is intended, by the wearer, to be read as a statement something along the lines: “Fuck you society, I identify with my religion so strongly that I don’t belong to your society and i don’t want to belong to it, and therefore I’m wearing a garment that says out loud that I don’t like you and I don’t want to have anything to do with the rest of you.”
      - So, being anti-burkha has nought to do with “racism”; it is more in the nature of a statement of disapproval of what the person suspects is probably the extremist attitude of the burkha wearer.
      - Why do opponents use the term “racist”? It is because the word “racist” has such a pejorative overtone, that to describe someone as racist is to say more about your feeling of extreme antipathy towards that person, than it does about the person whom you describe as a racist.
      - Personally, I would have nothing against the skin colour or race of a burkha wearer (mainly because i don’t think that either criteria is or should be relevant), but would i ban the burkha? I am certainly tempted by the idea, because I do think that the burkha wearer herself is probably giving the bird to the rest of society.
      I don’t approve of the burkha, however on balance i would refrain from banning it. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

    • PJ says:

      02:21pm | 14/04/11

      I have noticed you have cut and run Erick.

      Bit lightweight don’t you think?

    • Simonious says:

      02:23pm | 14/04/11

      “It seems that far from being tolerant 84.4% of Australians surveyed believe their is racial prejudice in the country”
      PJ just because they believe it does not mean it is true. What Eric quoted was the figure of who claim they are racist which is a lot more realistic than what you are sprouting on about. The problem is people like you and others in the media whom scream RACIST every time we try to have a debate on the subject leads the masses to think their is a huge racial problem in this country where there simply is not.

    • mike j says:

      02:27pm | 14/04/11

      Come on, PJ. Erick cites an OECD report, and you come back with something from the University of Western Sydney? Way to undermine your own credibility.

      Let me explain the difference: the OECD report is an international index that compares multicultural tolerances between nations. Erick’s statement that Australians are not ‘racist’ is therefore supported by this research, because it indicates that Australians are less racist than every other race in the world bar Canadians.

      The study you cite is internal to Australia, and has no international context. It merely says that some Australians have certain views, with no reference to the prevalent views in other nations or cultures. Your proposition that this is evidence of Australians being ‘racist’ is therefore laughable.

    • PJ says:

      02:44pm | 14/04/11

      mike j,

      Equally laughable is your assessment that because ONE survey says something, it’s therefore fact.

      Equally laughable is your assessment that because we aren’t as bad as others, it doesn’t exist.

      Equally laughable is your assessment that despite 84.4% of AUSTRALIANS believing it does exist, this is somehow incorrect.  I guess you are in the 14.6% then?

      Equally laughable.

    • PJ says:

      02:51pm | 14/04/11

      Simonious,

      Perhaps you missed the part:

      “The tolerance index is the ratio of the people who respond yes to the question of whether the city or area where they live a good place or not a good place to live for ethnic minorities, migrants, or gay or lesbian people to all people contacted.”

      Whether their city is a good place to live…kind of shallow assessment that doesn’t really mean the same thing as is their racial prejudice.

      That’s why Erick ran, his weak effort folded like a house made of cards.

    • mike j says:

      03:22pm | 14/04/11

      “Equally laughable is your assessment that because ONE survey says something, it’s therefore fact.”

      Never said that.

      “Equally laughable is your assessment that because we aren’t as bad as others, it doesn’t exist.”

      Never said that, either.

      “Equally laughable is your assessment that despite 84.4% of AUSTRALIANS believing it does exist, this is somehow incorrect.”

      I didn’t say any of that. What the hell is wrong with you? Learn to read.

    • James says:

      06:50am | 14/04/11

      I love the smell of xenophobia in the morning. Smells like… Australia.

      WAR IS PEACE

      FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

      IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

      ... and remember: we have always been at war with Eurasia.

    • Erick says:

      08:03am | 14/04/11

      Please, James, tell us exactly how this article is like Orwell’s “1984”. I’d love to see the details of the thought processes that led to this.

    • Hamish says:

      09:03am | 14/04/11

      Erick, I’m pretty sure there were very few ‘thought processes’ that went into it. It’s clearly a premeditated undergraduate attempt at intellectual humour.

    • James says:

      10:14am | 14/04/11

      The Punch has inexplicably declined to publish my clarifying remarks. Ah, and for a minute there I felt like a human being rather than a content-generating machine for News Corp.

    • Post-Normal Scientist says:

      11:45am | 14/04/11

      ‘In Newspeak there is no word for ‘Science.’ The empirical method of thought, on which all the scientific achievements of the past were founded, is opposed to the most fundamental principles of Ingsoc.’

    • Tom says:

      08:53pm | 14/04/11

      James, however clever and obtuse you might think your comments are, they fall into the category of “completely stupid”. Perhaps that is why Punch gonged it.

      PS love your tin foil hat.

    • Tedd says:

      06:53am | 14/04/11

      Talk about choice, as long as it is not the writers choice.

      Yes, “we simply need to remember who we are and where we came from”, just as we need to remember where “others” came from Michaelia, regardless of whether they came in “waves” or not.

      Weasel words galore.  Lots of ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ - standard poli-speak. Bet you were pleased with the poetic “fabric of society” bit.

      Reference to unspecified “Aussie values”.  Liberal = illiberal.

    • Matto says:

      11:01am | 14/04/11

      Agreed, this article is two-faced crap. Full of “yes, I agree, but, I don’t agree.”

      It drives me insane when people talk of “Australian values”, like they are some universal system of beliefs that everyone believes in. Having anti-mainstream values could just as easily be described as being an “Australian value”.

    • Rebecca says:

      07:04am | 14/04/11

      I’m a 31 year old fifth generation Australian, and I didn’t know our country’s values are predicated on social interaction. I must be un-Australian too. Oh yes, that’s probably because I’m gay and too busy tearing down the constitution and the Marriage Act to participate daily with the real Australians. By your definition of Australian, anyone who is vision or hearing impaired doesn’t qualify as Australian either. Look around, man. Australia’s white history is only a couple of hundred years old - don’t be all ‘it was mine first’ and ‘I’m the boss of you’. It amplifies how socially immature we really are.

    • Hamish says:

      09:13am | 14/04/11

      Rebecca, just because you don’t realise something doesn’t mean it isn’t the case. I feel a bit sorry for people like you who choose to deliberately exclude themselves from wider society. No one cares if you’re gay you realise. It’s your own perception of otherness which causes you to believe Australians don’t believe in social interaction.

      Have you ever wondered why in Australia we are very keen on helping vision and hearing impaired people participate in wider society? It wouldn’t be because we actually like the idea of an inclusive society, would it? Perhaps you could compare Australians’ attitude to the disabled to some of the countries where the burqa is commonplace. You know, the kind of countries where you would actually be ostracised (or worse) for your views and sexuality, not where you just develop your own personal persecution mentality for no good reason.

    • AdamC says:

      09:55am | 14/04/11

      Yikes, Becky. Do you compare the size of your victimhood with that of your friends behind the shelter sheds?

      What an appallingly awful comment.

    • Hamish says:

      10:04am | 14/04/11

      AdamC, mine’s definitely way bigger than yours!

    • Tombowler says:

      10:24am | 14/04/11

      Quite the victim are we Rebecca?

      Brings to mind that brilliant line from ‘The Social Network’ which I shall now deliberately misquoute:

      “You will go through life thinking people hate you because your gay, I want you to know that peple hate you because your an arsehole”


      There is no ‘old guard’ v ‘progressive’ cultural war here; do you think those that force women to wear burqa’s would not subject you to some real victim hood for your lifestyle?

      My problem is this:

      Muslims come to this country (i speak with reference to arab muslims here) and then attempt to steer our society in the direction of their homeland or create small ghettoised replicaitions and there is an amount of cognitive dissonance in failing to reconcile he totally f#cked nature of their previous glorious muslim dictatorship and the possibility that if our culture is abrogated to a smiliar extent then similar results could be suffered.

      To me it’s like having someone stay at your house because they burned down while they were smoking in bed and then you walk in to say good night and they are smoking in bed and siphoning gasoline and blather about rights when you point out the stupidity.

      Before you blame the failure of these god-forsaken, deprived, poverty-stricken, evil hellholes on the influence of the west I amend my analogy thusly;

      Just cos I buy someone a packet of fags I’m not responsible for the stupid sh#t they then do with them..

    • Manly games says:

      10:43am | 14/04/11

      No it’s not Hamish, that carbuncle on the end of yours doesn’t count towards the bigness.

    • LittleG says:

      10:48am | 14/04/11

      I think Hamish missed some blatant sarcasm…
      We may be keen on helping vision and hearing impaired people participate in the wider community, but the Deaf Community is understandably concerned that theirs is a way of life that may be lost. A sense of identity is vital to good mental health and participation in society, but we lose some of that sense when we devalue our personal and collective histories - including cultural influences.

    • fml says:

      11:33am | 14/04/11

      @Tombowler

      “Muslims come to this country (i speak with reference to arab muslims here) and then attempt to steer our society in the direction of their homeland or create small ghettoised replicaitions and there is an amount of cognitive dissonance in failing to reconcile he totally f#cked nature of their previous glorious muslim dictatorship and the possibility that if our culture is abrogated to a smiliar extent then similar results could be suffered.”

      My my quite the victim aren’t you. What about Iranian muslims, they are not arabs but persians, are they ok too? Ghettos? what about all those white ghettos, where you have to walk through to get to the bus, what the hell are the scheming, something nefarious no doubt!

      Im not sure you understand what cognitive dissonance actually is. Its basically being biased to your decisions while following a similar behavioral patterns or actions that someone else demonstrates.
      Even if muslims came here and tried to “steer our society”, which if done with out breaking the law, is obviously perfectly legal, this still does not constitute cognitive dissonance. However,  You, obviously while living here, are trying to steer the course of our society, yet cry when another follows the same path. That my friend is cognitive dissonance, you were right about the theory, but incorrect on the application.

    • Hamish says:

      01:06pm | 14/04/11

      Manly games, that ain’t a carbuncle and the stuff that comes out of it isn’t puss…

    • acotrel says:

      07:05am | 14/04/11

      I am not anti-islamic but I find the burqa confronting, As a kid I was brought up on a diet of western movies.  The baddies always covered their faces with their neckerchiefs. I cannot see how it can ever be permitted in secure areas where there is a reasonable likelihood of a crime being committed.

    • Tedd says:

      07:16am | 14/04/11

      “it” - hankerchiefs or burqas?

      Surely, you would only be concerned about a burqa-clad person riding a camel and totting a gun?

    • Super D says:

      07:33am | 14/04/11

      Still not sure of your logic but at least you arrived at the right destination this time :p

    • Scaarj says:

      09:56am | 14/04/11

      Time to grow up then acotrel

    • ZSRenn says:

      12:18pm | 14/04/11

      I don’t often agree with actoral but in this I do. I also have to admit I find the veil a little intimidating. I live most of my life where I am the minority and when I first came here my dress code labeled me as a little eccentric amongst the local population. Hell I was only wearing calf length shorts in summer.

      I really did not know I had this problem. I enjoy on a regular basis tasty Muslim food and at several restaurants am a well known patron and often asked to share tea with the owners. I thought I had a great tolerance.

      That was until I had to change flights in Manila to return home. I had been through Manila security checks and was waiting for my connecting flights when we were called to undergo a further security check by the AFP before boarding. This meant we all had to line up for another round of wand waiving and pat down searches. Then I noticed them about 10 people in front of me. Two women wearing the full face veil and the dark robes.

      At this point I realized my intimidation at the sight. So much so I moved out of the queue and waited until they had moved through until returning to the vicinity. I must say I was disappointed with myself but my reaction was almost instinctual.

    • fml says:

      12:21pm | 14/04/11

      @acotrel,

      “Im not anti-islamic but” is a racist favorite. Are you anti-islamic or arn’t you?, you cant be both.

      Your judging the character of a group of people by the actions of fictional movie characters in a setting 150 years ago.

      Once you realise the reason why you find it confronting is nothing more than an irrational fear of the unknown manifesting in your head you will find that you dont fear them anymore.

      Fear of a crime being permitted is a normal fear, but banning the burka because of it, is like banning apples because you might choke on an orange.

      Once this irrational fear is removed, you may be able to start thinking clearly. Instead of supporting a knee jerk reaction and singularly blaming one group, why dont you stop and think for a second for a more rational, effective response. For example, why not put metal detectors at the front of a bank? with a security guard?. Stops all weapons from going through and doesnt single out a group of people.

      This suggestion however practical will be seen as a waste of money and an inconvenience to many of the people on here, who are more interested in not giving up an iota of their time or effort to solve the problem, they would rather whinge loudly, blame someone else and not solve the problem.

    • Matt says:

      01:55pm | 14/04/11

      @fml, I don’t know if you got the memo, but Islam is a religion, not a race.

    • fml says:

      02:35pm | 14/04/11

      @matt,

      Only certain races wear the burqa, which is the topic at hand. Yes Islam is not a race. Using the word racist to describe racial or religious intolerance is often interchangeable.

      This is the UN’s definition of racism.
      “the term “racial discrimination” shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.” http://www.hri.org/docs/ICERD66.html

      Note the line, “which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life”

      So denying the burka as a cultral icon because it doesn’t fit in with “your culture”, is yes, racist.
      Your not going to get away with cultural intolerance by claiming its not syntactically correct.

    • Matt says:

      04:18pm | 14/04/11

      “@matt,

      Only certain races wear the burqa”

      Can you please list these races for me?

      As for the rest, that is a mighty long bow you’re drawn there.

    • trentyn says:

      04:34pm | 14/04/11

      @fml

      By your logic, denying soccer as a cultural icon is racist as well.

    • fml says:

      05:05pm | 14/04/11

      @matt

      Oh i get it, your trying to trap me into that reverse, reverse racism by getting me to name, names. I will leave that honor to you.

      Now. You righteously tell me that islam is not a race, i explain why it can be applied to religious intolerance, and now your trying to catch me out by getting me to name races instead of backing up your initial claim.

      Yes, i am the racist for calling you a racist for you wanting to ban the burka, I know you are you said you are but what i am i?. (sarcasm she wrote).

      “As for the rest, that is a mighty long bow you’re drawn there.”

      I have no idea what your even trying to infer here, but well done, “you’ve” really put me in my place.

    • acotrel says:

      05:07pm | 14/04/11

      @fml My dislike of the burqa has nothing to do with religion.  I equally avoid speaking with people wearing sunglasses, and balaclavas!  If they cannot expose their face while speaking to me, they can take their rude selves elsewhere! -  In the same way, as I would never speak to a priest in a confessional, hiding your face while speaking is just bloody bad manners and it’s offensive.

    • fml says:

      05:10pm | 14/04/11

      @trentyn,

      Yes, if you say a race, or, religious group of people are not allowed to legally play soccer in this country, then, yes, that would be racist.

    • PJ says:

      05:42pm | 14/04/11

      acotrel,

      So people should change because you have personality issues?

    • Matt says:

      11:33pm | 14/04/11

      Yes, fml… Its a trap. *rolls eyes* You were the one who said only certain races wear the burqa. You were the one implying that only certain races practice Islam. And then you move the goalposts further by trying to argue that you were speaking out against religious intolerance all along!

      I also never suggested the burqa should be banned in any of my posts throughout this thread. Go ahead and check. I’ll wait.

      “Yes, if you say a race, or, religious group of people are not allowed to legally play soccer in this country, then, yes, that would be racist.”

      Catholics should not legally be allowed to play soccer in Australia.

      Damn, that did come out sounding racist, didn’t it! /sarcasm

      If you can name the race of people I just vilified, I’ll post you a cookie. Otherwise, perhaps you should read up on the definition of racism again.

    • michael j says:

      07:05am | 14/04/11

      I suppose the Minster should put himself in the situation where he is going to have his hand or head chopped off to see just how far he can take his interpretation ,,,
      and on the heavier side of things,me being about 28 stone and well not the best looking bloke in town any-more,,was thinking about getting some loose fitting clothing ,,would i be offending anyone if i got one of those swept the floor dresses with a nice face piece to cover the ugly mug,,,
      i know it wouldn’t be ex,,arh,,unAustralian,we seem to be able to put up with any form of shit thrown at us,,,,

    • acotrel says:

      07:09am | 14/04/11

      ‘I encourage Muslim women in Australia to consider how they reconcile their Muslim identity with their Australian one, and urge women who hide their faces to reconsider their decision to do so. ‘

      Being accepted in Australia is a two way street?

    • Super D says:

      10:06am | 14/04/11

      Being accepted in any society is a two way street.  If you want to be accepted into arab society you keep your women covered.

      I’d be far more impressed if the women demanding the right of other women to wear the burqa in Australia went to the Middle east and defended the right of women not to wear them.  It’s far easier to be a “martyr” for a cause when the worst possible outcome for you is a fine for public nuisance.

    • Billy B says:

      05:33pm | 14/04/11

      acotrel - Bloody nora this must be a first - the first time I have agreed with acotrel.  Ripper!  I dips my hat to ya acotrel.

    • Chris L says:

      11:17pm | 14/04/11

      “the worst possible outcome for you is a fine for public nuisance” - isn’t that what the diggers fought and died for?

    • Jade says:

      07:09am | 14/04/11

      I personally don’t like the full face covering vale. I think that it is a security risk and feel sorry for those women walking around fully covered in the middle of summer.  However, they are entitled to wear what the want and if the situation was reversed and we were being told that we couldn’t wear a particular item there would be outrage across the country. 

      The Burqa is not religious, its cultural and isn’t Australia suppose to support all of these different cultures?

    • Budz says:

      09:11am | 14/04/11

      I also feel sorry for the tarts in Kings Cross and out in the city that wear dresses that barely cover their butt in the middle of winter, but I guess it’s their choice! And as long as it’s their choice, I have no problem with it.

      But, then again you can say that society has put pressure on these girls to dress in this way and that they will be social outcasts if they start covering up.

    • Jade says:

      10:13am | 14/04/11

      Haha hardly Budz.  Its not a cultural thing to want to wear next to nothing in the middle of winter now is it? Thats just being a skank.  I have been there (although its a QLD winter not NSW winter)... but then again its only cold outside - inside the clubs its toasty warm smile

    • Wendy says:

      07:15am | 14/04/11

      Having travelled extensively in the middle east, I can tell you that I have been required to respect the customs in all of the countries I have visited. That means covering up and wearing clothes I would not wear in Australia. I feel that if I have to respect the culture in countries I am visiting then my culture should be respected when people visit or come to live here. I don’t think this is racist just respectful.

    • marley says:

      08:49am | 14/04/11

      If you think that Australian culture should be as narrow as Pakistani or Saudi culture, fine;  if you think it should be more liberal and relaxed, then no, we shouldn’t require people to fit into a particular mold.

    • DS says:

      08:57am | 14/04/11

      Except our culture is not absolute. Also, there is a difference between respecting ‘customs’ and mandating it by law.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      09:16am | 14/04/11

      Quite right, Wendy.

    • Mouse says:

      09:35am | 14/04/11

      Yes, we respect other cutures in countries when we travel but if we expect the the same to be shown here, we are racist, xenophobic and intolerant. As for allowing freedom of expression, do the women who wear burqas do it because it is their choice or because they are made to? There are signs at the entry of banks requesting removal of all face coverings as a condition of entry.  If I was a teller in a bank do I have the right to refuse service to someone that does not have their face showing?  Does that make me a racist?
      It’s fine to be tolerant of other cultures and other religions but it is not fine to change our laws and practices to accommodate them. This is Australia, we are a young country, we are a tolerant country but we are our own country.  We accept worlwide immigration and enjoy the diversity it brings. All we ask is that this respect is returned

    • Dark Horse says:

      07:24am | 14/04/11

      The burqua is only a symbol of the much larger issue of Islam and whether it is compatible with Australian values of democracy and freedom. With a population last calculated at 1.7%, but probably now much higher, of muslims, we have the issues of demands by muslims for special toilets, not to offend them with Christian symbols like Christmas and Easter, calls for changes to our marriage act to accommodate the evil Sharia law, Islamic banking and all the rest of it.

      Evidence overseas suggests that at about 10% things will get worse; civil disobedience, violence and criminal behaviour being only some of them.

      The burqua is only part of the problem and it fades into insignificance in the face of the other horrors we are going to face in the near future. However, if we are going to tackle the burqua, it makes sense to do it now while there are fewer muslims to riot in the streets and do what seems to be natural for them overseas.

      Ban the burqua and ban muslim immigration. (And for those uninformed, Islam is not a race, it is a totalitarian system involving religion, politics and Sharia law).

    • Bruce says:

      09:13am | 14/04/11

      Dark Horse: Well said. Only if the UK, Europe and the USA had put actions in place earlier. It appears the French have had the guts to do something about it. However, most probably fighting a very difficult rear guard action. Regarding Australia, our politicians have no guts and are seen as ‘soft touches’ when it comes to immigration.

    • Slick says:

      09:46am | 14/04/11

      Dark Horse,
      I think that you go a bit far with your last paragraph.
      I would not Ban the Burqa, but I would place restrictions on it. Anywear that you are not allowed to wear hats or must remove helmuts (school classrooms, courts, banks, airports) then you should be unable to wear the full face covering burqa. Allow them to still protect their modesty by using the headscarf, but they must not be allowed to get away with something that we would not.
      If I went into a court room wearing something that only allowed my eyes to be seen and refused to remove it, I would be held in contempt of court, I would be refused entry to a bank or airport. Why should they be treated any differently?
      Ok, you say religious/ cultural reasons.
      So if someone from a remote tribe that still practises human sacrafice and canabalism were to move to Australia and continue practising it, would you accept that? But that is their religion and culture? (yes I know, extreme example)
      If you go to another country you need to learn to try and assimilate, and realise some things are not acceptable.

      But please, to all religions, please keep your opinions to yourselves… Im over trying to be converted to whatever belief you hold. Let everyone exsist happily and follow the laws of the land they now live on.

    • Pete says:

      07:34am | 14/04/11

      We are told, that the wearing of the burqa is a decision taken by a woman of the islamic faith comes to independently on religious convictions.

      We are told that the wearing of a veil and covering the head is a decision taken by a woman of the catholic faith comes to an indepently on religious convictions when she decides to become a nun.

      Apart from the names of the religion and the fact that one becomes a nun and the other doesn’t, where is the difference in strength of religious conviction
      Why do we object to one and not the other?  Is it because one comes from our culture and one doesn’t?
      I dont believe it is racist to object to the burqa and not to object to a nuns veil, but it certainly does suggest religious intolerance at best.  Quiet frankly I think religious beliefs should be used to “categorise” people and I dont think it is an arena where politicians or political parties should interfere or impose restrictions.
      The last time that happened we had a holocaust

    • acotrel says:

      08:12am | 14/04/11

      @Pete I would never talk to a person who had their face covered.  How do you detect when they are telling lies?  Women who wear the burqua in Australia risk being totally isolated, but perhaps that’s what their penis-driven men really want? In any case this discussion is irrelevant.  It will only take one incident involving explosives anywhere, where the criminal is disguised as a muslim woman, and the burqa will be banned everywhere!

    • Cloud Strife says:

      08:18am | 14/04/11

      This is exactly what I wanted to say, and couldn’t find the words. Thank you.

      There is so much ‘panic’ about Muslims and Islam, when a very small percentage are commiting acts that the Koran does not support. I’d bet that there are just as many Christians, Catholics, Jews, Protestants, athiests etc commiting awful acts.

    • Pete says:

      08:18am | 14/04/11

      correction
      Quiet frankly I dont think religious beliefs should be used to “categorise” people

    • Ronk says:

      08:40am | 14/04/11

      Christian nuns do not, and never have, covered their faces. The primary means for humans to identify each other is by the appearance of their faces. This is the essential difference.
      The necessity to ban the burqa and any other facecovering constantly worn in public by any person of either sex and of any religion or none,  is not because of prejudice about anyone’s religious beliefs or commitment.

    • Ripa says:

      08:44am | 14/04/11

      Christian bashing Pete?  how is it you cant tell the difference between a habit, and a burqa?. Women are not forced to be nuns and wearing a habit is a choice.

    • Gideon says:

      08:51am | 14/04/11

      Hear hear Pete and Cloud Strife.

      acotrel, if you met a burka wearing woman, you would simply refuse to talk to her? Nice. BTW, not all are forced by their ‘penis-driven men’ to do so, and if there was an incident involving someone wearing the burqa, it still wouldn’t justify banning it.

    • Michael says:

      08:55am | 14/04/11

      Acotrel, you can’t detect lies by looking at people. A person could have a judgement about another persons honesty based on any particular factor they choose to believe is proof of a previously established belief.

      ie, You can’t trust someone who covers their face, 1st belief.

          I can tell they can’t be trusted because they cover their face, 2nd belief.

          Someone that covers their face has something to hide, therefore must be dishonest. 3rd belief used as proof and derived from the 1st belief.

    • Pete says:

      09:00am | 14/04/11

      @acotrel I have seen some pretty acomplished liars who dont have their face covered, oerhaps thats where the term bare faced liar comes from. and I think you have to many fantasies and watch to much television.  perhaps you should start reading history books

    • Pete says:

      09:53am | 14/04/11

      @ ripa I’m not bashing anyone, I was simply pointing out that here we have two abrahamic religions with two similar conventions on dress in some circumstances. and i believe that we should show tolerance. If identification is required of a person with a burqa, it should be done in a manner that is not offensive. I do know the difference between a habit and a burqa and I also know that they both originate in the middle east . your statement of “women are not forced to become nuns and wearing a burqa is a choice “reflects what I’m saying, they are both voluntary decisions. based on religious beliefs. Why do you accept one and reject the other?

    • Slick says:

      09:58am | 14/04/11

      I can safely say that I have never in my entire life seen a nun wearing a full habit in my entire life, or heard about them asking that they can have their licence photos taken whilst wearing it, or refuse to take off the face covering if requested.
      Plus I also thought it only covered the head and neck and left the face all squishy in the middle, like in Sister Act?

    • Ripa says:

      10:26am | 14/04/11

      @Pete
      How do you allow someone wearing a burqa to drive a car or have a license, If someone wearing a burqa wanted to attend University how is the photo ID taken? How can this female enter a bank? How can she pick up a parcel from Australia Post? You can agrue for the freedom to wear whatever you like, but once you start making rules for different people or groups you begin to change laws, these women can not become productive members of society. Having women, forced or not, to cover their identity, their face, this is not a step in the right direction. IMO.

    • acotrel says:

      10:53am | 14/04/11

      @Pete
      I’ll bet you don’t even know when Tony Abbott is telling you lies?

    • michaela says:

      10:54am | 14/04/11

      Nuns hardly even wear habits anymore, because they’ve realised its an outdated tradition.

    • Pete says:

      12:54pm | 14/04/11

      @ acotrel, probably from the moment he opens his mouth till he closes it , like the rest of them. No plolie can take the higher moral ground on that

    • acotrel says:

      07:37am | 15/04/11

      @pete
      You must be very young if you rely on probabilty to assess when someone is telling lies!  Abbott is obvious to anyone with experience as a middle manager! Look at his face, and listen to the breadth of his hyperbole when he gets at it!  He’s as slippery as an eel, and his expression is a dead give away!

    • baal says:

      08:19pm | 15/04/11

      Research female suicide bombers in Iraq acotrel, traditional clothing and the customs surrounding it has already been used to get around security.
      The BBC did a harrowing and depressing story on it last year.
      This is complicated stuff but we need to know this, society changes, values change and we need to direct that change in a way that protects our freedoms.

    • Roddy Sexton says:

      08:15am | 14/04/11

      Ban the burka as France has done.

    • Jack Sprat says:

      08:16am | 14/04/11

      The French ban smacks very much of politicians “being seen to be doing something” about an obvious problem. Islam. And yet these same hypocritical politicians continue to allow hordes of Muslims to immigrate there. Some Liberal politicians in Australia are doing something similar. Just playing politics. Until we actually stop immigration from Islamic countries they are merely treating a symptom instead of the cause. I oppose banning face coverings on civil liberties grounds. If the burqa gets banned, what gets banned next? Hoodies, masks, hats, sunglasses? They can all impede someone’s identity being easily seen. And if governments decide burqas are an unacceptable form of self-expression, what comes next? How long before they start banning nationalist symbols because they might upset some oh-so-precious minority group? Remember, we already have draconian racial vilification laws in every single Australian state. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression go hand-in-hand. Neither should be compromised because someone precious might “get offended”.

      The whole burqa controversy smacks of assimilationist nonsense to me. It doesn’t matter whether Muslim women wear burqas or Australian flag t-shirts. They will still be Muslims. They will still be practitioners of an unassimilable religion. Stop Islam at the border. But don’t try and force Western values on Australian Muslims because this will only be counterproductive for a number of reasons.

    • Norman Harvey says:

      08:21am | 14/04/11

      Perhaps the Burqa would be more popular if clothing brands marketed it Billabong Burqa’s,  Victoria Secret Burqa,  Myer Clearance on fashion Burqa’s,Perhaps even Julia could wear a big red one

    • Keen Observer says:

      09:44am | 14/04/11

      They do, havnt you seen the bathing burqas?

    • $7@ litre says:

      08:35am | 14/04/11

      @ acotrel,More than the Burqa issue here acotrel,thought you were a progressive,an inclusionist,enlightened perhaps,no?

    • grumpy old man says:

      08:35am | 14/04/11

      I think there is a much simpler issue here:
      If I go into a garage to pay for petrol wearing my crash helmet, I’m asked to remove it.
      If I go into a bank with my crash helmet on, I would probably get arrested.
      if I remove my helmet, and put on a burqa, I can enter both these establishments and get served.
      I also think its quite rude when people keep their sunnies on and talk to me.

      This is not a racial issue, but a cultural one, the culture in Australia is that we like to see the people we are talking to, as a large part of the communication between us is done non verbally with body gestures and facial expression. If someone is covered from head to foot in loose fitting clothing, and we can’t see the body gestures and facial expressions, then the wearer does run the risk of being isolated from the normal course of mainstream life in Australia. If this is what the wearer wants, then I guess thats their decision, but is does seem to me that choosing to live in a country where this form of dress is a limiting factor in participating in the main stream culture, seems a bit odd, and I think those who choose to not participate in the mainstream culture of this country are not really in a position to criticize the society they have chosen by their actions, to not participate in. Put simply, you pays your money and you makes your choices, then live with the consequences, or , when in Rome, do as the romans do.

    • Jon says:

      08:36am | 14/04/11

      The Burqa is a softening up issue for Mohammedans and their apologist. Once they have managed to social engineer the acceptance this repressive religious and political symbol as statement freedom, they can move onto more important causes like the introduction of Sharia law in Australian, which is already happening the UK.

      The Burqa has no place in Secular Society and should be ban banned, as should Sharia law. Another way to limit it use would fine any man who forces a woman to wear it.

    • NicoleG says:

      08:39am | 14/04/11

      A few weeks ago, we were at our local Sunday market, it was so hot, I could barely function. There was a family there, man, woman and two kids. The woman was in full dress, covered from head to toe, the man had shorts and a singlet on, little boy had shorts and a t-shirt on and the little girl, probably not older that 6, had jeans, a jumper and runners on. The little girl, nearly in tears, asked her father if she could take her jumper off and the reply was NO. I was disgusted. I virtually had to hold my husband back from smacking him one.

      It was crystal clear they were made to cover up, so don’t anyone try and feed me the bullshit line of ‘it’s a choice’. It’s not. Ban the bloody things!

    • Gideon says:

      08:55am | 14/04/11

      It is a choice for some. You may think it’s bullshit, however you would be wrong.

      “Ban the bloody things!”

      Yes, who cares about tolerance and respect for freedom of choice?

    • NicoleG says:

      09:55am | 14/04/11

      I can tell you right now Gideon, these two females had no choice. So the choice line is bullshit. I don’t care who anyone worships, but being force to wear that get up in the stinking heat is just wrong. And while dad walks around with shorts and a singlet on, while his little girl is force to wear a jumper and jeans is ok by you? You’re a goose!

    • Gideon says:

      10:26am | 14/04/11

      NicoleG, I’m not talking about the two women. I’m talking about women in general; some do choose to wear it. So again, you may think it’s bullshit, however you would be wrong.

      “And while dad walks around with shorts and a singlet on, while his little girl is force to wear a jumper and jeans is ok by you?”

      Uh, I never said it was. Nor did I say it wasn’t. Read my post.

      “You’re a goose!”

      Same to you if you insist on banning the burqa.

    • The Badger says:

      10:53am | 14/04/11

      “I virtually had to hold my husband back from smacking him one.”

      Does your husband wear his underwear on the outside, or does he just really enjoy some biffo?

    • NicoleG says:

      11:17am | 14/04/11

      Well banning the horrid thing would put and end to those women who are forced to wear it. That would solve the problem, yes?

    • NicoleG says:

      11:29am | 14/04/11

      Now, now, don’t be cheeky Badger. But you know the answer to your question, don’t you?

    • fml says:

      12:46pm | 14/04/11

      @nicoleG,

      “Well banning the horrid thing would put and end to those women who are forced to wear it. That would solve the problem, yes?”

      Would it? This country is becoming too much of a nanny state, a little girl is too hot at the market, BAN THE BURKA!

      Too many people speed and drink drive, ban the cars!, too many people rob banks, ban the banks! ban! ban! ban! till there is nothing left that we can do. Knee jerk reactions to an emotionally sensitive subject is not the answer, thats how dictatorships start, you have to let people make their own choices, not force it upon them by using government intervention.

    • Tezza says:

      01:24pm | 14/04/11

      Scene: Circular Quay on a very hot day. Dad in short sleeved shirt. Mother in a “tent” (but at last a billowing tent which looked like it was made of relatively thin, coolish material). Young daughter - I would guess about ten years old. Wearing thick woollen trousers, skivvy style shirt (keeps the neck warm, but murder on a hot day), Phantom style head-dress (the face was bare but the head, cheeks and neck were closely covered - I remember wearing something similar when i went skiing at Thredbo in a blizzard), and another heavy woollen long sleeved overshirt, close fitting and covering the body. This poor kid was in danger of heat stroke!

    • John says:

      08:41am | 14/04/11

      You need to blame the Marxists for this. The West never wanted mass Muslim immigration. But ever since WWII the Marxists who hate Christianity and western society went into bed with Western Political parties to push this Marxist Multicultural West. Today we real from the effects of this. Islam should of never been been given a foot hole. Now the clashes and tensions are an everyday event. This is a mess and it will become a bigger mess if mass-immigration isn’t halted in the west.

    • Dorothy says:

      08:48am | 14/04/11

      Feminism is about fighting religious fundamentalists who promote physical and psychological violence against women and young girls.

      Feminism is not about tolerating the burqa which is the exterior sign of a desire to establish a master slave relationship between genders.

      In religious matters men enjoys the great advantage of having a God endorse the codes they write and since men exercise sovereign authority over women, it is especially fortunate that this authority have been vested in him by the Supreme Being. For Muslim fundamentalists, man is a master by divine right; the fear of God, therefore will repress any impulse towards revolt in the downtrodden female. One can bank on her credulity. Women take an attitude of respect and faith towards the masculine universe.

    • Gideon says:

      08:52am | 14/04/11

      I thought feminism was about choice, or it only if you agree with it? As it happens, most of the feminists I know (and I’m one) oppose banning it.

    • John says:

      08:54am | 14/04/11

      You need to blame the Marxists for this. The West never wanted mass Muslim immigration. But ever since WWII the Marxists who hate Christianity and western society went into bed with Western Political parties to push this Marxist Multicultural West. Today we real from the effects of this. Islam should of never been been given a foot hole. Now the clashes and tensions are an everyday event. This is a mess and it will become a bigger mess if mass-immigration isn’t halted in the west.

      I guess the most radical measures is the removal of all the current European governments and replace them with far-right/nationalist parties. They are the only parties that will honestly deal with the Marxist Multicultural problem. The rest of the leftist political parties are hell bent in destroying the European people, christianity and their nations.

    • Jon says:

      05:58pm | 14/04/11

      John@ Interesting, the following quote is similar - “Bolshevism combines the characteristics of the French Revolution with those of the rise of Islam….  Marx has taught that Communism is fatally predestined to come about; this produces a state of mind not unlike that of the early successors of Mahommet….  Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism, rather than with Christianity and Buddhism.  Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation.  Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of this world.” —Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)  Liberal icon.

    • Steve - Albury says:

      08:55am | 14/04/11

      I have no problem with anyone wearing anything they want.
      But - I ride a motorcycle and I am not allowed to walk into shops, banks or petrol stations with a motorcycle helmet on, because it obscures my face and so is a security risk. 
      If i walk down the street with my helmet on, then I can be stopped for security reasons, and asked to remove it.

      The same rules should apply to everyone.

    • Heavy Sigh says:

      11:44am | 14/04/11

      The same rules do apply to everyone. If you go into a bank etc. with a burqa on then you can be stopped and asked to either show your face/leave. Current legislation already allows for this.  Just as a person wearing a motorcycle helmet or a balaklava could be asked to remove it in a bank etc.

    • Seano says:

      09:03am | 14/04/11

      “As a Liberal, I believe in a free, fair, open and democratic society where people have the right to make their own choices about the way they live their lives.”

      Sounds good I fully support that.

      “It is my opinion however that the wearing of not only the burqa, but any apparel that completely covers a person’s face, is alien to our Australian culture and our values. “

      WTF? So you support people’s right to choose the way they live their lives but only if fits into what you decide are Australian values and culture.

      Your claim to support people’s right to personal freedom would be laughable if you weren’t hiding behind it to promote bigotry.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      11:29am | 14/04/11

      Is it bigotry to not want men to take 9-year old wives? After all, it is a Koran-sanctioned belief of Islam, to not allow it must be bigotry.

    • James1 says:

      01:04pm | 14/04/11

      Seano, subsequently, she states that she does not support a ban.  Having an opinion on something but still respecting people’s right to make autonomous choices is perfectly compatible with the opening statement.

      Indeed, it reflects my own position exactly.

      SSR, that is against Australian law.  As such it is a red herring in this debate.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      01:06pm | 14/04/11

      From the Hadith:

      Muslim (8:3309) - Muhammad consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was only nine.

      Muslim (8:3311) - The girl took her dolls with her to Muhammad’s house.

      Bukhari (6:298) - Muhammad would take a bath with the little girl and fondle her.

      Bukhari (4:232) - Muhammad’s wives would wash semen stains out of his clothes, which were still wet from the spot-cleaning even when he went to the mosque for prayers.

      This is the lifestyle of the ‘perfect man.’ The man all Muslims are encouraged to mirror. So yes, he was a pedophile.

      He was an intolerant murderer:
      Quran (2:191-193) - “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]...and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah.”

      Quran (8:12) - “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”

      He encouraged Muslims to lie about the true nature of their faith:
      Hadith Bukhari (49:857) - “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.”

      The guy was basically a completely amoral rapist, homicidal maniac and all Muslims are sworn to follow his example. Begin truth evasion sequence, Seano.

    • Seano says:

      03:33pm | 14/04/11

      “The guy was basically a completely amoral rapist, homicidal maniac and all Muslims are sworn to follow his example. Begin truth evasion sequence, Seano. “

      Sad Sad Reality, where did I at any stage support any of these sorts of ridiculous ideas. Always bemusing an idiot who ignores what you said and challenges an argument you didn’t make.

      I am an Atheist. I think they all believe in sky fairies personally and one lot of hocus pocus is as silly as another. The old testament is chock full of this sort of BS. But show me one of the vast majority of moderate muslims or christians who believes in this crap? You can’t except to point to a few extremists. It’s a ridiculous position to isolate the many moderates because of the loons, bigotted stupidity.

      I draw you a picture one what I actually said and less if you can actually respond to that instead of posting moronic, bigotted BS.

      I object to someone pretending that they support freedom of choice and then promoting bigotry because that freedom of choice does no sit with the narrow bounds which they define. That’s not freedom of choice that’s freedom to knuckle under and it’s bullshit.

      @James1 - She can believe what she wants, I completely support that. But as I said you can’t claim to support freedom when you put such narrow boundaries on what choices people make and you do it so people like SSR have a focal point for their bigotry.

    • Dave-o says:

      09:03am | 14/04/11

      So your against the Burqa but your against legislation against it. So essentially your asking everyone to have a whine with you.

    • CJ Morgan says:

      09:08am | 14/04/11

      Despite the overall xenophobic tone of the article, I agree with Michaelia Cash that there should be no legislative prohibition of the burqa - nor any other form of clothing, for that matter.  In a free society, people are allowed to wear pretty well what they like, and most of us are quite deliberate about how we choose to dress.  On the other hand, in a free society nobody forces people to dress in particular ways, so prohibiting the forced wearing of the burqa is somethingy I’d support.

      Of course the decision to wear a burqa sends a strong message to others, but in a free society people are allowed to express themselves freely.  It’s not against Australian law to be a fundamentalist adherent of Islam, so it shouldn’t be illegal to express that delusion in any way one wishes, so long as nobody else is harmed. 

      Yes, most of us find the burqa confronting when we actually encounter someone wearing it.  But that’s insufficient justification for banning an item of apparel - lots of people manage to be confonted or offended by any number of ways that women choose to dress (although far more commonly because they’re not covering enough of their bodies).  And if overt political or moral offence is sufficient reason to prohibit an item of clothing, there goes the political t-shirt.

      This is not to say that in situations where it is necessary to identify people for security or other good reasons, that items of clothing such as burqas, motorcycle helemets, hoodies and dark sunnies, Mickey Mouse masks etc may reasonably be required to be removed before entry is permitted.  But this can be achieved easily by regulation rather than by discriminatory legislation.

      Indeed, the whole thing’s only an issue if you want to make it one.  And I can’t imagine a Liberal politician would stoop to exploiting latent xenophobia in the electorate to score points… oh hang on.

      I call dog whistle on the whole confected ‘ban the burqa’ nonsense.

    • AdamC says:

      10:07am | 14/04/11

      CJ, dog-whistling refers to the (usually non-existent) practice of a politician saying something by not saying it. Calling for a burqa ban is pretty clear cut, that is, not a ‘dog whiste’. By contrast, a politician may ‘dog-whistle’ about muslims by, for example, opposing the construction of a mosque for spurious traffic management reasons.

    • CJ Morgan says:

      10:35am | 14/04/11

      @ AdamC:

      You must have missed the bit where she says she’s not calling for the burqa to be banned.  That’s quite understandable, given that it’s obscured by her carefully-written appeal to the inherent xenophobia of people like you.

      That you think that she called for a burqa ban is evidence that you heard the dog-whistle clearly, and responded as intended.

    • AdamC says:

      11:13am | 14/04/11

      CJ, my point about those calling for burqa bans was general, to illustrate how you were misusing the term ‘dog-whistle’. I wasn’t accusing the author of calling for a burqa ban.

      Her position is quite clear, though it is adorned with the usual PC polly-waffle. What you are doing, CJ, is trying to avoid engaging with the perfectly reasonable position Michaelia Cash is taking by spuriously accusing her of being xenophobic. It is a tired and predictable strategy.

    • CJ Morgan says:

      12:18pm | 14/04/11

      @ AdamC:

      What is a “tired and predictable strategy” is racist dog-whistling from a Liberal politician.  Unfortunately, it works all too well - as you so clearly demonstrate.

      Woof!

    • AdamC says:

      01:55pm | 14/04/11

      CJ Morgan, so, you aren’t even trying to support your original contention any more?

      This flick the troll switch routine reminds me a lot of another commenter around here. Or maybe another one of your pseudonyms.

    • CJ Morgan says:

      03:00pm | 14/04/11

      @ AdamC:

      I support every contention I’ve made here, including that Cash’s article is a dog-whistle to the latent xenophobia among those who read it. 

      I also made several other contentions about people being able to dress as they please in a free country, but you’ve completely avoided those.

      I don’t know what you mean by “flick the troll switch” here, but you’re appearing more and more like one.  Oh, and I only ever post to the Punch as CJ Morgan, which is my real name.

    • Polly-waddle-doodle-all-day says:

      03:18pm | 14/04/11

      Personally, I think she was dog whispering.

    • Hamish says:

      04:26pm | 14/04/11

      CJ, she’s not dog-whistling. A dog-whistle is a high pitched noise which humans can’t hear. The idea of dog-whistling is that a politician says something that on the face of it appears perfectly reasonable, but to their rusted on supporters there is a subtext which they pick up on that moderate people don’t. The moderates don’t ‘hear’ the subtext, just like a dog-whistle. A politician saying ‘I don’t like the burqa’ isn’t dog-whistling, it’s an honest and up-front opinion.

    • AdamC says:

      04:50pm | 14/04/11

      “I support every contention I’ve made here, including that Cash’s article is a dog-whistle to the latent xenophobia among those who read it.”

      CJ Morgan, you haven’t supported this contention at all, you have just repeated it over and over again. As Hamish says, and I have said previously, stating that you don’t like the burqa, would like to see women stop wearing it, but don’t agree with banning it, is not dog whistling.

      You are using a tepid neologism as an excuse to apply your own prejudice in accusing the author of being racist because she isn’t a Labor politician. Without the non-existent biases you have read into the article, your views on the subject seem pretty much the same as Cash’s.

    • overit says:

      09:09am | 14/04/11

      I was just reading articles on this issue yesterday and came across a couple of very imformative islamic question and answer type sites regarding the burqa.  One question was from a women saying she wants to wear the bloody thing and her husband was saying she couldn’t.  The answer from the iman was she must always respect her husband’s rights.  the next question was from a woman saying her husband was demanding she wear one, and guess what, the same answer.  She also was told her husband is the boss of the house and his rights must always be respected first and foremost.  BTW this was on 2 separate web sites.  The advice given to a novice burqa wearer was to wear it at home first without the ninja head covering, then wear the head covering whilst getting around seeing with tunnel vision only.  Then slowly acquaint yourself with the garmet before going out in public and scaring the bejesus out of anyone.  This items of clothing are an affront to Australian values (yes we do have values and our own unique culture folks), is a security risk, alienates that person from society at large and should be banned.  Let them wear the head covering but not the face covering.  They scream fundamentalism, the darker the material and the more coverage equates to more extremism.  Hell, even in Egypt they can’t work because employers, particularly private enterprise, refuse to employ them.  We are being taken for a ride.  I would wager a guess half the women are forced to do it and half do it because they like to stir the pot so to speak.  There are elements of the muslim population, both men and women, who hate it, so they don’t even have full support within their own religion.  How can we all live as one, which is surely the ultimate goal by all parties, when these women cannot be seen and cannot fully function in society?

    • James Hunter says:

      09:12am | 14/04/11

      seems that a lot of you are confusing Race and Culture and Mores, ; you know it is always a good thing to define ones terms or at least understand the meanings of the words that you use.

      All that said People come to this country to escape oppression and because (at least from affar) they admire our country and it’s way of life to which they aspire. There for they should fit in with our culture and not run round looking like rejects from some middel eastern bazare.
      All my grandparents came to Australia from Scotland but they did not run round the new country wearing kilts.

    • Who gives a damn says:

      09:18am | 14/04/11

      Honestly, has any woman wearing a burqa hurt you? Who really cares if they wear one or not. Is it your right to call for its ban because it conflicts with your personal ideologies?

      Before you accuse me of being Muslim, I’m a proud Anglo-Saxon Australian soldier who has deployed to the Middle East on operations 6 times. It is fear and feminism that drives you to despise the burqa; two conditions that harm our society.

      I am opposed to Sharia Law being enforced in Australia, but the wearing of a garment does not concern me. If a woman wants to buy a bunch of bananas from Coles whilst covering her face, who gives a damn. If you ban the burqa, you will alienate Muslim women even more. They will be forbidden from leaving the house and live in isolation. So be careful what you wish for.

    • Hypocrisy is rife in today's politically correct w says:

      10:49am | 14/04/11

      Well said. This is just feminist tripe. No one opposes Sikh men from wearing an enormous Turban that covers their uncut hair. Isn’t that a form of oppression too?

    • Ronk says:

      12:16pm | 14/04/11

      No it’s not, HIRITPCW. There is no suggestion that any adult Sikh is forced to wear a turban, and it doesn’t conceal his identity. If anything it helps to identify him. If you claim not to see the difference between a turban and a burqa concealing the whole face, you are the hypocrite.

      It may be true that some husbands will ban their wives from leaving the house if they can’t wear a burqa, but the answer to this is to educate the women on their rights. Not for society to simply give in to and implicitly endorse the oppressive husband’s demands that his wife cover her face.

    • David says:

      09:22am | 14/04/11

      The burqa should be outlawed, the sooner the better. I have no issues whatsoever with Islam, but I have a major problem with this garment, it’s such a major protest against Australian culture and values.

      If you want to wear it that badly, move elsewhere.

    • Janey says:

      12:27pm | 14/04/11

      There are a few comments talking about Australian culture and values as you have done.  I am wondering what this culture and values are?

    • overit says:

      12:49pm | 14/04/11

      Janey, if you don’t know what our cultures and values are, you better go back to school.

    • fml says:

      01:03pm | 14/04/11

      Janey,

      Its what ever David feels like it to be on the day.  If we are talking generally, i dont see how it would affect, bbq’s, beaches and a day out at the pub.

      I would of thought that Australian culture would be the celebration of the fact, that we are a free, democratic nation where we are free to eat, drink, wear and say what we want without persecution, but of course that would make me a bleeding heart do gooder with no concept of “real” australian culture and values.

    • Janey says:

      01:36pm | 14/04/11

      Thank you fml that was my guess too, that our culture values freedom.
      Ironic that freedom only applies to some.

    • Joan says:

      03:13pm | 14/04/11

      Janey ... since you are so ignorant of Australian culture and values I suggest you take some time out and spend a year in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran. See if you can spot the difference

    • Dan says:

      08:20pm | 14/04/11

      Joan, perhaps you should ‘take some time out and spend a year in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran’ as you obviously don’t know much about our Australian values or culture either. Wanting to ban the burqa because it’s bad manners or because ‘it’s not our way’ (how would you know?) opposes any ‘Australian values’ I can think of.

      The truth is, Australia does not have objective or absolute values, and if you think that we do, then you are simply a fool. Saying that those who question what values we have should go to Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran is not only offensive, but stupid as well. But then we are talking about you.

    • Joan of Arc is right says:

      03:39pm | 15/04/11

      Dan, your attack on Joan is uncalled for.  Read her comment again and think about how you responded/reacted.  A little shrill maybe.

    • James says:

      09:23am | 14/04/11

      If Australia bans the burqa, I think I might just have to start wearing one. Satyagraha and so forth. Hmm, I don’t imagine Target stocks them.

    • Phill says:

      09:24am | 14/04/11

      For me it is a security issue.  You can’t walk into a bank with a full facial bike helmet, why is the burqa different?
      Try walking around town with a full face balaclava and see the sort of looks you get.  If people want to hide their face, others are always going to ask why.

    • chungo mung says:

      09:27am | 14/04/11

      Incredible people. You cannot claim to be open minded and believe in tolerant societies where people are free to choose - and follow that with the subjective judgement that another persons choice is actually a form of oppression (sweeping judgement par-excelance) and desire a rejection of that choice.

      Bigots everywhere that are so self righteous, they feel they have the truth about what an experience is to another person.

      Go fight religious extremism wherever it is - for sure - but sitting in your opinionated chair, barking on about crusading for the oppression of women in Australia according to your ignorant judgement of another’s culture is just the same old pile of fear driven, conservative, racist, self righteous rubbish.

      Just wondering if it is at all oppressive in our society that so many women feel they need to wear make-up and mask the way their features and skin really look - in order to fit in to society? Also wondering if it is oppressive - in the nature of our society - that so many women feel they must go to the effort to look beautiful (clothes, shoes, body image, make-up, accessories, hair) and spend so much money on the practice - when they are out in the world at work, with families and living life (I just notice that at home, all the women in my family do not feel the need to do these things so much, though once they step out the door - they do feel these pressures).

      If it is, then where are the crusaders for the rights of women in this country (many of whom happily choose to live this way) as regards this issue. Don’t tell me your vigor only extends to others - that you don’t really know culturally and practically… your not xenophobic are you folks?

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      09:52am | 14/04/11

      We don’t believe in child rape either, but it states pretty clearly in the Koran that a man can sleep with a 9-year old girl. Should we allow such a practice to showcase our tolerance, or should we just admit it’s the work of a depraved stone age culture, arrest anyone who practices it and move on?

      And yes, it is exactly the same thing. Wearing a full face mask in Australia 24/7 breaks established laws.

    • Pete says:

      10:36am | 14/04/11

      @sad sad reality, show me one statute where it states you cannot wear a burqa or facemask.  They dont wear it 24/7, they wear what you would class as “normal” dress in the home. If you are going to criticize at least have the sense to examine and study the subject first. Why do you just talk of islam? why do you not also state there are many cultures in the world that act differently to us? It would be a more accurate observation

    • Brian B says:

      09:35am | 14/04/11

      You confuse me. Like a lot of modern day politicians you don’t appear to have a clear cut position on the issue.

      You are sitting on the fence Michaelia - you are trying to appease everyone. Show some political courage - commit yourself to a view.

    • some guy says:

      09:41am | 14/04/11

      i think the burqa is a symbol of opression

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      09:47am | 14/04/11

      I love the burqa and the hijab. They are like signposts for the socioeconomic success and safety of an area. Beacons of sanity in this insanely tolerant world.

      Anywhere you see a predominance of burqas and hijabs you see insane violence (take your pick; drive-bys in Sydney’s South West anyone?), suicide bombings (Luton I’m looking at you), hate speech against the infidel (Bankstown: you’re all over it), gang rape (Bankstown: you again?), honour killing (Arizona: you know what I’m saying) and all those other depraved acts that bleeding hearts like to pretend are anomalous when they happen every single day in every single Muslim dominated society on Earth. So thanks for that burqa and hijab. Even if the whole world wants to lie about the oppression and third-world backwardness you represent, the areas you populate never will.

    • Pete says:

      12:59pm | 14/04/11

      or anywhere you see the cross, the crusades, the inquisition, the wiping out of whole civilisations in north and south america, countless european wars, all in god’s name. christians are just as nasty as any other religion

    • youbetcha says:

      01:07pm | 14/04/11

      Cronulla?

    • Hamish says:

      01:40pm | 14/04/11

      Hey, SSR, post the Khomeini quote again. That was just hilarious…in a really disturbing way. There is no doubt there is a correlation bewteen how Islamic a country is (and/or how many muslims are in it) and how violent, oppressive and sexist it is. To not accept, recognise and consider that is just intellectual cowardice. We should come up with a trendy name for it like the Niqab Co-Efficient.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      02:37pm | 14/04/11

      I know, Hamish. Doesn’t it just make you laugh to you cry? 1.5 Billion people believing this insanity, this absolute lunacy, as perverse and grotesque as it is. Enjoy mate.

      “A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate vaginally, but sodomising the child is acceptable. If a man does penetrate and damage the child then, he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl will not count as one of his four permanent wives and the man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister… It is better for a girl to marry at such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband’s house, rather than her father’s home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven.” [“Tahrirolvasyleh”, fourth edition, Qom, Iran, 1990]

    • Cuppa says:

      03:31pm | 14/04/11

      Ha Ha! Gold SSR! And spot on.You forgot to mention Lakemba, Australias own little slice of middle eastern third world crap hole.Gotta love all the things muslims have contributed to Australia dont you.You know, like the middle eastern crime squad, ‘uncovered meat’, & pack rape.Oh wait…...

    • Hamish says:

      04:16pm | 14/04/11

      Cuppa, leave Lakemba Mosque alone! Where else am I supposed to purchase The Chronicles of the Elders of Zion, huh? And we wouldn’t have any of those ‘uncovered meat’ probems if all those slutty white girls were a burqa would we?

    • sniff sniff says:

      09:49am | 14/04/11

      “As a Liberal, I believe in a free, fair, open and democratic society where people have the right to make their own choices about the way they live their lives. “

      Classic manipulation. The implication of your statement is that Liberals alone have those ideals, therefore those that don’t identify as Liberals don’t have those ideals. Liberals therefore represent freedom and goodness, while everyone else oppression and evil.

    • Comedian says:

      09:56am | 14/04/11

      Do I agree with burqa that makes women look like ninjas of course NOT but I will support their right to wear it…WHY you may ask, it’s because one day some bastard somewhere will turn around and say lets ban the wearing of the crucifix and say we stopped to Muslims why not the Christians…etc etc

    • overit says:

      10:26am | 14/04/11

      Comedian, why would there be any suggestion of banning the crucifix, after all it hardly obscures the face, or any part of the body for that matter.  I think you’re confusing religion with other matters.  No one is suggesting the banning of the burqa on religious grounds.

    • Comedian says:

      11:05am | 14/04/11

      Overit, I’m not suggesting anything other than once you start attacking one religious belief it’s only a matter before it snow balls. No matter what excuse people give you (including media) regarding banning the burqa don’t be so naive to think religion prejudice doesn’t play a part in all this, it may not be the reason people give you (can’t see their face, we won’t a open society..etc etc) but it’s there. In a nut shell Overit the reasoning isn’t the issue.

      I urge everyone to see beyond the here and now and see the bigger picture….and yes I do have powers to see into the future

    • NSW says:

      09:59am | 14/04/11

      Must be a non sitting period in the Senate. This article is disgusting. “alien” burqa? Ignorant xenophobic racist.  How does a person that chooses to wear an item of clothing in any way affect or have anything to do with you let alone “diminish our culture and our values”? This is Australia - yogurt has more culture!

    • AdamC says:

      10:01am | 14/04/11

      The burqa’s ghastly, but banning it is illiberal and, in all likelihood, counter-productive. Clearly, some kind of immigration fix is preferable. I don’t think it would be too hard to develop an immigration compatibility test that would exclude burqa-wearers and female genital mutilators, among others.

      It is testament to the power of the multi-cult that a common-sense immigration reform is regarded as more radical than totally banning a garment.

    • James1 says:

      10:56am | 14/04/11

      That assumes that the people wearing the burka are in fact immigrants, and not native born.  I vaguely recall reading somewhere that face covering is more common among the Australian born than it is among migrants.

    • AdamC says:

      11:16am | 14/04/11

      James1, that is true. However, I suspect that without new, burqa-sporting arrivals, the practice would likely wither on the vine.

    • Hamish says:

      12:36pm | 14/04/11

      I agree wholeheartedly AdamC. The burqa is a concrete symbol of oppression, a deliberate attempt to symbolically and practically alienate women from broader male society. I’m not sure what is sadder, that some women are forced to wear the buqa or that some women choose to. It is sexist and it is disgraceful. But it cannot be banned.

      We should avoid the problem by simply not importing people whose cultural (as opposed to religious) practices are incompatible with our own.

    • James1 says:

      02:54pm | 14/04/11

      AdamC, I think it has more to do with the Muslims-as-victim narrative being peddled by some, coupled with some sort of teen rebellion complex (akin to all the white middle class kids dressing like Baltimore gangsters).  Waleed Aly gave a very good lecture on that narrative - the best encapsulation of that narrative I have ever seen - in a recent Senate lecture.

      There is no transcript yet, but this link will take you to the mp3 version, and if you have a spare hour or so it is well worth a listen.

      http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/pubs/occa_lect/transcripts/index.htm

    • Elphaba says:

      10:03am | 14/04/11

      I think so long as the women wearing it are doing it of their own free will and not being forced by their husbands or fathers, what’s the problem?

    • loxy says:

      11:28am | 14/04/11

      Elphaba, how would you know if a women wears it of her own free will? I lived in London for many years and although all the muslim women I came across over there would publicly say they are not forced to wear the headscarf or burqa, the reality for most of them is they were as their husbands and/or family significantly pressured them. People tie the wearing of the burqa to religious freedom but it has nothing to do with religion (given the Koran makes no mention of it) and everything to do with tradition and culture. This tradition and culture of oppressing and isolating women has no place in our country and demonstrates a complete unwillingness to integrate and accept our culture - which fundamentally contradicts the whole point of multiculturism in the first place. As controversial as it is, I would fully support a ban on the burqa.

    • Elphaba says:

      11:40am | 14/04/11

      @Loxy, but banning it would then affect women who do want to wear it.  You’re going to end up margianalising one group over another no matter what you do.

      If you support a ban on it, great.  I disagree.  I’m not about to tell people what to do when I don’t fully understand each individual’s situation.

    • Anti-hypo says:

      10:03am | 14/04/11

      You can’t ban burquas and call yourself a free country.
      If Australia’s gonna be a multicultural, diverse and pluralistic society going forward, then we have to be prepared to allow different cultural practises and even sharia law when the time comes if that what the free peoples of this great nation want.

    • braunman says:

      10:06am | 14/04/11

      Banning the burqa is a very dangerous idea. What it does is say that there are particular items of clothing which people can’t wear in public. It’s understandable that people should have to identify themselves in certain situations, such as in banks, court of law ect, but banning it entirely would send entirely the wrong message. Seriously we’re not talking about female circumcision here, it’s an item of clothing with particular cultural significance.

      It would be like banning men from using female characters in online role playing games like World of Warcraft. Sure men look stupid wearing dresses, but it doesn’t do anyone any harm if they do. Does this situation sound unlikely? A few years ago I think it was China that made this very situation illegal, and players now have to provide proof of gender before they sign up to such games.

    • Az says:

      11:00am | 14/04/11

      So, given its just an item of clothing, as you say, I could assume that you would feel OK walking into a bank and having the teller serve you in her bra and panties ? Or would it be OK for your electrician to turn up in his jocks ?

      Clothing - in most cultures - has more social and cultural importance than what you would suggest.

      I have travelled widely in the Middle East and have always been at pains to dress with respect to their cultural norms, why is it so hard for some people to respect ours ?

    • braunman says:

      11:44am | 14/04/11

      @Az

      I actually addressed the bank situation. Come to think of it being served by tellers in bra and panties would be pretty awesome. If I knew that it was illegal for bank tellers to wear clothes while working though it would truly disgust me as it removes their freedom of choice. That’s the whole point. Seriously what do you lose out on if a woman choses to wear a burqa? Why does it offend you so?  You said it yourself that clothing has different significance in different cultures, so what’s so bad with letting them wear that particular item which has significance for them? How is it disrespectful to us? Does someone having a different culture really bother you that much?

      I would also like to point out that I also have travelled around the middle east, having lived there for 8 years as an expat. I hate to tell you this, but Australia is not the middle east. In Australia we respect other cultures even if we don’t agree with them. Don’t stoop to the level of the Saudi’s, where codes of dress are legally enforced.

    • MarK says:

      10:08am | 14/04/11

      Was down at Flynns Beach yesterday.

      There was a family - well two of them.

      Few kids playing in the sand/water having an awesome time.

      The dads were down with the kids in their shorts and singlets watching the kids.

      The mums were back up on the sand in full top to toe dress/burqa whatever you call it.

      Must have been hot as hell.

      I felt so sad at the whole thing for other reasons though. What a pity.

    • An interesting fact says:

      10:09am | 14/04/11

      When the British invaded this country, they offended the Aboriginals by wearing pants, because anyone who hid their genitalia could not be trusted.

    • James says:

      10:16am | 14/04/11

      Well, they were right about that.

    • Tombowler says:

      10:36am | 14/04/11

      The British never invaded a sovereign nation:

      There was no contigous ‘aboroginal state’ just a bunch of alternating warring tribes and peaceful hombre tribes.

      The more accurate supposition is that they invaded a continent.

      I for one don’t buy the ‘invasion’ day crap- the aboriginals had 40,000 years or so to form a nation, learn how to build guns and a properly functioning modern society and failed to do so- the lie of the ‘noble savage’ is a stupid myth.

      The aboroginal people were unlikely, after taking 400 centuries to arrive at a stick that returns when you throw it, were unlikely to have a seat at the U.N for Australia off their own bat.

      This is not meant to be a slight at the aboriginal people, merely a comment that historical circumstances make it a ridiculous argument to suggest that Aus ever would have become a nation without asians, europeans or russians for that matter doing a spot of empire-building.

      If the ‘perfect world’ of the left existed then the evidence suggests that Australians would literally be living in tribes, dying at 38 and throwing sticks at marsupials still without the benefit of a nation-state

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      12:05pm | 14/04/11

      Tombowler
       
      and they killed off all the megafauna, thus ensuring they were doomed to a spartan, nomadic existence.

    • ;o) says:

      10:11am | 14/04/11

      ” The Koran calls for women and men to wear loose-fitting clothes to hide the outline of their bodies”.  Now If my new age religion called for me to walk around naked (god forbid) and to carry a sub machine gun with a blue smurf hat on my head in public, due to it being religious dress, just like the burqa or the the sik indian who can carry a dagger on there person because its considered religious dress. Would I be arrested, would my religion be accepted? would I be accepted? I tend to think not, I am sure I would be considered offensive to others. So why is it that we have to accept the Burqa and dagger as religious dress codes, and called a racists for not agreeing with this dress code. Seems one rule for some and no rules for others.

    • Big thinker says:

      10:20am | 14/04/11

      We need to think outside the square here people - clearly reading through all the comments people will never agree as to ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ to ban the burqua.

      So what we ALL as a society (men and woman) need to do is take an old bedsheet each - cut some eye holes out of it and start going about our daily lives - go into the banks, pay for petrol - ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE ABOVE COMMENTS AS PROBLEMATIC TO SOCIETY.

      Once too many people in society are masked the Government will HAVE to finally grow some balls and step in to ‘outlaw’ the covering of ones face.

      When the government dips their toe into to start trying to reason with us ‘ghost’ folk - we will let them know that we’re starting a new culture and that they have no right to tell us how to live our lives - we will then proceed to complain and whinge about things in ‘mainstream’ society which clash with our newly established ‘culture’ and jump up and down until the govt buckles - as so many cultures have done before us.

      WE WILL BE THE NEW MINORITY - AND AS WE ALL KNOW THE GOVT SEEMS TO BEND OVER BACKWARDS TO ACCOMODATE TO THE MINORITIES!!!

      You may think my idea is over the top - but sit and really think about it for a minute - it would work!!!

    • Thommo says:

      10:57am | 14/04/11

      Sometimes you can only show someone the error of their ways through Reductio Ad Absurdum

    • Slick says:

      11:39am | 14/04/11

      I like it!
      But it will be much too hot.
      Hell I don’t even wear Hats, let alone whole body covering clothing!

    • ;o) says:

      12:10pm | 14/04/11

      Your idea isn’t over the top at all. Imagine a mass visit to the public gallery of Parliament house in Canberra, while our politicians are in full sitting, I wonder how they would react to viewing a full public gallery of Australians sitting there with there faces covered. The question someone could answer is .....would security let us into the house and to the gallery? and if not why? Food for thought isn’t it.

    • Cat says:

      10:23am | 14/04/11

      Think about this: Women in Islamic countries have their passport photos taken with their burquas on, and because of that women can use their friends passports and letters of permission to leave the country illegally because no customs officer will ask them to remove their burqua to check… It is so much a part of their culture. Some women are forced to wear the burqua but I have met quite a few women whose husbands plead with them not to wear the burqua in Australia but they refuse and continue to do so.

    • Celia says:

      10:33am | 14/04/11

      I’m Anti-Islamic, and anti-Jewish, and anti-Catholic and anti-Protestant and anti-mormon as well as anti-scientology and anti-cagw - nothing wrong with being anti-religious.

    • T S Sebastien says:

      12:28pm | 14/04/11

      Hmmm.  Provided you don’t act on your prejudice you are fine. If however you decided to follow through on your belief by say not hiring someone because they were religious you would find yourself at the wrong end of anti-descrimination legislation. Further if you decided to publically vilify someone because of their religious belief you could find yourself at the wrong end of Anti-Vilification legislation. It’s fine to be anti-religious in belief but the moment you are prejudicial to someone because of that belief you cross the line into sectarianism….

    • JB says:

      10:34am | 14/04/11

      This is one of the more sensible responses i have on this topic. While I dissagree with some of the subtext of your article I totally agree that in a libertarian country like ours we absolutely should regulate what people can and cant wear. The burqa can be confronting but if a woman chooses to wear it we cannot deny them their right to choose what they wear.  It is ironic that people that call for the banning of the burqa, restricting the freedom of people to choose what they wear, justify it by saying it is about liberty.

    • Muslim says:

      10:37am | 14/04/11

      Yes, Islam is a not amonolithic faith, hence why the statement that the face veil is not a requirment is a contradiction - many, many Muslims DO believe that the veil is a requirment, just as many people DON’T. And BOTH sides have plenty of evidence from the texts to back up their claims.

      It is rubbish to say it is not a part of the faith - get some real education on teh issue before writting about it.

    • Slick says:

      11:52am | 14/04/11

      By that reasoning, Killing the infidal is also part of your faith, some people believe they should and others don’t. Do you plan to do that here as well?

    • Pete says:

      10:38am | 14/04/11

      “As a Liberal, I believe in a free, fair, open and democratic society where people have the right to make their own choices about the way they live their lives.

      It is my opinion however that the wearing of not only the burqa, but any apparel that completely covers a person’s face, is alien to our Australian culture and our values. “

      contradictory statements Michaela, you’ve been hanging around politicians to long

    • James1 says:

      10:52am | 14/04/11

      How so?  If you read the article, she affirms her commitment to openness, etc.  She also affirms her commitment to not banning burkas, instead preferring to convince those wearing them through education, reason, and example that there is a better way.

      This is entirely philosophically consistent.

    • Zaf says:

      11:13am | 14/04/11

      The only part of this meandering article that made any logical sense was the statement opposing someone being forced to wear a burka.  (Why stop at the burka?  People shouldn’t be forced to wear any specific item of clothing.) While the author does say she doesn’t want to see a burka ban, that’s a pretty luke warm (in comparison) statement about the right of women to wear what they please.

      And yes, we do communicate using our facial expressions – everybody does, not just Australians.  The issue is whether people are obliged to communicate with everybody they see in the course of a day.  Imho it’s their own business whether they do or not.  The rest of us need to stop being so precious about it.

    • Slick says:

      11:56am | 14/04/11

      Zaf, we are forced to wear articles of clothing all the time. I mean if I walked around on the streets without any clothes on I would be arrested for indecent exposure (and probably Manslaughter for all the heartattacks I caused).
      How is that not force?

    • Zaf says:

      01:52pm | 14/04/11

      Fair call Slick.  I guess the issue here seems to be the very targeted nature of a possible burka ban, and the underlying (imho smug and fatuous) assumptions about who WE are and who THEY are. 

      However it’s “dressed up” (ha!), it is not just a matter of covering the face – otherwise big sunnies/ski masks would be banned as well.  It’s about discomfort with a particular kind of Australian. (ie the Muslim kind.) 

      What on earth does incompatible with ‘our Australian way of life’ mean?  Is it really about women’s equality and dignity?  How come I haven’t heard anything about our Australian way of life being in danger when a group of football players misbehaves with a woman?  Or a group of cadets?  Or any white Australian rapist? 

      It starts to look like it’s being used as code for ‘people who are not like us’.  To add insult to injury, it’s being used for cheap political gain.  Imho that sucks.

    • Slick says:

      11:34am | 15/04/11

      Zaf, I have no problem with them doing it on a day to day basis, so long as anywhere we would have to take off our ski mask, helmut, hat, they also must take off the face veil of the burqa. In day to day life I am sure it would not be a problem, but in the courts, or if an officer requests to check a drivers licence photos, or at the airport, or in the banks, then they must comply and take the veil away. They may keep their head scarf part always, as they can be identified without seeing their hair.
      Other than that I have no problems with the thing. Providing they do not get rules that apply to them only. Otherwise I will go and buy a blakc burqa and rob a bank, and frame a muslim. I mean they would never know would they???(im joking ok.. I promise.!)

    • overit says:

      11:16am | 14/04/11

      OMG I’ve been drooling over that venim protein muscular guy all day and really believe he should wear a burqa so I don’t lose control of my self and think immoral thoughts.

    • david says:

      11:18am | 14/04/11

      So which is more oppressive? Your religion/heritage forcing you to wear it or a law forcing you not to wear it.

    • Traxster says:

      11:41am | 14/04/11

      I was going to make a comment on this subject but I can see, from what I’ve read here,  that once again the discussion has deteriorated,as it usually does , into a hate filled,name calling very immature squabble.
      I fully expected to see somebody writing,‘my Daddy can beat your Daddy’
      to someone with whom she/he disagreed.
      On such an important subject I expected more intelligent comments.
      Silly me…..............

    • Janey says:

      12:52pm | 14/04/11

      Come now Traxster, it is news limited and some have made their home here.
      If you are interested, I am interested in what constitutes “Australian culture and values” that so many speak of.  Do you know?
      Would it be the freedom to wear whatever I like, even if I am an overweight, pale skinned woman with fat rolls and sweaty armpits and no modesty?

    • Kevin says:

      11:42am | 14/04/11

      If a Saudi man gets separated from his wife in a Saudi shopping centre, how on earth would he find her?

    • Spell Cheque says:

      01:30pm | 14/04/11

      She’d be the one getting arrested for being a female in public without a male relative escorting her.

    • cRook says:

      12:02pm | 14/04/11

      As someone who grew up proud of my country, and who sees its identity as gloriously multicultural, I view the burqa as entirely Australian, and anyone who seeks to limit the choices of women as completely unAustralian. The argument that it hinders communication is ridiculous when you view the failed arguments for mandatory competency in spoken English.

    • JulesG says:

      12:12pm | 14/04/11

      We need to talk about the ‘alien’ Burqa

      What is there to talk about? Just ban it - end of story!

      As an Australian citizen I would not be allowed to walk into a bank wearing a crash helmet or wear a hat at my local after 8.00pm.

      We don’t need a protracted discussion about this because it is utterly alien and flies in the face as to to what is normal and acceptable in our society. Those that insist on wearing this hideous and ridiculous garment do so at odds with the country they are in.

      Whilst all the usual comments about individual freedoms still apply - there is a limit and we all have to conform to some degree or other, in order to be accepted by our peers and to fit in. Some things are just so alien and against our norms that they become non negotiable and this Burqa is one of those things.

      BAN IT, BAN IT, BAN IT!! Get rid of it; expunge it - Today! If some find that offensive then I would suggest that your system of values is so alien to ours that you really need to reconsider your position in a liberal and secular country like Australia. We wouldn’t accept honour killings so why would we accept the Burqa?

      The Muslim community and leadership should encourage openness and dialogue and make some effort at assimilation. The Burqa represents oppression and secrecy and does nothing for the image of muslims in this country.

    • Anne_N says:

      04:08pm | 14/04/11

      Ssshhh….if you’re not careful, people will mistake you for Fred Nile.

    • Knemon says:

      12:14pm | 14/04/11

      “As Australians, we must not be silent on those issues which could diminish our culture and our values” - What an absolute load of bollocks, how the hell is wearing a burqa going to diminish our culture and our Values?  I’ve read some rubbish but this article would be up their with the worst.

      Michaelia Cash should have removed her thinly disguised racist veil before writing such trash.

    • Hamish says:

      12:49pm | 14/04/11

      Are you suggesting you’re perfectly comfortable with women participating in their own symbolic and practical oppression by covering their face and deliberately alienating themselves from broader society? Isn’t gender equality and freedom of association part of Australian values? I don’t think the burqa should be banned but it is a disgraceful symbol of oppression and Australians should rightly be offended by it.

    • James1 says:

      01:56pm | 14/04/11

      “Isn’t gender equality and freedom of association part of Australian values?”

      For some.  However, you will find there are all sorts of nutty group who deliberately separate themselves from wider society.  I would argue that it is more the opportunity to associate freely that matters.  If some decide not to avail themselves of this opportunity, whether because they are Muslims, Exclusive Brethren, or World of Warcraft players, that is their right.

      However, once that decision is taken, they must also accept the costs that their choices impose.  In relation to the burka in particular, one of these costs is not fitting in, not making many friends, and not walking into a bank or any kind of store, should the owners wish to exclude you for safety reasons.

    • Knemon says:

      03:39pm | 14/04/11

      @ Hamish - To me It is a piece of clothing. I’m more disturbed by the sights I see at our shopping malls…half dressed fat bogans baring it all and letting it all hang out, not only disturbing but a rather sickening sight to behold.

      As for oppression - have you ever asked these women if they do NOT want to wear a burqa? I would say the majority do, it is part of their culture which has no effect on our own culture…whatever that is?

    • Hamish says:

      04:10pm | 14/04/11

      Knemon, just because somone chooses to be oppressed doesn’t make them any less oppressed. I’m not sure which is more disturbing, that some women are forced to wear a burqa or that a lot choose to. The burqa is a symbol of oppression, fatties wearing inappropriate clothing is a sign of liberty…even if it’s a very unfortunate sign. I think the burqa is incompatible with our culture. Wearing a mask is not acceptable in our society. The burqa is actually specifically designed to isolate the wearer and alienate the beholder.

    • jim morris says:

      12:18pm | 14/04/11

      Nothing should be done to discourage the burqa. It is irrelevant to the coming war between islam and the rest that will dominate the 21st century.

    • Static says:

      12:24pm | 14/04/11

      To be quite honest I find young men wearing dark sunglasses with a hoodie over a baseball cap far more intimidating then any burqa wearing woman and the fact that they do it of their own free will makes it scarier

    • Anna C says:

      12:32pm | 14/04/11

      If the burqa is so great why don’t Muslim men wear it???? Is it because it is restrictive, uncomfortable, confronting, hot, de-humanising etc etc. I cannot believe the number of times I have seen Muslim couples out and about with the men all tarted up in the latest sports fashions like preening peacocks while their poor wives are dressed down like some dowdy old bags.

      The burqa is a weapon used by Muslim men to subjugate their women. Any Muslim women who denies this has been brainwashed and is suffering from Stockholm syndrome. The wearing of the burqa is truly abhorrent and should be banned immediately. Apart from anything else it causes Vitamin D deficiency which can have serious implications for pregant women and their unborn children. The burqa is a throw-back from the 1300’s and has no place in modern Western society.

    • Bytchy says:

      03:52pm | 14/04/11

      Really one of my best friends was born in Australia and brought up as a Catholic, she converted to Islam while single and has been wearing the burqua since…. I dont like it but it is most certainly her choice. Please keep your silly assumptions to yourself

    • Anna C says:

      12:32pm | 14/04/11

      If the burqa is so great why don’t Muslim men wear it???? Is it because it is restrictive, uncomfortable, confronting, hot, de-humanising etc etc. I cannot believe the number of times I have seen Muslim couples out and about with the men all tarted up in the latest sports fashions like preening peacocks while their poor wives are dressed down like some dowdy old bags.

      The burqa is a weapon used by Muslim men to subjugate their women. Any Muslim women who denies this has been brainwashed and is suffering from Stockholm syndrome. The wearing of the burqa is truly abhorrent and should be banned immediately. Apart from anything else it causes Vitamin D deficiency which can have serious implications for pregant women and their unborn children. The burqa is a throw-back from the 1300’s and has no place in modern Western society.

    • Luke says:

      12:34pm | 14/04/11

      I think frances law is oppressive.
      I think Australia should have a law that forces women to remove a burka during legal proceedings (ie a court of law, whenever identification is required like at centre link). Maybe there is one already?
      Finally… i think the burka should be removed while driving so if they speed they cant get away with it.
      I wish people would be more practical when it comes to issues like this… so many views on it are so darn plain…

    • JulesG says:

      04:00pm | 14/04/11

      Luke: I think that France’s law is oppressive.

      How so? The Burqa in France makes no more sense than the Burqa in Australia. They are both secular countries an it is beyond their culture to allow this abomination.

      I think France is brave and far sighted and deserves a medal. I can’t wait for Australia to do the same and show some guts and stand up for its own culture instead of allowing this constant dilution of our values for the sake of being politically correct and not wanting to offend anyone.

      The Burqa has no place in Australia and should be banned for yesterday and we don’t need to apologise about it either.

    • Col. of Blackburn says:

      12:37pm | 14/04/11

      I agree that wearing a Burka/Niqab is totally UnAustralian. By all means let those who wish to wear a Headscarf/Veil

      I can’t think of any other form of dress from any country that is similar.
      I notice a female Australian ABC presenter now on TV wearing a headscarf when she is on TV as is required by her country of residence’s cultural mores, those who come hear should respect our cultural mores!

    • AnthonyG says:

      12:41pm | 14/04/11

      Now the shooting party has got some power can we shoot anyone wearing a burqa. Hey why stop there can we shoot the Greenies as well.

    • LouLou says:

      12:49pm | 14/04/11

      Yes, this is xenophopia at its finest.  I have probably a dozen friends who wear the burqa, by choice!  Yes, we are a democracy so yes, they are free to wear this.  If you’d prefer women not wear the burqa, perhaps you could also ask men to remove their beards; others to remove their facial tattoos (which I find personally gross but I couldn’t care less if somebody chooses to have them); and others to remove their facial piercings; oh, yes, not to mention women who wear so much hideous make-up complete with false eye-lashes that their natural appearance is completely hidden ... oh, puh-lease, you’re arguments don’t stand up at all!  Astonishingly ignorant.

    • Colmac says:

      12:51pm | 14/04/11

      Google the word “Purdah”, then try and tell me wearing the burqua is the womans choice. It is a practice that is of no benefit to our society, or to the woman being subjugated.

    • Bruno says:

      12:52pm | 14/04/11

      “As a Liberal, I believe in a free, fair, open and democratic society where people have the right to make their own choices about the way they live their lives. It is my opinion however…..” - thank you bye bye.

      I think the issue is is the individual being forced to wear it. If not then I have no issue. Why someone would want to wear it I don’t know, I don’t understand and will never understand. In fact I am a hypocrite because it is my firm belief that some people, male and female, should be forced to wear it. Some of the heads out there, they scare the children, the burqa would be an improvement. Tony Abbott for example should be jailed for not wearing one.

    • Mensur Cehic says:

      01:22pm | 14/04/11

      Legend! smile

      I agree with you on the issue where individuals (usually males) enforce some women to wear it. In such cases - and such cases ONLY - I support the French law to imprison such individuals.
      HOWEVER, if a woman choses such clothing, it MUST be allowed..and anyone forcing these women NOT to wear it, should also be jailed for up to a year.

      http://thevividwriter.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/heroine-2/

    • Romski says:

      12:54pm | 14/04/11

      ok for starters anyone saying this is racist, religion is a choice, unlike race, people wearing this things are choosing so either one their own back or being pressured by the male suitors, I believe in wearing whatever you like based on how you feel, you see goth kids walking around wearing the most ungodly clothing and sometimes they look scary, thanks to the news people see the burqa as a scary piece of clothing. Personally i believe the second those guys robbed a jewelery store wearing a burqa they became a security risk and the laws that are inforce in france are appropriate, if a police officer, in force by our government, asks you to remove a face covering you should and if you dont you should be arrested, i run to work wearing an under armour hood which covers my face because of the cold weather, and if a police officer asked me to remove it, it would be off faster than you could so yes officer.

    • mahhrat says:

      01:00pm | 14/04/11

      Not trying to be deliberately straw-like about this, but does a person’s right to be free to dress how they like trump my right to be allowed to see their faces (and perhaps only their faces, see below) in public?  If so, how is the right to wear a burqa then any different than wearing no clothes at all?

    • Just Sayin' says:

      01:13pm | 14/04/11

      Does a woman’s right to dress how she pleases trump my right to see her tits?  Yes.  Yes it does.

    • PJ says:

      04:10pm | 14/04/11

      You don’t have the right to see their face.

    • BMJ says:

      01:17pm | 14/04/11

      In the future people will look back on this debate and laugh at us just like we look back at history laughing and wondering “What they were thinking?”

      What I wear is my business. What a muslim woman wants to wear is hers. If she is FORCED to wear it we should make avenues available as a society to help her out. It’s that simple.

      It doesn’t intimidate me. I don’t care that I can’t see her face (Who actually looks someone in the face anymore anyway?)

      Honestly we have more pressing issues to deal with than banning something that a few thousand women wear.

      The fact that this issue receives as much “airtime” as it does says alot about Australia and it borders on scary.

    • overit says:

      01:20pm | 14/04/11

      I am all for religious freedom as long as it does not offend others and is legal.  Therefore I respect the rights of muslims to practice their faith as long as there are no chopped off limbs, no FGM, no forced marriages, no sharia law, no aspostacy laws, no taqiyya, no special pools or toilets, no beheadings and certainly no burqas.  Hell I might even become a muslim if this were the case.  I may not wish to become a muslim and may not agree with their religious beliefs but I do ask for respect and respect is a 2 way street muslims largely ignore.  Where is the rights of Australians in all of this?  Why are we being silenced by some who are intent on questioning whether Australia has any culture and insist on criticising christianity all the while they promote Islam and anything outside of Australia.  No one asks Hare Krishnas to remove their orange gowns, no one asks Indians to remove their saris and facial adornments because these items are not a direct impediment to both communication and integration.  There are also safety reasons for wearing the burqa.  Why oh why would anyone say it’s a good thing or is something we should accept.  Wear what you like but leave your face open.  I can see you with a veil, I can see you with tattoos and piercings, I can see you with thick makeup and sunglasses, but I have zero chance of seeing you and respecting you with a burqa.  My beliefs are nothing to do with islam and everything to do with the burqa so don’t start the racist comments with me.

    • Janey says:

      01:44pm | 14/04/11

      “...but I do ask for respect and respect is a 2 way street muslims largely ignore.”
      Who are you asking for respect from, and what must they do to show you they respect you?

      ” Where is the rights of Australians in all of this? “
      What rights are you referring to overit?

    • overit says:

      04:51pm | 14/04/11

      Janey, to your first question they must show me their face if I am to respect them.  Having said that I am never rude to them and always try to smile.  Problem is I have no idea if they’re smiling or not.  This is an obvious problem with burqas, amongst others.

      As to your second question.  The rights of the majority of Australians, as repeatedly shown through online surveys and forums and without a doubt through any future referendum, are not being respected.

    • Anna C says:

      01:33pm | 14/04/11

      How is wearing a burqa any different from walking around with a paper bag on your head? Why in god’s name are women expected to dress like this in the 21st Century? The burqa is a walking prison which de-humanises its wearer and screams alienation and non-confirmity. I cannot fathom why on earth anyone would voluntarily choose to wear one. I have no problems with Muslim women wearing head scarfs but I draw the line at the burqa.

    • Anna C says:

      01:33pm | 14/04/11

      How is wearing a burqa any different from walking around with a paper bag on your head? Why in god’s name are women expected to dress like this in the 21st Century? The burqa is a walking prison which de-humanises its wearer and screams alienation and non-confirmity. I cannot fathom why on earth anyone would voluntarily choose to wear one. I have no problems with Muslim women wearing head scarfs but I draw the line at the burqa.

    • Ross says:

      01:35pm | 14/04/11

      I would be just as offended by a builders bum cracks facing me in a café. Or a native tribesman from New Guinea in my face while I was eating in a restaurant, or an Australian native on walk about in a primary school. I do believe there is a place for such things and if the powers that be and the people in general for whatever reason find it unacceptable then either stop doing it or go do it where it is in common use. I would not be happy to sit next to a person who stank of crap on a long flight or standing in a bank queue is another place; I guess the best one can say about the burka is it covers a multiple of sins. There are some people who look better under a paper bag.

    • Ange says:

      02:03pm | 15/04/11

      Let’s hope Ross that you never have or do anythiing that offends anyone lest you find yourself banned. It’s oh so easy for us to point fingers at others and say “I don’t like that, you must stop it” until we’re the one’s having the fingers pointed at us.

    • Cattlelog says:

      02:00pm | 14/04/11

      What I find offensive is that the women are seen wearing it while the men wear whatever they like. I would have absolutely no problem with the burqa or the headscarves if it was *equally* applied to both sexes.

      When you go to the beach and see Muslim women totally covered up swimming in an amount of clothes that could only be considered dangerous to their health to be worn in the water while their men prance around in speedos.. that is, in my opinion, un-Australian.

    • Amanda frankston says:

      02:05pm | 14/04/11

      I don’t agree witha ban on the burqa but must say this has been the most eloquent article written on the issue against. Well done

    • Kika says:

      02:16pm | 14/04/11

      I don’t have a problem with niqaab or hijab. I seldom see anyone in Brisbane wearing the burqa (the full body one with a mesh over the eyes - niqaab is the one where only the eyes are visible).

      I don’t care really. In a few generations young Muslims will identify with being Aussies and probably relax upon the strict cultural ties to the niqaab and burqas. Wasn’t there moral panic about the wogs back in the 60’s, and 70’s and 80’s it was asians?

      Who cares. They aren’t going to take the country over and are only here wanting to live in peace with us. If they don’t want peace, fine, leave. But if they are here only trying to be hard working Australian Muslims, fine. Because I tell you what, Muslim immigration isn’t a new thing. There were Muslims here probably longer than some of my ancestors were. The first were the Afghan cameleers who helped the interior pastoralists get their goods out to the coast. The local mosque in my area celebrated their 100th anniversary a few years ago. So I believe we aren’t seeing anything new other than moral panic stemmed from the European realisation that their lax immigration policies in the past may be coming back to haunt them now. Plus they are all so uptight about their ‘cultural values’ that anything contrary to how they see the world is strange and foreign. Even my Norweigen relatives couldn’t cope with my Australianisms and distaste and fish in a tube…

      It’s not going to happen here because 1) We have pretty strict immigration and 2) They are never going to over populate us and 3) In a few generations the young Aussie Muslims will see themselves more culturally ‘Australian’ then ‘Saudi’ or ‘Pakistani’ etc.

    • stephen says:

      03:04pm | 14/04/11

      In terms of personal psychology, your article is non-sensical.
      Because, why do muslim women, if they at all intend to appear Aussie at a later stage, resist now, so much local influence ?
      I think they are so adament precisely because they have no intention of adapting to local customs.
      In France, where such garb is banned in public spaces, they will have now great difficulty in enforcing it, and indeed, a spokesman the the Muslim Brotherhood in, I think Nth. Africa, said recently that such legislation will unearth a hell on earth.
      We’d better make up our mind soon.

    • Kika says:

      04:49pm | 14/04/11

      Stephen, it does make sense. They are holding onto their culture because that is what they know and what they understand more. Within a few generations (and I mean generations, not 1st born or 1st generation)  and the more removed they are from their countries of origin the kids will look around at other aussie kids and feel more like them than their distant cousins back in Iran.  If you actually read what I said, I said the first immigrants will have trouble adapting, but as time goes on the kids will be more and more removed from the original culture there is no doubt that assimilation will occur eventually.

      I had lots of Muslim friends at school. Some where more ‘traditional’ and these kids usually were 1st generation, others you wouldn’t even know that they were muslim because they were just like us - aussie.

      The benefit of being in Australia is whilst we have a vast open shoreline to accept illegals we’re 1) Bloody hard to get to and 2) so far away from everything and everyone that most refugees don’t come here. . France is for the most part adjoined to Europe and is an easy gateway for illegals to get through the former Eastern bloc countries and hop their way into France that way.

      Also France has vast colonial past just as UK. A lot of their colonies were in North Africa. They allowed them into their country thanks to their shared prosperity together under colonial rule, so it’s no wonder they have an issue.

    • stephen says:

      05:39pm | 14/04/11

      The evidence suggests, Kika, that it is the second generation families of migrants who have the diificulties in a new culture.
      At any rate, I am in favour of this current form of Multiculturalism, and see no need to enforce rules that may be classed, for better words, ‘the aussie way’.
      Yet this particular form of dress needs to reigned in, if only because of our secularist societal norms.

    • The Vivid Writer says:

      02:17pm | 14/04/11

      “Much has been made of the debate over whether women living in Australia should wear a burqa.”
      —Wow, sounds like ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom of expression’. What’s next? A debate on should certain minorities wear an armband? Kristalnacht?

      “Rather, it is about living and being a fully functioning member on a daily basis in a country whose values are predicated on social interaction.”
      —Not sure if those values are predicated on “social interaction”. Much rather, those ‘values’ have been underscored by the Philip Ruddocks, John Howards and Pauline Hansons of this world to be: Anglo or non-Anglo. And such ‘values’ involve the exact opposite of “social interaction”. Especially when it comes to the fine art of approaching ‘Mainstream’ Australians, who find themselves somewhat outclassed, outskilled and outspoken by multilingual, well-travelled, high-achieving CULTURED ‘New’ Australians. It has occurred to me that once you feel ‘threatened’, in 9/10 cases, your little “social capital”, “social interaction” and your self-perceived and self-assumed protagonism goes straight out of the window and you start to make it it CLEAR just who was BORN HERE and who WASN’T. And it has nothing to do with Niqabs, Burqas, Muslims and terror. It has everything to do with you, Anglos, trying to retain your power structure and keeping the others as OTHERS. And in France’s case, they have had to swallow that pill of making it legal to torment a minority (a visible minority) which also happens to be closely associated with multi-billion dollars worth of global PROPAGANDA over the past decade or so. PROPAGANDA of FEAR, which has kept the MILITARISM well-OILED, highly FUNDED and too broadly EMPOWERED.

      http://thevividwriter.wordpress.com/2011/04/06/a-view-to-a-christianity/

    • Duff says:

      02:19pm | 14/04/11

      “I am opposed to women in Australia covering their faces in public particularly if this is not of their choosing or if it is imposed on them.”

      So, i assume you are opposed to sunglasses, then.  Or hats where the brim hides the face.  Or perhaps too much makeup or tattoos that are on the face?  Or how about nose rings, earrings and the like?  How are any of these different?

      But why just the face?  Why not hair styles or dress as well?  Orthodox Jews don’t cut their hair and they wear dark hats and beards.  Is that un-Australian as well?  How about Buddhists?  They wear long robes and shave their heads.

      It’s a long list, if you want to go down the road of policing people for what they wear and how they appear in public.  You can’t just single out burkhas.

    • Kika says:

      04:50pm | 14/04/11

      Or people in ‘Save the Koala’ foundation costumes? They are scary. They come and ask for money. Muslim women in Niqaabs don’t harass me for money, or sit in the local shopping centre wanting kids to sit on their lap and tell them what they want for Christmas.

    • Just Sayin' says:

      05:27pm | 14/04/11

      I’m definitely opposed to girls wearing those great big sunglasses.  Sometimes they look really hot, but then they take the sunnies off and they turn out to be very plain.  They are the facial equivalent of a wonder bra.  Maybe we should ban wonder bras too.

    • ;o) says:

      02:26pm | 14/04/11

      Forget the PC crap, The burqa is a control measure & a political statement pure and simple. I agree It would be acceptable to wear out in the desert to protect yourself from the harsh sun and dust storms while riding your camel. But in downtown suburbia!!! Oh wait someone will chime in and say its cultural wear,its about expressing someones cultural heritage, well so is nakedness on some beaches and forests, you wouldn’t see a naked person sitting on the train next to you would you!!!!. To those of you preaching its about choice & freedom personal rights etc need your heads read seriously.

    • youbetcha says:

      03:06pm | 14/04/11

      “harsh sun”

      So can they wear it if its a hot day in the city?

    • ;o) says:

      04:41pm | 14/04/11

      youbetcha says: 03:06pm | 14/04/11
      “harsh sun”

      So can they wear it if its a hot day in the city?

      Hell if the city is in the middle of a desert with a forecast of sand storms, wild camels on the run, and a chance of raining rockets why not!!!

    • Ricky says:

      02:29pm | 14/04/11

      The burqa is foriegn , alien & repulsive & represents the very worst of a violent, trouble making minority.Australian culture expects to see someones face & facial expressions & if muslims dont like it they should head pack to the third world crap holes they originated from where they can dress like mailboxes to their harts content.They wont be missed.

    • BMJ says:

      02:54pm | 14/04/11

      How would a muslim woman not wearing a burqa change your obvious deep, deep problems with muslims overall? It wouldn’t.

      I’d rather shallow people like yourself leave the country than some muslim quietly minding her business wearing a burqa tbh.

      What’s wrong with you people?

    • Jane says:

      08:34pm | 14/04/11

      Loathsome. Absolutely loathsome, and the Punch published this?

      The only thing repulsive I can see are views like yours and as for being a ‘violent, trouble making minority’ you are a delusional bigot.

      ‘muslims dont like it they should head pack to the third world crap holes they originated from’

      You do realise that many, if not most, Muslims were born here?!!!

      ‘They wont be missed.’

      Why don’t you leave? Nobody will miss you!

    • Ange says:

      01:49pm | 15/04/11

      Ricky - your posting is a perfect example of how media frenzies and propoganda can affect a person’s view of the world. I have a few muslim friends and I can assure you they are neither violent nor trouble makers. They are kind, generous, loving parents and dear friends of mine. But you’d never see that on TV because it’s not as interesting as portraying them as all carrying bombs under their clothes while charging through an airport yelling “Death to the infidels”.

      Wanna talk about violence? How about Hoddle St, Port Arthur, Ivan Milat…need I go on?

    • Leo says:

      02:45pm | 14/04/11

      So much for ‘liberal’ values.

      Sure, if I was talking to someone in public, I’d prefer to see their mouth. However, as I respect their right to religion, and as a piece of cloth does me no harm, I warmly respect a women’s choice to wear it.

      It’s a pity we’re happy to talk about physical barriers between two people relating to each other in public, but the ‘it’s all about me’ culture we have going on at the moment which often results in rudeness, which I perceive to be a much greater and offensive barrier to good relations.

      Wake up Australia. Smell the roses. Diversity, when we embrace it, makes us stronger.

    • Bob says:

      09:09pm | 14/04/11

      So Leo, how would you feel about the other extreme? Peoples right to wear no clothes in public? Do you have any problems with the concept that people could go shopping in the local supermarket exposing themselves to young and old alike? If it is acceptable for people to fully cover their faces in public despite the fact that many find it very offensive, should not the opposite position also be permitted? I say no to the burqa and I say no to public nudity. Unlimited freedom for some always becomes oppression for others.

    • BMJ says:

      10:40pm | 14/04/11

      @Bob

      Stop being silly.

      Do you expect anyone to believe you take offense equally at someone wearing a burqa as you do someone being nude on the street? If you do you have issues.

    • Tigger says:

      02:30pm | 15/04/11

      @BMJ

      Why is it silly?

      I find the burqa highly intimidating and highly offensive. In fact I think that nudity is far less offensive - it does not look nearly as menacing.

      If people should be free to wear whatever they want, then why shouldn’t we be free to wear nothing at all? It’s a valid choice and it harms others no more than a burqa does.

    • Janey says:

      02:48pm | 14/04/11

      Goodness me Ricky, sounds like you have been brought up in a crap hole yourself.

    • Fluff says:

      03:31pm | 14/04/11

      Funny, all this.  I saw a doco the other night about how we Westeners used to dress at the beach, not too long ago.  Women wore head to toe bathing “costumes” to go swimming at segregated beaches.  In fact, I think Coogee still has a “women’s only” ocean bathing pool, doesn’t it?  My point is, I suppose, that we are not all so different as we think.  Let’s just calm down and try to be a bit more accepting of others, heh?  One day we may just find ourselves on the wrong side of the majority!

    • Kika says:

      04:53pm | 14/04/11

      I agree Fluff. Just because Aussie women don’t wear burqas on our head doesn’t mean we don’t wear them on the inside!  It’s actually in the bible that women should cover their hair when they go to church.

    • OGLER says:

      03:32pm | 14/04/11

      C’mon, ban the burka
      I’m licking my lips just thinking about it.

    • The Vivid Writer says:

      04:28pm | 14/04/11

      OGLER, you’re not in a toilet cubicle on your knees somewhere..are you?

    • Boo hoo I said it! says:

      04:57pm | 14/04/11

      We have a right to complain about the burqa being a women’s right issues once and only Aussie women are truly equals as well in our own culture! Who are we to say what’s right and wrong when women are still considered a man’s chattel right here and now.

    • Niqaabi says:

      05:12pm | 14/04/11

      Hello everyone, how are you? I see you’re all getting very worked up. I’m a niqaab wearing Australian, my family have been here for 5 generations. My family are Muslim by name only, they do not practice Islam. I chose to wear the niqaab of my own free will. I choose to cover my face because it is my personal choice based on my own interpretation of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. My ex-husband, doesn’t dislike the niqaab but, he never encouraged me to wear it, I choose to do this of my own free will and we are divorced now and I continue to wear niqaab. I love the niqaab, and as someone quoted another niqaabi earlier in saying that it “brings her closer to God”, I’d have to agree. I do not know of one niqaabi in Australia that has been forced to wear the niqaab by her family or her husband, you are right this is Australia and we are free to wear what ever we choose. There is the exception, where security is involved, for example banks, airports and of course testifying in court and other incidences where identification is required. That said, niqaabis are happy to reveal their faces in those incidences, in fact, Islam makes it clear that it is compulsory to reveal your faces in those incidences. So that is not an issue. Also, I have to say that it is liberating, not worrying about my physical appearance when I leave the house. At the moment I look after my son full-time and help out part-time at a clothing store. I know niqaabis who have taken office jobs. Wearing the niqaab doesn’t affect our ability to work as it doesn’t affect our ability to socialise. I have many non-Muslim friends as well as my Muslim friends. I have made friends with the employees at the checkouts in various stores, the always say hi when I come in. Communication is not centred around facial expression, it is also manner of speech and body language. We see ourselves as part of Australian society, I sincerely wish that you would accept us for who we are, not what we wear, as we accept/respect other peoples choices.

    • Louisa says:

      07:22pm | 14/04/11

      I guess that one plus for wearing it that you don’t have to wash your hair or decide what to wear each day smile

    • Niqaabi says:

      08:11pm | 14/04/11

      lol Louisa yeah something like that… but I like to have clean hair.  When I go out I just chuck my hair in a pony tail, get dressed, grab my handbag and off I go :D It barely takes 5 minutes.

    • Tigger says:

      02:36pm | 15/04/11

      Nudists find it liberating to strip off to nothing. It does affect their ability to work, rest or play either. And yet they’re not accepted doing that in public society. Why should you be treated differently?

    • Niqaabi says:

      01:05pm | 16/04/11

      I have to point out that clothing and nudity are two opposites. I also want to point out that I wasn’t the one who banned public nudity and I’m not out there protesting that they ban nudist beaches or anything like that. The difference is hygiene, in the work place, for instance working with food, its in appropriate to have your arm pits exposed because you would sweat over the food or contaminate the working area or if your have long hair, it has to be tied appropriately to avoid hair ending up in food and some places insist on hair nets. It’s also about work place health and safety. Would you like your penis caught in a machine? Protective clothing reduces the risk. There’s a law against being naked in public places, honestly I don’t understand why, when people wear so little clothes these days and you can see breasts in magazines, on the runway or at the beach and its fine when Hamish and Andy expose their bums on television. Exposing yourself isn’t as big a deal as it once was. The only points that comes to my mind to why it is still banned, is to protect the innocence of children and to ease the minds of the small amount of people who think it is taboo and those people seem to be a dying breed. The new ‘taboo topic’ seems to be the niqaab or the burqa, people have went from one extreme to the other, and to be honest it has only become a topic of interest in the last 10 years. Before that Muslims in general were left alone, to live their lives and we integrated well with everyone else. I feel ashamed and angry because of what a small amount of people of the Muslim faith have done, because they used Islam as an excuse to hurt others, when it says nothing in Islam to support what they have done. So now all Muslims are being blamed for what these people did and our practices are put under scrutiny. I have to ask you, if you had not seen all the negative media and got to know us in the way Islam really is, would you still feel the same way? Do you harbour some sort of bias, some sort of Islamophobia because of what you see in the media or because of what your family and friends say? Do you really know about what we believe and how we practice? That Islam is a peaceful way of life, that Islam means peaceful submission, that there is no compulsion in Islam. All I hear is people saying that Muslim women are oppressed and when we speak for ourselves, if we say we’re not, then we are brain washed, and that is not the case. There is one reason and too us it is the best reason, that we wear a hijab or niqaab or burqa or chador, for God alone, not to impress anyone, not because anyone anyone tells us what to wear. If you don’t like it, well too bad because we don’t wear what I wear to impress you as you don’t wear what you wear to impress us or the nudist don’t wear anything, because they don’t care what anyone thinks.

    • Damian says:

      06:58pm | 14/04/11

      Once as a teacher, I interviewed a mother wearing a burqa about her child.  I felt very uncomfortable as I feel that next time I will exercise my right and not speak to someone unless I can see their face.  It is a slippery slide when we start discussing rights.

    • bikinis on top says:

      08:13pm | 14/04/11

      batman , robin and batgirl wore burqas and they were heroes.
      spiderman wore a burqa and he was a hero.
      catwoman and riddler wopre burqas and they were villians.

    • bikinis on top says:

      08:16pm | 14/04/11

      Liberal Women do not understand Muslim women.
      They don’t understand any women.
      They are maneating barflies.
      the Redneck Red Head should put them on Work for the Dole

    • Govt@FauxCitizen says:

      09:39pm | 14/04/11

      I wouldn’t talk to someone whilst wearing my sunglasses let alone full face covering.  Full face coveing doesn’t have a place in Current Australian Culture, but who knows, with current immigration and bithrates??  Anglo Saxon,  European and Cristian numbers on the decline by comparison,  population ethnicity demographics changing dramaticly,  who cares? After all it’s a democracy yeah?  I can’t wait to be part of a minority group and get some of that squeaky wheel oil !!!!!

    • Chrissy says:

      10:25pm | 14/04/11

      Ignoring the on-going debate (is hijab etc a cultural or religious requirement), people should have the right to dress as they wish within reason. This probably means that women/men can wear what they want, with some exceptions. Women can’t usually do topless, and everyone gets to cover their pubic region. Past that point, it is generally up to the person to decide. However, if someone decides to cover their face for whatever reason, they should also understand that in some circumstances they willbe required to uncover it. Motorcycle helmets/face coverings (balaklavas etc) can already not be worn in many businesses, and in others still (including bars) you may be asked to remove sunglasses and hats so your face can be seen by attendants and cameras before you will be served. So - lets keep in simple. Wear the full face covering, but please don’t get upset if a police officer, public official or customer service agent asks you to uncover your face for Identification purposes; or the duration of your stay in that business or government office.

    • Veronique says:

      02:16am | 15/04/11

      Far out pP.J.  You jumped on here waving your Jihaadi war flag before anyone even had a chance to disagree with you.  No-one is telling anyone what to wear!  We are saying that for many reasons wearing a mask is unacceptable in public as is walking down the street naked.  You sound like a muslim, dhimmi or socialist to me, you are right and the rest of the world is wrong.  Even Saudi Arabia is banning it.  Burqas need to be banned worldwide for the following reason.
      Health and Safety Hazard:  Block periferal vision when driving, Lack of VitD cause rickets in unborn babies and mental problems in wearers,  Restrict movement, exercise and cause accidents including fatal ones.

      Security Risk:  Favourite attire of Terrorists, used as disguises in criminal activity and discriminatory being allowed to mask their face in public.

      They are anti social, political and offensive They are not a religious requirement but left over from slavery, and women who choose to wear them are condemning those who have no choice to spend the rest of their life in a body bag.

    • Rick says:

      09:02am | 15/04/11

      Well said  
      “Anyone living in this country should be free and able to make choices about the way they live their lives, but must recognise that with freedom comes a responsibility to respect the history, to respect the culture and respect the values Australia was built on, and everyone who lives here, regardless of who they are and where they or their parents were born, should be mindful of that. “

      Unfortunately under the rules of multiculturalism and the regime of tolerance we are SECOND HAND CITIZEN and the only way to stop it is to have a true system of democracy a la Switzerland in which only the people are sovereign with the legal democratic right to repeal or to modify any laws against the will of the people via a petition ( currently 50 000 citizens).

      Anything else is just irrelevant the way we are now.

    • James says:

      12:50pm | 15/04/11

      Only science and rational thought can spare us for the curse that is religion.  A pox on all religions for all the ignorance and misery they have unleashed upon the world, the sooner we rid ourselves of childish delusions the better

    • Ange says:

      01:41pm | 15/04/11

      Couldn’t agree more James. However people should still have the right to have religious beliefs no matter how ridiculous we may think they are.

      Does anyone else find it odd though that we talk about freeing a woman from the slavery of imposed religious rules only to have her enslaved by a law which contradicts her beliefs? Either way, it appears that we have forgotten to ask the fundamental question: “what would YOU like to wear?”

      And for what it’s worth I’m really sick of governments using the old Terrorism angle to justify the erosion of our freedoms. Who cares if someone wants to walk around in a full chicken suit all day. Really…who cares!!  Leave me to get on with my life and I’ll leave you to get on with yours.

    • James says:

      09:07pm | 17/04/11

      People are entitled to believe what ever they like, I strongly believe in that right, but keep it to yourself and don’t even try and spread it to others or organise a group around it.

    • the true believer says:

      04:19pm | 15/04/11

      Religion is the hell of any human life and death is paradise.

    • r0sie says:

      09:57am | 16/04/11

      I miss seeing smiles returned when I smile
      0therwise wh0 cares

    • Cazza says:

      06:00am | 17/04/11

      Some points:

      *  I find it amusing that a ‘gay’ person (Rebecca) is sticking up for muslim women’s right to wear a burqua in this country, when if she were in a muslim country she would be stoned to death.  It’s illegal to be ‘gay’ there.

      *  There have been many crimes committed here involving balaclavas, stockings over the head, and motorbike helmets… robberies, rapes, you name it.  There have also been crimes committed here by males wearing the face covering burqua.

      *  Muslims were given the right to wear burquas in hospitals here, thus escalating the risk of infections.  Don’t take my word for that, ask the medical staff who voted against it.

      *  Burquas are not only worn by ethnic muslims - they are also worn by white Australian (and white western) converts.  Where’s the “race” argument there???

      *  Burquas are worn by muslims of all different races including white.

      *  Muslims are not made to show their faces at airports.  People wearing balaclavas are made to take them off.

      *  In certain situations burquas and head scarves can be dangerous.  A young mother lost her life because her head scarf got tangled while she was riding a quad bike.

      *  When an Aboriginal is allowed to walk our public streets wearing only his traditional lap-lap - when Australians are allowed to wear T-shirts with slogans on them which only some might find offensive (eg: the Nazi symbol) -  when everyone is allowed to wear a balaclava or any face covering mask into a bank or any money institution - when everyone is allowed to wear a balaclava through airport security - when muslim men stop flogging their wives for defying them by not wearing a burqua - when muslim men stop insisting their wives wear a burqua… when all that ‘discrimination’ is stopped, then and only then should the burqua be allowed.

    • lach says:

      12:35pm | 18/04/11

      A girl i know recently went on holiday to the United Arab Emirates. She covered her arms, hair and legs whilst there as to abide by the law. Even if it wasn’t a law, she said she would have done it so as to abide by these people’s beliefs.

      When in Rome…

    • Harquebus says:

      12:57pm | 18/04/11

      If we combat and defeat religion, a lot of these problems will go away.

    • Cazza says:

      07:26pm | 18/04/11

      When you see these sort of things (link below) going on in the UK, makes you wonder how long before we are experiencing the same.  But wait… we already are to a lesser degree!  This is absolutely horrifying and has no place at all in a western democracy!  Do we want this for Australia?

      There is much much more to this than just having a PC “discussion” about the burqa - it is only the start to future problems and demands…

      ‘Wear a headscarf or we will kill you’: How the ‘London Taliban’ is targeting women and gays in bid to impose sharia law

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1377780/London-Taliban-targeting-women-gays-bid-impose-sharia-law.html

    • sophiecg says:

      01:13pm | 19/04/11

      good on you Cazza. i was just about to post the very same article to focus this ridiculous discussion where, per usual, the politically correct think that ‘liberty’ is something real and that freedom to choose is an unalienable right. our so-called ‘freedoms’ are curtailed on a daily basis but the minute anyone mentions banning an abhorrent and oppressive cultural imposition such as the burqa - yee ha! the politically correct jump up and down with glee, pointing fingers and claiming an infringement of human rights. here’s another article on the same topic: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3532426/Islamic-extremists-bent-on-Sharia-law-in-UK-vow-to-kill-women-who-dont-cover-heads.html. and you are so right - we do not, nor should EVER tolerate anything of this sort here. and preventing it starts with banning (or at least actively discouraging) the burqa.

    • Haraam Dogma says:

      10:36pm | 28/04/11

      The full face covering obliterates a persons identity.  I think of it as removing the wearer from society. Its the visual cue that the wearer, by choice or otherwise is not participating.  This may all sound somewhat ephemeral but it does affect how we interact, judge (as we do) and deal with people.

      Depending on who you talk to, 60%-90% of communication is non verbal, much communicated by the face. I don’t support a blanket ban, however I do think we should ban the burqa in banks, shopping centres, airports and anywhere where there might be the slightest security risk. Terrorists have disguised suicide bombers as women in the past, and even used autistic children. Their depravity has no limits.

      As an atheist and secularist, I believe anyone can practice their religion as they please, provided it does not affect me,  the way my children are taught at school, the way politics is practiced,  the food I eat, the way I work, the way science is practiced, the law etc.

      Really the only bright light in the last 2000 years on religion, is that we are gradually converging on the right number of gods, zero. The sooner we get there the better for all.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter