Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Dutch propose burka ban in public

Associated Press

Latest comment posted at 2:16 PM EDT 17/11/06

Immigration Minister says ban is ‘for reasons of public order, security concerns and protection of citizens' ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. B. Coli from Toronto, Canada writes: I seriously doubt that public order in the Netherlands is so tenuous that it is threatened by women being allowed to wear the burqa. What other mean-spirited and discriminatory fashion prohibitions are the cranky old men in the Hague thinking of making next? Turbans? Kilts? Bikinis?
    A woman in a bikini is a greater threat to public order than one in a burqa, if you ask me.
  2. M B from Toronto, Canada writes: Should a ban of baseball caps worn in conjunction with hats be considered too?

    How about banning balaclavas during winter, they also cover the face?
  3. Tiberius McMahon from T-dot, Canada writes: While decisions regarding public security and religious tolerance must be scrutinized, certainly the court will also consider the wearing of football helmets and other face coverings at large public gatherings.
  4. bob crier from Toronto, Canada writes: Civil rights of one sgement of the community should not endanger public safety and security. Has anyone ever tried to go to a mall or a restaurant with a full face balaclava? Why not? A burqua is even more dangerous because it can concele wepons or bombs. Anyone can put on a full body covering and concele anything underneath it, there is no way to allow its use only amongst Muslims. This is a move in the right direction and more countries, including Canada should follow suit. It is dangerous to maintain certain practices, regardless of whether they are mandated by a religion, if they are not in line with the democratic thinking of a society. In my opinion democracy should also encourage sharing of ideas, inclusion and growth of learning in the society. Allowing questionable practices only increases the segregation and narrow mindedness in the society.
  5. The Philosopher King from True North Strong, Canada writes: That's a bit much isn't it? People are starting to get silly with this fear of terrorism. I mean realistically the average individual has a better chance of winning a hundred million dollar lottery than being involved in a terrorist attack. I remember when governments still attempted to actually protect society by doing their job quietly and not constantly enflaming such tensions or freaking people out. Now we have colour coded warning systems and intelligence agency heads fear mongering on a regular basis.

    Can anyone tell me what the hell the average person can do about terrorism? The authorities keep saying 'be vigilant' as if there's anything the average joe can do, which they can't. It's propoganda pure and simple, and the media which is supposed to keep these people honest aren't doing their job. Instead they constantly splash sensationalist headlines to beef up their bottom line.

    I think the west has created one of the most diverse, expressive and powerful societies in the history of mankind, but sometimes we can be such suckers.
  6. Maddog Murdoch from Toronto, Canada writes: I think we should ban the mullet. Is there anything more annoying?
  7. darren silverthorn from Canada writes: Might i just say bravo, now if canada and the rest of the civilized world follow suit.
  8. Henry B from Galt, Canada writes: If wearing a Burka is a matter of religious freedom, let Muslim women wear them in the mosques where they are free to practise their religion. Of course, they will be free only to enter the women’s side of the mosque but this gender inequality is also a matter of “religious freedom”. The choice to wear a burka or a niqab is a political expression. This oppressive & backward garb has been banned outright or from specific public locations within Muslim nations like Tunisia & Turkey. Good for Holland, maybe they can live in a society the way the majority wishes to live and save the burkas for Hallowe’en night.
  9. and I from erie shore, Canada writes: Finally; sanity from a western government. No-one is forced to emigrate to the Netherlands. If you don't like it, go somewhere else or stay home. Would that Canada had the courage of the Dutch.
  10. Mike Charters from Calgary, Canada writes: Not a good idea!! Religious clothing bans?? Next will be religious icon bans. What about the Skiks and the religious knife? That is dangerous too. Oh, a large cross could be a weapon. Ban the cross? I don't think so.

    Get off the anti-Islam cursade. Try to understand the religion. It is one of peace.

    By the way, I am not islamic.
  11. linn wei from Vancouver, Canada writes: Good.
  12. dman T from Toronto, Canada writes: the muslim religion teaches and promotes violence against woman - the religion should be outlawed because beating and raping wowam is wrong.
  13. Richard Roskell from Naramata, Canada writes: Uh, Bob? While you can hide a weapon under a burqa, you can hide weapons under just about any article of clothing. Do armed robbers enter banks wearing burqas?

    I believe your objection is irrational.

    Your belief that democracy is best served by forcing minorities to conform to some 'norm' of appearance and mannerism is wrong, if not dangerous.
  14. Balboa R. from Toronto, Canada writes: The Burka is forced upon woman, baseball caps are not. It is a way of giving woman rights and breaking free of islamic men's control. In Holland after Van Gough was killed they cheered in the streets of the islamic areas. Kids wore t-shirts praising his death. Muslims do not want to integrate and they hate, I repeat hate Christians and Jews. I was shocked when I travelled through Europe and saw the different areas. The BBC did a great report on the muslims in Europe and they basically said they want a mini- islamic state within Europe and will one day make it all islamic from population alone. Now, if you want to lose rights for gays and woman, go ahead and support them.
  15. Barry Hankins from Canada writes: Finally a government taking steps to weed out the most fundamental elements in Islam. We can't be rude and kick them out then we should change our laws to make it so they don't want to live here to begin with. Sorry Islam your religion has been found to be violent and intolerant to other people/religions and I for one don't want it in this country. We counter your offer of convert, pay or die with convert to western ideology or go home. ADQ Leader Mario Dumont the other day said it best 'Religious and cultural accommodations in light of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms no longer makes sense'. THANK YOU MARIO!
  16. M Phillips from Canada writes: Forget about banning the Burqua. I understand that the 'Big Burqua' is the best selling golf club in the middle east. Would be a shame if it was to start getting banned although perhaps it is time club makers were reigned in a bit.

    Now on another note perhaps rather than banning in public those long head to toe coverings, cannot remember what they are called, they require both male and female members of that religion to wear the darned things. I suspect that in short order they would no longer be that popular.
  17. bj sutherland from Victoria, Canada writes: When Islamic countries recognize the equality of women in all spheres: education, right to divorce, equal access to work and inheritance, reproductive rights, freedom of dress, legal protections etc., then I can see the possibility of women freely choosing a type of dress that reflects their personal faith in those countries. But it should be the perogative of governments regulated by secular laws to expect citizens and refugees seeking its protection to subsume their religious traditions to what is considered the greater good for all the people of that land.
  18. Tiberius McMahon from T-dot, Canada writes: The issue is without necessary comment. The women must wear what we ask of them as doing otherwise would prohibit men and agents of private security militias operating clandestine retail surveillance networks to ogle and make judgements based on body shape, skin color, hairstyle or any other mark of beauty. The first women forced to abandon their chosen style of dress should be forced to disrobe in publis.
  19. Aziza Ibrahim from Nanaimo, Canada writes: I have said this before but you did not post my comment on the case of the muslim woman lawyer refusing to remove her full veil in a court of law. Islam does not ask muslim women to cover their faces. This practice is a cultural overlay, probably forced on women by the males in whatever locale Islam was practised, not a matter of religion. The woman in UK was pushing the British legal system for political reasons, not for any reason that the Nabi Muhammad (salalah aleihi wasalam) gave.
    I suspect that the muslims in the Netherlands will react in the same way, pushing the country they have chosen to live in to change for them instead of accepting the laws of that land. It has nothing to do with civil rights and everything to do with security. The last poster had it right when he said you can hide a lot under a burka, which constitutes a danger when one hears of the carnage caused by fundamentalism of all stripes.
  20. Two Cents from Toronto, Canada writes: I hope it passes. And I hope all countries adopt this measure.
  21. Nasser Sahlool from Orangeville, Canada writes: While I do not agree with the idea of a woman wearing a burkha (and I am a muslim), this whole proposal smacks of electioneering and pandering to the worst elements of society. I have read elsewhere that of the sizeable muslim population in the Netherlands, there are only fifty (50!!!) women that actually wear the burkha.
    My personal opinion of the burkha (for what it's worth) is that the woman wearing it in a Western country is in effect cutting herself off from the rest of society, making her life that much more difficult.
    That said, I don't believe it's the place of government to tell us how we may or may not dress. As Ronald Reagan once said, government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem.
  22. linn wei from Vancouver, Canada writes: In the late 90's a gay American man (Bruce Bawer) left his country and settled with his partner in what he thought is an oasis of tolerance: Holland. Earlier this year he published a book about what he saw there: 'While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within.' Recommended for all those unconvinced by the right-wing-racist-neocon-(add your label here) propaganda about the dangers posed by Islam and political correctness for the Western societies.
  23. Phil G from Ottawa, Canada writes: The creation of a Fashion Police Department is, for political and esthetic reasons, an excellent idea.
  24. Ray B from Charlottetown, Canada writes: I'll have to agree with bob crier. Wearing religious garb will only induce segregation instead of promoting inclusion. Looking at this from the west-to-east perspective, if my wife were to walk around a muslim state wearing jeans and a logo'd t-shirt of jesus, she'd likely be arrested, under the best circumstances, and that would be considered acceptable action at the local level. But somehow, it is considered to be terrible for a western society to impose the same type of actions against muslims. I feel the 'when in Rome...' approach would greatly improve things here.
  25. Jeff Kelly from Kitchener, Canada writes: We could all learn a lot from the Dutch, I think. They've seen firsthand the dangers of allowing extremists in their midst, and are developing thoughtful and comprehensive ways to deal with them. Canada should watch closely and follow suit.
  26. D I from Toronto, Canada writes: How am I not surprised with the comments posted here - always the lefties. firstly, this recent law is just the tip of the iceberg of laws that have been passed in The Netherlands recently, in response to the slaughter of Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh - what you don't remember how he was stabbed, shot and than had a note pinned in his chest with a knife, all in broad daylight - and for what? For expressing his few on extremist Islam. So the Dutch saw it fit to preserve their society and have laws changed so that immigrants arriving there would conform to their culture, not the Dutch having to conform to Islam. I salute those move and more importantly this one. Why do all you lefties condemn the west for wanting to preserve their culture? It's ok for muslims to wear burkas and their head scarfs in public, but God forbid we use the word Jesus or Christmas on any type of public display at this time of year. A bit hypocritical no? You want to enjoy the freedom and riches of western culture? Than confirm to it. No special courtrooms for Islamic law, no freedom of speech to spread extremist thoughts by way of 'religious organizations', no no no....it's time we take the lead from the Dutch and start to enact some of these laws.
  27. Bob Rollheiser from Canada writes: No one is forced to immigrate to any particular country. If some are fleeing persecution, it would be a nice gesture on their part to try and assimilate some degree in their host country. If not, there are lots of places where they can practice their conventions.
  28. R L from Canada writes: Such intolerance. I guess the 'only a few hundred' people in the Netherlands will just have to give up their beliefs or leave the country. That's called oppression of the minority.
  29. polar camel from Toronto, Canada writes: Yeah... this secret army of burka-clad women has to be stoped immediately! There are no other dangers in the Netherlands. I can't believe this minister is not a character in some silly operetta.
  30. Richard Roskell from Naramata, Canada writes: The idea that a free and democratic society would dictate norms of dress and appearance is repugnant, particularly as it applies to minorities.

    Shall we demand that Hassidic Jews shave their full length beards, or that Jews in general stop wearing yarmulkas?

    Shall we demand that Sikhs take off their turbans and saris?

    Shall we demand that priests take off their collars and robes? That teenagers take out their studs and scrub off their tattoos?

    Shall we, in fact, demand that all Canadians wear costumes of a particular style and colour? It worked for the Chinese: a billion of them wore blue Mao jackets for decades.

    Or shall we come to our senses and recognize that fear and bigotry masquerade as many things. Not the least of those is a demand that everyone conform to a particular way of thinking and doing.

    Reject the idea that democracy is well-served by taking away one's freedom of personal choice. Embrace the appearance in our society of things which lawfully step outside the norm. Those things are direct evidence that our society is free and that democracy is thriving.
  31. Lyn Alg from Canada writes: I heartily commend the Dutch Government on their decision to ban the wearing of burkas in public. When in Muslim countries, Western women are expected to conform to Muslim cultures by covering their heads and faces; why not expected Muslim women to conform to Western cuklture when in Western countries? '..When in Rome, do as the Romans do..' . I am absolutely fed up with Muslim immigrants entering Canada and practicing their culture in our country. If they wish to continue their culture, don't emigrate to Canada. Stay where you are. Canada doesn't want you! Go home.
  32. Jean-Noël Roy from Montréal, Canada writes: I'm not sure this is the right thing to do, but then I'm not Dutch. It is surprising, considering the Netherlands have a well-earned reputation for tolerance and have long been at the forefront of social progress. It would seem the murder of filmmaker Van Gogh by a Muslim fundamentalist several years ago has been more traumatic for the country than the rest of the world realises.
  33. David Robertson from toronto, Canada writes: Interesting, if you happen to travel to Saudi Arabia try walking around in Shorts and Halter top and or T shirt. If you do you will go directly to jail. No discrimination there. We have to play by their rules.
    David
  34. Glenn Hawley from Calgary, Canada writes: B. Coli from Toronto, Canada writes: 'A woman in a bikini is a greater threat to public order than one in a burqa...'

    Where would she hide the nail bomb?
  35. jack brinke from Canada writes: there are other situations in society that require that a person be able to be identified for public safety enforcement . Namely license plates on cars. So it has become the means in western society to identify people by their faces and this also is means to identify law breakers and help reduce law breaking because face is exposed.
    I woudl suggest that if they do not want to be part of this soceity and its means to maintain law. Then they should move.
    Or agree to a license plate number system on their burkas.
  36. Ken Woodwords from Ottawa, Canada writes: I applaud the Dutch government for their courage and not to give in to be politically correct BS. Aren’t we sacrificing our soldiers in Afghanistan to bring freedom and democracy which includes but not limited to freeing woman from oppression? If they want to stroll around in public with burkas there are so many countries in the world where they will feel at home. I wish Canada would bring such measures. Before calling me bigot and narrow mined I would like you to spend first 25 years of your life in a Muslim country as a Christian. .
  37. James Cyr from Balmertown, writes: Post #1: a woman in a bikini is a threat? Bite your tongue!
  38. Shawn B from Canada writes: It has nothing to do with Security. It is about Islamophobia. Security reason is a total BS. And for some idiots who think this is fare and they need to use common sense that security can be infringed many different ways in this modern times. A real criminal/terrorsit or whatever you call them does not have to wear a burkha to conceal weapons, it could be as simple as lunch bag for all that matters. So stop this indirect way of harrassing Muslim women in the name of security. Dutch people are racist people anyways so this does not surprise me at all.
  39. Knee Jerk from Canada writes: How far can you stretch the rights of a religion? Burkas really stretch the limits of what should be tolerated. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the wearing of Burkas is a subjugation of female rights. In a society such as Holland where the equality of the sexes is considered an essential right, why should the Dutch subjugate their right to support sexual equality in the name of religious tolerance.
  40. Iain Scott from Calgary, Canada writes: I must agree with the Dutch government on this position, on the basis that concealing your identity in public is simply anti-democratic. The same people who complain that this concept deprives some of this right or that are the first to complain when plain clothed police perform sting operations - you can't have it both ways. If someone's religious conviction is so deep that it prevents them from participating democratically in a democratic society, then they just don't belong there. And aside from security considerations, in this specific case, regarding the burka, this is an attire that advertizes the concept that women are inferior, and therefore repudiates our basic societal values as well. Walking around in 'hate literature' is simply unacceptable, whether it targets Jews in the case of swastikas or women as the case is here.
  41. Harvey Mushman from cambridge, Canada writes: If you want to live where you can go topless or nude in public...then pick your country appropriately. Same applies to wanting (or having) to wear the burka. Muslims who protest such proposed laws claiming 'religious intolerance' 'discrimination' and 'racial profiling' should practice what they preach first. 'Western' women are not allowed to walk the streets in what we would consider normal, even modest clothing without risking beatings, imprisonment, rape and even murder in numerous Islamic countries. Why is it OK for them to impose their culture and societal norms on us in their country but them not be subject to, or even respect ours? Most likely because we walk on eggshells trying not to offend them and risk setting off violence and bloodshed. Tolerance should be a 'two way street' but increasing it is handed out...in fact demanded...by those in our society who do not practice it or even respect the concept.
  42. Shawn W from Toronto, Canada writes: Over the past number of years the Dutch have come to realize that wide-open immigration policies were definitely not the way to go. Tolerant by nature, I think the Dutch are now understanding that they may have gone too far. How else would you explain the record numbers of Dutch who have left the country for places like Canada, the US and Australia? One Dutch acquaintance of mine has remarked on numerous occasions that he no longer recognizes his own country.
  43. Blue Sky from Calgary, Canada writes: How dare they ban clothing that completely hides the face, gender and identity of people! Perhaps if the people here whining about rights had a suicide bomber blow up a family member they might change their minds about how 'unjust' this is. Give me a break.
  44. F E from Ottawa, Canada writes: The burka in itself is a form of oppression and slavery and should be banned not only in the netheralands but also in Canada. For the sake of Securioty is only one reason but the actual segregation that it wedges for muslim women is what is innapropiate.

    Ban the Burka. (period)

    If they want to live as second class citizens without beign equal they should stay in their own country.

    Bravo to the Netherlands
  45. Lori R from Kitchener, Canada writes: What frustrates me is the number of middle aged men in power who think they are doing something to help the 'poor defenseless burka wearing women'. Do they not realize that this ban smacks of paternalism? Ironic considering arguments in favour include saving women from being forced to wear the burka in the first place.
  46. Zed mahoney from Vancouver, Canada writes: The western world has been incredibly generous to people from other cultures in the last 25 years. We have welcomed them in, and given them freedoms and standards of living that they could not have imagined in their own world. We allowed them to maintain their own cultures and languages --even funded those things with government money.

    Those other cultures, are now strong enought to have an impact. The results? Home grown terrorism in Britain, Canada, and Spain; the Air India bombing; rampant domestice violence culminating in a spree of murders of South Asian women in British Columbia.

    While we still should welcome those who want to come, it is time for us to insist that the newcomers adopt and adhere to certain core (judeo-christian) values and aspects of culture that our society is based on. If we don't, we risk descending into the mire that we see in other places in the world.

    Wearing of burkhas may sound trivial, but perhaps it is a symbol of rejection of those core western values. That the incredibly open-minded, generous, and all-accepting Dutch are starting to feel the need for this kind of step tells us that we too will need to start looking at where to draw the line.
  47. Progressive Canadian from Canada writes: The fact that people see mere clothing like a burqa as a security threat only confirms that Western civilisation has reach a level of paranoia beyond comprehension. So big deal, someone can hide weapons and bombs under there, one can hide such things under lots of different types of clothing or in different kinds of bags.

    If we live in an insecure world, petty actions like this are a big part of the reason why.
  48. gord winters from transcanadawanderer, Canada writes: holland is strugling for its future survival as a liberal, tolerant society. the new infestion of intolerance is regretable, but understandable. i have been to holland many times. i have seen the population numbers, and i know what will be lost if holland becomes a outpost of the new islam. the muslim religion may be one of peace, but not how it is being practised in holland.
  49. jay bechtloff from Canada writes: I don't see how you can just say that this is islamaphobia. How many people are allowed to walk in public and not show their face? I know in Austria and Germany I believe it is illegal to wear ski masks because they cover your face. Although there is a religious base, you still cannot identify any criminal be it bank robbing or otherwise.
  50. Agent Smith from GTA, Canada writes: Why is it the women who wear the Burkas and not the men? When I see a couple walking down the street, with the guy in summer clothes, and the women in a black, full-length Burka, I can't help but think that for the sake of young women everywhere, it should be banned.
  51. John Longshot from Canada writes: Excellent initiative!!!
  52. guy olivier from Orlando, United States writes: Just another step towards the impending religious war. i think they look rediculous but if they want to wear them, who cares? It's just another way of men oppressing women, they're just too dumb to realize it.
  53. Bruce Marsh from writes: In these times, the wearing of a burka may be a valid cause for anxiety for Westerners. It is in the context of Islamic extremism that these feelings arise. Add to that the fact that Canadians are increasingly forced to give up traditions in favor of political correctness, I see this 'burka ban' as a logical and necessary step, even if much of it is symbiolic in nature.

    At some point, the majority will react to the preferential treatment provided the minority. In my opinion, we have alreadt passed that point.
  54. Judy Green from Toronto, Canada writes: Thank God at least one western country has the courage to do this. It's long overdue ! Canada, Great Britain, and the United States should follow suit. Kudos to the Netherland policians for having the courage to see through the politically correct BS, and do what is necessary for public security from the Islamic extremists.
  55. Rick Drysdale from Sidney B.C., Canada writes: Just goes to show Canada doesn't have a lock on bonehead politicians. But hey if its good enough for them maybe we should ban them too after all the government here always looks at other countries as role models.
  56. k b from Canada writes: Let's call this measure what it really is. It's the Dutch government putting its foot down on the fundamentalist Muslim sect whose single biggest outward symbol is the burka. The nations in Europe are struggling with an aggressive minority sect of Muslim which wants to establish Islamic law, or failing that an Islamic region, within Europed. They openly promote hatred of Jews and Christians as well as gays and anybody else that espouses feminism, and the principles of a free and secular society and hide behind claims of racism, assimilation, and freedom laws to do it. Holland is saying that they symbolically have to bend to greater society and adopt the way of life, if not the religion, of their adopted country. It hampers the hard line Muslim and I have no problem with that. While it flies in the face of political correctness, I would welcome this policy in Canada. Would the Khadr parents have immigrated to Canada and started their disastrous little clan in Canada if our nation had a ban on the burka at the time? I doubt it, and we would have been better off for it.
  57. Ray Ormsby from Cambridge, Canada writes: Kudos for the Dutch to show some much needed leadership on this subject. The time will come when the same debate will occur in Canada. We live in a society of majority rights - - those who do not like it can go elsewhere if their Religious beliefs are so extreme that they can not show reasonable adaptation to Western Society.
  58. Paul who is from Vancouver, Canada writes: 'We are the Borg. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.'
  59. M Phillips from Canada writes: Look for once and for lets put to rest the notion that Islam or for matter most other religions are religions of peace. They are only at peace when they have succeeded in destroying all other points of view and those that hold these points of view. Islam is to be feared if you are not Islam. Just as if you are Islam Christianity is to be feared. They only co-exist because they have to.
  60. Vern McPherson from Toronto, Canada writes: I plan to enter my bank wearing a balaclava. What do you think will happen ? This stupidity of forcing women to wear wearing full face veils and then hoodwinking them into think it frees them should be outlawed. Women are not inherently dirty and that is that - medieval bulllkaka. The only reason women wear these things is because men make them do it under serious threatening or brainwashing from a very early age. Why do we even have to bother with this nonsense well into the the second millenia ?
  61. Western Pragmatist from Edmonton, Canada writes: Civil liberties should not become so enshrined as to blind society to reality. The civil liberties arguement has become a matra. It is put forward as an axiom, never to be questioned. 'Any action that diminishes civil liberties must be wrong'. Civil liberties are enshrined in our society because pluralism and diversity make us stronger. This is a well researched and established fact. However these benefits of an open society do not come for free. There are also costs for an open society to bear. The objective must be to maximize the benefits and to minimize the costs. Accepting the benefits does not exclude efforts to minimize these societal costs.

    Clothing serves to separate one individual or group from another. It is an expression of an indivdual's personality. Conservative dress has an definite association with terrorism. Like it or not that is a fact. Conservative dress does not bring people closer together it drives people apart. So there is a big difference between wearing something that is non threatening and something that is threatening. For example dressing as a skin head or a punk was used by young adults in the past to appear threatening and dangerous. Bikers use the same device. Like brightly coloured frogs this dress says 'look out! I'm dangerous'.

    I would suggest that given the current situation that conservative muslim dress is inflamatory. It should be voluntarily discarded by the muslim population for the benefit of societal harmony. That would be the 'right thing' to do.
  62. Mud Hut from Canada writes: What would the penalty be for wearing the Burka? A fine? What if the person wearing the Burka gives the wrong name when she's being fined- it's not like the cop is going to be able to check her photo i.d. - unless the cop forces her to remove the burka at the time of the arrest. I can't see how this law would actually be enforced.
  63. Rene Carloni from Penticton, Canada writes: This is an absolute wonderful step in the right direction. If Canada would do this it would be fantastic. All you poeple that leave these 'not fair' and 'intolerable' comments are completely ignorant as to what the islamic community is trying to do to both you and I and your children. I strongly suggest you spend a few days watching Glenn Beck or other shows that are willing to throw political correctness out the window in return for accurate reporting. Good on you Holland. I hope others follow suit.
  64. Anna Karenina from Toronto, Canada writes: If given the option -- remove the burka in public or stay home -- many women will elect or will be required by their family and religious authorities to stay in the home. This kind of legislation is foolish because it will do very little to assist Muslim integration into the larger society. In addition to further alienating an already alienated group in society, this kind of legislations put women at incredible risk. Has anyone actually thought about the social and health implications of banning the burka on devout Muslim women? Can you imagine what it would be like to be unable to leave your house without betraying your faith? What are you like when you don't leave your house for a few days, nevermind ever? National security is no doubt an issue that requires constant vigilance, but what about the personal security and health of women? How can something like a symbol of faith be more important than the health and safety of women and the general integration and acceptance of good Muslim citizens into society?
  65. Hans Heeneman from Port Carling, Canada writes: Right on. Again, leave it to the Dutch. The rest of the western world will likely follow.
  66. Wayne B from Calgary, Canada writes: Let them wear what they want. But, they should make it law that they remove the item to show their faces to law enforcement or government officials at the least.

    We don't outlaw halloween masks, yet they can be used to disguise. What about fake beards and moustaches?

    There has to be a way to reach these women and let them know that they do not have to wear this item if they do no want to. Problem is, their social engineering runs deep and cannot be easily altered...
  67. Proud Canadian from United States writes: I bet many a Muslin women are saying a silent prayer that this legislation is passed. God, I hope their prayers are answered, God Willing.
  68. Progressive Canadian from Canada writes: Anybody who thinks that the Netherlands (or anywhere in Europe) is the model for tolerance has obviously never been there.

    I agree with the concerns people have with the oppresive nature of the garment, but there are many women who feel they want to wear it, whether brainwashed or not, it is still their decision. If people have concerns, then they should communicate with the communities involved, legislating it away is counter productive.
  69. G P from Canada writes: Great initiative. Canada should also consider the same. Burka's treat women like slaves. Remnant of a middle age custom.
  70. John Venturini from Canada writes: I would NEVER let my children be driven to school by a woman (?) wearing this thing. Baseball caps, turbants or kippa's DO NOT cover the face and you can see who you are talking to. I wish the Canadian Government could have the same courage!
  71. The Philosopher King from True North, Canada writes: I can't believe the number of people here who think this is a good idea. This is an extremely dangerous precedent that has led to much suffering in the past. Try reading a history book, because this issue is as old as rain. While the quote is actually from Richard Jackson and not Benjamin Franklin as some suggest, it still rings true: 'Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.'

    The Dutch are over reacting to a non-issue and being very racist to boot. Last time I checked there has never been a suicide-bomb attack in any western nation. I mean for christ's sake people get a grip. This is a bald faced excuse to be racist and bears no resemblance to the principles upon which our nations are founded. FOR SHAME BIGOTS, FOR SHAME.
  72. Steve Wilkinson from Canada writes: Excellent Idea! I only wish Canada and USA would follow suit with such bold move. It's time to take back our countries.
  73. Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: Heads up! The Dutch are a highly civilized people who have welcomed minorities and protected their rights for centuries. They took in many Jews during the Inquisition and were one of only two countries in the WORLD who said they would take the Jews when Hitler offered to deport them. (The other country was Denmark - everyone else stayed silent. Hitler was pretty clear about what awaited the Jews if countries didn't take them.) SO if the Dutch think this is a good idea, I am willing to think seriously about it. They have earned the right to draw the line. The trouble is that separating Islam from medieval middle eastern culture is pretty much impossible.
  74. Harvey Mushman from cambridge, Canada writes: Can someone please tell me what the difference is between this situation and a hooded Klu Klux Klansman roaming the streets in full attire? None that I can see. We shouldn't tolerate or pander to either.
  75. Frenchspeaking Frenchname from Toronto, Canada writes: The Dutch have just basically understood that if they cannot expect Muslim men to gradually embrace the freedom that the Netherlands has to offer them by no longer forcing their wives and daughters to wear burqas, veils or whatever other "shield against rape," then Rita Verdonk should step in herself and just ban the burqa, veil and what have you. Yes, the burqa, veil and what have you, specifically. And that, my friends, is doing women a favour.

    As a Canadian male I find it utterly offensive to hear that Muslim women need to be veiled to ward off male temptation. Sorry, maybe not in the Middle East, but in my country, which shares so much with the Netherlands in terms of values, men have learned to control themselves. And we, men, are fully supportive of our women's right to exist, to contribute to society, to plan their family, to try and err, and be pretty or not pretty if that's what makes them happy. And us men in the Western world have learned a lot from our women and we are thankful to them for that.
  76. Conrad Gartz from New York City, United States writes: All the Dutch need to do is declare the face has to be exposed in public and let everyone figure out how this will happen, adjusting dress as necessary. A burka can be designed to religiously objectify women while showing their faces. Democracy isn't a default condition. I can understand why the Dutch are concerned about its interpretation.
  77. Billy Bob from Canada writes: Well I don't expect to be able to wear a belaclava in public all seasons. If I were to wear one in the summer I would hope that the police would pull me over ASAP. If they didn't I would seriously question their resolve to protect me and my family. Burka's completely obscure ones identity. This is not about head scarves it is about being able to identify people, it is about security and I am all for it. Sorry if it offends anyone but I for one am all for the authorities being able to identify people in public. Anyone who does not see how this is in the interest of the public good should have their head examined.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top