Quite simply you can’t wear a motor cycle helmet or hoodie in a bank you shouldn’t be able to wear the burqa either. Driving is another issue as it gives tunnel vision. Banning it outright no though.

Bank robbers also put pantyhose on their heads. No use banning burqas unless tights get banned as well.

I’m sorry to be facetious, this is an admirably clear and calm discussion of the issue.

Surely polarisation and the ‘them and us’ position is created by outlandish garb like the niqab? But banning anything is counter-productive. However, countering the cultural pressures that influence the wearers of these strange garments with our own cultural perspectives seems a good way forward. And it would be silly to argue that we should give equal weight to the mad Medieval rationale behind the use of these cover ups.

I think Laura’s facetiousness makes makes a good point. There are many ways yo disguise yourself for a bank robbery but only this one about religion has been banned.

Also I think you missed a bit ot the link in “isk to bank staff”

Correct me if I am wrong, Senator Bernardi, but isn’t Australia a multicultural society? If you had been in power in the post-war years, try to convince me that you would not have banned salami and other strange tucker. Today, with Islamophobia rampant, it is the time-honored customers of the larger world beyond our shores that now confront us.

I will admit that the sight of a woman covered head to toe on Lygon street is iniatially disconcerting. But if you think of the burqa as a cloth version of the way African Americans use the N-word or gays throw about the former insult “queer” then it is a weapon of liberation.

To judge how women of other ethnic groups mesh with their families and societal niches is to engage in cultural imperialism.

I wish our government would show that kind of hutzpuh. Instead,they’d probably try to find a way to make it ewven longer

Yes pantyhose can be used in robberies but you can still see the offenders face not like the burqa. The only reason this is brought up is it is the only religion that is completely covered up including the face it isn’t about religion at all just the same common sense approach to the same person if they entered a bank in a motorcycle helmet it is just logical.

“…to ban the burqa risks limiting Muslim women’s interaction in society.”

No, Islam limits a woman’s interaction in society. The thought that some omniscient being is really that concerned with dress code sounds like something out of a Douglas Adams novel.

@Laura—Where is it legal to wear pantyhose over your head? This is about banning the wearing of the burqa, not the garment itself. There’s being facetious and then there’s missing the point entirely.

@Stanlie—Multiculturalism would be a fine if it weren’t for how unwilling Islam is to adapt to western society. At every turn Muslims want their way and make no compromise and no concession for the rights and person freedom of others; not to mention the laws of the country they are citizens of.

If you want a truly fine example of cultural imperialism, visit any Middle Eastern country that requires by law for women (even foreign tourists) to wear Hijabs in public places—not to mention the absurd laws they have for their own female citizens. Respecting another’s culture is fine and leaving them to believe in whatever nonsense they want is basic common courtesy—but this by no means dictates that I should show it any more respect than I do for belief in the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny.

If Muslims want to be accepted in western society, they must respect the laws that western society has laid down for all of its citizens, regardless of religion. If this is tantamount to blasphemy to them, well, there are 195 countries in the world. Pick one that caters to the absurdity you subscribe to and go there. We’ll be happy, you’ll be happy; everybody wins.

As someone once said, “We should have open minds but not so open that our brains fall out.”

@ Gary -Islam limits a woman’s interaction in society. this is total b.s. maybe the countries do, because they’re corrupt due to western involvement. In addition, If you want a truly fine example of cultural imperialism, visit any Middle Eastern country that requires by law for women (even foreign tourists) to wear Hijabs in public places—not to mention the absurd laws they have for their own female citizens. I really would like to know what country you’re talking about exactly, because from the sounds of it you haven’t been in the Middle-east. Tourists are never forced to wear hijab so that’s wrong there (I know that for a fact from traveling there and had many friends who are not Muslim travel there.) And by the way, it’s not required by law, it’s required by islam, BUT only if you really feel dedicated about wearing hijab… so get your facts straight. Funny thing is that this is somewhat true but also false: If Muslims want to be accepted in western society, they must respect the laws that western society has laid down for all of its citizens, regardless of religion. Sure they have to respect the laws, but regardless of religion that’s off. Hope you know that the “Constitution” and “Declaration of In dependence” of Austrailia, Great Britain, The U.S., France, and some other western countries are derivatives. And if that is so, each country has the right to religion, speech, and press. Not trying to attack you Gary, but you seem to be attacking a religion which most of your facts towards it are utterly biased or incorrect.

Lastly Gary, could I have an example(s) of this quote you said, “At every turn Muslims want their way and make no compromise and no concession for the rights and person freedom of others; not to mention the laws of the country they are citizens of.”