Human rights and equality in Belgium - Religion of Peace™ style

Asserting their rights not to be dictated to by a seventh-century supremacist Middle East doctrine:

Not a single MP in the lower house of parliament voted against the ban on clothes or veils that do not allow the wearer to be fully identified, including full-face Muslim dress such as the niqab or burqa. There were two abstentions. Supporters said the law would help fight terrorism and grant rights to Muslim women.

Daniel Bacquelaine, one of the liberal MPs who originally called for the ban, insisted the new law was “aimed at stopping people from not being identified”.

“It’s not about introducing any form of discrimination,” he said.

The ban, which is thought to affect around 100 women, would be imposed in streets, public gardens and sports grounds or buildings “meant for public use or to provide services”.
Those Muslims who ignore the ban could face fines of £22 and a jail sentence of up to seven days unless they have written police permission to wear the garments.

Controversy has raged elsewhere in Europe over the wearing of Muslim veils in public.
President Nicolas Sarkozy has declared the burqa not welcome in France, calling it an affront to French values that denigrates women. He is pressing ahead with a bill to ban it, despite advice that such a law could be illegal.
France’s National Assembly will begin debate in early July on a bill banning Muslim women from wearing the full Islamic veil.

International human rights and religious groups have condemned the ban, warning that it set “a dangerous precedent”. Human Rights Watch has said that there is no evidence that banning the full veil would protect public safety or the rights of Muslim women. “Bans like this lead to a lose-lose situation,” said Judith Sunderland, senior researcher at HRW. “They violate the rights of those who choose to wear the veil and do nothing to help those who are compelled to do so.”

Guy Harpigny, the Roman Catholic bishop of Tournai, said: “Does the state really have the right to regulate the symbols of personal beliefs?”
MPs in Belgium’s lower house voted for the ban despite the country’s Flemish-Walloon crisis, which has caused the collapse of the government and will lead to the dissolution of the Federal parliament next week before elections in June. But implementation of the law may have to wait until after the summer because of likely challenges to it in the parliament’s upper house and elections on June 13.

We know there are some bloggers we respect highly that have come down against this vote – and while we understand fully and appreciate their reasons for doing so, we have decided to support the ban in principle. We’ve thought hard about this, because there are issues of freedom of expression here, a principle we support passionately.

But we feel that on balance, the burkha remains a particularly incongruous and anachronistic symbol of a primitive, middle-ages doctrine that denies human rights to all but a few – and discriminates against women in particular. The burkha, niqab and similar types of fully-enclosing religious garment are one of the ways in which Muslim women’s rights are curtailed in Islam – even in western countries.

And since we believe that Islam itself is fundamentally incompatible with the notion of a modern, pluralistic and equal society, these garments in our view can have no place in such countries.

After years of being told by a seemingly endless stream of liberals, leftists and the media that we must unquestionably accept such customs and values as part of the ‘benefits’ of living in a multicultural society (tellingly, they never impart to us precisely what these benefits actually are); a sense of outrage is becoming palpable in Europe.

Outrage that indigenous populations must apparently acquiesce uncomplainingly to the sense of entitlement and the demands of poorly-integrating incomers – and to accept unquestionably their cultures and morés, even though, in the case of Islam, they can often be backward and repugnant.

If a Muslim woman is entrapped in a house, for example, it is not the fault of the host country, but that of her barbaric husband for barring her (probably under pain of violence) from venturing in public without wearing a mediaeval fem-tent.

As we have seen here, the human rights industry (and it is an industry) has already started to cry ‘foul’. But they need to be challenged to defend their cultural relativism and their often morally-inverted invective. In other words, we need to ask them to consider the state of human rights in all Muslim countries – and the likelihood of these women having any rights at all in their home nations.

Europeans have not struggled for centuries to achieve high levels of rights and freedoms, to be told what to do by adherents of a doctrine that sets women’s and girls’ rights back 1400 years and promotes terrorism against the West on an industrial scale – or by politicians, right-on NGOs and the EU – all of whom have vested interests in importing ever more of these immigrants.

Just as with the Swiss, who recently told their politicians that they do not wish to have the minaret – that phallic symbol of Islamic supremacism – proliferating on their European skyline; so the Belgians are too preparing to push back for change.

We will no longer be bullied into tolerating the intolerant; nor stand for being labelled intolerant ourselves, when we dare to challenge politically-correct orthodoxy.

[Source: The Telegraph]

Please consider supporting Un:dhimmi by making a small donation to the site, in order to show your support and help us with our work.

Get Your Copy of The Documentary the Iranian Régime Doesn’t Want You to See

2 Responses to “Belgian MPs Vote to Ban the Burkha”