Good for Sarkozy! Now About Those Stupid Black Hats…
June 23, 2009 BeyondBT, Charedim
CNN reports,
The French National Assembly announced Tuesday the creation of a inquiry into whether women in France should be allowed to wear the burka, one day after President Nicolas Sarkozy controversially told lawmakers that the traditional Muslim garment was “not welcome” in France.
I would also suggest outlawing black hat wearing in the summer and winter months for underage kids, in order to send a message to the frum that society frowns on fundamentalist child abuse. Remember when they first started when Beyond BT used to have post after post pretending how our objection to dressing penguin was because we critics are all a bunch of punk rock teens with that “spikey hair” and “pierced eyebrows” who “look down” on everyone who aren’t “non-conformists” like they are? Yeah, they dropped that one like a pasul esrog alright.
“Learning, Growing!”
10 comments
I love it when they pull this. Not to keep repeating myself, but, again, it’s the same among the evangelicals – “We’re the real nonconformists!” Meanwhile, try disagreeing.
And this as well: “A Jew is a Jew and can never hope for self-actualization without Torah and Mitzvahs i.e. living as a Jew.” Right. Screw you, Rabbi.
In the “Stolen from the Goyim” department, he goes on to say,
There is a Midrash about the cruelty of S’dom. In S’dom there was only one bed for wayfarers. When the forlorn traveler was forced to spend a night in S’dom they were made to lie down on a “one-size-fits-all” bed. If they were too short a rack would stretch them and if they were too tall they would be decapitated to fit the bed.
Yeah – except that it was from Greek mythology, and was called the bed of Procrustes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrustes). It’s used today to connote imposed conformity, or an argument in which the facts are tailored to support a desired outcome.
Do they have no original material? If I were the Greeks, I’d have sued for plagiarism centuries ago. Statute of limitations is probably in effect by now.
The clothes are not the problem; the attitude is. If somebody wants to wear all black garb in hot summer weather, fine with me. Just don’t sit next to me on a train as I’m smell-sensitive. If the clothes cause potential risks to the health of children though as in being too hot and therefore inadequate for the weather, then it should be addressed by Children’s Services.
Will there be Hallowe’en exemptions? I mean, think about it: what if a non-Muslim woman, as a joke, wants to wear a burka or something like it? Will she be arrested?
Or will it be based on colour? Like, if you’re wearing a bright purple one you’re clearly not a die-hard threat to France’s secular culture, but with a black one you are?
And if they catch a woman with burka, what do they do? Yank it off her in public or take her down to the station? Are you telling me France’s police have so much free time for this, what with the Paristinians setting the ‘burbs alight all the time ?
It’s one thing to demand that they remove it in court or for things like licence photos. Banning clothes in the public square simply won’t work.
Will there be Hallowe’en exemptions?
Who cares?
I strongly disagree with this attitude. The correct response is to let everyone where what they want. The charedim can wear black hats, the religious Muslims can wear burkas and I can go with my head uncovered.
Government shouldn’t be restricting how people dress without more compelling reasons than one personally not liking the signals that the clothing sends.
Underage also, Joshua?
DK, generally yes. Parents have large amounts of leeway about how to raise their children. Once the children are of age, they can make the decisions for themselves.
the french are idiots. If they have an immigration problem they should deal with it at immigration, or cut their subsidies, instead of going fascist. at some point this is going to boomerang.
“Yeah, they dropped that one like a pasul esrog alright.”
Funny.
France is France, and the laws they impose on their folks is their business. But if they tried to pass a law like this here, It would be a travesty. I don’t like burqas like I don’t like streimels. But people should be free in America to observe their religion in any stupid way they please.
Another point of interest: streimels are one thing — although I would point out that kids don’t wear them. But a black hats and suits in the summer? That’s not much different than having to dress for a summer internship on Wall Street, is it? Anyway, why should what others wear bother me?
The comparison which should be made is with Gay Pride marches. Preventing the wearing (or lack of it) by marchers of clothing which offends public decency is not a denial of freedom of expression. If homosexuals which to dress ‘provocatively’ then they cannot do so on the public street but find a more private domain.
However preventing the marching by homosexuals who are dressed with the rules of public decency (such as the fascists in Jerusalem seek to do) is a denial of freedom of expression.
Likewise publicizing extremist views which offend public decency. Restricting offensive expression of opinion on the public highway is not necessarily a denial of freedom of expression. There are other ways they can express themselves.
The French have every right (and are morally correct) to consider the sight of a woman dressed in a burka as provocative and as offensive to their values as the sight of a Jew wearing a yellow star because of the message it gives as to their status. They are therefore entitled to restrict that sight from the public highway and force it on to private domain.
Leave a Comment