Jack Straw would rather prefer Muslim women not wear 'veils'

[Hatebreed]

I'm sure some of you have already heard of this latest controversy, after all when was the last time the Muslims had a break from it?


--------------------------------------------

British Cabinet Minister Jack Straw has said he would prefer Muslim women not to wear veils which cover the face.

The Commons leader said he did not want to be "prescriptive" but he believed that covering people's faces could make community relations more difficult.

Mr Straw has said he asks Muslim women at his Blackburn constituency surgeries if they would mind removing veils.

Some Muslim women called his remarks insulting, but other Muslims said they understood his concerns.

Mr Straw has dismissed suggestions that his remarks are designed to raise his profile ahead of Labour's deputy leadership election.

He has yet to confirm whether he will join the race to succeed John Prescott but is widely expected to do so.


Meeting strangers

Mr Straw is Labour MP for Blackburn, where between 25% and 30% of residents are Muslim.

He sparked controversy when he told his local paper he asked female constituents visiting his surgery if they would uncover their faces.


He said he made sure he had a female colleague in the room when asking someone to show their mouth and nose - and his constituents had so far always agreed to do so.

Asked on BBC Radio 4's Today programme if he would rather the veils be discarded completely, Mr Straw replied: "Yes. It needs to be made clear I am not talking about being prescriptive but with all the caveats, yes, I would rather."


Mr Straw explained the impact he thought veils could have in a society where watching facial expressions was important for contact between different people.

"Communities are bound together partly by informal chance relations between strangers - people being able to acknowledge each other in the street or being able pass the time of day," he said.

"That's made more difficult if people are wearing a veil. That's just a fact of life.

"I understand the concerns but I hope, however, there can be a mature debate about this.

"I come to this out of a profound commitment to equal rights for Muslim communities and an equal concern about adverse development about parallel communities."


'Separateness' fears

Mr Straw stressed it was a choice for women and he was making a request and not a demand.

"What I've been struck by when I've been talking to some of the ladies concerned is that they had not, I think, been fully aware of the potential in terms of community relations," he said.


"I mean, they'd thought of it just as a statement for themselves, in some cases they regard themselves as very religious - and I respect that - but as I say, I just wanted to put this issue on the table."

He said he was worried the "implications of separateness" and the development of "parallel communities".

Tony Blair's official spokesman said the prime minister "believes that it is right that people should be able to have a discussion and express their personal views on issues such as this".

The spokesman said Mr Straw's comments were not government policy and he refused to reveal Mr Blair's views on the issue.


Source: BBC

--------------------------------------------


I think Mr. Straw has the right to express his concerns, because communication is just not about eye contact or speech, but also facial expression. It can be intimidating speaking to strangers whose face you cannot see.

On the contrary, people have the constitutional right to choose whatever they wear. These women come to Mr. Straw for advise, not suggestion for what to wear.

There are still questions whether his comments were politically motivated, because many think he is eyeing for deputy Prime Minister John Prescott's job and to get his face on media is exactly what he needs, because even bad publicity is publicity and the British media is surely enjoying this.

Mr. Straw received plenty of criticism and praises from politicians, media, etc. Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott has defended the right of Muslim women to wear veils which cover their faces.

Elsewhere, various media has been holding polls to find out what the general public thinks and a vast majority supported Jack Straw and/or to ban veils, which it is a nationwide success for him even though a vast proportion of his local constituents are Muslims.

His comments have sparked anger in the Muslim community, racial tension and even attacks on Muslim women wearing veils.


So what are your views? Do you agree with Jack Straw? What are your views on the different types of veils Muslim women wear? Do you agree they should be banned?

[imtiaz82]

I think Jack Straw has the right to show his personal view point on a matter but at the same time every person in a free country has the right to choose what he/she wants to wear.

I personally feel that there should be a grand conference among the top muslim scholars around the world where they would agree/decide on one ruling for various matters like:

- definition of halal/zabiha food. Can we eat food from christians/jews as in england/US or do they need to be slaughtered properly by a muslim?

- how should Eid/ starting of ramadan be decided on various countries. On local moon sighting or following Saudi Arabia.

- what is the definition of "modest clothing" for men and women. Do women have to cover face and hair? or do men have to keep beard? is it fard or wajib? etc

The scholars would have to decide on this based on the strongest evidence from Quran and Sunnah. If they cannot come to a conclusion even after all the discussion then both rulings should be made permissable and left for personal discretion.

The christians had a similar conference under the Byzantine emperor in 300AD where various issues like (should Jesus be a God or just a messiah) were decided. Fortunately we muslims DO NOT have such huge difference in aqeedah(belief), and the small differences like moon sighting and proper attire should be easily resolved...

[Bancan]

he said he preffered it and if people didnt like it , he would still respect their decison. i dont think there is anything to get really mad at. he has the right to express that.

[Hatebreed]

The real problem is that a simple matter like this is being excessively politicised and publicised to the general population. The media is shoving it down our throat everyday and the way reactions to Straw's comments have been portrayed is as if he demanded the veils to be banned. This is causing confusion and making the public think veils are a threat to society and Straw is being subjugated by Muslims.

Many Muslim women have already been subjected to racial abuse and this unnecessary row over whether or not veils should be "banned" has escalated to horrendous proportions.

All these controversies is only sending the world one message, that Muslims are intolerant, violent and they despise freedom of expression.. Islam has become the public enemy #1!

[imtiaz82]

Everybody has the right of "freedom of expression" and like hatebreed I believe that we muslims should not make a big deal out of Jack Straw's comment.

But at the same time I think muslims have been in the receiving end of much hatred, criticism and abuse. We don't see the media broadcasting news about why amish women cover their hair or why their men keep long beard!! Shouldn't those people be "liberated" first from this backwardness etc ?? While the media goes crazy about Afghanistani or Irani men/women wearing conservative clothes, absolutely nothing is said about christian nuns or jews who dress equally conservatively.

"Da vinci code" was banned in many Christian areas due to its depiction of Jesus but the news didn't make headline in BBC, CNN or any other media. But if the muslims did something similar all hell would have broken loose..

[Alien]

Most westerners feel the same way but keep it to themselves rather than voicing out.

You would be surprised how many of them here in Australia are against constructing mosques coz its isn't "Australian enough"...

I am sick of people bragging about Australian values but can't mention what they really are.

[ammark]

(I started writing this post thinking it'll be short enough, but its turned into a rant I want to express. Given some ideas and opinions I wrote, I thus want to start in the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful, and ask His forgiveness for any error in what I say, and to guide me in the Right Path)

I agree with Hatebreed, the media makes too much of an issue and people effectively misperceive things. A few weeks ago, there was the issue in Germany about the Berlin Oper banning a Mozart opera that shows severed heads of Prophets Muhammad and Isa (AS) and Buddha and someone else.

The opera house took a prudent measure to not show the play fearing a backlash from us muslims who would obviously be disturbed. On the other hand the general german population, politicians and media have criticised this*.

About Jack Straw's report: I agree 100% with his argument. I sympathise with muslim women (among many of them my friends and peers) who consciously don the hijab and see it as sth liberating. I have also met many muslim women who accept the burkha fully (mostly because their hujurs-pirs-baap-ma have condemned them to hell if they do otherwise).

In my opinion thats where the problem lies: there IS a community of muslims who do retain hardcore interpretations and want to live their lives according to their values, and to say that they dont have distrust and contempt for parts of their host country's society is a lie. - and when that translates to actions: THAT is extremism, to enforce on others the idea that my values are better than yours.

And on the other hand a similar attitude already exists on the host society's mindset: the main frustration I face with many Canadians is their inherent Euro-western centric biases, and I dont blame them... but when they talk of respect and tolerance they do look at Muslim extremities, then judge against their norms, and then retrench themselves in their reactionary, counter-productive arguments.

faithful Muslims have to concede that Islam is very broad and very dynamic in and of itself for implementation. There are hadeeth and ayaat like "Muslims are people of the middle path", "do not make haram out of which Allah has made halal for you" and which say "We have made it (Islam/Deen) easy for you" & "There is no compulsion in Deen/Islam". If we truly follow the Prophet's words and actions then Muslims should be the first to discard bigotry, hatred and violence from every day life, and work to build a society of perpetual peace and common good with our host societies. In light of this, and I know many muslim community representatives (I dont like the word 'leaders' in this context) do follow this path, and jack Straw's comment is just reciprocal to their deeds and words.

Muslim societies (esp. women) cannot isolate themselves socially and politically in a society that works peacefully for common good and peace, by being belligerent, when they do have sufficient room to reciprocate to someone like Jack Straw's goodwill. It is only the removal of the face-veil he's suggesting. This isnt forbidden in the Quran, and if anything the intention for someone not wearing a veil should be that it builds confidence and trust with (the representative of the) other society and purports to an end good, when already their every movement and action is exacerbated and portrayed negatively by the host society's media.

I mean, for example. I find it pointless to have passport shots of women covering everything but their eyes. There's modesty, and then there's paranoia. Behind everything there is intention, and I believe Islam values intention a WHOLE lot more than what we give credit for, especially since too often muslims criticise of the surface appearance of the picture rather than the intention and pupose of having a picture in the passport.

I dont know, I'll end my rant here with "God knows best".

* Curiously I'm yet to come across any muslim representative publicly and prominently supporting the Opera house, which I feel would have been constructive and good; instead I have read instances where they seemed to cower to German sentiment and emphasise the right and freedom of speech, criticism and artistic license. If admitting that an extreme reaction from muslims around the world being likely is considered conceding weakness, then I think our community's PR has serious Problems! We are in effect afraid of saying the Truth!

[Banglatiger84]

Originally Posted by ammark



In my opinion thats where the problem lies: there IS a community of muslims who do retain hardcore interpretations and want to live their lives according to their values, and to say that they dont have distrust and contempt for parts of their host country's society is a lie. - and when that translates to actions: THAT is extremism, to enforce on others the idea that my values are better than yours.!

See the part in bold, thats exactly what many liberal Muslims are doing, they think they are superior because they despise the Niqab/Hijab. They consider not drinking alcohol to be a sign of narrow mindedness. So arent they as much extremist as the Muslim who tries to enforce Niqab on others?

The problem here is that the anti-Niqab Brigade is trying to force women to remove their Niqab as it will help in communication bla bla bla.
While the conservative groups, at least in most Western countries and places liek BD are unable to force their values on others, in secular extreme countries, are banned from keeping long beard sor wearing Hijab, such as in turkey ,tunisia etc.

Now tell me which group is more extreme in imposing its values on the other?

[imtiaz82]

I think wearing hijab or niqab should be left to personal discretion. It should neither be banned nor forced upon women. Allah(swt) made daily 5 prayers, giving zakat fard or compulsory too, but we don't see anyone in muslim countries enforcing those things which have been made obligatory explicitly. Then why all these arguments about hijab?? On the other hand, the women in Amish,the nuns and conservative jews also cover their hair(similar to hijab), but not a single news or tv report comes about regarding their "liberation". Its a strange world...

[ammark]

Originally Posted by Banglatiger84
See the part in bold, thats exactly what many liberal Muslims are doing, they think they are superior because they despise the Niqab/Hijab. They consider not drinking alcohol to be a sign of narrow mindedness. So arent they as much extremist as the Muslim who tries to enforce Niqab on others?

The problem here is that the anti-Niqab Brigade is trying to force women to remove their Niqab as it will help in communication bla bla bla.
While the conservative groups, at least in most Western countries and places liek BD are unable to force their values on others, in secular extreme countries, are banned from keeping long beard sor wearing Hijab, such as in turkey ,tunisia etc.

Now tell me which group is more extreme in imposing its values on the other?

Interesting perspective. I was having more in mind people (burkha clad, or heavily bearded and dressed in awami shalwar kameezes) who attempt to slander, harm and injure others because of not conforming to their own values. I am not arguing for the so-called "liberal" muslims, but I think all groups have to work within themselves to improve, not crticise others all the time (which the liberal muslims are doing as you point out).

Ultimately, we have to work with the "other party" (in this case, racially-culturally-religiously European/Western) as the basis, and NOT the 'liberal muslims'. Its kind of repeating what our khateeb at U of T has said often enough - we have to work within ourselves, we have some room and space, and we have to be active and engage our host society as Muslims who want to live faithfully and in peace.

We have to have the best and noblest intentions and build trust among others. But in a world of continual conflict, when there are bombs going off once a year in the west scaring these people shitless, it only proves how disunited our community is. For the actions of the few, the rest are asked to compromise, and take off their veil "to build trust". So after failing to rein in our own who go to extremes, is our community to continue being belligerent and uncompromising for demands that are arguably well within our
constraints?

( I think I should make clear though, that a continual thought I have in regards to this niqaab issue is the physical, social, cultural security of person in the western countries. My opinions are based seeing how Muslim, especially women are more subject to assault and discrimination. Appearance only tends to exacerbate their difficulties in this case. First of all, in assuming they are physically weak, Women are more likely of facing physical assault. Secondly, comes the idea that the burkha-niqaab does make Muslim women stand out more, and cause more vulnerability to their personal safety/security.)

[crickwizard]

religions do not work by logic. Logically covering face and head with a mask in the twentieth century is ridiculous and barbaric. Self willing women who like to 'obey' and 'respect' their 'customs' have a possibility of doing so as they feel safe under borka. You see, men use to be like animals thousands of years ago. At that time, muslim men use to own girls and they didnt want to share the view of their girls to other men. In order to keep their snake in cage, women needed to hide their body under something where s'uality won't be inflicted. However, doing so in this century is not logical. European girls used to wear long sleeve and long skirt to hide them body under huge metal frame but that has changed. But muslim religion did not update in time...as a heads up, muslim's Pandora box is busted. Almost every other month you would hear someone has said something and as a result some muslim men around the world are burning cars and throwing stones (like some do during hartal) and all the media will make money out of it. This madness got to stop, muslims need to be less excited about what other thinks of them and sometimes actually listen to others. Being illogical and assuming everyone would 'respect' that does not make sense. Either fix the logic or have people who can talk beyond hoor pori and behesto

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by Banglatiger84
See the part in bold, thats exactly what many liberal Muslims are doing, they think they are superior because they despise the Niqab/Hijab. They consider not drinking alcohol to be a sign of narrow mindedness. So arent they as much extremist as the Muslim who tries to enforce Niqab on others?

The problem here is that the anti-Niqab Brigade is trying to force women to remove their Niqab as it will help in communication bla bla bla.
While the conservative groups, at least in most Western countries and places liek BD are unable to force their values on others, in secular extreme countries, are banned from keeping long beard sor wearing Hijab, such as in turkey ,tunisia etc.

Now tell me which group is more extreme in imposing its values on the other?

Even if they do so and think so, how they become extremist since they ( liberal Muslims ) dont force anyone to do what they do, and think what they think? As far I know nobody trying to force women to remove their Niqab, perhaps you may say they support / prefer not wearing Niqab, which still left on ones choice ( in this Straw case, as well as liberal Muslims ).


Are you sure about this banning thing in Turkey? because couple of months ago I was there and saw people beard, and women wearing Hijab, not as many as BD though.

[ammark]

To PoorFan

There are many self-proclaimed "liberal muslims", and there is a prominent group of them in Canada who advocate many issues and changes among the muslim community who use that label. I dont specifically know what their agenda is, however, I have often felt that their use of the word "muslim" in their label is quite frivolous at times... and I find it hard to associate and identify with them because of this. For reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam#Contemporary_and_co ntroversial_Issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irshad_Manji

[thebest]

as I mentioned in other threads on the issue of islam, before crticising other look at ourself first.
1. BT bhai, I completly disagree with your opinion. I do not know about Tunisia, but if that is the case in Turky, why evrytime religious parties are gaining so much seat in parliament.
2. Can you answer me why non-muslims do not have right to pray in Saudi Arabia? this was one point raised by Pope in his recent dialogue. I know very well jew and Kafir had there right to pray in Madina.
3. If you are so much conscious about your culture why you go to the place where you can not safe guard your culture. Respect to host culture is also a tradition for muslims. Rasul allah (SA) specfically mentioned it to the groups of Mohajirs who moved to Ethopia
4. your so called Muslims are infact more conscious about the image of islam than this hardcore muslims. I do not remember any liberal muslims forcing anybody to do what they do but often found the opposite to the conservative muslims.

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by ammark
To PoorFan

There are many self-proclaimed "liberal muslims", and there is a prominent group of them in Canada who advocate many issues and changes among the muslim community who use that label. I dont specifically know what their agenda is, however, I have often felt that their use of the word "muslim" in their label is quite frivolous at times... and I find it hard to associate and identify with them because of this. For reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam#Contemporary_and_co ntroversial_Issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irshad_Manji

Thank's ammark, I shall take a look on your link later, and come up with some comment if I have any.

[Hatebreed]

The question is what defines a "liberal" or "moderate" Muslim?

Islam requires women to dress "modestly" around strange men, and for good reasons. If a woman voluntarily chooses to wear a veil then she has every right to do so.

How can people who defend freedom of expression so dearly want to stop other people from wearing what they want, only to protect themselves from "cultural offence", without any regard for the sentiments of others?

How does a woman's right to cover herself become a barrier between cultural integration when women are equally allowed to wear short skirts and tops that barely covers their breasts? If a Muslim guy asked a half-naked woman to cover up, he would be instantly branded an "Islamofascist". It's as if, things like dressing inappropriately, homosexuality, depicting insensitive images of religious figures, etc are perfectly ok, in fact they are the very examples of "freedom" and "progression". So what do we have left of “culture” or “values”?

How can a society thrive to be multicultural and “tolerant” if it so easily finds it intimidating or offensive for women who cover themselves, while doing the very things to hurt others’ feelings? When a society demands cultural integration it should first correct its own flaws that created these sense of separateness and insecurity. This is the society that so vigorously condemns Islam’s “repressive” nature, and now demanding a ban on veils whether or not women agree to it.

What a bunch of hypocrites!

This whole row started with a concern expressed by Jack Straw, who I believe in his good conscience wanted to improve communication and community relation with his Muslim constituents.. but many thanks to the media for glorifying this issue into Islam's rampant extremism, while doing a great job in popularising Islamophobia.

Now look who has jumped the bandwagon- http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_head...name_page.html

[Banglatiger84]

Originally Posted by Hatebreed
If a Muslim guy asked a half-naked woman to cover up, he would be instantly branded an "Islamofascist".

Very good point. I doubt those Muslims who are praising Straw's comments will ever be similarly offended by tank-tops..........

Muslims are accused on beign intolerant whenever they are ofended by anything, now isnt it intolerant to criticise the veil?

[ammark]

HB, your link didnt work for me, but I have read that Salman Rushdie has joined the party. Your post does show the hypocrisy that exists here in the west... and I feel its an accurate post-modernist criticism of everything about the Western society and policy. While clamouring for tolerance and respect for the other, they do promote the "vices" and "oppression" that is "inherent" in muslim society and culture and they want to effect change. This is best exemplified when politicians have to take a stance. Its very unfortunate that the media will never loudly present this argument.

Last year I attended a lecture by George Galloway here at U of T, and he had supported that Ontario (my province in canada) allow Shariah Law for internal family arbitration, just as Orthodox Jews, and Amish and Orthodox Christians are allowed. The reaction from the majority white anti-war peaceniks audience was a "boo". There is an inherent bias that runs among these host societies... they can be very idealistic and speak of tolerance and respect, but when it comes to certain core issues like this they are often very negative.

Frankly I agree fully with the "personal freedom" to wear a niqaab.I strongly believe that those who come abroad ought to engage with the host society and not just mooch off and live in a shell. They have to make that effort, even if they wear a niqaab. But they have to be mindful of the fact that bigotry exists on both sides, and those who wear the niqaab must consciously do so, bearing in mind the vulnerabilities and risks they expose themselves to. In that scenario, they have the full option to not wear the veil. I think Jack Straw has been extremely diplomatic in his statement. He respects that if any person wants to retain the niqaab, she may do so. Unlike the media and the arrogant / ignorant society around him, he certainly sounds more respectful, tolerant and true to ideals of freedom of choice and respect for differences!

[ammark]

duplicate post

[Alien]

Originally Posted by Banglatiger84
Very good point. I doubt those Muslims who are praising Straw's comments will ever be similarly offended by tank-tops..........

Muslims are accused on beign intolerant whenever they are ofended by anything, now isnt it intolerant to criticise the veil?

No one's praising Jack Straw. We all say he as a right to say what he feels like.

If you and I can say George Bush and Tony Blair is a horse$hit and exercise our freedom of speech then he to has the right so long he doenst offend or attack our faith.

I personally dont agree with his view. Just like Hatebreed said, you dont need to uncover your face to improve community relation.

I'll give an example. In Australia, we have a large population of Chinese and Vietnamese. They dont wear hijab or anything but seldom mix with other non-asian members of the community. Some have been living here for 15 years and still cant speak a word in english. This has caused huge debate in past years and people are asking for reforms to immigration to filter out these immigrants who have zero understanding of english and stay rest of their life within a tightly knit community.
While i respect Jack Staw's views, I dont agree with him.

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by ammark
To PoorFan

There are many self-proclaimed "liberal muslims", and there is a prominent group of them in Canada who advocate many issues and changes among the muslim community who use that label. I dont specifically know what their agenda is, however, I have often felt that their use of the word "muslim" in their label is quite frivolous at times... and I find it hard to associate and identify with them because of this. For reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam#Contemporary_and_co ntroversial_Issues

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irshad_Manji

I went through your link and found it more or less same as I define a 'liberal muslim' in that wikipedia, though I read the front page only. As for that lady in other link, Irshad Manji, I don't know anything on her ( pardon my ignorance ), nor I read any of her books. The paragraph on her view seems nothing wrong to me, but detail could be different than what we think or define as 'liberal muslims'. I read the criticism on her book 'The Trouble with Islam' by Tarek Fatah which suggest she was biased in her writing on ''Muslim Complicity in the Holocaust'.

And yes, if that the case, it's hard and confusing who and what is ''liberal muslims'. Average people like us should keep our eyes open, work our common sense, don't eat all that comes in and out, without having a bite.

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by Banglatiger84
Very good point. I doubt those Muslims who are praising Straw's comments will ever be similarly offended by tank-tops..........

Muslims are accused on beign intolerant whenever they are ofended by anything, now isnt it intolerant to criticise the veil?

Not in the 'public' places ( road, train, park, restaurant, working place etc. ), but in 'private' places ( my house, my office etc. ). It's ( Straw's comment ) not about agree or disagree, praise or denounce, but showing respect to other's taste and choice, so please dont get me wrong here.

[Fazal]

Ahhh... its always good to hide in forget cricket after such miserable display by our boys. Its like a quite basement or a bathroom.

Any way... what you guys are agruing about? To tell you the truth... Poor Fan is almost always right... he is like our sob janta buro. Don't under estimate him by his name... he is nooo poor.

Therefore you guys are all wrong and Poor Fan is right.

But can anyone tell me in one sentence what Poor guy(Fan) is trying to say anyway?

[Tigers_eye]

A'righty then, (Fazal's post made me come here)

If I say, "Fazal, stop that fazlami" that would mean very little. However, if Zunaid or Chinaman says, "Fazal, stop that fazlami" even as a freedom of speech context that would weigh differently. Because they are men of power here.

If I have said, "woman should get rid of the veil" nobody would care. But Jack Straw says that then the implecation and affect is more than one can imagine. Whether it is politically driven or not that is yet to be seen. Now this message is being spread in every media outlet and talked upon. One can see the poll results of banning the veil. A liberal man in power (in position where everyone notices) creates this uproar just by simply saying a line which is well under his freedom of speech rights. But the final affect becomes is banning the veil or at least thinking of banning the veil. Is it not imposing his liberal thoughts on others?

So men in high positions should think twice be saying something otherwise they are indirectly doing the same thing as the radicals are doing. Forcing others to comply to their (fanatics) will and wishes.
That's all.

[Hatebreed]

I think Poorfan is saying people should be entitled to their opinion as well as choice of clothing.

Interestingly, while I was outside today I probably saw more young girls and women wearing headscarfs and veils than I'd normally care to take notice. Not just in East-London which is an ethnically diverse place, but also in the city where it's not a common sight to find women in burkas/niqabs. It almost felt like these girls were rebelling.

As a commuter I see all kinds of people on my daily journeys. Then I started thinking if goths can wear a kg of mascara, lipstick, have weird (but cool) hairstyles, wear spiky wristbands, a few dozen piercings, long boots with metal soles, clothes with symbols of vampires/devil/bugs/reptiles and dead things -- then why should Muslim women be deprived of their rights to weir veils?

Anyway Fazal bhai, for your amusement, I'll share something with you that truly happened today...

I was on the train returning home from Uni, it was jampacked. At the next station, about 5-6 orthodox Jews got aboard, rare beings these I tell you!.. When the train entered the tunnel it came to complete stop.. for at least 6-8 minutes. Ironically, but unintentionally I was listening to hardcore German Metal on full volume, with my trusty pair of earphones with no noise reduction. I could notice some of the individuals get rather intimidated, but I had no other music to play.

While the band [Rammstein] I was listening to has nothing to do with Nazis, they have been accused of "fascism" due to the dark and somewhat militaristic imagery of their videos and gigs. [Download a song here]

Now do you think I might have "culturally" offended the Jews by publicly listening to German Metal on full blast? Should it be banned for this reason?