Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Germany: Burka ban to be proposed in security clampdown [View all]Xithras
(16,191 posts)All Islamic societies agree on that. They only differ on the amount to be covered.
Someone once compared it to Christians going to church. The Christian Bible doesn't actually require its followers to attend church, but simply requires that they spend time reflecting and praying. The Christian interpretation of that requirement, for at least the last 1500 years, says that you fulfill the requirement by attending church on Saturday or Sunday.
Strictly speaking, church attendance is not mandated by Christianity. But the popular cultural interpretation says that you ARE supposed to attend church if you're a Christian. Most Christians will tell you that you are not an observant Christian if you aren't attending. Simply put, the Bible lays out a requirement, and western cultural norms govern that requirements enforcement.
This is the way all religions have always worked. The religion lays down basic requirements, and the people apply their own cultural interpretations to those requirements. It's a bit disingenuous to claim that its not religious though. The requirement only exists because the Quran reduces a womans appearance to an item of property that belongs to her husband and family. Whether or not her face counts as her "beauty" is secondary to the objectification and dehumanization that Islam imposes on its female adherents. The fact that many Islamic cultures don't objectify and dehumanize women as badly as others is hardly a defense.
And, for what it's worth, I'm only pointing this out about Islam because it's the subject of this discussion. I'm fully aware that many other religions (including Christianity) to the same thing. That's also not a defense that anyone should be using.