Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
It's not denying health care to niqabis but rather not letting doctors who wear niqab practice medicine or work in that health office.
Yup! Mistake was mine...
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
Teachers don't teach topless because it's illegal and considered vulgar, not because it inhibits the teacher from doing her job.
The Niqab is not illegal...but many secularists do consider it vulgar. That's the issue here. This whole inhibiting the job nonsense is, well...nonsense. Indeed...what if there is a niqabi patient that only wants to talk to a niqabi doctor...oh oh...can't get one, at least not in that secularist's ideal vision of Pakistan (which, I should add, doesn't really jive with your secular vision). As for communication break down...it's a niqab, not tape on the mouth...
In any case, this dude is perfectly okay with not hiring Hijabis..let alone Niqabis...so, let's not sweep that under the rug...this isn't just about the Niqab...is it? Or should we forget that, at least accoding to some, the elimination of public aspects of religious expression (and hence, the marginalization of those who are religious through social boycott and regulation) is part and parcel of 'progress' towards a secular state?
How else to explain the left-field conclusion of the letter, and the proposition of a 'threat' by all niqabis (predicated on his invocation of the few 'Ninjas')?
Pico, I used it just as an example. Of course it's illegal to teach topless. The dude who wrote the article have no clue of civil liberties. Nothing wrong with hijaabi teachers or doctor in Pakistan.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
^
There's nothing dignified or respectful in porno...or suggesting it as a release...
And there is nothing dignified or respectful in expecting women to cover up to keep men's libidos and pornographic imaginations in check. To say that a woman cannot be respected in any dress that is even remotely revealing is indicative of the faults of the man, not of the woman who chooses to wear a skirt or short sleeves.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
There's nothing wrong with Hijab being worn by medical staff. The niqab, Mrs. Saeein, I do have an objection against.
Poic - you keep referring to examples of scantily clad women. No one who is opposing your viewpoint says that women need to wear scantily clad clothes. Whatever happened to a happy medium? I wear a jeans, shirt with long/ 3/4 sleeves, and a jacket/sweater to school every day. Would you view me as a slut, based on that attire?
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
Niqaabis are well within their right to wear niqaab, but they must respect the fact that some situations will require the niqaab to come of (in antirely non-sexual context, making it ok I guess). For example, for identification, eduactaion, medical examination etc.
Those that argue niqaabs should come off altogether are wrong, so are those who argue that they have the right to wear niqaab all the time.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
Pakap, that's why this is becoming a problem in many non-muslim countries. Unlike the muslim countries these immigrants come from, the non-muslim countries that are babysitting these people are allowing them the freedom to wear what they want (which would NOT be allowed in a place like Saudi, or Egypt, or Syria, or Iran, or even Pakistan to some extent - I can't wear a halter top on the streets of karachi - I'll get pummeled).
But they do expect some cooperation with lawful procedures. When the niqaab needs to come off, it just does. I recall people in the US making a fuss about taking off their niqaab for identification at airports. Is it haraam to cooperate in a security process that is there to protect millions of lives coming in and out of an airport?
Where whatever you want whereever you want. Walk around with a bedsheet over your head if you wish. But when a cop pulls you over for speeding, don't give them the whole "I-can't-take-off-my-niqaab" when that officer is a guy.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
I have never encountered a niqaabi who has a problem with identifying on airports they just wish for a female officer. And i dont find there is anything wrong with getting yourself heard in that regard.
Re: “No to Ninja Nuisance” ?
Me… 
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
- Poic - you keep referring to examples of scantily clad women.
Woa! Wasn't my example...I was simply responding to LB's.....my take is that the view of the Niqab as being a functional hindrance is a bit far fetched...so if one doesn't like the Niqab, chances are it's because they don't like the concept of Niqab...not because of any consequence of wearing it...in other words, they think it's a vulgar concept...
I didn't say that such dress is the only decent form of dress...
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
And there is nothing dignified or respectful in expecting women to cover up...
This is neither here not there...every culture (yes, fine, culture) has notions of what is or is not respectable. There are always expectations. I'll be honest...if indeed a woman was walking around naked, or even half of that...I wouldn't show her half the respect I would someone who was even just remotely more covered up...there's this possibly arbitrary line we all draw. Simply because, as per social context, she (or **he **for that matter) isn't dressing respectably...and it has little to do with the amount of clothing.
If someone come sto a job interview dressed in a track suit, I'm not going to take them seriously. Okay, that's a lie...but only because I'm in Software...but you get the point.
It's not about libido. Talk to a real traditionalist, one that isn't bothered by concocting apologia's for Western bigots, and the reason for Burqa will be simple: it's "mandated", i.e. it's an obligatory tradition. If it is or not, that's a different debate...but it's not the nonsensical reasons many pseudo scholars come up with to justify what really doesn't need to be justified.
Now the letter writer is in Pakistan...he isn't talking about established norms as per his social context, he's talking about social boycott of those who dress in *traditional *ways...so yeah, that is ominous and threatening.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
But its not mandated. And if you question the idea of how "mandatory" it is, then you don't automatically become an apologetic for Western bigots. It could very well gasp mean that you're thinking on your own two feet. I've studied Islam. I don't see the justification for covering your face. There is not a single ayah that commands it. There is not a single hadith that commands it. If anything, there is a hadith that claims your face is one exception to the body parts you have to cover.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
^I have a question. If it is not mandatory then what does islam say about women who take it knowing its optional being very religious? Dont you find it disturbing that the writer of this article has an extremely arrogant manner? Which instead of questioning an interpretation causes distances and apparent discrimination? Its not just niqaab he/she has a problem with. Its hijab as well. I sort of get the impression "my way or high way " from the writer. Its a symbol of a bigot to me.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
If you read the article, you'll notice the writer claims that their AUNT doesn't hire ladies who wear even the hijab. However, regarding her own feelings on the matter, the writer says:
"While a hijab maybe recommended according to some religious interpretations as a means of maintaining personal modesty, the Ninja version of it isn't!"
Therefore, I don't see the writer as being disrespectful of the hijab - as in the scarf that is used to cover hair.
In fact, they acknowledge that various interpretations of Islam approve of the hijab.
The writer's target is the Niqaab, not the hijaab.
I don't think the manner of their writing is arrogant.
What does Islam say about women who wear niqaab, when it doesn't suggest it? I don't know, but you can guess what the judgement would be if the Prophet himself says in a hadith that you cover everything except hands, feet, and face. These ladies are going overboard. I don't know how God would judge them, because I'm not God. But I would assume that the sin would be heavier on those people promoting the niqaab when they know very well there is no basis for it in Islam, and who do it to inhibit women from communication, and in the spirit of keeping their female population subjected. Its not a secret that many (not all) muslim women are vastly uneducated and given little chance for employment and self-sufficiency. What the punishment would be for a brainwashed lady who thinks she's pleasing God, I don't know. My intuition says, probably not severe in any way, because she is doing something unnecessary and something that's hurting her ummah without her even realizing it. But then I'm not God, so I don't know.
But I do know that when I see something wrong, I'm supposed to say something about it. And anybody here who says that niqaab is mandatory, is plain wrong, and I've made my attempts to correct them.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
Umm the writer doesn't say anything about the aunt being discriminatory. Its a news paper an excellent platform to raise such issues like discrimination at work place. I find it odd that all the pains over extra careful women and no support for Muslims following the rules?
Secondly i differ in my opinion towards Niqabis. I see them having more taqwa than me. A non niqabi. It makes it life hard for them in West true. But Pakistan being an Islamic Republic should atleast know how to tackles with 'over board muslims' or zealous practisers of faith in my opinion. Only Allah can be the judge of that. But i havent formed this opinion of niqabis without a reason. You can dispute it in reference with time and age argument but to me its valid.
So here is how i think. The best woman role model we muslim women have is Hazrat Fatima r.a . What example did she leave for us? She was what some might call over boad muslim in today's society. I have read that in her last moments she was constantly worried about the funeral being held in covered up manner. Bear in mind she would be dead and it was her body but she was worried about being compeletly covered even in her last moments.
And to me the early ages of islam were as mordern as now a day in term of women dressing. So for her to practise that level of modesty was very hard for her as well. I haven't got enough knowledge to declare it mandotary or obligatory or what not. However I have nothing but respect for niqabis and i think some respect is due for women who are acting on their faith. Its asks for more courage than i have. I applaud them for being bold and practising at the same time.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
^^
Since when you have become Mufti.
The first verse regarding veil was revealed in al-Madina when Umar ibn al-Khattaab admonished the prophet’s wife, Sawdah bint Zam’ah, while going outside without a veil. Allah Ta’ala states, ‘O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (except eyes to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed.’ (33:59)
Generally, the veiling covers the whole body including head, face, hair, bosom, hands and feet. But in the absence of men it is permissible for woman to uncover her face as narrated by Aaisha [Radhiallaahu anha], ‘Some riders passed by us while we were with Allah’s Messenger [Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam] in the state of ritual consecration. When they came face to face, one of us let down her cloak (veil) from her head on her face and when they preceded us, we uncovered it.’ (Abu Dawud)
Niaqb is also wajib like Hijab.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
^eeeek quote her! dont point that big bad board towards me!
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
^eeeek quote her! dont point that big bad board towards me!
Ops l0l, where did you come from. :D
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
what is alarming and unacceptable is the lack / absence of tolerance amongst secularists !
Is this the kind of freedom these people believe in?
How problematic is it and important to see the face of a female nurse?
Why is there even a need to have female nurses in male wards?
In fact Eastern or Brown/Black Secularists are much more extremists than the Westerners are. Such people don't have any self respect and live under inferiority complex, all they view in their pathetic lives is a way to please their white gods, so they can either get a foreign visa or a high paid job.
In fact, Britain is much more better than Pakistan, because British are Kaafirs but Pakis are Secular-Munafiqeen, worse than Kaafirs. In Britain, Muslims are not forced to shave their beards or abandon their veils.
Even Hindus of India are better than these Secular Extremists.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
You're basing your judgement on history about Fatima, that I don't know who wrote. I've never heard anything like that. Quite often, you'll find that Islamic history is very unreliable at times, because you have different accounts of the same event. But the Quran is not unreliable.
Re: "No to Ninja Nuisance" ?
^^ Since when you have become Mufti.
The first verse regarding veil was revealed in al-Madina when Umar ibn al-Khattaab admonished the prophet’s wife, Sawdah bint Zam’ah, while going outside without a veil. Allah Ta’ala states, ‘O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (except eyes to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed.’ (33:59)
Generally, the veiling covers the whole body including head, face, hair, bosom, hands and feet. But in the absence of men it is permissible for woman to uncover her face as narrated by Aaisha [Radhiallaahu anha], ‘Some riders passed by us while we were with Allah’s Messenger [Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam] in the state of ritual consecration. When they came face to face, one of us let down her cloak (veil) from her head on her face and when they preceded us, we uncovered it.’ (Abu Dawud)
Niaqb is also wajib like Hijab.
How convenient. Hasn't anyone told you that anything in parenthesis in a translation was inserted by the translator? I'll have you know that my Quranic translation reads without what you've got in parenthesis.
Secondly, go back to the original arabic word "khimar" used in that verse. Khimar is not the same thing as a niqaab.
Third, if you take into account the hadith that recounts what the Prophet said needs to be covered, you'll see that he said that the face can be left open. Therefore, your translation is wrong.
Translators aren't idiots. They know what they're translating. If they decided not to take that hadith into account when inserting that parenthesis, then they're deliberately misleading people.