Well since nobody, not even Muslims know or agree on what "Islam" is or means, that is not the same as the Burqua which is a very real instrument of subjugation.
To defend it is to defend Islamism or at least the 7th century culture the extremists of Salafists and Wahabists teachings follow.
I am not defending a woman being forced to wear a Burq or any other forced restriction - like being forced to not wear a Burqa if she interprets her faith as calling for that.
The Burqa is not an 'instrument of subjugation', nor have I seen any evidence or arguments supporting that assertion. The Burqa is merely a piece of clothing.
The instruments of subjugation are the men who force restrictions upon women, whether it be denial of education, physical abuse or other
Moderates covering for the extremists, like in so many other areas of religion.
As of yet no sustainable argument showing the Burqa itself as inflicting tangible harm on society has been presented - so the extremists are those who share your views, in terms of banning a piece of clothing, not those who seek to prevent such draconian restrictions on ones freedom to act in accordance with their faith.
And no, Islam will not be banned, ever. No western constitution allows for that.
Yet we see a harmless piece of clothing being banned without any evidence supporting any tangible harm to society from it, just because some people associate it with 'Islamic extremists'. In fact people like Wilders have already attempted to essentially make the same argument - that it is Islam that is the problem, simply becasue extremists proclaim their actions to be guided by Islam.
I for one still hope you moderates come to your senses and it wouldn't even be necessary. ;P
The moderates are in their senses, as we point out how absurd the ban of the Burqa is, and how the arguments in support of such a ban themselves smack of extremism and draconian restrictions on the freedom of individuals to practice their faith as they interpret it, provided their is no tangible harm to society.
When some people choose to wear it but most don't then to ban it is to protect the many from that possibility. Yes I agree it is not the main issue, but you have to start somewhere. It takes power away from the men who want to force their daughters or wives. Combined with a helpline (which already exists in every western European country) for mistreated women, safe houses and harsh laws domestic violence in non muslim families has been mostly eliminated. And I'm sure we can do the same for Muslims where structural violence in many shapes is still prevalent.
To ban it does not 'protect' those who are forced to wear it. A piece of clothing does not 'harm' an individual, the mental and physical abuse that individuals might be subjected to from individuals who force women to don a piece of clothing does harm women, and on that count, protecting women from the actual abuse, the ban on the Burqa does nothing.
If a helpline can prevent domestic abuse, then the same measures can also liberate a woman being forced to don a Burqa, without imposing draconian restrictions on the freedom of others who freely choose to wear the Burqa.
Your argument falls flat on its face here.
One thing working against that is they often receive less harsh punishments for violent crimes (in at least one case even murder), a disgusting result of cultural relativism.
Then that is where laws need to be reformed, in ensuring that enforcement and punishment for crimes such as domestic abuse is uniform, and not by changing laws to impose restrictions on the freedom to practice ones faith as interpreted.
The Burqa ban as of now is nothing more than an expression of Islamophobia, couched in the language of 'liberating women', when the real causes that need to be addressed are either being ignored, as is the fact that if the underlying causes of male domination and abuse are addressed, women being forced to wear a Burqa is also addressed.
