And forgive the formatting, Facebook is not an ideal platform.
I personally have no problem with the Burqa, it's not too dissimilar to your average slob dressed in baggy jeans and a baggy hoodie with nowt but a fag-end showing (although there could presumably be an attractive person underneath the burqa, and my inner pervert gently weeps), I only have a problem with coercion. And there's no guarantee that someone wearing a burqa is forced to do so *against* their wishes. It's a cultural garment, and so long as it is worn voluntarily, then what business is it of ours to tell someone else how they may dress? In any case, generational exposure to a new society with new norms will have successive generations appearing more and more Ocker (Allah help them =P) and the issue will resolve itself UNLESS the point is forced, in which case the burqa will no doubt remain as an emblem of identity and continuity with a culture where those being targetted actually felt accepted.
For purposes of identification etc. on private property (ie. banks) then this is not an issue of law, but rather an issue of the rights of owners of private property to enforce a sensible dress-code, as such locations are within the private sphere, NOT public, and as such it is unnecessary for legislation to be enacted. France, take note.
Whenever Sharia Law is brought up, it feels like a smokescreen or xenophobic knee-jerk reaction to (heaven forbid!) something different! Cultures from regions heavily populated by Muslims are not a mainstream thing in most western nations, so the debate in the public sphere carries the burden of representation for Muslims, and the quiet moderates who live down the road, tend their garden, follow the footy and enjoy a good halal barbecue aren't sensational enough to grab headlines... "In the news today, Muslim Couple Perfectly Normal, had Lamb Roast on Sunday, Concerned with the Rising Cost of Petrol, settled in to watch Australian Idol... here's Tom with the weather!"
Doesn't really happen, does it? Folks point at terrorists and poorly researched polls (like the one in England that asked the leading question "do you see yourself as British, or Muslim?"... the number of 'Muslim' responses shocked folks who didn't really stop to consider what the result would've been if Christians were asked if they saw themselves as British or rather as Christian), at demogogues and rallies, at violent protests in war-zones and so on, and treat that as representative.
Every time some makes a fuss about the "Sharia law" strawman, it paints the entire collective of so, so many differnet cultures and ethnicities, religious sects and persuasions, with one oriental, alien 'other' brush, the binary opposition at play.
I'm curious as to what spurred your initial post? Most Muslims don't want Sharia Law, no non-Muslim is going to settle for life under Sharia law, and within the grand sweep of Islam there are so very many interpretations of Sharia anyway that it's near meaningless to implement. Honestly, the only religion likely to take hold of Australian law to the detriment of society is Christianity. The moralizing busy-bodies have already afforded fictional people the rights of legal protection from rape or sexual misconduct, that's far more of a worry than the spectre of Sharia Law.
And as for 'becoming Australian', or in my case, becoming a Kiwi, this shouldn't mean discarding your prior cultural identity to conform to some homogenous fiction of national character. People should be themselves, provided they obey the laws as is the social contract, the understanding that you will enjoy the benefits of society provided you abide by the rules and conditions for participation, or else your ability to participate (freedom) will be curtailed.
There's always such concern that foreigners will undermine national values, national culture... this idea that values and culture are static, timeless and universal is complete bullshit. A culture that does not grow and evolve, is dead. And those values we hold dear, we must have faith that they will endure and will influence those who encounter our culture, and those values that do not survive contact, deserve to be lost as they are weak and undesirable values. A point the Americans got right in claiming "We hold these truths to be self-evident", a good idea is a good idea and when we consider things on their own merit rather than basing our judgement on who puts the idea forward, value will show. The only thing that will ensure that bad values prevail is adhering to a binary us-vs-them mentality, tribal mentality, that will not admit to honest analysis and criticism, treating association and exclusivity as more important than robust, rational debate on what is and what ought to be.
If anyone is still awake after reading all that, I commend your steely determination, and denounce your sense of masochism!
