There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

rferl.org

BarbecueCowboy , to world in Tajikistan Set To Outlaw Islamic Hijab After Years Of Unofficial Ban

Looking at demographics, predominately is almost an understatement for the Islamic population, looks like maybe up to 96%? I’m treading carefully on my wording here because I know anything along these lines is always sensitive, but it sounds like they’d be inclined to be supportive of Islamic standards, I just kind of wonder where this ban comes from?

manucode ,
@manucode@infosec.pub avatar

As far as I know, the hijab is more of an Arab tradition rather than a Muslim one though many non-Arab muslims have adopted it as well. In Tajikistan it might never have been common. Please take all of this with a grain of salt though, I’m far from an expert on any of these topics.

groet , to world in Tajikistan Set To Outlaw Islamic Hijab After Years Of Unofficial Ban

Tajik Islam is its own thing. They are (relatively) open and women are frequently seen in public. They can walk around on their own and they dont cover their heads with hijabs or similar. They are also very vary of foreign influences such as Arabic Islam, Turkish Islam and above all Taliban influences. The hijab is a staple in all of these forms of Islam, so banning it is essentialy telling those groups to stop trying to take over Tajik Islam. This is a good thing. It is protecting women from a shift to much more oppressing religious practices.

Psychodelic ,

I’m honestly not a fan of the government deciding which version of a religion is correct, and I’m even less into the gov enforcing targeted dress codes. It seems super authoritarian to me and I can’t really see how it could be a good thing.

I’d consider myself anti-theist but still, I don’t see how you can live in a free society and let the government have that power

That said, I’m open to learning how this could be a positive/negative and whether or not it would create a group of second class citizens.

AngryCommieKender , (edited )

As a non-participating* Baha’i, I still agree.

I can understand the potential ban against the hijab in governmental, scholarly, and other public places, but only because of how the Shia, and to a lesser extent the Sufi, attempt to enforce those laws, and the absolute fact that religion and politics have no place in the same arena.

Since it is Sunni that are creating and enforcing progressive laws, who am I to disagree? I can only mourn the needless violence and suffering that may occur amongst my cousins.

  • I was kind of “raised” Baha’i, except not exactly. I do not exercise any of my rights such as voting because I do not interact with other Baha’is. I am still technically a Baha’i, but I have been given the choice of the hardest route, of isolation and teaching by example.
groet ,

Dont get me wrong, Tajikistan is a capital D dictatorship. With pictures of the president on every public building and daily propaganda prodcasts from megaphones installed at public squares. Its also not the first time the government banned certain traditions (such as a way to celebrate weddings).

They are banning the symptom instead of the cause. Instead of banning preachers of foreign schools of Islam they are banning something that is central to those preachings.

I agree, banning religious expression is generally a bad thing, I am just happy they are fighting to keep radical Islam out of the country. For reference, Tajiks are the second largest ethnic group in Afghanistan (~25% of the population) so there is bound to be cultural exchange between the countries. a And Tajikistan is very afraid of the Taliban getting any support in Tajikistan. And the first step of that support is through religious radicalization.

Archelon ,

My main disagreement with this decision is the same reason I disagree with countries that strictly enforce wearing hijabs.

Whether or not a person chooses to wear a hijab, or a burka, or khakis, or a swimsuit, or nothing at all is a personal decision. It’s the part where they choose that’s important.

It’s certainly arguable whether social or cultural or religious norms can remove the ability to choose without any legal action whatsoever, but I don’t think that justifies this kind of action and I don’t think this law will result in any sort of liberation. Historically speaking this direction tends to result more in reactionary radicalization.

scrubbles , to childfree in Russian Government Moves To Stigmatize 'Extremist' Idea Of Not Having Children
@scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech avatar

World leaders: constant greed, destroying the planet for short term gains, destabilizing the world, starting wars, ignoring climate change, trending more fascist and conservative, clawbacks of rights

Also world leaders: why don’t you want to bring kids into this world???

sunzu , to childfree in Russian Government Moves To Stigmatize 'Extremist' Idea Of Not Having Children

Governments will do anything about this issue besides making their shiti countries more friendly to mothers, children and families

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines