hmm so the writer says:

'The choice to cover one’s face is for many women a genuine expression of the most private kind of religious sentiment. To prevent them from doing so is discriminatory, persecutory, and incompatible with the Enlightenment traditions of the West.'

But she later says:
'..this is our culture, and in our culture, we do not veil.Our culture’s position on these questions is morally superior.'
I hope I'm not wrong but doesnt 'western soil' pride itself on being open minded and multi-cultured. If so, then banning the hijab would be AGAINST their cultural norms. And for those who find the hijab weird to look at... well I find tatooes n piercings weird n i think a lot of ppl do too... would it make sense if we asked 4 a ban??!! :P
I also disagree with the view that burka-wearers are' submissive, silent, and enslaved'. I wear an abaya and I definitely dont think it has silenced me in any way.. let alone enslaved me.. :P Plus the idea that most women are forced to cover themselves.. yes some are but most?? I dont think so.. Quoting Yvonne Ridley, the revert British journalist: '..I used to look at veiled women as quiet, oppressed creatures and now I look at them as multi-skilled, multi-talented, resilient women whose brand of sisterhood makes Western feminism pale into insignificance.'
A point made in the article tht i hvnt heard/thought of before... is prejudice towards non-veiled women.. if its true, then a simple preaching in such suburbs should be organised n financed that point that out to ppl n urge thm 2 stop doing that... going for a nationwide ban cz of a small suburb issue -is laughable. I hope I've covered everything. Anyone interested should read Yvonne Ridley's ultraaaa cool article on: www.yvonneridley.org/yvonne-ridley/articles/how-i-came-to-love-the-veil-4.html

If veiling signify a subjugated woman,oppressed by her male relatives then how the hell banning it would solve their troubles.Now such women are more shut up from the world than they were before.I do see the point that burqa clashes with europrean ideal,but just dont say that its for the benefit of very small minority of muslim woman that they are banning it.
If they do care about these women then they should hold seminars in muslim neighborhood educating women as to how they can easily access authorities if someone is forcing them to do anything.
As far as religious degradation of woman is concerned then every religion has fair share of it....the so called sermon of that so called MULLah was absolutely Disgusting and preposterous. Church is no better anyway.THIS IS WHAT CATHOLIC CHURCH ASK OF WOMAN .....As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."
THE thing is male mentality is prety much same throuout the world. Some draw the line at veiled women and think unveiled are here for their pleasure,some fancy that pencil skirts and high heels are yearning for their attention only.
As far as sexual objectification of women is concerned both west and muslims are in a league of their own. Millions of women in west are harassed by their pimps.Human traficking is in full swing in eastern europe.Hollywood horror stories of starlets are common knowledge.AND lets keep silent on rape statistics.Women are so desperate to please by their looks that they develop eating disorders resulting sometimes in theitr death.As far as muslim world is concerned the women are more sheltered but definitely more oppressed.So in both worlds gender equality is a long way ahead.
An as far as the jealous primitive male crap in the end is concerned then,all islam ever asked of muslim women was to dress modestly.Different interpretation of modest clothing do exist but the spirit was to appear modest.Even in Quran Allah addresses moslim women only through Prophet PBUH,and tells them to appear modest.Allah never addresses their husbands or fathers ,and certainly never gives them the liberty to force anything on their wives.

i also think that too much is done for politicizing burqa and a lot less is done in terms of UNDERSTANDING individuals who chose to wear it.In my case spending some time with my burqa clad class fellows greatly improved and changed my perception about them.Burqa like most other things is not a defining characteristic of personality,so stereotyping those women as enslved or fanatics is DUMB.
Its the threat that the western values feel from Burqa itself which makes this garment politically so incorrect.Religious extremists have always been ENFORCING this dress,and still are in some parts of world.The problem is that the narrow minded patriarchal Muslim scholars did all they could in the early 1400 years of islam to keep women ignorant and easy pray for their domination. But the 20th century dawned with women suffrage in west.The trend initially faced much resistance from the mullahs but since westerns were rulers back then,it was taken up by many muslims.Mullahs then dug up old islmic teachings that promted both men and women to seek education and to this day they delude muslims into believing that the present women rights are given by islam.Ofcourse they never mention suffrage.No Mullah ever speaks up against domestic violence,forced marriages,gang rapes,but they are all very vocal when it comes to condemning a woman who goes against the traditional dress code.the same Mullah after every sermon ,very promptly pray for destruction and annihilation of western civilization and predict ,that it would any day from now.They are doing everything to widen the gulf between west and muslims.Indeed most mullahs have such mentality to degrade women and call them a piece of meat.After listening to them no wander a muslim would become judgemental about the unveiled women.
So i think to address the root cause sermons in mosques should be monitered both in muslim states and non muslim states by fair secular bodies

Of course, the issue is tricky and complex, and there is no clear cut answer. At the end, it is a judgment call. The author's judgment, based on the detailed analysis she has presented and with which i agree, is that the West should ban the burqa, even though it would result in the violation in the rights of those who adopt it willingly.

In fact, if i may be bold enough to say, Muslims don't even have the RIGHT to complain if West bans the burqa. Why? Because Muslims don't even believe in the Enlightenment values, such as freedom of dress. Will a Muslim government or society (say Pakistan) ever allow a woman to publicly wear a bikini on a beach? Of course, not. It is a totally normal, non-controversial thing for Muslims to do. Oh, yeah. Like said, Muslims don't even have the right to complain. The can complain the day they start believing in the freedom of dress, which ain't gonna happen.

@ Fizza

"then banning the hijab would be AGAINST their cultural norms."

The writer has explained that yes it is, but that allowing the practice of burqa is becoming a threat to these very Enlightenment traditions by facilitating oppression of women.

"And for those who find the hijab weird to look at"

I don't think the writer used this argument.

"I also disagree with the view that burka-wearers are' submissive, silent, and enslaved'."

The writer distanced herself from this stereotype from the very start of the article by the examples she gave.

"prejudice towards non-veiled women.. if its true, then a simple preaching in such suburbs should be organised n financed that point that out to ppl n urge thm 2 stop doing that."

Such fundamentalist behavior is not open to reason. Furthermore, a community which believes in the religious compulsion of veil is almost certainly also going to think bad of the women who wouldn't veil. It's like a logical corollary.

"going for a nationwide ban cz of a small suburb issue -is laughable."

It's not laughable. Its not a small suburb issue. It's a deep seated expanding ideological problem.

@ Anam

"If veiling signify a subjugated woman,oppressed by her male relatives then how the hell banning it would solve their troubles."

It wouldn't in itself get rid of the oppression, but it would stop the Government being an accomplice to the oppressors by making things easier for them.

"If they do care about these women then they should hold seminars in muslim neighborhood educating women as to how they can easily access authorities if someone is forcing them to do anything."

The West had previously been trying to focus exclusively on the burqa-enforcement issue. It didn't work, for obvious reasons. A woman who allows herself to be subjected to such humiliating treatment would hardly have the guts to do something like go to the police to report her own family.

Besides, the issue of burqa by consent is complicated itself. In the legal sense, it is almost impossible to take account of peer pressure, family pressure and pressure of religious neighborhood. If a woman starts wearing a burqa because if she doesn't, she is treated like a whore, then LEGALLY, it would be seen as burqa-with-consent, but SOCIALLY, it would be a clear-cut case of an enforced dress code.

"As far as religious degradation of woman is concerned then every religion has fair share of it."

The Leftists and Liberalists are usually non-religious. Secularism has the best track record of women rights.

Yes, the West often falls short of its own ideals. But at least it has IDEALS. Muslim world doesn't even have that.

gOVT WONT BE AN ACCOMPLICE...I agree but u know what will probably happen with most of these women.Their narrow minded parents would stop sending them to schools,and will have them quitely shipped off to their homeland in a typical arranged marriage. SUCH A BAN IN MY OPINION IS ONLY MAKING THINGS WORSE
I DO AGREE THAT IF THE ALTERNATIVE WAY OF EDUCATION AND SEMINARS IS TAKEN, THEN MANY WOMEN WONT REPORT THEIR FAMILIES,BECAUSE PPL DONT REPORT THEIR LOVED ONES.A CHILD OR EVEN A TEENAGER WONT REPORT ABUSIVE PARENTS.But such education would atleast help them regain their lost self esteem.They will eventually get the courage to say NO to peer pressure.If they wish to distance themselves from the family n neighbourhood they'll be able to do so by getting a job after their education.Dont say that education doesn't work.After civil war defeat Southerns were extremely prejudiced and were determined to raise their children according to their prejudiced values.But after their children were forced into state schools and were taught liberal values,they did become a lot better citizens than their parents.My point is that education does alleviate narrow mindedness.

AS for your remark 'Muslims shouldn't complain' I do agree that western society is WAY more tolerant that muslim world,the chief reason for which is that west is multicultured as well as more secular in its thinking and there every argument is open for debate.But that is the reason that they should avoid any extreme step like banning veiling even on roads and parks.ITS NOT JUST THE MUSLIMS WHO ARE COMPLAINinG BUT A VAST MAJORITY OF WEST IS ALSO AGAINST THIS
THe INTERESTING THING IS THAT BANNING IS CONSIDERED BEST FORM OF PUBLICITY. ThatS how people like Marquis de sade became a legend and Lady Chatterley's lovers became a sort of cultural phenomenon :p
Lets see what sorta reaction takes place with burqa ban

@Awais Bhai Can you prove that women who wear the burka are oppressed? I think that's where we differ... I dnt think the vast majority are.. isnt the west just supposing that they must be.. is supposing an Enlightenment tradition now :P?

and if it hasnt been proven then saying that the govt is an accomplice in oppression-would be wrong.
If there ARE individuals who have been forced, then I agree with Anam that teaching, preaching n educating is how that problem'll be solved. Telling- n not enforcing- is a purely Islamic IDEAL...Religion HAS given Muslims ideals- we're just too stupid to follow them.
If liberals have always been the right-bestowers to women-- why are these ahem.. liberals.. showing downright extremism n taking the right of choice away from them?
And as far as believing in the freedom of dress of say westerners in a Muslim country is concerned...well..ISLAMIC IDEALS would preach 'La Ik Ra ha Fid Deen--that there's no compulsion in Religion(what Muslims would do or do is a whole diff issue)

(sorry abt the looking weird argument- bt I gave it cz I read a news article on msn on the same n a lot of the comments under were abt how burkas seem voldemortish :P)

@ Fizza

"Can you prove that women who wear the burka are oppressed?"

All those women who veil because of direct or indirect family pressure and social pressure are oppressed. That much is obvious. Those women who choose veil by their own free will and their own judgment are not oppressed.

Now, the question becomes: how many women veil because of direct or indirect family/social pressure? Well, the exact answer can only be given after a detailed sociological study, but i am convinced that there is a significant percentage. It might not be the majority (i think it is), but it is safe to say that there is a significant percentage.

Furthermore, oppression isn't the main crux of the argument. A culture that believes in the moral superiority of a burqa makes life hell for those who choose not to wear it. To allow such a culture to spread goes against all spirit of liberalism. As the author wrote: "There is no nation on the planet where the veil is the cultural norm and where women enjoy equal rights. Not one. Nor is there such a thing as a neighborhood where the veil is the cultural norm and yet no judgment is passed upon women who do not wear it."

'If there ARE individuals who have been forced, then I agree with Anam that teaching, preaching n educating is how that problem'll be solved.'

People differ in religious views. If a family believes that Islam instructs women to veil, it is obviously going to pressurize its women into wearing a veil. In such cases, there won't be a clear-cut coercion involved. The woman would veil because she would lose the respect of her family if she doesn't. Islam may be against clear-cut coercion but it definitely isn't against pressuring one's family. "Enjoin your wives, your daughters, and the wives of true believers that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad)..." [Quran. 33:59]

So what exactly can you teach such a family? The only effective teaching would be to say that women who veil and woman who do not veil are both morally equally. That would be the only belief that would ensure that there is no discrimination or judgment done. But Muslims can't really believe that, can they?


@ Anam

"Their narrow minded parents would stop sending them to schools,and will have them quitely shipped off to their homeland in a typical arranged marriage. SUCH A BAN IN MY OPINION IS ONLY MAKING THINGS WORSE."

The effective solution is to make school education compulsory for all, which is the case in many European countries. Ban the burqa and make education compulsory. So, the fundos would either have to force their daughters at home, which would be a crime punishable by law, or they could leave and go to their own messed up country where women oppression is the norm.

About the muslim world ideals.....The main problem is that muslims are the biggest narcissist among all nations.It starts with childhood when we start polluting a young soul with prejudices ,hate mongering and intolerance.Ideals cannot be construed in a society which would most willingly stagnate but wont listen to reason or question the existing values.
In case of religious prejucice of which our society is teeming, i'll just give 1example.Recently a very beloved demonstrator lost his son in a terrosist attack at a local mosque.It was an Ahmedi's mosque.When the news reached our class the next day,the girl sitting next to me exclaimed "was he a muslim?"Hearing this was one of the most shocking moments of my life.I just couldn't believe my ears.A young precious life was brutally ended and all she could think of was whether that boy followed the same set of beliefs as she did.What is more shocking is that she didn't belong to the uneducated class of society but rather is a student of 1 of the prestigious institutes of the country and the demonstrator who lost his son has a record of never failing a student and naturally he's a favourite among the students. This is the level of humanity in our country!

Look in many cases family pressurizes the children to do a lot of stuff which is unreasonable according to western standards and the kids follow the rules just so they could have the family's respect. Eg catholic parents wont allow their daughter to have sex outside marriage or even in some cases they wont let her date.If the daughter doesn't follow the parental rules or become pregnant she would be not only severely castigated but in many in many instances she'll become an outcast.A worse treatment would be done to a gay child.Now western ideals are against such parental treatments.In both cases children are damaged psychologically,their self respects are crushed but law does not interfere here and does not ban religious teachings that glorify chastity or those which declare gayness satanic.
While in case of Burqa they are bent on denying the wearer not only the right of education but also fresh air.Burqa in most cases in worn willingly and u are overruling the right of majority to dress according to their choice to snub a judgmental behavior.They author of this essay has not sited even a single example where burqa was forced on the wearer ,rather i only found examples pointing to the contrary.
Banning burqa is not only a blow on personal freedom, its also a blow against democracy.

As far as judgemental LOOKS are concerned, then plz dont forget that burqa wearer also gets a fair share of everywhere. Even in this country,i've seen girls who started veiling had to explain their choices to friends.In our society where everyone is convinced that their brand of islam is the right 1,the hijab wearer would openly tell the veil observing girl that her veil has no foundation whatsoever in islam. And apart from that , they obviously have to face extremist label,no one bothers that the wearer maybe way more broadminded than they are.In many cases the family itself becomes the opposition.

a ban (atleast on dressing) itself signifies a not so liberal position of a society. although paradox is something pretty natural and there is nothing you can actually not explain. but it ain't only explanation that matters. on the face of earth, in fact the whole existence, the thing that matters is how you really feel about a thing.worst oppression refers to that of "thoughts and feelings".a women is oppressed by an enforced burqa then if she is at mental unease without burqa (obviously due to the way men look and converse to and about her) that again is nothing less than an oppression. better neither to enforce pardah nor ban it. for this a government, not only in west bt in muslim countries as well, should better educate men to respect females, and not to put the burden of another obligation (as a ban) on them. also not to emprison them in a so called liberty. this is no more important than the liberty inside a prison. education yields tolerance and tolerance on the part of a culture is something thats the need of the hour! considering it from a bit more than a single dimension!i hope a sense of respect develops a harmony where the oppression of liberty and liberty of oppression does not prevail! let the wearer decide what to wear and what not! neither the tribe's or family's head nor the government should force a dress code in daily life!

1)Here's a perspective:
**I believe that there are a lot of med girls who're forced by their parents to choose medicine as a profession.
I believe there’s a significant no. that comes into med cz of ‘indirect family/social pressure.’
I also believe the families who do so, think less of girls who go into vocational professions like engineering.
So cause that boils me over, what could I do?
Hmm oooh hey lets BAN girls from becoming drs!
Well, it’s a necessary step… yes I know there're soo many girls who WANT to be docs, but… sigh… I’ve got to do something harsh n ILLIBERAL to fight for the spirit of LIBERALISM.Here's to freedom of choice!! **

Imagine that.
yup the solution sounds insane.
Like something you’d say when you’ve had a frying pan to your head :P
Come on, Point made?

2)my eng tr of the Quran which is the most pop, uses the word 'tell' and not enjoin for that verse... plus all scholars agree that fathers n bros should recommend the Islamic hijab to their women- yes, but also that the use of force in this matter is clearly forbidden.

3)Anam’s made a lot of solid points.. that a ban would mess up matters more...

4)Your solution doesnt take into account the very many individuals who willingly wear the hijab. this soln would make life hell for THEM.

5) Effective teaching would include emphasizing that nobody can make a judgement abt who's moral n who's not.. that's up to God alone.

6) @everyone: sheeesh what a mind boggling discussion! We deserve a nice, yummy treat for grind-a-fying our minds over this. Anyone know the kels president? :P

Ideally, i would be against banning burqa myself, but these are not ideal conditions. The arguments for ban on burqa are contextual and practical, and not purely logical. None of the analogies presented fits the scenario which makes burqa a controversial issue. Burqa is an overt religious symbol; it is a statement of an ideology; it is perceived by West as a symbol of oppression; it stands for gender segregation; it stands for a lot of things.

Furthermore, no freedom is absolute. To believe completely in the freedom of dress would also imply that people be completely free to roam around naked, to attend school and go to work without any clothes on. Yet, public nudity is banned in much of West, and it makes sense. Banning public nudity in a primitive African tribe doesn't make sense. We cannot see things without context.

The author has already agreed that banning burqa would be disciminatory and against freedom. But she believes the situation in the West is such that it justifies a ban. The reasons she presents make sense in the context of the West, in their culture, in their background. And to my mind, they make sense.

It's another matter what the people defending the burqa in this debate believe the burqa represents, and it is another matter what the mass practice of muslims in the West is regarding the burqa, and what justifications they give for it. If a huge number of Muslims believe that Burqa provides modesty to women (and hence women without burqa are immodest by direct implication), then it doesn't matter whether this is the "true" Islamic stance or not. What matters is that people believe it.

I do not believe anyone in this debate has even come close to appreciating the arguments the author presented, her analysis of the situation and her own admittance of how the ban goes against the notion of personal liberty. I am posting certain selections from the article again, which i feel are important.

"In the suburb of La Courneuve, 77 percent of veiled women report that they wear the veil to avoid the wrath of Islamic morality patrols. We are talking about France, not Iran."

"The arguments against a ban are coherent and principled. They are also shallow and insufficient. They fail to take something crucial into account, and that thing is this: If Europe does not stand up now against veiling — and the conception of women and their place in society that it represents — within a generation there will be many cities in Europe where no unveiled woman will walk comfortably or safely."

"But the burqa is simply the extreme point on the continuum of veiling, and all forced veiling is not only an abomination, but contagious: Unless it is stopped, the natural tendency of this practice is to spread, for veiling is a political symbol as well as a religious one, and that symbol is of a dynamic, totalitarian ideology that has set its sights on Europe and will not be content until every woman on the planet is humbled, submissive, silent, and enslaved."

"At its core, the veil is the expression of the belief that female sexuality is so destructive a force that men must at all costs be protected from it; the natural correlate of this belief is that men cannot be held responsible for the desires prompted in them by an unveiled woman, including the impulse to rape her."

"Such a stance would serve the cause of liberty more than it would harm it: While it is true that some women adopt the veil voluntarily, it is also true that most veiling is forced. It is nearly impossible for the state to ascertain who is veiled by choice and who has been coerced. A woman who has been forced to veil is hardly likely to volunteer this information to authorities. Our responsibility to protect these women from coercion is greater than our responsibility to protect the freedom of those who choose to veil. Why? Because this is our culture, and in our culture, we do not veil. We do not veil because we do not believe that God demands this of women or even desires it; nor do we believe that unveiled women are whores, nor do we believe they deserve social censure, harassment, or rape. Our culture’s position on these questions is morally superior. We have every right, indeed an obligation, to ensure that our more enlightened conception of women and their proper role in society prevails in any cultural conflict, particularly one on Western soil."

I do not believe I have anything more to offer to this discussion. So, this is me signing out.


Lolz. Yes, everyone deserves a treat :) Well-argued, ladies.

A very well-rounded discussion indeed. The arguments the author uses are pretty persuasive and yet my heart rebels at the very basic point: banning the burqa is a direct curb on personal choices(let’s overlook the whole issue of coercion for a minute)
The basic thing here is that at the end of the day we all follow our own interpretation of religion. So many issues in Islam are contradictory and hard to reconcile with the world we’re living in today: music, sculpting, pictures, art, movies, all our modern forms of entertainment. One of my more conservative friends says that we’re sinning by finding loop-holes around what Islam really ordains about such things. That makes me uncomfortable. For me that goes against the general feel and spirit in which I perceive my religious beliefs. So my friend’s following her own interpretation and I’m following mine. We conveniently choose to ignore the ‘so who turns out to be right in the end’ thoughts. Nobody’s got any real answers. That’s just the way it is.
And it’s funny how the head scarf and burqa has emerged as an entity in its own right. It’s managed to acquire a character(a personality, if you will) of its own Again, different people hold different views about it and the whole relativity of the various view-points make it such a tricky issue. People claim to have had religious experiences and stuff through the burqa. That’s ok I guess. Personally I’m going to stick with the ‘general feel’ theory of mine. The way I see it, my religion enjoins decency, simplicity and modesty in clothing. If a certain person believes that their requirements of modesty are being fulfilled with or without the wearing of a burqa or a head-scarf, then I guess that’s ok too. People thinking that it somehow proves as a shield against indecent behaviour or whatever makes me uncomfortable too. While it may complement an individual’s perceptions on modesty and comfort level in matters of dressing(which are strictly personal and should not and cannot be judged on the plane of logic especially by an outsider), the fact of the matter is that it is after all, JUST A PIECE OF CLOTH! I guess the main problem here is our habit of conflating rite with righteousness. Of perceiving religion as this strict, inflexible suffocating dogma that thrives on the whimsical imaginings of those who are weak in minds and spirit. A superstition of sorts that has survived criticism and cynicism over the ages. Maybe we need to be re-schooled in the art of loosening up and letting go a little and of seeing religion as a general light of guidance that mainly aims at making us better human beings. Of creating a balance and connecting to both the ‘rite’ part of religion and the ‘righteousness’ part of it, without losing touch with either.

And then there are the two extremes. My parents used to work in Saudi Arabia a couple of years ago and my mother used to tell us that in the smaller cities, the Imams of the mosques would go out on the streets after prayer time, with these canes in their hands and they’d strike on the ankles of women who were not wearing an abaya. So even though my mom just covers her head and doesn’t wear an abaya at home, she had to there, because all the other people were wearing it and she would’ve been an exception if she hadn’t. And it wasn’t like she was complaining or anything, but I guess that’s what the author is referring to…with the increase in the number of Muslims (and by a certain implication, of burqas too) maybe the natives are feeling pressurized or something…and we can sneer and sneer and say that they don’t have to but when people of different religious or social backgrounds live together, such clashes are bound to develop. It’s different strokes for different folks so maybe, in a certain sense the author’s justified in her support for the ban.
But I guess, then the West’d have to put a stop to women wearing practically nothing to their beaches too because they threaten and ‘pressurise’ other women who don’t want to be seen in the same type of clothing.
It’s such a mess, this whole debate!

eni think the problem lies here
"familiarity breads contempt"(mark twain)
for a psychological detail follow
/www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-the-name-love/201001/darling-might-our-love-turn-contempt
an interesting article

A very good debate indeed with very genuine questions being raised. Enforcing, degrading somebody morally,primitively strict gairah attitudes and killing of personal freedom are some of very dangerous trends arising in the contemporary Muslim world.A Typical of Talbanization.
Instead of waging a war on religious teachings which will on only create reaction-ism i think its better to fight this talbanization.and how that should be done.The same beautiful principle on which europe has earned the right to boast and created a tolerant society" quality mind opening education,discussions, dialouges to create mutual understanding ,eliminating misconceptions and creating genuine concern in the society helping empathizing .
Although the arguments of the writer are solid and concern are genuine but the solution she presented couldn't help but show the ideology of desperately complexed Mustafa Kemal trying to blindly follow europe in search of enlightenment and progress.
The same Islamic ideology when was applied in Arabia led to emancipation of not only women but there were no such issues of intolerance.This not a flaw in religion but a clash of civilizations.Defaming religion is not right and it will only lead the already paranoid Muslims to become more reactionary and will increase hatred on both sides.

Interesting...v v interesting!
so mr awais wat is ur final verdict? ur opinion? if u were in a position to make a decision abt ths matter wat wud u finally decide?