Should the Burqa be banned in Western countries?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Blablahb:

JimB:

Blablahb:
If I break the neighbour's windows, I get arrested. If a Muslim breaks his neighbours windows because they're homosexual, it's legal.

Where on Earth do you live?

The Netherlands, Utrecht to be precise. There's a few dozen cases each year of homosexuals being terrorised severely by gangs of Muslim youths. Only two have ever been arrested, only to be promptly acquitted because, quoting the court, they 'wouldn't learn anything from a sentence'. Our spineless socialist mayor Wolfsen keeps on about how shocked he is each time, but nothing has been done about it, despite perpetrators sometimes being caught red handed by neighbours and being known by name pretty much to all involved.

The cases were pretty high profile and have been making news for years, but it's not created any solutions yet.

I don't know if there's a policy of not arresting Muslims for hatecrimes, but I do know that many crimes going unpunished makes something de facto legal, and many people in villages and cities with such immigrant groups have similar stories to tell.

To name an example, which I hope will remain the only one for years to come:


I've been involved in a pretty hairy fight in one of those neighbourhoods myself when I was heading to the supermarket with my girlfriend. I'd forgotten my wallet and ran back, so I was trailing her by half a street, when she was attacked by four Moroccan goons aged somewhere 18-20. They called her a whore and tried to hold and grope her. I ran over and jumped in between, shoving one off, after which the group promptly attacked me. Purely because I'm a trained fighter I managed to stand my ground, knocking down two and sending the other two running. After that I was yelled at by the father of one of the goons who had been sitting maybe 20 metres away in his front yard, and apparently didn't do anything about it untill I was done with them.
We moved on to the shopping centre, my girlfriend shocked and me still buzzed on the adrenaline. I noticed then I had a bit of one of the guy's bracers stuck in one of my knuckles, which was pretty hilarious in a strange way. Anyway, there, 10-15 minutes later we decided to phone the police, only to hear they were already on site.
We went there to find the perps (free and all) talking to the police, accusing me of just running up randomly as they were doing nothing and beating them without any provocation... Ah yes...
The police were quite sceptical about me even after hearing what happened. Apparently I shouldn't have been so violent, and noting how it was four guys against one of which had shouted he had a knife (which was a lie obviously) did little to sway them, neither were seeing the injuries I sustained during the fight and a passerby getting involved by saying she'd seen that they started it all. All in all I felt treated rude and respectlessly. The police officers refused to let me and my girlfriend press charges over it and refused to take the attackers to the station, and the perpetrators walked away unpunished, but fortunately at least not unscathed.

It's a sad truth that such occurances are quite often. I hate to sound like 'the Muslims are tearing it up' because I don't believe in such things, but I know at least half a dozen similar horror stories regarding sexual agression and gang attacks by Moroccan Muslim immigrants, or better said, Berber immigrants and their children. (most Dutch Moroccans are Berbers from the mountains, who are hailed like a sort of rednecks in their own country)

Just as to why they got away with a brutal racially motivated sexual assault and attempted agrevated assault, without even an attempt at proscecution being made; you tell me. I don't know. As much as I hate jumping to conclusions, I cannot explain those occurances in any way other than racist policing. Whether implicit or explicit, policy level or just per person, I don't know either. All I know is that when I think about it, I have no other explanation.

Let it be said that many policemen here are quite capable and quite just both formally and informally, and most of my limited experience with police being involved in anything is a good experience, but events like that are still a big black stain on policing around here.

Accuse your mayor of being a homophobe/gay hater. That'd work well in some parts of the U.S.

Don't bring up the fact that they were Muslim attackers just talk about all the attacks he didn't do shit about.

Nikolaz72:

Katatori-kun:

Nikolaz72:
No, their symbol doesnt 'just' symbolize their religion. Thats what you dont understand, a lot of westerners think it symbolizes islam but it doesnt. It Symbolizes the woman being owned by her husband. Some women choose to wear it out of free will, because it is the right thing to do and they dont want others than their husband seeing their hair or their face. But seriously, that sort of women-oppresion should not be in the west. And people who say its 'not' that. Dont understand the symbol.

Funny, we've got thousands of women in the US who get misty-eyed when they hear "Stand by your Man". We've got a whole subculture built around women enjoying being dominated by a man. I recently saw an ad on Craigslist for a woman who wanted to literally play out being someone's pet. And these are maybe seen as a little odd, but no one would dream of outlawing them.

But when some brown women who dress differently express the exact same notions, suddenly we know better than they do and it's our job to protect them from themselves.

No woman should ever be forced to wear a niqab, but by the same token to propose banning it is rank bigotry.

They are trained from childhood to either do what they are told or be a whore. I mean for gods sake its different than people who choose for themself 'when' becomming an adult. Im as against wearing Burqa as im against religious indoctrination. Its something that doesnt belong in the west, Christian, Muslims, Or Jew. Heck, this can go for political opinions aswell. Anti-Communism implanted in kids mind ruined relations with Socialists for decades.

ANYONE can wear a burqa on a whim. It is not proof they're being forced to do anything.

JimB:

Volf:

JimB:
It sounds to me like the problem is much more with the laws in the Netherlands than it is with Islam.

Are you sure about that?

Without bothering to click the link: Yes. If the laws of your country value religious tolerance to the degree that they are allowed to use it as a shield against prosecution for criminal acts, then the laws do not apply equally to all people and are therefore unfairly implemented.

I suggest you take a look at the link

Volf:

JimB:

Volf:

Are you sure about that?

Without bothering to click the link: Yes. If the laws of your country value religious tolerance to the degree that they are allowed to use it as a shield against prosecution for criminal acts, then the laws do not apply equally to all people and are therefore unfairly implemented.

I suggest you take a look at the link

A site called "wikiislam" with an article where the first quote is from Bruce Bawer is something I'd considered "biased". A quote about Islam from the man who wrote When Europe slept, a book that basically argues in favor of the Eurabia nonsense, should not be considered factual in anyway. All in all, that website felt resoundingly anti-muslim biased. No need to click the link and be spoon-fed propaganda.

Batou667:

Kendarik:
I saw a bunch of people covering their face the last time we had a bad snowstorm too. Also skiing. Oh, and then there was last Halloween.

So... not an everyday form of dress, then? A mode of dressing yourself that is actually an integral part of the exciting novelty of Halloween celebrations, in fact? You're not making a good case for the normality of hiding your face on a day-to-day basis.

Nice selective reading. Read the first couple sentences and not just the third. Besides, I was responding to a comment that you cut that suggested its always a sign of guilt to cover your face, which is just silly.

Where I live it is ALWAYS legal to cover your face, although you may be required to identify yourselves to appropriate legal authorities on request.

Legality isn't in question, as far as I'm concerned.

And yet that's the question in the thread, and if its not illegal, its also none of your business.

What I'm disputing is whether it's desirable for face-covering to become normalised. As it is, only a small minority of women actually wear fully-concealing burqas, and that's fine. But on the whole it's something I'm a little uneasy about, I just don't think it "gels" with Western society. That's not an anti-religion comment, as I'm perfectly happy with people wearing crosses or Jewish kippahs or whatever. Nor is it a racist comment, because I think it's great that people can express themselves through ethnic dress.

As I said before, there's something deeply profound about covering your face. Perhaps that's a Western-biased viewpoint, but actually I can't think of many other cultures around the world where obscuring your face is normal (to the point where identification is all but impossible, I'm not talking about make-up or piercings). Just my personal sentiments on the matter.

Yes, you are showing your bias. The point is that if it is just a bias and there is no valid reason to make it illegal, get used to it.

Personally I think a lot of fashion options are wrong, but I don't want them banned or the people to feel they aren't "normalized". The same argument you are making to ban the burka can be made to ban skirts above the ankle.

Personally i rule it down to this,

If visiting that country or territory, if you have to abide by their rules and customs, i,e respecting their culture and so forth.

They must do the same where ever they go.

You don't force the Jewish man to eat pig, so they can't force us to wear the Kippah.

:)

Nikolaz72:
and if Dothraki refugees came to us, I would also be against them trying to get at 'least' one kill before the ending of a wedding. Because murder is also illegal.

But it would be sooooooo boring.

I do not support the banning of the Burqa or any other religious garb, mostly because I view it as infringing upon their rights to worship as they choose. Of course, with everything, there are limits, for example, if it interferes with laws or identification and such they would be required to show their face. That said, I'm very much so against the burqa. To me it represents a patriarchal society that values women less than men as well as being a symbol of Islamic societies view that its the woman who causes the man to be lustful, but it is their right to wear it.

I think wearing Burkas should be banned. It is not part of the religion of Islam but instead is a part of certain oppressive cultures that happen to have adopted Islam as their religion.

Furthermore, it is a criminal risk in a way. I can't walk into a department store with a giant trench coat, baggy pants, and a ski mask and not be asked to leave, but if people are permitted to wear the burka I, even being a male, could easily walk into that same store and use it to sneak things out without paying.

Danyal:

Danny Ocean:
Which is why I said in that other thread that you should try visiting Egypt or somewhere before you say the things you do about these places and these people.

image

Hello again, old friend.

I wasn't going to post anything, my life has been quite a bit more productive during this hiatus, but in hopping around I have seen you post this twice and it's just getting to me. I find it alarming that you would discredit personal experience, and would prefer to replace it blanket statistics based on information which you neither gathered yourself nor fully know how said statistics were gathered. I understand and agree with the logic of your little anecdotal rhetoric thing, however there is a world of difference between making arbitrary decisions based solely off of what happened to someone else, and putting yourself into an unfamiliar place to truly experience a culture through your own eyes.

The example given in that image is refusing to use your own logic and decision-making skills to make a decision, and applying that logic to what Danny Ocean said is refusing to use your own personal experience to get to know a culture and letting it be spoonfed and paraphrased by others who have experienced it. Anyone who has ever been to a country very different from theirs will tell you it's nothing you can just read in a book or see in the news. I have a couple of friends who recently visited Israel and they said as much when summarizing the experience, and my parents always say the same when recounting their visits to Turkey (I've also been there, but I was seven so I don't exactly remember much except eating at a Pizza Hut in Istanbul and my GameGear breaking on a marble floor).

Of course what you experience will never encompass the culture as a whole, I doubt there is anyplace in the world you could spend an entire lifetime visiting and studying and learn ALL there is to know about the culture. However, you can be certain that what you do learn there will be the most raw and direct information you will ever receive about it.

Gethsemani:

Volf:

JimB:

Without bothering to click the link: Yes. If the laws of your country value religious tolerance to the degree that they are allowed to use it as a shield against prosecution for criminal acts, then the laws do not apply equally to all people and are therefore unfairly implemented.

I suggest you take a look at the link

A site called "wikiislam" with an article where the first quote is from Bruce Bawer is something I'd considered "biased". A quote about Islam from the man who wrote When Europe slept, a book that basically argues in favor of the Eurabia nonsense, should not be considered factual in anyway. All in all, that website felt resoundingly anti-muslim biased. No need to click the link and be spoon-fed propaganda.

Instead of using ad homenims to attack the source, look at the instances that it has listed. I don't know about the website that much, nor do I care what the sites general message is, the only thing I'm focusing on is the instance that the site has collected.

2012 Wont Happen:
I think wearing Burkas should be banned. It is not part of the religion of Islam but instead is a part of certain oppressive cultures that happen to have adopted Islam as their religion.

Oh, I forgot to put this aspect in my post, so I will elaborate on what 2012 Wont Happen said. The Burqa is actually originally a Persian garment worn by women, in my opinion in part to protect them from the sun (sun exposure can be really bad if you're not wearing enough clothes), its similar to how the males wear robes vs pants. It likely became an effective tool for controlling women after the spread of Islam, which changed it from simply a practical way of dressing, into something that a women must do so as not to be sinful in Allah's eyes.

Not really sure what the logistics of banning an article of clothing without directly punishing the people who feel pressure or have a desire to wear it are. I'm guessing that there is no way.

I think that banning the burqa would probably be a bit of a bad move; ultimately if people choose to wear it they should be allowed to. That does not mean, however, that it should be allowed in an area where doing so would pose a security risk.

Is it funny that "western" countries that often mock Islam for forcing women to wear garments is now trying to force women not to wear them?

The identification issue seems solid, removing it for things like that should be fine, but an outright ban? Please.

Lilani:

Hello again, old friend.

I wasn't going to post anything, my life has been quite a bit more productive during this hiatus, but in hopping around I have seen you post this twice and it's just getting to me. I find it alarming that you would discredit personal experience, and would prefer to replace it blanket statistics based on information which you neither gathered yourself nor fully know how said statistics were gathered. I understand and agree with the logic of your little anecdotal rhetoric thing, however there is a world of difference between making arbitrary decisions based solely off of what happened to someone else, and putting yourself into an unfamiliar place to truly experience a culture through your own eyes.

The example given in that image is refusing to use your own logic and decision-making skills to make a decision, and applying that logic to what Danny Ocean said is refusing to use your own personal experience to get to know a culture and letting it be spoonfed and paraphrased by others who have experienced it. Anyone who has ever been to a country very different from theirs will tell you it's nothing you can just read in a book or see in the news. I have a couple of friends who recently visited Israel and they said as much when summarizing the experience, and my parents always say the same when recounting their visits to Turkey (I've also been there, but I was seven so I don't exactly remember much except eating at a Pizza Hut in Istanbul and my GameGear breaking on a marble floor).

Of course what you experience will never encompass the culture as a whole, I doubt there is anyplace in the world you could spend an entire lifetime visiting and studying and learn ALL there is to know about the culture. However, you can be certain that what you do learn there will be the most raw and direct information you will ever receive about it.

Your example is Israel. When we're talking about the morality and legality of the existence of Israel and the crimes of Zionism, should somebody visit Israel before they can have an valid opinion about this? Does "I've visited Israel and the people there were very nice to me" matter in the debate?

I've heard and read loads of stories about normal people adopting Nazism without being horrible immoral evil person. Does that make Nazism less horrible, less immoral or less evil?

By the way, I've talked to loads of Muslims, both IRL and online. And OT; No, I don't think the burqa should be banned.

I think we have established a good unwritten rule in western society. When we speak with you, we want to see your face. If you don't like it, you're free to wear a burqa in Hajistan or in the privacy of your own home.

When it comes to identification, women need to have pictures taken without it and obviously be identifiable by police or other officials.
But that doesn't mean you have to ban the burqa, you just have to enforce rules for exceptional circumstances where women cannot wear them (for short amounts of time), be identified and then put them back on if they want to.
Which is more infringing on their personal liberties, including such exceptions or taking it away entirely?
So, no, don't ban it. Just regulate it for those rare situations.

Cowpoo:
I think we have established a good unwritten rule in western society. When we speak with you, we want to see your face. If you don't like it, you're free to wear a burqa in Hajistan or in the privacy of your own home.

That's not true, I'm beta as fuck and prefer to stare at the ground. Should I fuck off to stareatgroundistan or retreat to the privacy of my own home?

Shock and Awe:
I don't think anyone should be able to run around with their full face covered in public areas except when weather makes it a necessity and thats only outside. So basically the face veil would go along with ski masks if you ask me. However there nothing(legally) wrong with the Hijab.

Why do you hate Halloween and Gorillagrams so much? WHY?

Cowpoo:
I think we have established a good unwritten rule in western society. When we speak with you, we want to see your face. If you don't like it, you're free to wear a burqa in Hajistan or in the privacy of your own home.

It's an UNWRITTEN rule for a very good reason, just like most of our other unwritten rules. If you want to feel uncomfortable around someone covering their face that's your right but like most other things that do nothing more than make people uncomfortable enshrining it in law is a terrible idea.

They should have to remove it if there is need for identification. It can be checked by females if that makes them more happy. Apart from that i see no need to ban any clothing, or would you ban a nuns gown too?

lapan:
They should have to remove it if there is need for identification. It can be checked by females if that makes them more happy. Apart from that i see no need to ban any clothing, or would you ban a nuns gown too?

nuns gown doesn't cover their face.

Volf:

lapan:
They should have to remove it if there is need for identification. It can be checked by females if that makes them more happy. Apart from that i see no need to ban any clothing, or would you ban a nuns gown too?

nuns gown doesn't cover their face.

Which is why i said they should have to remove it in situations where identification is required.

lapan:

Volf:

lapan:
They should have to remove it if there is need for identification. It can be checked by females if that makes them more happy. Apart from that i see no need to ban any clothing, or would you ban a nuns gown too?

nuns gown doesn't cover their face.

Which is why i said they should have to remove it in situations where identification is required.

It was pointless to even mention nuns

Danyal:

Danny Ocean:
Which is why I said in that other thread that you should try visiting Egypt or somewhere before you say the things you do about these places and these people.

image

Oh dear. More official looking pictures* with no link to any evidence to support them. That strikes me as:
image

Quoting individual bits of the Koran and saying that it constitutes the way that every male Muslim treats his wife? That's
image

In fact, a lot of your comments about Muslims seem to be an
image

Sorry, I couldn't resist. :P

In seriousness though, I also disagree with this source (whatever it may be) - there's no way that Iran is as bad as Saudi for practical women's rights.
Also, just because the holy book says it doesn't mean that it has to be taken literally. After all, the Old Testament has the fun with Lot's daughters - that doesn't mean that all Christians are going to give up their daughters for gang rape.
I'm sure you accept that, but quoting from selected Koran verses makes you seem somewhat unreasonable.
I have concerns about the Burqua, that doesn't mean I'm going to seemingly start slurring an entire religion for the sake of making a point.

It seems to me to be about as reasonable as banning public nudity, which means I'm against such a ban. I'm for freedom in clothing choice, and no clothes is just as much a choice as covered from head to toe. The law should not infringe such freedom just for the sake of enforcing cultural norms or making sure everyone is 'comfortable' with what they see.

And no, I'm not frightened of the sight of morbidly obese people, absurdly droopy ballsacks, or discolored pustules and other skin conditions.

no, we should not ban the Burqa because its a persons religious freedom to wear it.

Kendarik:
Nice selective reading. Read the first couple sentences and not just the third. Besides, I was responding to a comment that you cut that suggested its always a sign of guilt to cover your face, which is just silly.

The first two sentences were talking about wearing ski masks as protection against unusually cold weather. Again, it's an article of clothing that's notable by its rarity of use.

It's not always a sign of guilt to cover your face. But let's look at various face-coverings:

A medical or surgeon's mask. A welder's mask. Ski mask or Balaclava. Halloween mask. Crash helmet. An opaque stocking worn by a bank robber. A gas mask. A masquerade ball mask. A burqa.

Each and every one of the above can be put in one of two categories: articles of protection, and articles designed for changing or concealing your identity. Which category would the burqa go in? Compare it to the other articles found in the same category. Do they form part of many people's daily outfit? I'm not saying that wearing a burqa is proof positive of having something to hide or being the victim of repressive social conventions, but you can see how to Western eyes it could be seen as such, simply because there is no existing and positive precedent for walking around with your face obscured as part of your normal attire.

And yet that's the question in the thread, and if its not illegal, its also none of your business.

True enough, but I'm exploring a slightly different area of the topic than set out in the OP. Also, I don't necessarily agree that just because something is legal it's none of my (or society's) business. Right from the beginning my argument has quite pointedly been not to challenge whether Muslim women are allowed to wear a burqa, but whether it ought to be encouraged as a symbol of religious expression or discouraged as an incongruous departure from the way Western society views and treats women.

Yes, you are showing your bias. The point is that if it is just a bias and there is no valid reason to make it illegal, get used to it.

Personally I think a lot of fashion options are wrong, but I don't want them banned or the people to feel they aren't "normalized". The same argument you are making to ban the burka can be made to ban skirts above the ankle.

If it became the fashion for 12-year old girls to walk around in bikinis, I'd have the exact same view towards it. No, it's not illegal. No, it's not hurting anyone. Doesn't mean I have to like it, or bite my tongue when the topic comes up in conversation. And, the same with Muslim ladies wearing burqas, I wouldn't say "You mustn't wear this" but rather "You don't have to dress this way, in fact, you may find you get treated better in society if you don't".

Captcha: fashion victim. I swear I'm not making this up.

If they can wear a burka in a Mall then I want to be able to wear a ski-mask or hoody.

Batou667:

Kendarik:
Nice selective reading. Read the first couple sentences and not just the third. Besides, I was responding to a comment that you cut that suggested its always a sign of guilt to cover your face, which is just silly.

The first two sentences were talking about wearing ski masks as protection against unusually cold weather. Again, it's an article of clothing that's notable by its rarity of use.

It's not always a sign of guilt to cover your face. But let's look at various face-coverings:

A medical or surgeon's mask. A welder's mask. Ski mask or Balaclava. Halloween mask. Crash helmet. An opaque stocking worn by a bank robber. A gas mask. A masquerade ball mask. A burqa.

Each and every one of the above can be put in one of two categories: articles of protection, and articles designed for changing or concealing your identity. Which category would the burqa go in? Compare it to the other articles found in the same category. Do they form part of many people's daily outfit? I'm not saying that wearing a burqa is proof positive of having something to hide or being the victim of repressive social conventions, but you can see how to Western eyes it could be seen as such, simply because there is no existing and positive precedent for walking around with your face obscured as part of your normal attire.

Well from the women's point of view it is an article of protection, similar to wearing other clothing. Should we ban all clothing?

If it became the fashion for 12-year old girls to walk around in bikinis, I'd have the exact same view towards it. No, it's not illegal. No, it's not hurting anyone. Doesn't mean I have to like it, or bite my tongue when the topic comes up in conversation.

I agree with you here (and in fact 12 year olds here often do wear almost nothing/sexy outfits) but....

And, the same with Muslim ladies wearing burqas, I wouldn't say "You mustn't wear this" but rather "You don't have to dress this way, in fact, you may find you get treated better in society if you don't".

Here you go too far. You assume those women don't know they don't have to wear them. In my experience they know and WANT to. You shouldn't assume you know what they want. It isn't uncommon where I live to see women dressed in burqas and the one with open eyes (forget the name) but have their female children next to them wearing something more modern, like Hijabs. That makes me think they quite clearly understand this society and no one is forcing them to wear anything or their kids would also be wearing one.

Phototoxin:
If they can wear a burka in a Mall then I want to be able to wear a ski-mask or hoody.

Are you sure you can't? It's perfectly legal (even if most people don't know it) where I live. People first became aware of this a few years ago during the G20 when police pointed that out as their reason for not arresting the many people walking around with masks during the protests.

People should be free to wear whatever the hell they want, unless dictated otherwise by their employer. As such, the decision to 'ban' the wearing of the burqa or niqab should be left up to employers of women who want to wear these items.

This applies equally to Christians who say they are 'persecuted' for not being allowed to wear a cross necklace in their work (just do a cursory search of The Daily Mail's website and you'll find something on this). Anyone can wear whatever necklace they want on their own time, but if your employer says 'no' and you don't like it, well you can find another job if it bothers you that much.

It's like if I wanted to wear a hat to work with 'I'm a massive atheist' printed on it as an expression of my beliefs (or lack thereof), and my employer had a problem with that (he's a Member of Parliament so he probably would), then I would understandingly take it off. I would do this happily because I know that when I'm at work I can't do whatever I like, because I'm on somebody else's dime.

In short, people need to realise that employment trumps religion every time.

CAPTCHA 'for the birds' - and the bees too of course.

Cowpoo:
I think we have established a good unwritten rule in western society. When we speak with you, we want to see your face. If you don't like it, you're free to wear a burqa in Hajistan or in the privacy of your own home.

The millions of people who play MMORPGs, text chat, instant message, email, skype, phone, or team speak with their friends would disagree with you.

All of these arguments for banning the burqa (or more accurately the niqab) smell of post hoc justification for casual discrimination. People are uncomfortable with members of their society looking visually different, and want that difference banned. Kinda reminds me of all the old farts who got their panties in a twist over punk. Or of those old codgers in Iraq who are throwing a fit about kids dressing emo. All over the world, a small subset of the majority group tries to force dress code conformity. Not because other dress codes are objectively wrong, but because it feels good to dominate someone who looks different from you.

The "If you don't like it then you can git out," sentiment you've expressed makes it pretty clear this is nothing more than rank bullying. A lot of people are only okay with Muslims if they are invisible. Which says something pretty profound. Is your self-image so weak that you can't handle even encountering people who dress differently?

Zekksta:

Cowpoo:
I think we have established a good unwritten rule in western society. When we speak with you, we want to see your face. If you don't like it, you're free to wear a burqa in Hajistan or in the privacy of your own home.

That's not true, I'm beta as fuck and prefer to stare at the ground. Should I fuck off to stareatgroundistan or retreat to the privacy of my own home?

You must have one hell of a hunchback if noone can see your face when talking they talk to you. Religious freedom is a nice thing, but if you want me to communicate with you, I want to see your face. What about my freedom of knowing who I'm talking to? Why don't we all wear skimasks and interact with each other like anonymous dicks. It would be the internet in real life.

Katatori-kun:

Cowpoo:
I think we have established a good unwritten rule in western society. When we speak with you, we want to see your face. If you don't like it, you're free to wear a burqa in Hajistan or in the privacy of your own home.

The millions of people who play MMORPGs, text chat, instant message, email, skype, phone, or team speak with their friends would disagree with you.

All of these arguments for banning the burqa (or more accurately the niqab) smell of post hoc justification for casual discrimination. People are uncomfortable with members of their society looking visually different, and want that difference banned. Kinda reminds me of all the old farts who got their panties in a twist over punk. Or of those old codgers in Iraq who are throwing a fit about kids dressing emo. All over the world, a small subset of the majority group tries to force dress code conformity. Not because other dress codes are objectively wrong, but because it feels good to dominate someone who looks different from you.

You need to go out more.

Cowpoo:

Zekksta:

Cowpoo:
I think we have established a good unwritten rule in western society. When we speak with you, we want to see your face. If you don't like it, you're free to wear a burqa in Hajistan or in the privacy of your own home.

That's not true, I'm beta as fuck and prefer to stare at the ground. Should I fuck off to stareatgroundistan or retreat to the privacy of my own home?

You must have one hell of a hunchback if noone can see your face when talking they talk to you. Religious freedom is a nice thing, but if you want me to communicate with you, I want to see your face. What about my freedom of knowing who I'm talking to? Why don't we all wear skimasks and interact with each other like anonymous dicks. It would be the internet in real life.

So your freedom to see someones face when you're talking to them, is more important than someones freedom to choose what clothing they can wear?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked