Happy Atheist Forum

http://tinyurl.com/yecajx6

This is a really interesting topic for me because I don't know how I feel about it.  On one hand, as an atheist and a woman, I am supportive of this ban because it not only promotes a secular public atmosphere but also strikes a blow against the perpetuation of the subjugation of women.  On the other hand, I don't feel that any government should have the right to dictate people's personal freedoms, including what anyone wears in public.  I want to be allowed to wear my atheist t-shirt in peace, therefore I feel I have to respect a person who wears a cross and someone who wants to wear a burqa, etc.  Additionally, while I myself abhor the subjugation of women, there are some women who believe that their place is below that of a man's.  Does anyone else have the right to tell these women that they can't believe that for themselves?

Also, the ban technically makes it illegal for anyone to wear an item which covers their face with a few exceptions made for carnivals and the like but it is very well known that the spirit of this ban is a response to the burqa.  Does anyone find this disingenuous of the French government?

If they're worried about religious influence, all they really need to do is make sure they don't have Sharia courts and to crack down on imams (or pastors, or priests) who are calling for violence. An abaya isn't going to do any actual harm to anyone because it's just a piece of cloth.

I'm in favour of banning the burqa, for the same reasons as the guy here in the YouTube clip
[youtube:tutc1gas]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlkxlzTZc48[/youtube:tutc1gas]

I'm against banning it because doing so violates personal freedom....(i have not yet watched the video or read any of the posts).

A guy on twitter provided this as a comment after seeing this thread posted on there:

@Alamsha_Karnan :
@HappyAtheist Should India ban Burqa? A great Twiitter debate with @AamAdmy. http://bit.ly/8Tcr0K (http://bit.ly/8Tcr0K)

^thought it was interesting because the two involved seem to be non-american.  By twitter standards it wasn't a bad 'debate', usually on twitter it is @joe "x is bad because y" @Jane "Well screw you bigot, x is awesome"

edit:  While I agree with the video that banning the burqa would help promote feminist values.  I really don't see how violating someone's right to choose what they wear is a proper way to go about promoting women's rights.  Not to mention that many of these women would feel like they are naked without being covered (at first, they would get use to it eventually like a woman I knew in college who slowly kept removing unnecessary coverings until she was Americanized).  As far as security is concerned, they can just choose to not go to places that require security or try and hope they get a female officer.  We shouldn't have to make special accommodations just because of someone's religious preference...then anyone could make up some religion and start demanding special treatments (like those idiots with the weed religion, rastafrian).  Similarly, I also do think that the burqa should be banned from being worn when taking identification photos.  That is where their right to choose their clothing is trampled by society's right to make sure everyone is properly identified so that no legal or security confusion occurs.

I've stopped liking Condell's videos so much. He's overly hostile. I agree with him on some things though. With regard to burqas, I think that unless someone is causing harm or a public nuisance, I question the reason to restrict their freedom. The issue for me is more whether women wearing burquas are doing so freely. Some surely are and I respect their freedom. If they aren't wearing them freely though, rather than defend their wearing of burqas in public places, I would defend their freedom to not wear them. It is plausible to me that many women wearing burqas are themselves being harmed. I also think that encouraging them to not make themselves completely anonymous in the eyes of society and be a nobody outside of their home might be a good idea.

I'm in favour of the ban. I like integration and multiculturalism but I'm not a big fan of letting an entire group of people create a 'Londonistan' enclave in another country. It becomes dangerous when entire swathes of a town/city are unable to speak the language of the adoptive country. That leads to people asking for the exact same laws of their mother nation to be introduced in the country they've migrated to. Such double standards erode social order. The burqa is just one small aspect of this.

Most shopping centres in the UK have banned hoodies because statistically, people who walk around with their hoodies up are young trouble-makers. It is much harder to catch them on CCTV with a hoodie up. It is just an example of how our laws can and do restrict people from wearing specific kinds of clothes. Currently, people walking into a bank have to take off their motorbike helmets. People wearing a burqa do not have to conform to this. I think that's a bad double standard.

With the UK at least, I feel some ethnic groups have really started to take the piss out of our hospitality. This is a country which has already-established laws and policies which its citizens have to live by but the right wing islamic groups have got our government scared, so they get special treatment. They will never pass laws banning the burqa here. The banning move by the French authorities might have logical reasons written on paper but I think there's also something else going on. They are sending a message that the French still own and run their country. If you immigrate there, you live by its rules or leave. I've got no issue with that way of thinking and I believe it will help integration in the long run. The people really against the ban will go back to their country of origin.

Personally I think people who wear burqas look sinister. Just my opinion though.

Quote from: "karadan"Most shopping centres in the UK have banned hoodies because statistically, people who walk around with their hoodies up are young trouble-makers. It is much harder to catch them on CCTV with a hoodie up. It is just an example of how our laws can and do restrict people from wearing specific kinds of clothes. Currently, people walking into a bank have to take off their motorbike helmets. People wearing a burqa do not have to conform to this. I think that's a bad double standard.

Rules at shopping centers and banks aren't necessarily laws...of course individual businesses should be allowed to ban people from entering the premises if their face is covered for security purposes.

Quote from: "Whitney"

Quote from: "karadan"Most shopping centres in the UK have banned hoodies because statistically, people who walk around with their hoodies up are young trouble-makers. It is much harder to catch them on CCTV with a hoodie up. It is just an example of how our laws can and do restrict people from wearing specific kinds of clothes. Currently, people walking into a bank have to take off their motorbike helmets. People wearing a burqa do not have to conform to this. I think that's a bad double standard.

Rules at shopping centers and banks aren't necessarily laws...of course individual businesses should be allowed to ban people from entering the premises if their face is covered for security purposes.

Actually that's a good point. I hadn't made the distinction between a rule and a law.. I can't think of any UK laws which prohibit a certain kind of clothing although it might be against the law to wear anything with a swastika on it, but then people don't wear burqas simply to piss people off. There is, of course, a law prohibiting anyone not wearing any clothes in public.

QuoteOn the other hand, I don't feel that any government should have the right to dictate people's personal freedoms, including what anyone wears in public. I want to be allowed to wear my atheist t-shirt in peace, therefore I feel I have to respect a person who wears a cross and someone who wants to wear a burqa, etc.

i completely agree with this.

QuoteI'm in favor of the ban. I like integration and multiculturalism but I'm not a big fan of letting an entire group of people create a 'Londonistan' enclave in another country. It becomes dangerous when entire swathes of a town/city are unable to speak the language of the adoptive country. That leads to people asking for the exact same laws of their mother nation to be introduced in the country they've migrated to. Such double standards erode social order. The burqa is just one small aspect of this.  

however i also agree with this statement as i have heard in some places in frace sharia law is legal now.

in the end i dont believe the government should impose upon ones freedom of religion. i think that banning religious clothing of any kind is the wrong move. i think it was Will who mentioned monitoring the imams and local area. thats sounds better to me. although i dont live in france and dont know the situation.

Now Islam is not an established religion in Italy (http://sify.com/news/italian-mosques-denied-share-in-income-tax-revenue-news-international-ki2uucdhbcj.html). What's going on with Europe? France and their burqa ban, Ireland's blasphemy law and this?!

Quote from: "Sophus"Now Islam is not an established religion in Italy (http://sify.com/news/italian-mosques-denied-share-in-income-tax-revenue-news-international-ki2uucdhbcj.html). What's going on with Europe? France and their burqa ban, Ireland's blasphemy law and this?!

Anti-Islam laws:  It's a mass panic based on a fear that has been blown way out of proportion by the media.

However, I'm not sure what in the world made Ireland think blasphemy laws were a good idea...unless that was some round about way of preventing people from practicing Islam too.

I guess for atheists this has a silver lining...we might not be the most hated group anymore.

Quote from: "Sophus"Now Islam is not an established religion in Italy (http://sify.com/news/italian-mosques-denied-share-in-income-tax-revenue-news-international-ki2uucdhbcj.html). What's going on with Europe? France and their burqa ban, Ireland's blasphemy law and this?!

Well, they're more tolerant than us Americans, that's what.  /snark

Quote from: "Whitney"I guess for atheists this has a silver lining...we might not be the most hated group anymore.

That's one way of looking at it.

My own opinion on the matter, if people want to wear burqas, let them. As long as they don't try to force the wearing (or not wearing) of burqas on others.

We can all get along if we don't nitpick the other's choices.

I would ban face-covering clothing except where the conditions demand them, so I'm not opposed to a burka ban. However, this is an issue so far down on my priority list that I wouldn't mind letting the opposition have their way without losing any sleep over it.

Here's a thought. I'm fine with people wearing a burqa. What I dislike is a person who wears a burqa expecting me to treat them as if they are not wearing a burqa. Wearing a burqa is a choice, it says something about that person's world view. It is an overt statement directly reflecting their world view. Yet they don't want me to see that and react to it. There appears to be a massive double standard to me.

Wearing a burqa says to me. I am Muslim, therefore I place mysticism before reality. I don't trust men. I am better than you, ie arrogant.  Yet a person wearing a burqa expects me to ignore these messages that are sending to me.

Quote from: "Tom62"I'm in favour of banning the burqa, for the same reasons as the guy here in the YouTube clip
[youtube:3mosey8b]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlkxlzTZc48[/youtube:3mosey8b]

I agree with some  of this.  I hate the burka, because I can't see the goods.  I hate women being treated poorly, because I hate humans being treated poorly.  I agree that burka's and masks should be banned in banks and government buildings, and that private businesses have the right to refuse service/entrance if somebody won't show their face.  But this dude goes too far.

The problem is that these women likely want to wear these burkas, and there is nothing inherently sexist about a piece of clothe.  Heck, how many western women would where the same thing everyday and not have to bother with hair, shaving, and makeup if it was acceptable in their culture? I don't see how we one can say that Islam is oppressive to women, the Koran is no more sexist than the Bibles.  Look at a country like Qatar, that's a Muslim country, and women seem to be getting along relatively well.  Do they have equal status with men, no, but neither do women in the states (less pay for same education, no fem president yet, glass ceilings etc.).   Islam doesn't entail poor treatment of women any more than Christianity.  They are both silly cults, the best we can do is bring extremists and fundies to middle. Vilifying one particular religion isn't going to solve anything.  When women from Islamic countries come to the West, we have to make our best efforts to educate these women and let them make their own decisions based on all the evidence.  We can't legislate feminism.

Quote from: "Whitney"I guess for atheists this has a silver lining...we might not be the most hated group anymore.

Yeah, but after hating muslims who are they going to hate?

Quote from: "humblesmurph"I agree with some  of this.  I hate the burka, because I can't see the goods.  I hate women being treated poorly, because I hate humans being treated poorly.  I agree that burka's and masks should be banned in banks and government buildings, and that private businesses have the right to refuse service/entrance if somebody won't show their face.  But this dude goes too far.

I completely agree.

QuoteThe problem is that these women likely want to wear these burkas, and there is nothing inherently sexist about a piece of clothe.  Heck, how many western women would where the same thing everyday and not have to bother with hair, shaving, and makeup if it was acceptable in their culture? I don't see how we one can say that Islam is oppressive to women, the Koran is no more sexist than the Bibles.  Look at a country like Qatar, that's a Muslim country, and women seem to be getting along relatively well.  Do they have equal status with men, no, but neither do women in the states (less pay for same education, no fem president yet, glass ceilings etc.).   Islam doesn't entail poor treatment of women any more than Christianity.  They are both silly cults, the best we can do is bring extremists and fundies to middle. Vilifying one particular religion isn't going to solve anything.  When women from Islamic countries come to the West, we have to make our best efforts to educate these women and let them make their own decisions based on all the evidence.  We can't legislate feminism.

[Emphasis added]

This is a good point, but it's important to remember that both holy texts can be used to justify sexism; it depends 1) on the liberalism or fundamentalism of the believer, and 2) the social, legal, and cultural environment in which the religion is being practiced.

Quote from: "humblesmurph"Do they have equal status with men, no, but neither do women in the states (less pay for same education, no fem president yet, glass ceilings etc.).

That's a good point, and led me to try to find some info on whether a salary gap (something I consider at least somewhat a reliable measurement of gender equality within a society) exists in France.

There isn't much recent data to be found, but I did find this -

QuoteThe 2003 report on gender parity published by the French National Statistics Institute (L’Institut national de la statistique et des ´etudes ´economiques, INSEE) shows that, on average, wages of French women are only about 80% of male wages in the private and semi-public sectors (85% in the public sector). That gender inequality in general remains a problem for France is further documented by the United Nation’s most recent Gender-related development index, where France ranks 17th, behind many of its continental neighbors, the U.S., the U.K. and Australia.

http://www.economics.adelaide.edu.au/workshops/doc/breunig1.pdf

Which leads me to question why some French politicians have been so vocal about women's rights in regard to the burqa when obviously their own country isn't getting the best of marks when it comes to gender equality to begin with.  More and more this seems like a familiar political game - distract the public with something foreign and scary so they stop asking so many questions about how their own government is doing.  Then again, I've never been to France.  There could be some nuances that I'm missing.

I do think there are good reasons to ban face coverings from some places, but shouldn't that be up to the discretion of the business owner/event organizer/etc?  A public ban on an article of clothing seems like a pretty big infringement of personal freedom.

Anyway, great point humblesmurph.

Quote from: "Tank"Here's a thought. I'm fine with people wearing a burqa. What I dislike is a person who wears a burqa expecting me to treat them as if they are not wearing a burqa. Wearing a burqa is a choice, it says something about that person's world view. It is an overt statement directly reflecting their world view. Yet they don't want me to see that and react to it. There appears to be a massive double standard to me.

Wearing a burqa says to me. I am Muslim, therefore I place mysticism before reality. I don't trust men. I am better than you, ie arrogant.  Yet a person wearing a burqa expects me to ignore these messages that are sending to me.

I don't understand the underlined. It's not clear to me how covering one's body is connected to feelings of distrust or superiority, let alone necessarily indicative of them.

Quote from: "humblesmurph"

Quote from: "Tank"Here's a thought. I'm fine with people wearing a burqa. What I dislike is a person who wears a burqa expecting me to treat them as if they are not wearing a burqa. Wearing a burqa is a choice, it says something about that person's world view. It is an overt statement directly reflecting their world view. Yet they don't want me to see that and react to it. There appears to be a massive double standard to me.

Wearing a burqa says to me. I am Muslim, therefore I place mysticism before reality. I don't trust men. I am better than you, ie arrogant.  Yet a person wearing a burqa expects me to ignore these messages that are sending to me.

I don't understand the underlined. It's not clear to me how covering one's body is connected to feelings of distrust or superiority, let alone necessarily indicative of them.

One of the reasons cited for wearing a burqa is that men are uncontrollable beasts who will rape a women at the sight of an ankle. As a man I object to being objectified in that way. Particularly as I have done some erotic photography and have been a perfect gentleman in the presence of some very attractive ladies with no clothes on whatsoever.

The arrogant comment is purely my emotional irrational reaction and is probably wrong on my part.

Quote from: "Tank"One of the reasons cited for wearing a burqa is that men are uncontrollable beasts who will rape a women at the sight of an ankle. As a man I object to being objectified in that way. Particularly as I have done some erotic photography and have been a perfect gentleman in the presence of some very attractive ladies with no clothes on whatsoever.

The arrogant comment is purely my emotional irrational reaction and is probably wrong on my part.

Never really thought of it that way.  I always thought that they considered showing skin whore-ish. I would love if women in the US all wore short skirts, bikini tops, and 6 inch clear heels, I wouldn't be any more likely to attack them, but I'd certainly enjoy the view.  Alas, unless they are "working" US women usually wear less provocative clothing.  Maybe these burka babes just view showing any skin at all in the same vein as US women view the lovely 6 inch clear heel.

Thanks for the clarification.  I'm not going to try to argue you off your position. It just seems to me that you may be causing yourself unneeded irritation taking offense when none may be intended.  You don't need that at your advanced age  twinkle twinkle.

Quote from: "pinkocommie"http://tinyurl.com/yecajx6

This is a really interesting topic for me because I don't know how I feel about it.  On one hand, as an atheist and a woman, I am supportive of this ban because it not only promotes a secular public atmosphere but also strikes a blow against the perpetuation of the subjugation of women.  On the other hand, I don't feel that any government should have the right to dictate people's personal freedoms, including what anyone wears in public.  I want to be allowed to wear my atheist t-shirt in peace, therefore I feel I have to respect a person who wears a cross and someone who wants to wear a burqa, etc.  Additionally, while I myself abhor the subjugation of women, there are some women who believe that their place is below that of a man's.  Does anyone else have the right to tell these women that they can't believe that for themselves?

This is my feeling on it, pretty much verbatim.  While I wish there was no such thing as a burqa, I don't believe anyone has the right to tell a woman she can't wear one.

Quote from: "pinkocommie"Which leads me to question why some French politicians have been so vocal about women's rights in regard to the burqa when obviously their own country isn't getting the best of marks when it comes to gender equality to begin with.  More and more this seems like a familiar political game - distract the public with something foreign and scary so they stop asking so many questions about how their own government is doing.  Then again, I've never been to France.  There could be some nuances that I'm missing.

I do think there are good reasons to ban face coverings from some places, but shouldn't that be up to the discretion of the business owner/event organizer/etc?  A public ban on an article of clothing seems like a pretty big infringement of personal freedom.

Anyway, great point humblesmurph.

The fact that the legislation claims to be aimed at "masks" and not burqas makes us secularists look not only dictatorial, but pusillanimous. Those following the debate know fully well that the law is aimed directly at the burqa.

Also, I completely agree with your statement that since we wish the right to dress as we please, we ought not dictate to others what they may wear, as odious as the symbolism of that garment may be.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"The fact that the legislation claims to be aimed at "masks" and not burqas makes us secularists look not only dictatorial, but pusillanimous. Those following the debate know fully well that the law is aimed directly at the burqa.

Also, I completely agree with your statement that since we wish the right to dress as we please, we ought not dictate to others what they may wear, as odious as the symbolism of that garment may be.

Indeed. Dictating what muslim women wear is suppose to be left to muslim men. Why stoop to their level?

hahah, well-put.

Quote from: "humblesmurph"

Quote from: "Tank"One of the reasons cited for wearing a burqa is that men are uncontrollable beasts who will rape a women at the sight of an ankle. As a man I object to being objectified in that way. Particularly as I have done some erotic photography and have been a perfect gentleman in the presence of some very attractive ladies with no clothes on whatsoever.

The arrogant comment is purely my emotional irrational reaction and is probably wrong on my part.

Never really thought of it that way.  I always thought that they considered showing skin whore-ish. I would love if women in the US all wore short skirts, bikini tops, and 6 inch clear heels, I wouldn't be any more likely to attack them, but I'd certainly enjoy the view.  Alas, unless they are "working" US women usually wear less provocative clothing.  Maybe these burka babes just view showing any skin at all in the same vein as US women view the lovely 6 inch clear heel.

Thanks for the clarification.  I'm not going to try to argue you off your position. It just seems to me that you may be causing yourself unneeded irritation taking offense when none may be intended.  You don't need that at your advanced age  twinkle twinkle.

You are quite right. I am creating myself apparently needless aggravation because as you rightly pointed out I am taking offence where none is intended by the person wearing the burqa. I don't claim it's a rational view, emotional reactions are by definition irrational. This is why I am not keen on banning clothing simply because it is intended to make a statement eg Goths don't bother me.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"hahah, well-put.

It's not really funny though is it.
I've heard Moslem men laughing while explaining why woman wear black in some desert regions.
Well the superior gender wears white because it's hot, woman must be differentiated, let them suffer in black .

I'm not as religiously tolerant as many people here.
Years ago as a teenager I welcomed the idea that I was living in a secular society.
I'm not convinced a society with a history stained with blood from religious rivalry, should accept an influx of people practising a  militant religion.
I agree once someone becomes a resident of a country, they need to be treated fairly.
I don't have a problem with the French approach, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and the rest should be challenged more often.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"hahah, well-put.

It's not really funny though is it.

I like a point when made sarcastically.  I'm pretty sure he wasn't advocating for the gender status of women.

QuoteI've heard Moslem men laughing while explaining why woman wear black in some desert regions.
Well the superior gender wears white because it's hot, woman must be differentiated, let them suffer in black .

I've also seen Muslim men who didn't have a problem with women wearing western-style garb.

QuoteI'm not as religiously tolerant as many people here.
Years ago as a teenager I welcomed the idea that I was living in a secular society.
I'm not convinced a society with a history stained with blood from religious rivalry, should accept an influx of people practising a  militant religion.
I agree once someone becomes a resident of a country, they need to be treated fairly.
I don't have a problem with the French approach, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and the rest should be challenged more often.

We'll have to disagree, then; I don't see how restricting what a woman can wear is broadening her freedom.  Indeed, there are many who argue that the net result of the French legislation will be to confine women to the home, because their religion -- or their husbands -- won't permit them the "immodesty" of going without a burqa.

I don't mind challenging a religion.  Nor do I advocate for shrinking civil rights.  Certainly the former can be done without the latter as an effect.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"hahah, well-put.

It's not really funny though is it.

I like a point when made sarcastically.  I'm pretty sure he wasn't advocating for the gender status of women.

I don't think we have a point of contention here, but I think Sophus was advocating FOR a posititive status of women.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

QuoteI've heard Moslem men laughing while explaining why woman wear black in some desert regions.
Well the superior gender wears white because it's hot, woman must be differentiated, let them suffer in black .

I've also seen Muslim men who didn't have a problem with women wearing western-style garb.

QuoteI'm not as religiously tolerant as many people here.
Years ago as a teenager I welcomed the idea that I was living in a secular society.
I'm not convinced a society with a history stained with blood from religious rivalry, should accept an influx of people practising a  militant religion.
I agree once someone becomes a resident of a country, they need to be treated fairly.
I don't have a problem with the French approach, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and the rest should be challenged more often.

We'll have to disagree, then; I don't see how restricting what a woman can wear is broadening her freedom.  Indeed, there are many who argue that the net result of the French legislation will be to confine women to the home, because their religion -- or their husbands -- won't permit them the "immodesty" of going without a burqa.

I don't mind challenging a religion.  Nor do I advocate for shrinking civil rights.  Certainly the former can be done without the latter as an effect.

I have heard that argument about "oh no now women will be confined to the home".
So who's going to do the shopping?
Mr No respect for women?

"Confine women to the home."
This is a problematic sentence for me.
I say challenge any bastard who suggests such a thing.

I doubt that it will be proposed.  My objection is based more on principle than hypotheticals anyway: it singles out the Muslim faith.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"hahah, well-put.

It's not really funny though is it.
I've heard Moslem men laughing while explaining why woman wear black in some desert regions.
Well the superior gender wears white because it's hot, woman must be differentiated, let them suffer in black .

I'm not as religiously tolerant as many people here.
Years ago as a teenager I welcomed the idea that I was living in a secular society.
I'm not convinced a society with a history stained with blood from religious rivalry, should accept an influx of people practising a  militant religion.
I agree once someone becomes a resident of a country, they need to be treated fairly.
I don't have a problem with the French approach, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and the rest should be challenged more often.

I am basically of the same mind as you Magic Pudding.  I'm quite intolerant of religion.  I don't think it should be offered any special protections or tax breaks under the law.  As you point out, we don't live in a secular world society, things are messed up around here.  However, I think it counterproductive to label Islam as "militant".  It implies that Christianity, the dominant Western religion, is not militant.  This gives Christians a sense that theirs is the superior religion, and makes Muslims dig their heels in to defy this obvious lie. If Islam is militant, so is Christianity.  It's all the same gobbly gook.  I think the underlined is quite correct.  All religions should be challenged, but at the same time, not one by one.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"I doubt that it will be proposed.  My objection is based more on principle than hypotheticals anyway: it singles out the Muslim faith.

Well I don't doubt the Muslim faith inspired it, but it can be applied to all evil fucks equally.
And why shouldn't a 21st century society say to newcomers from a 15th century society, hey we don't do that here?

Perhaps because it violates their freedom of conscience?  Perhaps because it is discriminatory?  Perhaps because it is a thinly-disguised stab at immigrants?

Tell me, do you protest nuns wearing their habits in public, or priests their frocks?  After all, the Catholic Church too has committed what can be defined legally as crimes against humanity.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"Perhaps because it violates their freedom of conscience?  Perhaps because it is discriminatory?  Perhaps because it is a thinly-disguised stab at immigrants?

Tell me, do you protest nuns wearing their habits in public, or priests their frocks?  After all, the Catholic Church too has committed what can be defined legally as crimes against humanity.

Do nuns still wear habits?
Do the priests wives tell them to wear the frocks?
"Perhaps because it is a thinly-disguised stab at immigrants?"
Yes I think that is it, but you don't want to disguise it to thinly or the voters won't pick up on it.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding""Confine women to the home."
This is a problematic sentence for me.
I say challenge any bastard who suggests such a thing.

I think as an outsider looking in who really won't suffer any repercussions from this stance, it's an easy position to hold.  It is a tough question though - how much should you tip toe around religion in order to protect the more subjugated from possible horrors?  Or do you skip the tip toeing completely and just reject the religion in general for being cruel and barbaric or otherwise unacceptable and hope those subjugated have the will and ability to get out?  I tend to lean toward the latter, but I don't think outright legally banning religious clothing is a positive step.  It seems like another equally unsavory form of control, just dressed in secular clothing.

Quote from: "humblesmurph"

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"hahah, well-put.

It's not really funny though is it.
I've heard Moslem men laughing while explaining why woman wear black in some desert regions.
Well the superior gender wears white because it's hot, woman must be differentiated, let them suffer in black .

I'm not as religiously tolerant as many people here.
Years ago as a teenager I welcomed the idea that I was living in a secular society.
I'm not convinced a society with a history stained with blood from religious rivalry, should accept an influx of people practising a  militant religion.
I agree once someone becomes a resident of a country, they need to be treated fairly.
I don't have a problem with the French approach, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and the rest should be challenged more often.

I am basically of the same mind as you Magic Pudding.  I'm quite intolerant of religion.  I don't think it should be offered any special protections or tax breaks under the law.  As you point out, we don't live in a secular world society, things are messed up around here.  However, I think it counterproductive to label Islam as "militant".  It implies that Christianity, the dominant Western religion, is not militant.  This gives Christians a sense that theirs is the superior religion, and makes Muslims dig their heels in to defy this obvious lie. If Islam is militant, so is Christianity.  It's all the same gobbly gook.  I think the underlined is quite correct.  All religions should be challenged, but at the same time, not one by one.

Militant, yes it is  a word, and so many religions seem bent in the direction of its definition.
Christianity has been sleepy, dozing off.  It may have tortured some astronomers some time back, but I don't think it's issued any fatwa's lately.
Challenge all religions at once if you want, but it may not be for the best strategically.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"Militant, yes it is  a word, and so many religions seem bent in the direction of its definition.
Christianity has been sleepy, dozing off.  It may have tortured some astronomers some time back, but I don't think it's issued any fatwa's lately.
Challenge all religions at once if you want, but it may not be for the best strategically.

Why not? What would be the best strategy?

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"Do nuns still wear habits?

Yes, they do, at least here in Southern California.

QuoteDo the priests wives tell them to wear the frocks?

Probably not, given that they're forbidden marriage, but that doesn't change the fact that this garb is religiously required.  

Quote"Perhaps because it is a thinly-disguised stab at immigrants?"
Yes I think that is it, but you don't want to disguise it to thinly or the voters won't pick up on it.

I think you have it a bit backwards on this one.  The thinner the disguise, the easier it is to pierce.

Quote from: "humblesmurph"

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"Militant, yes it is  a word, and so many religions seem bent in the direction of its definition.
Christianity has been sleepy, dozing off.  It may have tortured some astronomers some time back, but I don't think it's issued any fatwa's lately.
Challenge all religions at once if you want, but it may not be for the best strategically.

Why not? What would be the best strategy?

The best strategy if one wants to win a battle is to bring unbearable force on a small point, divide and conquer. One also has to be cohesive. One also has to learn how to win by starting small. Where I used to work we rolled up quite a lot of the competition not by taking on the biggest competitor  but by taking on our weakest competition. We targeted their business ruthlessly. Where ever we found they were active we undercut them but nobody else. It took about two years to get there share value down to the point where we could take them over. We then went on to the next biggest one. Over a decade we had soaked up most of our smaller competition and without taking on our main competitor at all we out grew them by acquisition. At which point we simply soaked the duopoly.

How could atheism do this? It can't as atheists are not cohesive!

Quote from: "Tank"

Quote from: "humblesmurph"

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"Militant, yes it is  a word, and so many religions seem bent in the direction of its definition.
Christianity has been sleepy, dozing off.  It may have tortured some astronomers some time back, but I don't think it's issued any fatwa's lately.
Challenge all religions at once if you want, but it may not be for the best strategically.

Why not? What would be the best strategy?

The best strategy if one wants to win a battle is to bring unbearable force on a small point, divide and conquer. One also has to be cohesive. One also has to learn how to win by starting small. Where I used to work we rolled up quite a lot of the competition not by taking on the biggest competitor  but by taking on our weakest competition. We targeted their business ruthlessly. Where ever we found they were active we undercut them but nobody else. It took about two years to get there share value down to the point where we could take them over. We then went on to the next biggest one. Over a decade we had soaked up most of our smaller competition and without taking on our main competitor at all we out grew them by acquisition. At which point we simply soaked the duopoly.

How could atheism do this? It can't as atheists are not cohesive!

Look at Tank channeling is inner Sun-tzu   .  Respectfully, it looks like this isn't analogous to business or war.  What I would like to see is the end of religion, or at least the end of religion as a socioeconomic force.  From what I can best guess, Magic Pudding would like something similar as well.  What you, Tank, are talking about above is having the best business, what I'm talking about is the end of commerce.  I don't want to have the best team, I want to stop playing the game.

These companies you took over had employees, many of whom I assume either found new jobs or continued to do the same work for their new boss, you.  If Islam is a company, their business is worshiping a god and following dogma.  If we were to do a hostile takeover, their followers (employees) would find a new God to worship and new dogma to follow, because we have neither to offer them.   Then we go down the line of all the other religions and the same happens. Then we get down to one religion or company, let's say Christianity, because they seem to be winning the race.  The world could be every bit as religious after these hostile takeovers, the religious would just all practicing the same religion.  They would be an even harder force to overcome because now they are all on the same team.

The eradication of religion may not be a war, maybe more like the defeat of a pathogen, and a good analogy would be Smallpox. And AFAIK a good religion free education is what is required to start that process off. You're quite right that there is bugger all point in replacing one dogma with another. The religions have been trying to do that for millennia and look at what we have, a few big interest driven cartels.

Quote from: "Tank"The eradication of religion may not be a war, maybe more like the defeat of a pathogen, and a good analogy would be Smallpox. And AFAIK a good religion free education is what is required to start that process off. You're quite right that there is bugger all point in replacing one dogma with another. The religions have been trying to do that for millennia and look at what we have, a few big interest driven cartels.

Pathogen, I like that.  Education is the cure, or at least medicine that keeps symptoms in check.  Keeping religion out of schools seems to be the only way. It's slow, but it's effective.  The more we know, the smaller God gets.

 It may take a long time, but with education, I suspect these ladies won't have to be told to remove their burkas because eventually they will refuse to wear them in the first place.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"Perhaps because it is a thinly-disguised stab at immigrants?"
Yes I think that is it, but you don't want to disguise it to thinly or the voters won't pick up on it.

That was a weak attempt at irony.

QuoteI think you have it a bit backwards on this one.  The thinner the disguise, the easier it is to pierce.

I realise a racist could easily make the same arguments I am.
I would be suspicious of the motivation of the French government, or someone writing what I am for that matter.
Governments aren't above playing the race card.
In the recent Australian election the conservative party played it shamelessly, and they're likely to win because of it.
The Theo Van Gogh/Ayaan Hirsi Ali affair illustrates to me religion is just, plain, bad.
My view is likely to put me amongst some gruby company.  
I'm not comfortable with this, but I just can't accept being open to all manner of religious madness is a good thing.

I cannot tell if my bitter feelings toward the burqa are justified morally speaking or if it is an ethnocentric instinct as a Westerner. How many of you remember this girl:

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F_ZInWXQXDO2E%2FTFgxKuiO8HI%2FAAAAAAAADiw%2FJofPqLRc-oo%2Fs640%2Fafghan-girl.jpg&hash=0dec5281c30013cdaf0de74624ccac373e5ffb5c)

National Geographic wrote about the haunting quality of her eyes and how fierce the Afghan girl looked. While anthropologists countered saying she must have felt raped of her privacy by revealing to a complete stranger what she would only reveal to those closest to her.

I suppose the question comes down to how does each individual woman feel about wearing the veil? What do they think of it? Do they feel oppressed or is it no less oppressing from how we feel about having to cover our own body with clothes as Westerners? Some native born Americans feel the requirement of clothes is a cultural mistake that prevent them from being free. I'm sure there are some Afghan women who feel that way about the veil. On the other hand, I don't know and I can never know how they feel about it. Although regardless, they should never be punished for not wearing one, exactly as I think no one should be punished for wearing their birthday suit. [spoiler:8vwjhfc8]Does it strike anyone else as bizarre that there is a law against walking out in public the way you're born? I'm not a nudist and have no interest in such a lifestyle (quite contrary). But still, how weird is that law, when you really think about it?[/spoiler:8vwjhfc8]

Muslim women who wear the hijab and niqab explain their choice:  http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/2 ... =allsearch (http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/23/muslim-women-who-wear-the-hijab-and-niqab-explain-their-choice/?iref=allsearch)

Having known a muslim woman who came to the US for college on a visa wearing a head covering, I know that anyone who wears something like that will feel just as naked as any other woman would if you took their shirt away.  The student eventually did quit wearing her head covering but even as she found it liberating she still mentioned feeling a bit exposed.  It would be like if a western woman moved in with a primitive tribe and they encouraged her to just wear a loin cloth.  Our ideas of modesty are all made up yet they control to what degree we have to cover up before we feel that our privacy is compromised.

I don't agree with any kind of ban.  The premise that a burque is demeaning to women is also wrong.  We make this assumption from our Western perspective.  We also wrongly apply the idea of feminist freedom.  The definition of such freedom differs from society to society.  To an Islamic woman of certain sects, donning a burque is their freedom, and they gladly and proudly embrace it.  What business is it ours to define what we think other people's freedom should be?

My feelings on this are exactly how I feel when I am judged by a theist as to what they think I should be and also the unfair presumption that they make on me as an atheist.  Saying that I am atheist creates stigmas and stereotypes such as immoral, murderous, incorrigible, etc.  Why do we apply the same thought process to a religious rite?

Saying that when an Islamic woman dons a burque is submissive, violated, and uncivilized derives from the same attitude and stereotypes.

France and Europe at large has created a rather dangerous slippery slope.  With a State that promotes and enshrines religious freedom yet arbitrarily bans certain religious practice such as that may as well begin to systematically banning other religious symbols and rites.  Now imagine banning frocks and habits...

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"Perhaps because it is a thinly-disguised stab at immigrants?"
Yes I think that is it, but you don't want to disguise it to thinly or the voters won't pick up on it.

That was a weak attempt at irony.

QuoteI think you have it a bit backwards on this one.  The thinner the disguise, the easier it is to pierce.

My Intel Irony chipset was busy getting a co-processor upgrade.  It appears I missed this.

QuoteI realise a racist could easily make the same arguments I am.
I would be suspicious of the motivation of the French government, or someone writing what I am for that matter.
Governments aren't above playing the race card.
In the recent Australian election the conservative party played it shamelessly, and they're likely to win because of it.
The Theo Van Gogh/Ayaan Hirsi Ali affair illustrates to me religion is just, plain, bad.
My view is likely to put me amongst some gruby company.  
I'm not comfortable with this, but I just can't accept being open to all manner of religious madness is a good thing.

First, let me say that I am not trying to paint you with a racist, or culturalist, brush.  If anyone has that impression, let me disabuse them of it now.

Second, as an American, I have a pretty good first-hand idea of how government can play "the race card" in a very subtle manner; to be honest, it is this experience which raises my hackles about this French legislation.  It samcks of "us/them" politics, which we've had for the last 30 years or so.

At the same time, when given the choice, I'd rather choose tolerance, for the simple reason that, to quote Donne, "no man is an island."  The loss of rights for one is the loss of rights for all.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"I realise a racist could easily make the same arguments I am.
I would be suspicious of the motivation of the French government, or someone writing what I am for that matter.
Governments aren't above playing the race card.
In the recent Australian election the conservative party played it shamelessly, and they're likely to win because of it.
The Theo Van Gogh/Ayaan Hirsi Ali affair illustrates to me religion is just, plain, bad.
My view is likely to put me amongst some gruby company.  
I'm not comfortable with this, but I just can't accept being open to all manner of religious madness is a good thing.

I admire the honesty of this. Also, I never actually saw the VanGogh flick. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.  It was disturbing.  I didn't know about the aftermath either.  I knew Van Gogh was killed, but not about the Mosque and Church burnings/bombings.  Religion does seem to be just, plain, evil.  While we may not agree on where to draw the line, I think eventually your last two sentences will apply to most reasonable people.  At some point enough is enough.

I heard an interesting claim yesterday that women prefer to wear covering so as to be judged for who they are and not by what they look like. Of course, ideally, men wouldn't be slimy enough to judge women by looks, but that's the world we live in. This isn't to say that some muslims women are subjugated by this, but I think in a lot of cases this is more of a cultural practice than a religious one. I can completely understand wanting to be judged by who you are and not how you look. Men are pigs.

Quote from: "Sophus"I heard an interesting claim yesterday that women prefer to wear covering so as to be judged for who they are and not by what they look like. Of course, ideally, men wouldn't be slimy enough to judge women by looks, but that's the world we live in. This isn't to say that some muslims women are subjugated by this, but I think in a lot of cases this is more of a cultural practice than a religious one. I can completely understand wanting to be judged by who you are and not how you look. Men are pigs.

Oink.  Not to be too vulgar but a gay man once told me something I found to be profound.  "We are all slaves to what gets us off". He was referring to his preference for men, but I think applies to physical preferences in general.  Some men like skinny girls, some men like fat girls, some men like tall girls, and so on.  

Don't be so harsh in your judgment of those who place a high priority of the physical form.  We can't help it.  

Quote from: "humblesmurph"

Quote from: "Sophus"I heard an interesting claim yesterday that women prefer to wear covering so as to be judged for who they are and not by what they look like. Of course, ideally, men wouldn't be slimy enough to judge women by looks, but that's the world we live in. This isn't to say that some muslims women are subjugated by this, but I think in a lot of cases this is more of a cultural practice than a religious one. I can completely understand wanting to be judged by who you are and not how you look. Men are pigs.

Oink.  Not to be too vulgar but a gay man once told me something I found to be profound.  "We are all slaves to what gets us off". He was referring to his preference for men, but I think applies to physical preferences in general.  Some men like skinny girls, some men like fat girls, some men like tall girls, and so on.  

Don't be so harsh in your judgment of those who place a high priority of the physical form.  We can't help it.  

Nothing wrong with attraction but once discrimination starts because of it, then we've got a serious problem on our hands. Or if people somehow start blaming the women for being raped. For the most part I see this as an attempt to prevent the men from making unfair judgements that could, for example, keep a women from getting a job she is perfectly qualified for.

Quote from: "Sophus"

Quote from: "humblesmurph"

Quote from: "Sophus"I heard an interesting claim yesterday that women prefer to wear covering so as to be judged for who they are and not by what they look like. Of course, ideally, men wouldn't be slimy enough to judge women by looks, but that's the world we live in. This isn't to say that some muslims women are subjugated by this, but I think in a lot of cases this is more of a cultural practice than a religious one. I can completely understand wanting to be judged by who you are and not how you look. Men are pigs.

Oink.  Not to be too vulgar but a gay man once told me something I found to be profound.  "We are all slaves to what gets us off". He was referring to his preference for men, but I think applies to physical preferences in general.  Some men like skinny girls, some men like fat girls, some men like tall girls, and so on.  

Don't be so harsh in your judgment of those who place a high priority of the physical form.  We can't help it.  

Nothing wrong with attraction but once discrimination starts because of it, then we've got a serious problem on our hands. Or if people somehow start blaming the women for being raped. For the most part I see this as an attempt to prevent the men from making unfair judgements that could, for example, keep a women from getting a job she is perfectly qualified for.

Ah, point taken.

A full face, head, body covering prevents women from doing any kind of job outside of the home that requires interaction with even one man.  They cannot take the burqa off if they are in public unless they are in an enclosed space with only women.  The burqa limits women and many women buy into these limitations because they fear that if they do not wear it they will be considered "lose" or "impure".  The burqa is much more than a fashion choice or even a religious choice.  It is a symptom of cultural restriction of women's rights.

It is also a serious security issue since almost anything or anyone can be hidden under a burqa.  France is showing basic common sense in banning the burqa.

Quote from: "Sophus"I heard an interesting claim yesterday that women prefer to wear covering so as to be judged for who they are and not by what they look like. Of course, ideally, men wouldn't be slimy enough to judge women by looks, but that's the world we live in. This isn't to say that some muslims women are subjugated by this, but I think in a lot of cases this is more of a cultural practice than a religious one. I can completely understand wanting to be judged by who you are and not how you look. Men are pigs.

Surely everyone's guilty of judging people by how they look, even if it's subconcious. Humans are pigs!

There is no common sense when a Secular State bans a religious practice, and in this case a very specific religious practice.  It starts with this and it slides rapidly to where the State begins to legally sanction bigotry.  The US Constitution's First Ammendment was ratified to avoid such autrocities.

Banning a religious practice and then justifying that ban based on opinion (restricting their feminine rights, security reasons, etc) is just the beginning.  Make no mistake about it, this is religious persecution specifically aimed at Muslims.  It is demoralizing and sickening.

Tough call, as others stated it is a personal choice to wear one that should be protected. However they have to take it off for the photo IDs and they can't have some problem with male police officers dealing with them. They don't like it? Too bad, you immigrated to western society to get out of your craphole, deal with it or get out.

Immigrants are great, but they need to assimilate. Otherwise they shouldn't come over here and expect some kind of special treatment.

Quoteit is a personal choice to wear one that should be protected.

Not if you work with customers or public services like schools, hospitals or law enforcement. I wouldn't like my doctor to wear a carpet over his head, nor the police officer patrolling the streets. Then I think you should - by law - leave your burquas, niqabs and balaclavas at home except when the circumstances demand preservation of anonymity.

Yeah, I have no argument with requiring the removal of the burqa in places like airports, banks, and government buildings, and for law enforcement/ID purposes.  But the government has no business dictating religious practice that harms no one except perhaps the practitioner, by my lights.  

And not all Muslim women in the West chose to emigrate here.  Many were brought to the West as children, or were fleeing persecution in their homeland, as in Ali's case.

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quoteit is a personal choice to wear one that should be protected.

Not if you work with customers or public services like schools, hospitals or law enforcement. I wouldn't like my doctor to wear a carpet over his head, nor the police officer patrolling the streets. Then I think you should - by law - leave your burquas, niqabs and balaclavas at home except when the circumstances demand preservation of anonymity.

I didn't clarify enough. Out and about on the streets, sure you can wear your stupid garbage bag or whatever the hell it is.

Public services, to hell with it, take the damn thing off or don't work for the government.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"Yeah, I have no argument with requiring the removal of the burqa in places like airports, banks, and government buildings, and for law enforcement/ID purposes.  But the government has no business dictating religious practice that harms no one except perhaps the practitioner, by my lights.  

And not all Muslim women in the West chose to emigrate here.  Many were brought to the West as children, or were fleeing persecution in their homeland, as in Ali's case.

Sorry but I could care less about their problems. They came here, they need to become Americans. Refugees have a soft spot in my heart but I'm not a total softie about it. Why would any woman want to wear something that degrades them? I always want to start yelling at them when I see them wear it all covered up head to toe. It's disgusting.

Quote from: "Big Mac"I didn't clarify enough. Out and about on the streets, sure you can wear your stupid garbage bag or whatever the hell it is.

Public services, to hell with it, take the damn thing off or don't work for the government.

Misunderstanding clarified.

I think the ban should apply to any customer service profession though, not just the government ones. From cops to librarians to convenience store cashiers to burger flippers to taxi drivers. What an architect wears in his/her office or a software designer or a phone salesman, I care not.

Quote from: "Asmodean"I think the ban should apply to any customer service profession though, not just the government ones. From cops to librarians to convenience store cashiers to burger flippers to taxi drivers. What an architect wears in his/her office or a software designer or a phone salesman, I care not.

Completely agree. Honestly it's hilarious to watch people try to justify it on them wearing it for photo IDs. I laugh when PC types start going off about how they have a right to wear it all the time.

Quote from: "Big Mac"

Quote from: "Asmodean"I think the ban should apply to any customer service profession though, not just the government ones. From cops to librarians to convenience store cashiers to burger flippers to taxi drivers. What an architect wears in his/her office or a software designer or a phone salesman, I care not.

Completely agree. Honestly it's hilarious to watch people try to justify it on them wearing it for photo IDs. I laugh when PC types start going off about how they have a right to wear it all the time.

I agree. The full veil is not an excuse for effective anonymity in circumstances where security and accurate identification is required.

In the UK some shopping malls don't allow people to wear baseball caps or 'hoodies' with their hoods up as these obscure people's faces from security cameras. I've not seen an example yet where a veil wearing female has been asked to remove her veil though.

Quote from: "Tank"In the UK some shopping malls don't allow people to wear baseball caps or 'hoodies' with their hoods up as these obscure people's faces from security cameras. I've not seen an example yet where a veil wearing female has been asked to remove her veil though.

That wouldn't fly here. They'd tell them to take it off and if they protest they'd just say they have to leave. Europe is a little coddling I guess.

Quote from: "Tank"In the UK some shopping malls don't allow people to wear baseball caps or 'hoodies' with their hoods up as these obscure people's faces from security cameras. I've not seen an example yet where a veil wearing female has been asked to remove her veil though.

I wish my government had some balls to infringe on "freedom of religion" a little... After all, in the name of the named freedom, people are doing things that have nothing to do with their religion, but are in stead motivated by tradition or personal objectives.

Quote from: "Big Mac"Sorry but I could care less about their problems. They came here, they need to become Americans. Refugees have a soft spot in my heart but I'm not a total softie about it. Why would any woman want to wear something that degrades them? I always want to start yelling at them when I see them wear it all covered up head to toe. It's disgusting.

It has apparently escaped your notice that the country under discussion is France, and not America.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "Big Mac"Sorry but I could care less about their problems. They came here, they need to become Americans. Refugees have a soft spot in my heart but I'm not a total softie about it. Why would any woman want to wear something that degrades them? I always want to start yelling at them when I see them wear it all covered up head to toe. It's disgusting.

It has apparently escaped your notice that the country under discussion is France, and not America.

It's reasonable, however, to compare the American way of doing things with French or even European.  Especially as Americans get hammered all the time.

In Florida, I don't think there would ever be a burqa ban.  I see women wearing Burqas at Disney, even.  But try to wear it for a driver's license, and we have a tendency to say, "How about 'no,' and by the way, fuck you."  It seems to work a bit better than the struggle between appeasement and having a secular society that France tends to go through.

Quote from: "Big Mac"

Quote from: "Tank"In the UK some shopping malls don't allow people to wear baseball caps or 'hoodies' with their hoods up as these obscure people's faces from security cameras. I've not seen an example yet where a veil wearing female has been asked to remove her veil though.

That wouldn't fly here. They'd tell them to take it off and if they protest they'd just say they have to leave. Europe is a little coddling I guess.

Absolutely, we have grown up  :D

Quote from: "epepke"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "Big Mac"Sorry but I could care less about their problems. They came here, they need to become Americans. Refugees have a soft spot in my heart but I'm not a total softie about it. Why would any woman want to wear something that degrades them? I always want to start yelling at them when I see them wear it all covered up head to toe. It's disgusting.

It has apparently escaped your notice that the country under discussion is France, and not America.

It's reasonable, however, to compare the American way of doing things with French or even European.  Especially as Americans get hammered all the time.

In Florida, I don't think there would ever be a burqa ban.  I see women wearing Burqas at Disney, even.  But try to wear it for a driver's license, and we have a tendency to say, "How about 'no,' and by the way, fuck you."  It seems to work a bit better than the struggle between appeasement and having a secular society that France tends to go through.

I have no problem with this, and,indeed, the comparison is useful.  But the idea that you can expand someone's freedom by legislating what they can and can't wear is obviously silly, on its face.

It's funny that BM would limit freedom in this thread, and yet bemoan its loss in another.

Quote from: "Tank"

Quote from: "Big Mac"

Quote from: "Tank"In the UK some shopping malls don't allow people to wear baseball caps or 'hoodies' with their hoods up as these obscure people's faces from security cameras. I've not seen an example yet where a veil wearing female has been asked to remove her veil though.

That wouldn't fly here. They'd tell them to take it off and if they protest they'd just say they have to leave. Europe is a little coddling I guess.

Absolutely, we have grown up  :D

I don't wanna grow up...I'm a Toys R Us kid. There's a million muslims that I can bomb with.