Angela Merkel wants to ban the burka?

[Warpoet]

More like "complete disregard for religious freedom, a basic tenet of any free society." Not that I expect you to care about that.

 

[barbos]

More like "complete disregard for religious freedom, a basic tenet of any free society." Not that I expect you to care about that.

I don't consider islam a religion. It's religious ideology which does not respect free society in the first place.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I'm saying banning burkhas are.

How come the choice to wear or not wear a burqa is an individual choice that has nothing to do with race, religion or creed, but banning them is somehow racist (nevermind that Islam is not a race)?

I haven't objected to the Burqa as this should be a choice. The only issue are veils and masks for security reasons. Correct Islam is not a religion but some say it is racist to deport or bar illegal immigrants which it is not.

 

[LordKiran]

More like "complete disregard for religious freedom, a basic tenet of any free society." Not that I expect you to care about that.

I don't consider islam a religion. It's religious ideology which does not respect free society in the first place.

How come the choice to wear or not wear a burqa is an individual choice that has nothing to do with race, religion or creed, but banning them is somehow racist (nevermind that Islam is not a race)?

I haven't objected to the Burqa as this should be a choice. The only issue are veils and masks for security reasons. Correct Islam is not a religion but some say it is racist to deport or bar illegal immigrants which it is not.

So who's to say what is and is not a religion? Me? You? Is there a committee? How about the president? Or is it the say of the people who practice? (Here's a hint: Its the last one.)

 

[barbos]

I don't consider islam a religion. It's religious ideology which does not respect free society in the first place.

How come the choice to wear or not wear a burqa is an individual choice that has nothing to do with race, religion or creed, but banning them is somehow racist (nevermind that Islam is not a race)?

I haven't objected to the Burqa as this should be a choice. The only issue are veils and masks for security reasons. Correct Islam is not a religion but some say it is racist to deport or bar illegal immigrants which it is not.

So who's to say what is and is not a religion? Me? You? Is there a committee? How about the president? Or is it the say of the people who practice? (Here's a hint: Its the last one.)

No, it's not a last one.

 

[LordKiran]

How come the choice to wear or not wear a burqa is an individual choice that has nothing to do with race, religion or creed, but banning them is somehow racist (nevermind that Islam is not a race)?

I haven't objected to the Burqa as this should be a choice. The only issue are veils and masks for security reasons. Correct Islam is not a religion but some say it is racist to deport or bar illegal immigrants which it is not.

So who's to say what is and is not a religion? Me? You? Is there a committee? How about the president? Or is it the say of the people who practice? (Here's a hint: Its the last one.)

No, it's not a last one.

It actually is. At least in my country. Who are you to dictate the validity of someone else's faith anyway?

 

[whichphilosophy]

Don't be naive, these women don't dress themselves. they are dressed by men, filthy disgusting islamist men.

The prefer to dress themselves
The majority do this by choice except in places like Saudi where the Tory PM is currently on a bootlicking mission.

 

[Jayjay]

Or maybe Muslims are individuals like you and I, and they all have their own different reasons for wearing a certain garment.

If that were the case, then the ban would affect you and I just as much as it does muslims, and it wouldn't be racist or discriminatory.

If you admit that it is done with a particular group in mind, a group that happens to have a habit of using the burqa as a tool for oppressing women, then that justifies it.

No it doesn't, because A) it's merely your belief that the women wearing it are being oppressed and B) there are already laws in Western countries against forcing people to wear things they don't want to. Banning the article itself is a stupid solution, since it's punishing people who are choosing to wear it of their own free will, and doing nothing to solve the underlying problem for any hypothetical cases where they aren't.

And that's without even wading into the incalculable dangers inherent in giving the government free rein to ban expressions of religious freedom, or any other form of free speech, merely because they think it doesn't serve the greater good. Nothing can go wrong there, now can it? But hey, don't let this kind of critical thinking or concern for civil liberties get in the way of your predictably overgeneralized, fuck 'em all logic.

"Punishing people" and "incalculable dangers" are hyperbole that ignores that real impact: removal of a cumbersome piece of clothing in favor of something else. It's a insignificant inconvenience at worst. If there was a law to ban top hats for some reason, and I liked to wear a top hat, it would maybe annoy me a bit but wearing a top hat is not a fundamental human right: I might as well wear another type of hat in public, or no hat at all.

Thousands of women are being oppressed and forced to wear the burqa in Germany alone. This is not a hypothetical, it's a fact. Existing laws can't touch it, because they are not going to file criminal charges against their husbands or fathers or alienate their entire families, but they are nevertheless harmed by it. A public burqa ban will help them break at least a little bit free without facing repercussions, which is a good thing, and this is far more important than a few people being slightly inconvenienced by having to leave out their metaphorical top hats at home.

Besides, GErmany already has history of similar laws affecting germans: the ban on nazi symbols and books. Clearly these laws are limiting the freedom of expression of some people, but they are understandable considering Germany's history and the issues they had with Nazis. I don't see the burqa being any different from someone wanting to wear an SS uniform in public.

 

[barbos]

How come the choice to wear or not wear a burqa is an individual choice that has nothing to do with race, religion or creed, but banning them is somehow racist (nevermind that Islam is not a race)?

I haven't objected to the Burqa as this should be a choice. The only issue are veils and masks for security reasons. Correct Islam is not a religion but some say it is racist to deport or bar illegal immigrants which it is not.

So who's to say what is and is not a religion? Me? You? Is there a committee? How about the president? Or is it the say of the people who practice? (Here's a hint: Its the last one.)

No, it's not a last one.

It actually is. At least in my country. Who are you to dictate the validity of someone else's faith anyway?

But I am not dictating anything, it's muslims who are dictating, that's why it's not a religion but ideology,

- - - Updated - - -

Don't be naive, these women don't dress themselves. they are dressed by men, filthy disgusting islamist men.

The prefer to dress themselves
The majority do this by choice except in places like Saudi where the Tory PM is currently on a bootlicking mission.

There is no word "choice" in islam.

 

[LordKiran]

How come the choice to wear or not wear a burqa is an individual choice that has nothing to do with race, religion or creed, but banning them is somehow racist (nevermind that Islam is not a race)?

I haven't objected to the Burqa as this should be a choice. The only issue are veils and masks for security reasons. Correct Islam is not a religion but some say it is racist to deport or bar illegal immigrants which it is not.

So who's to say what is and is not a religion? Me? You? Is there a committee? How about the president? Or is it the say of the people who practice? (Here's a hint: Its the last one.)

No, it's not a last one.

It actually is. At least in my country. Who are you to dictate the validity of someone else's faith anyway?

But I am not dictating anything, it's muslims who are dictating, that's why it's not a religion but ideology,

- - - Updated - - -

Don't be naive, these women don't dress themselves. they are dressed by men, filthy disgusting islamist men.

The prefer to dress themselves
The majority do this by choice except in places like Saudi where the Tory PM is currently on a bootlicking mission.

There is no word "choice" in islam.

How people choose to follow a given faith is not indicative of what the faith in itself represents on paper. I mean you could say the same thing of Christians who have no understanding of secularism and why its important in a democratic society. So I'm not sure why you're acting as if this kind of authoritative moral mandate is specific to Islam, because its not.

 

[Warpoet]

I don't consider islam a religion. It's religious ideology which does not respect free society in the first place.

Nobody cares. You don't get to single out an entire religious group and take away their constitutional protections because you don't like them, even though I doubt you've ever fucking met one to begin with.

 

[Jayjay]

How come the choice to wear or not wear a burqa is an individual choice that has nothing to do with race, religion or creed, but banning them is somehow racist (nevermind that Islam is not a race)?

I haven't objected to the Burqa as this should be a choice. The only issue are veils and masks for security reasons. Correct Islam is not a religion but some say it is racist to deport or bar illegal immigrants which it is not.

I can respect your view. Personally I think the "security reasons" are just a pretext. Most places don't have that kind of surveillance at least in Germany that banning face masks would make any difference. Maybe in the future when CCTV cameras and automatic facial recognition software becomes the norm (and yes I realize UK may be closer to this world already).

 

[LordKiran]

If that were the case, then the ban would affect you and I just as much as it does muslims, and it wouldn't be racist or discriminatory.

If you admit that it is done with a particular group in mind, a group that happens to have a habit of using the burqa as a tool for oppressing women, then that justifies it.

No it doesn't, because A) it's merely your belief that the women wearing it are being oppressed and B) there are already laws in Western countries against forcing people to wear things they don't want to. Banning the article itself is a stupid solution, since it's punishing people who are choosing to wear it of their own free will, and doing nothing to solve the underlying problem for any hypothetical cases where they aren't.

And that's without even wading into the incalculable dangers inherent in giving the government free rein to ban expressions of religious freedom, or any other form of free speech, merely because they think it doesn't serve the greater good. Nothing can go wrong there, now can it? But hey, don't let this kind of critical thinking or concern for civil liberties get in the way of your predictably overgeneralized, fuck 'em all logic.

"Punishing people" and "incalculable dangers" are hyperbole that ignores that real impact: removal of a cumbersome piece of clothing in favor of something else. It's a insignificant inconvenience at worst. If there was a law to ban top hats for some reason, and I liked to wear a top hat, it would maybe annoy me a bit but wearing a top hat is not a fundamental human right: I might as well wear another type of hat in public, or no hat at all.

Thousands of women are being oppressed and forced to wear the burqa in Germany alone. This is not a hypothetical, it's a fact. Existing laws can't touch it, because they are not going to file criminal charges against their husbands or fathers or alienate their entire families, but they are nevertheless harmed by it. A public burqa ban will help them break at least a little bit free without facing repercussions, which is a good thing, and this is far more important than a few people being slightly inconvenienced by having to leave out their metaphorical top hats at home.

Besides, GErmany already has history of similar laws affecting germans: the ban on nazi symbols and books. Clearly these laws are limiting the freedom of expression of some people, but they are understandable considering Germany's history and the issues they had with Nazis. I don't see the burqa being any different from someone wanting to wear an SS uniform in public.

So can you explain to me what is specific to burkas that isn't specific to other face concealing garments that requires they be singled out? Because from where I sit, the only difference is that burkas are predominantly worn by muslim women: an easy punching bag.

 

[barbos]

How people choose to follow a given faith is not indicative of what the faith in itself represents on paper. I mean you could say the same thing of Christians who have no understanding of secularism and why its important in a democratic society. So I'm not sure why you're acting as if this kind of authoritative moral mandate is specific to Islam, because its not.

But it is unique to islam, which basically started with their prophet killing all these who disagreed with him. That's pretty much all you need to know about this "religion"

 

[LordKiran]

How people choose to follow a given faith is not indicative of what the faith in itself represents on paper. I mean you could say the same thing of Christians who have no understanding of secularism and why its important in a democratic society. So I'm not sure why you're acting as if this kind of authoritative moral mandate is specific to Islam, because its not.

But it is unique to islam, which basically started with their prophet killing all these who disagreed with him. That's pretty much all you need to know about this "religion"

Conquest and subjugation of the heathen and non-believer is at the heart of all Abrahamic faiths. Whether you wish to remain willingly ignorant of this fact is entirely up to you however.

 

[Jayjay]

If that were the case, then the ban would affect you and I just as much as it does muslims, and it wouldn't be racist or discriminatory.

If you admit that it is done with a particular group in mind, a group that happens to have a habit of using the burqa as a tool for oppressing women, then that justifies it.

No it doesn't, because A) it's merely your belief that the women wearing it are being oppressed and B) there are already laws in Western countries against forcing people to wear things they don't want to. Banning the article itself is a stupid solution, since it's punishing people who are choosing to wear it of their own free will, and doing nothing to solve the underlying problem for any hypothetical cases where they aren't.

And that's without even wading into the incalculable dangers inherent in giving the government free rein to ban expressions of religious freedom, or any other form of free speech, merely because they think it doesn't serve the greater good. Nothing can go wrong there, now can it? But hey, don't let this kind of critical thinking or concern for civil liberties get in the way of your predictably overgeneralized, fuck 'em all logic.

"Punishing people" and "incalculable dangers" are hyperbole that ignores that real impact: removal of a cumbersome piece of clothing in favor of something else. It's a insignificant inconvenience at worst. If there was a law to ban top hats for some reason, and I liked to wear a top hat, it would maybe annoy me a bit but wearing a top hat is not a fundamental human right: I might as well wear another type of hat in public, or no hat at all.

Thousands of women are being oppressed and forced to wear the burqa in Germany alone. This is not a hypothetical, it's a fact. Existing laws can't touch it, because they are not going to file criminal charges against their husbands or fathers or alienate their entire families, but they are nevertheless harmed by it. A public burqa ban will help them break at least a little bit free without facing repercussions, which is a good thing, and this is far more important than a few people being slightly inconvenienced by having to leave out their metaphorical top hats at home.

Besides, GErmany already has history of similar laws affecting germans: the ban on nazi symbols and books. Clearly these laws are limiting the freedom of expression of some people, but they are understandable considering Germany's history and the issues they had with Nazis. I don't see the burqa being any different from someone wanting to wear an SS uniform in public.

So can you explain to me what is specific to burkas that isn't specific to other face concealing garments that requires they be singled out? Because from where I sit, the only difference is that burkas are predominantly worn by muslim women: an easy punching bag.

The difference is that muslims women are coerced to wear burqas, as part of a systematic oppression of their rights and isolating them from the world outside their families. It's always muslim men who oppose such bans much louder than the women.

 

[barbos]

I don't consider islam a religion. It's religious ideology which does not respect free society in the first place.

Nobody cares. You don't get to single out an entire religious group and take away their constitutional protections because you don't like them, even though I doubt you've ever fucking met one to begin with.

I have constitutional protection to get to single out or dislike anybody.

 

[barbos]

But it is unique to islam, which basically started with their prophet killing all these who disagreed with him. That's pretty much all you need to know about this "religion"

Conquest and subjugation of the heathen and non-believer is at the heart of all Abrahamic faiths. Whether you wish to remain willingly ignorant of this fact is entirely up to you however.

Unlike their prophet Jesus conducted no conquests, so no, it's not the same.

 

[Warpoet]

If that were the case, then the ban would affect you and I just as much as it does muslims, and it wouldn't be racist or discriminatory.

This doesn't even come close to making sense.

"Punishing people" and "incalculable dangers" are hyperbole that ignores that real impact: removal of a cumbersome piece of clothing in favor of something else. It's a insignificant inconvenience at worst. If there was a law to ban top hats for some reason, and I liked to wear a top hat, it would maybe annoy me a bit but wearing a top hat is not a fundamental human right: I might as well wear another type of hat in public, or no hat at all.

This is the kind of shitty logic you always fall back on when you advocate things that are blatantly antidemocratic. "It's really not that bad, so they should just shut up and deal with it." These constitutional protections exist precisely because of people like you.

Thousands of women are being oppressed and forced to wear the burqa in Germany alone. This is not a hypothetical, it's a fact.

Your assertion is not fact. Produce the evidence.

Existing laws can't touch it, because they are not going to file criminal charges against their husbands or fathers or alienate their entire families, but they are nevertheless harmed by it.

A) That's not something you actually give a shit about
B) There are all manner of abuses that occur within family settings, Muslim or not, which the government can't help; that doesn't entitle them to start passing draconian laws that strip people of their rights regardless of whether or not any wrongdoing has occurred.

A public burqa ban will help them break at least a little bit free without facing repercussions, which is a good thing, and this is far more important than a few people being slightly inconvenienced by having to leave out their metaphorical top hats at home.

No it won't. If anything, it will intensify the problem because the oppressors will simply find different, maybe worse ways of oppressing. It is a masturbatory, self-gratifying gesture meant to appease authoritarians like yourself.

Besides, GErmany already has history of similar laws affecting germans: the ban on nazi symbols and books. Clearly these laws are limiting the freedom of expression of some people, but they are understandable considering Germany's history and the issues they had with Nazis. I don't see the burqa being any different from someone wanting to wear an SS uniform in public.

That's because you have an inherently fucked up, ignorant view of Islam and Muslims.

 

[LordKiran]

If that were the case, then the ban would affect you and I just as much as it does muslims, and it wouldn't be racist or discriminatory.

If you admit that it is done with a particular group in mind, a group that happens to have a habit of using the burqa as a tool for oppressing women, then that justifies it.

No it doesn't, because A) it's merely your belief that the women wearing it are being oppressed and B) there are already laws in Western countries against forcing people to wear things they don't want to. Banning the article itself is a stupid solution, since it's punishing people who are choosing to wear it of their own free will, and doing nothing to solve the underlying problem for any hypothetical cases where they aren't.

And that's without even wading into the incalculable dangers inherent in giving the government free rein to ban expressions of religious freedom, or any other form of free speech, merely because they think it doesn't serve the greater good. Nothing can go wrong there, now can it? But hey, don't let this kind of critical thinking or concern for civil liberties get in the way of your predictably overgeneralized, fuck 'em all logic.

"Punishing people" and "incalculable dangers" are hyperbole that ignores that real impact: removal of a cumbersome piece of clothing in favor of something else. It's a insignificant inconvenience at worst. If there was a law to ban top hats for some reason, and I liked to wear a top hat, it would maybe annoy me a bit but wearing a top hat is not a fundamental human right: I might as well wear another type of hat in public, or no hat at all.

Thousands of women are being oppressed and forced to wear the burqa in Germany alone. This is not a hypothetical, it's a fact. Existing laws can't touch it, because they are not going to file criminal charges against their husbands or fathers or alienate their entire families, but they are nevertheless harmed by it. A public burqa ban will help them break at least a little bit free without facing repercussions, which is a good thing, and this is far more important than a few people being slightly inconvenienced by having to leave out their metaphorical top hats at home.

Besides, GErmany already has history of similar laws affecting germans: the ban on nazi symbols and books. Clearly these laws are limiting the freedom of expression of some people, but they are understandable considering Germany's history and the issues they had with Nazis. I don't see the burqa being any different from someone wanting to wear an SS uniform in public.

So can you explain to me what is specific to burkas that isn't specific to other face concealing garments that requires they be singled out? Because from where I sit, the only difference is that burkas are predominantly worn by muslim women: an easy punching bag.

The difference is that muslims women are coerced to wear burqas, as part of a systematic oppression of their rights and isolating them from the world outside their families. It's always muslims men who oppose such bans much louder than the women.

I mentioned this before but I still cannot accept this idea of protecting women's rights by curtailing their right to wear what they want. It sounds incredibly disingenuous.