Quote:Which is a ridiculous conclusion to make. By all means, if someone comes into a bank with a face covering, take caution. Have security on alert (as if they should ever not be), but wait until something happens before accusing the person of being a criminal. Maybe they just want to take some money out, as an honest customer. It is far more likely that they are not a criminal (criminals make up a very small percentage of the population), so stop treating them like one.

Obviously, there are times when you may ask a person to remove certain body clothing in times when it's needed. Like for example, letting them into the country, where you have to see someone's face when making an assumption.
It's rare that I see a person with a veil anywhere in the country I live, a 90% moslem country.

Yes, when needed then of course face coverings should be removed, but customs and religions should be respected.

Well, I would never want a government to dictate how I dress, and a Burqa doesn't hurt anybody, so I'm not sure why it matters.

People need to remember what they claim to use as moral guidance and apply it to the situation, because I sense a bit of hypocrisy.

I don't like Burqa's, I don't like what they represent, but its none of my damn business to be honest.

(May 14, 2012 at 4:34 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(May 13, 2012 at 10:58 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Sorry Tiberius Not scared of Islam/ Judaism or Christianity......but the wearing of Motorcycle Helmets, Balaclavas, Hoodies (yes fucking hoodies jackets) and sunglasses are banned in government public places and shops/ service stations...Don't even THINK you can get into a bank let alone approach the desk with one of these "items of clothing" unless of course you are wearing a full burqa with niqab then that's ok.

That may be your own personal justification, but as I noted before, this guy wants to ban them everywhere.

Everywhere? NOT MY PERSONAL justifications Tibby...it is LAW here. Or just in places of commerce? And just what is this persons "version" of a "burqa"? As I have stated...Full face coverings are not acceptable in places of commerce or Government organisations and the fact that a police officer asks you to remove your FULL FACE COVERING is not something that should bow to a select few based on 'religious reasons'

(May 14, 2012 at 4:34 am)Tiberius Wrote: We don't ban helmets everywhere; in fact, in some places it is illegal *not* to wear one.

Hair splitting Tiberius....
Again we ARE talking about places of commerce. And what are you trying to say?? Helmets are part of the standard acceptable and lwful PPE equipment for motocycle riding...what value of PPE does a bit of fabric give?

(May 14, 2012 at 4:34 am)Tiberius Wrote: Still, the question of whether helmets, balaclavas, and burkas should be banned needs addressing. I'm personally against it, for the simple reason that it doesn't actually do anything. Banning people from wearing a burka in a bank is like banning people from taking a gun into a bank. If you do that, then the only people who will ignore the ban are criminals, and they were the people who the law was aimed at. Banning something which criminals use to commit crimes ensures that only criminals will have it. It does absolutely nothing. It is a waste of a law.

Tell that to the commercial banking staff who have been threatened by the wearing of such clothing Tiberius.

(May 14, 2012 at 4:34 am)Tiberius Wrote:

Kichi Wrote:Actually you will be asked (politely) to remove you face covering here in Australia. You want to advertise Sheridan Sheeting material that's fine ...cover your face and you are a criminal.

Which is a ridiculous conclusion to make. By all means, if someone comes into a bank with a face covering, take caution. Have security on alert (as if they should ever not be), but wait until something happens before accusing the person of being a criminal. Maybe they just want to take some money out, as an honest customer. It is far more likely that they are not a criminal (criminals make up a very small percentage of the population), so stop treating them like one.

I am thinking you are naive in this regard....it is NOT ridiculous and is common practice here in Australia. Only those of "Islamic proclivities" are exempt and I find this rather unfair since I HAVE to remove my motorcycle helmet to just pay for the fuel I just put into my tank! You seem to forget Tiberius that Australia "IS a prison island" (thank you UK) and if you are wearing a covering over your face you 'must be a criminal' (thank you again UK) as those who do not wear a covering are just your average immigrant and can be disregarded as a threat.

Your face is EVERYTHING here...your identity and validity depends on you being Facially identified.

---

(May 14, 2012 at 5:25 am)Tiberius Wrote: Yes, when needed then of course face coverings should be removed, but customs and religions should be respected.

Why?? Mine aren't. Religion deserves NO respect...tolerance yes, respect no. I have no issue with people wanting to cover themselves from head to toe with fabric, it just makes me wonder what they are trying to hide. BUT, if full face coverings are banned for the majority then religion can go take a hike if they want to function in Australian society and there's an end to it.

(May 14, 2012 at 5:25 am)Tiberius Wrote: Yes, when needed then of course face coverings should be removed, but customs and religions should be respected.

lolwhy?

(rhetorical)

(May 14, 2012 at 5:25 am)Tiberius Wrote: Yes, when needed then of course face coverings should be removed, but customs and religions should be respected.

You mean customs like female circumcision?

Just wondering.....

(May 14, 2012 at 8:44 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Everywhere? NOT MY PERSONAL justifications Tibby...it is LAW here. Or just in places of commerce? And just what is this persons "version" of a "burqa"? As I have stated...Full face coverings are not acceptable in places of commerce or Government organisations and the fact that a police officer asks you to remove your FULL FACE COVERING is not something that should bow to a select few based on 'religious reasons'

Fair enough, they were not your personal justifications. What are your personal justifications? Please don't say "it's the LAW", because that is not a justification for the law itself. I want to know your actual justification for why the burka should be banned. The issue of a police officer asking you to remove your full face covering is another matter; if there is reason to suspect the person, and facial identification is required, then it should be allowed. This is not the same thing as banning the burka everywhere, or in select places. There is no reasonable justification for banning it in banks or other commercial buildings.

Quote:Hair splitting Tiberius....
Again we ARE talking about places of commerce. And what are you trying to say?? Helmets are part of the standard acceptable and lwful PPE equipment for motocycle riding...what value of PPE does a bit of fabric give?

No, it's not hair splitting. My point was, if the reasons for banning the burka are the same as banning helmets, then banning the burka everywhere should mean helmets are banned everywhere as well. This is of course absurd, and my underlying point was that there are other reasons (Islamophobia) for wanting the burka banned.

Quote:Tell that to the commercial banking staff who have been threatened by the wearing of such clothing Tiberius.

This is more a failing of the staff than the person wearing the burka. There is no rational reason to be threatened by a person wearing a burka, or a helmet, or skiing goggles, etc. There is only a rational reason to be threatened if the person themselves is being threatening. Someone wearing clothing is not a valid reason to be threatened by them. Sorry, it just isn't.

Quote:I am thinking you are naive in this regard....it is NOT ridiculous and is common practice here in Australia. Only those of "Islamic proclivities" are exempt and I find this rather unfair since I HAVE to remove my motorcycle helmet to just pay for the fuel I just put into my tank! You seem to forget Tiberius that Australia "IS a prison island" (thank you UK) and if you are wearing a covering over your face you 'must be a criminal' (thank you again UK) as those who do not wear a covering are just your average immigrant and can be disregarded as a threat.

I'm not entirely sure whether you disagree with me or not. I'm arguing that the practice is ridiculous; you should be able to wear a helmet to pay for fuel, just as a Muslim should be able to wear a burka. The attitude "covering your face means you are a criminal" is not good, nor is it based on rational thought. However, if you do actually disagree with me, then please state your reasons why. Being common practice does not negate its ridiculousness, nor is it a valid argument for the continuation of the practice. I don't want to know what currently goes one; I want to know why you support it.

Quote:Your face is EVERYTHING here...your identity and validity depends on you being Facially identified.

It shouldn't, which is my point.

Quote:Why?? Mine aren't. Religion deserves NO respect...tolerance yes, respect no. I have no issue with people wanting to cover themselves from head to toe with fabric, it just makes me wonder what they are trying to hide. BUT, if full face coverings are banned for the majority then religion can go take a hike if they want to function in Australian society and there's an end to it.

Your customs should be respected, just as anyone's should be. Obviously there are exceptions, there always are, but for the most part, people's customs are their own, and shouldn't have to be torn apart. Your attitude of "tolerance yes, respect no" doesn't conform with your final demand that the religious can "go take a hike" if their clothing is banned. That isn't at all tolerant.

Zen Badger Wrote:You mean customs like female circumcision?

No. I'm not even sure why that is relevant in this conversation. We are talking about clothing.

This is a very simple issue. To ban the clothing would limit personal choice. It's that woman's choice to put the burqa on, it's her choice. It does not hurt her, or anyone else. It's clothe. I understand that some use the burqa as a symbol of oppression of women, but out issue should not be the clothes. It should be the people. Banning the burqa is, frankly, a silly thing to do.

(May 12, 2012 at 10:46 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: Banning the symptoms of social problems, instead of addressing the cause, never leads to progress.

/end

That depends on whether you think the cause is strengthened by the symptom and the baning of the symptom weakens the cause.

Baning the symptom may also be seen as progress if it is successful gambit to taunt the advocators of the cause to overreact and thus indirectly hurting the cause.

Baning the symptom may also be seen as progress if it establishes a precedent in the legal framework for broader charllenges to the cause.

The burka thing is rather complex, actually. Most of you people don't really know what it serves to do, or whatever religious context that is behind it.