(December 11, 2013 at 10:40 am)Jacob(smooth) Wrote: Ok, so let's ask the septics.

Hey guys, reckon we need to ban Thanksgiving. I find it offensive and demeaning to native Americans.

Who wants to tell me to go Fuck myself?

After all that "black friday" bullshit made it's way over here? Not a chance. Outlaw the fucking thing

(December 11, 2013 at 12:16 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(December 11, 2013 at 10:49 am)MarxRaptor Wrote: I believe that what I am actually referring to is the the French form of secularism; Laïcité.

The definition of 'laïcité" is absence of religious involvment in government affairs and absence of government involvement in religious affairs. Banning the niqab is a violation of laïcité, not an example of it.

Political secularism or laïcité is the idea that the government should be as neutral as possible toward religion, neither promoting nor oppressing it. Banning an article of clothing because of what its religious significance is oppression. And it's stupid, since oppresson promotes solidarity in the oppressed.

I suppose the work around is what has already been suggested, banning a face covering not on religious/anti-religious grounds but on public safety grounds. If face coverings of any kind were uniformly banned in public this could certainly help to quell much of the inevitable fuss from muslims. However we then get in to more moral and practical quicksand; what constitutes a public space? And is there sufficient public interest to warrant such regulation? The smoking ban in the UK covered public and privates spaces for example. Even private businesses (pubs, restaraunts, shops etc) were not given the freedom to decide the rules for their particular premises. This is why government regulation is so great but also so bad.

The best way of course would be able to convince people, without coersion, that religious face coverings are completely stupid and are routed in dominant male tribal attitudes, not the will of some daft deity. Until the cycle of family and community indoctrination can be somehow interrupted however, how do we begin to save women from the talons of stupidity?

I dont think the idea of banning burqa is for the security reasons , it is just an effort to provoke muslims.

I'm agree about the banning veils and whereat niqabs for face recognition.

(December 11, 2013 at 6:30 pm)Nineteen Wrote: I dont think the idea of banning burqa is for the security reasons , it is just an effort to provoke muslims.

I'm agree about the banning veils and whereat niqabs for face recognition.

Nineteen to be blunt these Muslims would have you raped for not wearing a hijab.

(December 11, 2013 at 10:58 am)MarxRaptor Wrote: The only thing I don't like about Quebec is Napoleonic Law.

Impossible! How could liberal Quebec have such an authoritarian legal system?

(December 10, 2013 at 12:30 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: I think it should be banned for security reasons. You simply cannot allow people to walk around with everything covered, you know basically nothing about them.

There have been actual cases of criminals dressing up in burkas, which in addition to masking their identities had to effect of making people intentionally avoid looking at them for fear of being considered "politically incorrect".

(December 11, 2013 at 7:46 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:

(December 10, 2013 at 12:30 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: I think it should be banned for security reasons. You simply cannot allow people to walk around with everything covered, you know basically nothing about them.

There have been actual cases of criminals dressing up in burkas, which in addition to masking their identities had to effect of making people intentionally avoid looking at them for fear of being considered "politically incorrect".

Yes but there have also been actual cases of people wearing haloween masks, a pair of tights, balaclavas, motorcycle helmets, scarves and fake beards to hide their identitied in order to commit crime.

I don't think that's even close to a good enough reason.

(December 11, 2013 at 8:03 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote:

(December 11, 2013 at 7:46 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: There have been actual cases of criminals dressing up in burkas, which in addition to masking their identities had to effect of making people intentionally avoid looking at them for fear of being considered "politically incorrect".

Yes but there have also been actual cases of people wearing haloween masks, a pair of tights, balaclavas, motorcycle helmets, scarves and fake beards to hide their identitied in order to commit crime.

I don't think that's even close to a good enough reason.

All should be banned in public with exceptions for motorcycle helmet and balaclavas
+

I don't think the government should ban any form of clothing, or non-clothing for that matter.
Other people being offended is neither here nor there, it doesn't give you rights to dictate what others do or don't do.
If muslim men lack the moral integrity not to rape a naked woman they should be prosecuted, not the woman (whilst demonstrating that religion is worthless for determining morality).

That's pretty much what I always thought. It says more about the men than the women if they need to cover women and have them escorted everywhere if they're outside the home just to keep her from being raped.

Do they even have a markedly reduced amount of rape in places that do this?