Belgium bans the burqa, chador, and hijab.

[dj1470]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...5/Belgium-set-European-country-ban-burka.html

............... and France is soon to follow

I agree with this law.

For the following reasons:
The burqa is incompatible with basic security as everyone in public must be recognizable and clashes with the principles of a western emancipated and free society that respects the rights of all.

I am sure someone here will call me a racist or whatever.

But I applaud this decision by the Belgian government and only hope and wait for the day Canada will do the same.

 

[Mod100]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...5/Belgium-set-European-country-ban-burka.html

............... and France is soon to follow

I agree with this law.

For the following reasons:
The burqa is incompatible with basic security as everyone in public must be recognizable and clashes with the principles of a western emancipated and free society that respects the rights of all.

I am sure someone here will call me a racist or whatever.

But I applaud this decision by the Belgian government and only hope and wait for the day Canada will do the same.

I'm commenting as an individual and not as MOD100 representing TERB.

I totally agree with both counties decisions and your position.

 

[Rockslinger]

Belgium-set-European-country-ban-burka.html[/url]
............... and France is soon to follow
I agree with this law.

It is their country so they can set the rules. When in Belgium and France do as the Belgian and the French do. If you don't like, don't go. After all, when a White blue eye blonde Australian woman goes to Saudi Arabia she wears a scarf. When you go to Dubai, you don't kiss your wife while on the beach.

 

[anon1]

The creation of North American society was predicated on the Freedom of Religion.
This freedom is entrenched in the US Bills of Rights and Canadian Constitution.
Any laws that encroach on these freedoms are unconstitutional.

You may not like them,
you may not trust them,
you may not want them here,
you may want to expatriate them.
But they are only the last in a long line of "others" that have been persecuted.
2 generations ago, it was my family.

 

[Keebler Elf]

Sharia law is not supported by the majority of Islamic peoples... it's like saying the teachings of David Koresh were representative of most Christians.

 

[papasmerf]

The creation of North American society was predicated on the Freedom of Religion.
This freedom is entrenched in the US Bills of Rights and Canadian Constitution.
Any laws that encroach on these freedoms are unconstitutional.

You may not like them,
you may not trust them,
you may not want them here,
you may want to expatriate them.
But they are only the last in a long line of "others" that have been persecuted.
2 generations ago, it was my family.

Actually

Religious LAW can not circumvent or be considered over American Laws.

 

[Rockslinger]

The creation of North American society was predicated on the Freedom of Religion.
This freedom is entrenched in the US Bills of Rights and Canadian Constitution.
Any laws that encroach on these freedoms are unconstitutional.

We are a secular society. They can still practice their religion in private, as I think this law only applies when they are in public. We don't hang homos and we don't bury our daughters alive. Sorry, if this infringes on someone's "religious freedom".

 

[oldjones]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...5/Belgium-set-European-country-ban-burka.html

............... and France is soon to follow

I agree with this law.



For the following reasons:
The burqa is incompatible with basic security as everyone in public must be recognizable and clashes with the principles of a western emancipated and free society that respects the rights of all.
I am sure someone here will call me a racist or whatever.
But I applaud this decision by the Belgian government and only hope and wait for the day Canada will do the same.

Racist you may be, but the law is about not race. It's about dictating a certain manner of dress and forcing it upon everyone under penalty of law. Hypocritically, people like you call this emancipation.

Did you just make up that stuff about chadores and hijabs, you said were also banned? I couldn't find any such info in the article. Perhaps some anti-Islamic glee over-excited your typing finger?

I live in deep apprehension that such bigotted xenophobic ,ignorance as we've already seen in Quebec, France, now Belgium and heard—not surprisingly—from our rigidly right government will become the order of the day here. This thread being just a tiny bit of evidence that ignorance and prejudice are flourishing in the new century.

Waddya gonna do when those scary muslim women start wearing motorcycle helmets, now that niqabs are banned? I trust no more brides will be permitted to walk down the aisle with their faces covered by veils as their mothers did in simpler times.

If anyone really thought covered faces were a security issue they'd be outlawing veils, masks, hoods, balaclavas and face coverings of all kinds.

Too simple. And besides, it ain't about face covering, it's about scary muslims.

 

[Rockslinger]

I live in deep apprehension that such bigotted xenophobic ,ignorance as we've already seen in Quebec, France, now Belgium and heard—not surprisingly—from our government will become the order of the day here.

It is terrible. Our government is currently studying ways to make polygamy illegal and "honour killings" are already illegal.

 

[dj1470]

Racist you may be, but the law is about not race. It's about dictating a certain manner of dress and forcing it upon everyone under penalty of law. Hypocritically, people like you call this emancipation.

Nope not about race. If it was chinese people wearing them I would still be against them.

Did you just make up that stuff about chadores and hijabs, you said were also banned? I couldn't find any such info in the article. Perhaps some anti-Islamic glee over-excited your typing finger?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/31/belgium-public-ban-burqa-niqab
Nope but nice try. It's called research. Try it sometime if your brain could handle it.

I live in deep apprehension that such bigotted xenophobic ,ignorance as we've already seen in Quebec, France, now Belgium and heard—not surprisingly—from our rigidly right government will become the order of the day here. This thread being just a tiny bit of evidence that ignorance and prejudice are flourishing in the new century.

It's got nothing to do with race. It's got to do with security. Pure and simple. Perhaps too simple for you. Easier to win an argument if you don't debate intelligently and just scream RACIST over and over again.

Waddya gonna do when those scary muslim women start wearing motorcycle helmets, now that niqabs are banned? I trust no more brides will be permitted to walk down the aisle with their faces covered by veils as their mothers did in simpler times.

Too simple minded. This statement is just plain dumb. Equating a muslim practice to a christian practice. Yeah sure that works.

 

[dreamblade]

Actually, this may be a good thing. We all know that the Muslim world was a centre for learning, science, and tolerance in the Dark Ages, but something I just found out recently is that Islamic fundamentalism, along with the hijab, burqa, and sexist non-sense is only about 60 years old.

Maybe it's time to slap down this wave of thought, along all other lines of fanaticism.

 

[Rockslinger]

We all know that the Muslim world was a centre for learning, science, and tolerance in the Dark Ages,

They were actually more advanced than Christians at one point in time in the past.

 

[The Bandit]

As I said before in another thread, Canada would be too scared to create this type of law...pussy's.

 

[Dougal Short]

As for freedom of religion - these rules were set up in different times under different circumstances.

I don't think these laws prohibit them from practising their religion, only from wearing that clothing which keeps them in the dark ages...

 

[mandrill]

I don't think these laws prohibit them from practising their religion, only from wearing that clothing which keeps them in the dark ages...

Okay. Use the same argument and ban Anglican vicars from wearing the dog collar or nuns from wearing the habit and see where your argument goes. I'll tell you. The ban gets immediately invalidated as discriminatory on religious grounds by every judge in Canada. Ban Eastern Orthodox priests from wearing those weird tall black hats or Jews from wearing beenies - same fucking result.

Oh and the silly "security argument": How many armed robberies or other serious crimes have been committed by Arab women wearing the niqab? Not many, right? Your little problem is that in Canada, one has to LEGALLY PROVE that there is a serious existing security issue that is of national importance before you can ban religious clothing. Guess you fuck up on that little problem, huh, all you niqab-haters.

Actually, Old Jones is perfectly correct. If you attempt to disguise an ordinance which is - deep down inside - motivated by racial dislike or religious dislike as "security" or "cultural values", it will still be declared discriminatory and invalidated by the courts. I mean, c'mon, guys. The only "security issue" or "liberating" that's going on here is that most of you fellas don't like Muslims and are gloating at the fact that they're getting kicked in the nuts in Belgium. And any half-smart Canadian judge is going to figure this out in 15 seconds and kick you and your silly "niqab security" ban out on its racist half-assed ass.

 

[Rockslinger]

Whatever happened to that "covered people" voting issue? Are people covered head to toe allowed or not allowed to vote? I heard that many non-Muslims in Montreal decided to cover themselves from head to toe when they went to vote during the last federal election.

 

[Rockslinger]

The ban gets immediately invalidated as discriminatory on religious grounds by every judge in Canada

Does the ban apply to everybody or only Muslims?

 

[oldjones]

Nope not about race. If it was chinese people wearing them I would still be against them.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/31/belgium-public-ban-burqa-niqab
Nope but nice try. It's called research. Try it sometime if your brain could handle it.



It's got nothing to do with race. It's got to do with security. Pure and simple. Perhaps too simple for you. Easier to win an argument if you don't debate intelligently and just scream RACIST over and over again.



Too simple minded. This statement is just plain dumb. Equating a muslim practice to a christian practice. Yeah sure that works.

You're reading too fast, and making stuff up that isn't there: Though you may well be (why do you think it would it make adifference if chinese people were the target of this law?), I didn't call you racist. You made that up; neither your original Mail article, nor the subsequent Guardian one supports your "Belgium bans Chadors and hihijabs' post title, did you make that up too? Don't expect others to research your fables.

It's got to do with security. Pure and simple.

So simple you can't provide a single example, justification or shred of evidence let alone respond to any of the day-to-day unbanned 'security dangers' I mentioned. Guess they were too simple. But since you read the list as "just scream[ing] RACIST over and over again", it seems in fact you are too simple to get past the paranoid "I am sure someone here will call me a racist" you started with so you can actually debate the issue.

Your last paragraph is beneath contempt.

 

[Rockslinger]

These "religious freedom" cases seem to surface from time to time. Here are some I remember (perhaps not perfectly).
1) No photos on driver's license.
2) Polygamy.
3) No transporting alcohol in taxi.
4) Male doctor can't examine female patient.
5) Isn't there also a religion that forbids paying taxes?

 

[oldjones]

Actually, this may be a good thing. We all know that the Muslim world was a centre for learning, science, and tolerance in the Dark Ages, but something I just found out recently is that Islamic fundamentalism, along with the hijab, burqa, and sexist non-sense is only about 60 years old.

Maybe it's time to slap down this wave of thought, along all other lines of fanaticism.

True, this wave of Islamic fundamentalism is only some sixty years old, but it ain't the first, nor will it be the last. No more than the current spittle-spewing, Bible-thumping 'gay's will burn in Hell' evangelical Christian fundamentalism was the first or will be the last intolerant, vicious, throwback to a past that never was that we'll have to suffer through. All religions foster, schisms, and reformations, develop progressive and regressive strains and sects. We used to burn Quakers for not taking off their hats in church. And God thanked us for it and gave us the bountiful, disease free world of peace and plenty we enjoy now.

We haven't come far enough yet to be telling other religions how they should practise their faith.

PS. The folks who say niquabs and burkas are not religious but folk customs, use evidence that shows they were around for centuries, well before this 'new wave' fundamentalism.