Top Judge Overturns France's Burkini Ban!

[ladybirder]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3759938/France-s-administrative-court-overturns-burkini-ban.html

Wow!

[Arksided]

Flexible laws, viva le france.

[naomi24]

divebuddy, the headgear, that covers head and neck, is the giveaway - not the costume itself.

[sp1814]

"The French Court should have upheld the ban on clothing that is distinctly Islamic."

But the burkhini is not 'distinctly' Islamic.

First of all, it's not traditional Islamic clothing, only having been invented about a decade ago.

Secondly - I thought the ban was on all religious clothing?

Is it now being claimed that it really WAS only aimed at 'Islamic' clothing?

Amazing how people are getting themselves tied up in knots supporting this nonsense 'law'.

[naomi24]

sp, //But the burkhini is not 'distinctly' Islamic. //

Yes it is. //Zanetti designed the swimsuit in 2004 so Muslim women, who choose to wear a head covering like the hijab, could participate in water activities and other sports.//

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/burkini-ban-designer-who-invented-the-swimwear-says-it-has-been-misunderstood-by-french-authorities-a7208326.html

[sp1814]

At least we can all rest easy in the knowledge that society telling women what they can and cannot wear on the beach isn't a new phenomenon:

http://tinyurl.com/hfarnuh

[mikey4444]

Common sense and justice has ruled the day as it was obviously going to do, right from the start.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37198479

"The ban in Villeneuve-Loubet "seriously and clearly illegally breached fundamental freedoms", it found, including freedom of belief".

"These bans do nothing to increase public safety but do a lot to promote public humiliation."

[Arksided]

The irony is she couldn't have being any more provocative.

[sp1814]

naomi24

That doesn't make it Islamic.

And in any case, I still don't understand the ban...is it only on Islamic forms of dress or all outward religious clothing?

What are nuns allowed to wear on the beach?

And will priests be forced to remove their dog collars?

[sp1814]

mikey4444

I believe this ban was nothing more than the authorities trying to make it look as if they were 'doing something'.

And indeed they were.

They were effectively making themselves look like jackasses.

[Zacs-Master]

sp....pass me that shovel mate.

[andy-hughes]

Arksided - //The irony is she couldn't have being any more provocative. //

Sure?

She could have been shouting 'Allahu Akbar!' and firing a machine gun over her head.

I can't really see what is 'provocative' about lying down on a beach dozing!

[ToraToraTora]

hows that work then, judges cannot overturn laws.

[mikey4444]

SP....this is precisely why these daft laws have now been overturned. They were designed to be divisive.

I said a couple of days ago that while bigotry would never go away, it shouldn't be state-sponsored, and that is precisely what this was all about....pandering to the bigoted.

[Arksided]

Andy double meaning:

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=provocative%20meaning

[naomi24]

Quite sad that westerners who do have the freedom to do as they wish encourage others to continue to concede to the outdated rules imposed on them by antiquated religious practices - and so many men, to whom such rules would never apply, among them. Better, in my opinion, to encourage these women to reject restrictive religious clothing altogether…. but that’s just me I guess.

[jim360]

I quite agree that we should work as hard as possible to discourage this notion that women need to be protected from society, or society needs to be protected from women, expressed symbolically through items of clothing that literally cut them off from sight of the world. Absolutely it's sad to see.

But it's not -- absolutely not -- a matter for state law. The burkini anyway isn't the offending item (that would be niqabs, for example, or proper burkas), so a law imposing a ban on them is already unjustified as the wrong target. But quite apart from that, you cannot restore freedom of choice by removing freedom of choice. That is what this ban was trying to do. It would have failed by definition. Good riddance to it.

[ChillDoubt]

Well, there are plenty of instances involving odd decisions by judges, nothing new.
Given that it is suggested that more French citizens backed the ban than were against it I'd imagine that the likes of Marine Le Pen et al can't wait for the next set of elections.

[mikey4444]

Chilli....yes, you may be right....lots of bigots and racists like Le Pen can't wait to get into power !

[andy-hughes]

Arksided - //Andy double meaning:

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=provocative%20meaning //

If I have missed the irony of your post - which often happens in print, please accept my apologies.

If I have, I am really annoyed with myself, because it makes it a really good point, and I would have loved to have loudly applauded it!

[Peter Pedant]

and here is the judgement - scroll down

http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2016/08/26/le-conseil-d-etat-suspend-l-arrete-anti-burkini-de-villeneuve-loubet_4988472_3224.html

o level french needed

// hows dat work ven, judges cannot overturn laws.// 3T

erm yes they can ( US all sorts of laws are found unconstitutional and the same may well be in France. Here the supreme court can advice the govt that the law has to be changed )

in this case la cour has declared the arrete to be invalid