Will Starmer Have To Replace Lammy?
News2 mins ago
Bruxelles and the Burka
47 Answers
Over here in Belgium they are lvoting today on whether or not to ban the burka. The French have also indicated they are keen too. Fines of 110 for first time and Jail for subsequent offences.
Given the labour parties desire to covet all things from Belguim coupled with its desire to slur everyone who would suggest such things a racist in this country and of course the views 'unite wimin' Hariat Harperson just what are they going to do ? Labour must be in total turmoil !!!
http://www.telegraph....to-ban-the-burka.html
Given the labour parties desire to covet all things from Belguim coupled with its desire to slur everyone who would suggest such things a racist in this country and of course the views 'unite wimin' Hariat Harperson just what are they going to do ? Labour must be in total turmoil !!!
http://www.telegraph....to-ban-the-burka.html
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There are ideals and aspirations Britons can be proud of - Democracy, the rule of Law, equality of opportunity for all, regardless of colour, gender, age or creed, tolerance of others,, and the right of its citizens to free expression.
Despite a claimed belief in these values, it always amazes me that those of the libertarian right of centre persuasion, those that always respond to the introduction of new laws as evidence of the "Nanny State", or the "EU taking over England" - it is these who are the first to cry for antidemocractic laws to be passed, over the wearing of clothing. You want to potentially criminalise women over an article of clothing!
Not much evidence there then of the Great British values of tolerance and equality!
There is an argument to be had over whether or not such items as the Burqha are a cultural tool of female oppression, but to attempt to address that by blanket legislation and criminalisation is using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.
There is also an argument over proof of ID - so in such cases, passport checks, entrance to banks, police checks,etc. there should be no argument that the face should be shown and refusal to do so risks non access to the service or more. Nor should clothing covering the face be allowed for teaching, but to bleat on asking for a general ban is just sad.
Despite a claimed belief in these values, it always amazes me that those of the libertarian right of centre persuasion, those that always respond to the introduction of new laws as evidence of the "Nanny State", or the "EU taking over England" - it is these who are the first to cry for antidemocractic laws to be passed, over the wearing of clothing. You want to potentially criminalise women over an article of clothing!
Not much evidence there then of the Great British values of tolerance and equality!
There is an argument to be had over whether or not such items as the Burqha are a cultural tool of female oppression, but to attempt to address that by blanket legislation and criminalisation is using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.
There is also an argument over proof of ID - so in such cases, passport checks, entrance to banks, police checks,etc. there should be no argument that the face should be shown and refusal to do so risks non access to the service or more. Nor should clothing covering the face be allowed for teaching, but to bleat on asking for a general ban is just sad.
So, should it be acceptable to dress like this in public in the UK?
http://www.itusozluk....ler/ku+klux+klan/6830
http://www.itusozluk....ler/ku+klux+klan/6830
It's not a different argument, it is freedom of choice. It covers less of the face than the burqha, at least you can see the eyes.
It is impossible for a deaf person to converse with someone who covers their face, and it is a physical barrier preventing contact and communication.
Women who wear the burqha believe that any man who catches sight of them will be lusting after them. Conversely it would be the woman's fault if she were raped and not dressed 'modestly'. I want no part of that way of thinking.
I have no objection to headscarves, or any other form of religious, cultural or traditional clothing or objects.
I simply object to people walking around with their faces covered, for any reason.
It is impossible for a deaf person to converse with someone who covers their face, and it is a physical barrier preventing contact and communication.
Women who wear the burqha believe that any man who catches sight of them will be lusting after them. Conversely it would be the woman's fault if she were raped and not dressed 'modestly'. I want no part of that way of thinking.
I have no objection to headscarves, or any other form of religious, cultural or traditional clothing or objects.
I simply object to people walking around with their faces covered, for any reason.
Interesting conversation. I must admit I'm a fence-sitter on this one. At my daughter's school they are not allowed to wear hats/caps/hoodies on school premises even on a cold day and yet the muslim girls can wear their headscarves. I find this a little worrying. I can quite get my head round all the arguments. I hate it on the fence but can't decide which grass is greener. (whoa, too many metaphors there)
When have we ever coveted anything from Belgium? Except maybe Woofgangs list.
When have we ever considered a blanket ban on the Burkha. I am not talking tabloid speculation i'm talking facts.
The whole Burkha thing stems from the terrorist who fled dressed as a woman. Lazy Gun I think has the right of it.
We should not confuse the religious with the secular and should avoid positive discrimination. If a bank says you can't cover your face when entering its premises then there should be no exceptions and if Francis's school says no head covering there should be no exceptions.
When have we ever considered a blanket ban on the Burkha. I am not talking tabloid speculation i'm talking facts.
The whole Burkha thing stems from the terrorist who fled dressed as a woman. Lazy Gun I think has the right of it.
We should not confuse the religious with the secular and should avoid positive discrimination. If a bank says you can't cover your face when entering its premises then there should be no exceptions and if Francis's school says no head covering there should be no exceptions.
Latest Posts
69M Uninformed Horrible People....and...
News3 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Is Biden To Blame For Harris's Defeat?
News5 mins ago
ChatterBank31 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.