[HyperionTheEvil]

I could care a less if the ban Burqas, i can easily support the law if they also banned people wearing crucifixes or stars of david or banned showing pictures of the flying spaghetti monster . Doing one without the other is just plain hypocritical

[RUEZ]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

I could care a less if the ban Burqas, i can easily support the law if they also banned people wearing crucifixes or stars of david or banned showing pictures of the flying spaghetti monster . Doing one without the other is just plain hypocritical

I take the opposite view. I'd rather them not ban anything, because the next thing could be something I like.

[HyperionTheEvil]

RUEZ RUEZ:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

I could care a less if the ban Burqas, i can easily support the law if they also banned people wearing crucifixes or stars of david or banned showing pictures of the flying spaghetti monster . Doing one without the other is just plain hypocritical

I take the opposite view. I'd rather them not ban anything, because the next thing could be something I like.

That was pretty much my point, if you can ban burqas , you can ban the bible. While i think religion is a monstrous construction i would rather squeeze it our by reason than by targeting one religion as bad and not the others.

They're all bad

[andyt]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

I could care a less if the ban Burqas, i can easily support the law if they also banned people wearing crucifixes or stars of david or banned showing pictures of the flying spaghetti monster . Doing one without the other is just plain hypocritical

Your argument doesn't stand up. Nobody's banning burkas for religious reasons. In fact the banners always point out that burkas/niqabs are not required on religious grounds. When people are forced to wear stars of David, or use crosses to disguise their identity, the we can talk.


but what are they going to do about these guys?

[RUEZ]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

They're all bad

I say live and let live, as long as it's not hurting people in the mean time. If people want to believe in Allah or God then who are we to complain?

[HyperionTheEvil]

andyt andyt:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

I could care a less if the ban Burqas, i can easily support the law if they also banned people wearing crucifixes or stars of david or banned showing pictures of the flying spaghetti monster . Doing one without the other is just plain hypocritical

Your argument doesn't stand up. Nobody's banning burkas for religious reasons. In fact the banners always point out that burkas/niqabs are not required on religious grounds. When people are forced to wear stars of David, or use crosses to disguise their identity, the we can talk.


but what are they going to do about these guys?

well then why the ban? If it's just the wearing of clothes seems to me that it shouldn't be illegal. If you're going to ban a clothes for ideological reason then it has no basis. You might as well ban people from wearing wool scarves in summer, it may be a silly idea to do so, but it certainly doesn't rise to the level of requiring a law to forbid it

[HyperionTheEvil]

RUEZ RUEZ:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

They're all bad

I say live and let live, as long as it's not hurting people in the mean time. If people want to believe in Allah or God then who are we to complain?

My issue is that most of the people who believe in jesus, allah or jehova like to do things because they think they're god told them to do, or to do things to other people because their god told them to do. Which is why i don't support criminalizing religion, you just have to show that religion is by it's very nature irrational.

And really it's not that hard

[andyt]

I'm against a total ban myself. The argument for it is that many women are forced to wear the burka, it is a form of oppression. I think there are better ways of dealing with Muslim women being oppressed - even ones who don't wear the burka are subject to honor killing for example. I just want absolutely no exemptions made where identification is concerned, and I want employers to be able to set rules against them.

[GreenTiger]

andyt andyt:

I'm against a total ban myself. The argument for it is that many women are forced to wear the burka, it is a form of oppression. I think there are better ways of dealing with Muslim women being oppressed - even ones who don't wear the burka are subject to honor killing for example. I just want absolutely no exemptions made where identification is concerned, and I want employers to be able to set rules against them.

Identification is a major reason why I'm against the burka, would you want a waitress wearing a burka, or a medical professional?
Personally I want to see the face of the person I'm dealing with.

[andyt]

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

would you want a waitress wearing a burka,

Me, not so much. Customers of an Afghan or Saudi restaurant, maybe.

[EyeBrock]

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

andyt andyt:

I'm against a total ban myself. The argument for it is that many women are forced to wear the burka, it is a form of oppression. I think there are better ways of dealing with Muslim women being oppressed - even ones who don't wear the burka are subject to honor killing for example. I just want absolutely no exemptions made where identification is concerned, and I want employers to be able to set rules against them.

Identification is a major reason why I'm against the burka, would you want a waitress wearing a burka, or a medical professional?
Personally I want to see the face of the person I'm dealing with.

And that is the way most people in western society feel.

Surely we can say what is acceptable and not acceptable within our own social structures? Especially if the people not complying with our beliefs are entering our society freely?

We should be able to pick and choose who comes to Canada and those immigrants need to know that certain things are acceptable and others are not. At the moment it looks like nobody has a say on who gets in.

Immigration brings responsibilities to both the host nation and the immigrant.

Women wearing full veils is not something we see and like for a lot of salient reasons.

I don’t think an outright ban is the answer but pretending it doesn’t bother people is just political correctness gone wild.

There is no reason that these women wear the Bhurka or Niqab other than cultural. It’s not a religious requirement of their faith.

If they continue to choose to wear the veil knowing it’s negative connotations within the countries they have emigrated to well, we should be able to set some common-sense boundaries without banning them.

Identifying yourself when required is one.

Requiring people giving evidence in court to remove the veil is another. Since the Magna Carta the accused has had the right to see their accusers.

A ban in Canada wouldn’t get through a charter challenge anyway so it's a moot point.

Personally I would have thought that new immigrants would try and fit in to their new country. I did and have. It would be nice if others did eh?

[EyeBrock]

andyt andyt:

GreenTiger GreenTiger:

would you want a waitress wearing a burka,

Me, not so much. Customers of an Afghan or Saudi restaurant, maybe.

Oooo, a Saudi restaurant.....sounds fun!

Maybe a bit of stoning before your appetizer sir? I’m sorry, we don’t accept orders from females and I’d just like to check your marriage certificate before we can continue table service.

Oh, and the drive through window, we don’t allow females to drive on our property so you’ll have to make sure that your infidel whore isn’t at the wheel.

Do come again!

[martin14]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Personally I would have thought that new immigrants would try and fit in to their new country. I did and have. It would be nice if others did eh?

Amen

[andyt]

Actually they've trained all the serves at Saudi restaurants to ask: "would you like George Bush to kiss your ass with that?"

[EyeBrock]

I can't wait for their oil to run out.