Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Burka ban

1…1819212324…138

Comments

  • #602
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #603
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    you know exactly what I mean, don't try to pretend you don't

    societies like Dubai do not respect human rights and we do. Therefore the argument of 'well, they do it so we can as well' doesn't wash.

    Then why allow the burka? They do it, for reasons described before (domination and subjigation of women under the guise of religious duty). Why should we emulate them and encourage it, or even allow it all?


  • #604
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    Yes, it does actually. If something does not harm anyone, people should be allowed to it. Wearing a particular costume does not harm anyone. No matter how you trying to say it does, it does not.

    Its already explained how the burka can harm society, so unless you have something beyond incredulity, you have no comeback.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    Yes, some people are forced to wear it, but that does not make the garment itself worthy of a ban. It's being coerced into wearing it that's the problem. But that's already illegal!

    Everyone who wears it is being coerced into wearing it. Either through immediate physical coercion(relative forcing them), or through indocrinated coercion (being lied to that it is necessary, otherwise they will be punished in hell).
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    And I said that your argument is fallacious. The burka is a symptom and not a cause, and those views would exist irrespective of the burka.

    You can treat both you know, or are you in favour of removing pain killers from hospitals, as they only treat symptoms?
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    As for a garment undermining the power of officials, I can only laugh at that groundless claim. How?

    I've explained this time and tyime agian. By wearing the garment, it shows support for people other than the elected officials. It encourages people to unquestioningly support the religious who made up the rule for the burka (seriously unquestioned, there is nothing in the quran about the burka, and even a brief logical thought on the point leads to the conclusion that it only aggravates the problem it supposedly solves).
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    a) how do you know this in the case of EVERY person. How do you know lots of people don't wear it by free and unrestricted CHOICE (without going into a long argument of what choice is)?

    I dont need to know everyones case. Because I know the case of the religious leaders who made up the rule, and I know that the basis of the case of everyone who wears the burka is religious.
    Besides do we need to know if everyone who speeds will crash in order to make it illegal to keep everyone safe?
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    b) how will banning the burka make the lives of people forced to wear it better? The coercion (beatings, discrimination, force marriages) will still be there, you just take away the garment!

    So we cant fix everything in one foul swoop, so lets not fix anything?
    Besides, the other things you mention here, are also based on the same teachings and teachers that prescribed the burka. To interfere anywhere else will through up the same counter arguments - that these women choose their positions.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    what I am trying to prove is that the motivation behind the ban is dislike of muslims and not any great desire to improve people's rights. Hence the pope comparison.

    Would make its easy to discount us, wouldn't it? If we were just racists. Its a kind of racism in of itself, you know, to automatically cry racist when someone contradicts something you hold to.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    you invest more into education and support groups. Read beruithiel's link. One of the reasons her main character (Yildiz) cannot break away from her family is imho financial. It must be a major factor: many of those muslims live in poor areas and the young girls simply cannot afford to set up home by themselves.

    How many of them do you think would be allowed? The same forces that hold them to wearing the burka will hold them away from these educational and support groups. You cant force these people into the groups, you will still have people coerced into saying they dont want to go, followed by religious leaders claiming discrimination and asking what right the state has to interfere in religious matters.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    Thousands of muslim women in france go and seek help, but the resources are so stretched that not a lot can be done.

    Evidence please.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    The burka itself is not an abuse. The burka is a lifestyle choice. Coercion is an abuse. Forcing someone to wear something is already illegal, there's no need for extra laws there.

    The burka is abuse. Saying the burka is not abuse, is like saying self flagilation is not abuse. Just because you convince someone to abuse themselves, doesn't mean that you aren't abusing them too.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    and banning the burka will change that, right? No it won't, it will victimise the already victimised.

    Banning the burka will at least show that we dont support them.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    doesn't matter, does it: abuse of women is abuse of women...

    Of course it matters, we are talking about the burka ban, so we are talking about muslim women. Those organisations aren't dealing with muslim women anyway.
    Moomoo1 wrote: »
    what makes you think that banning the burka will make a woman more likely to seek help?

    It will make them question the point of the burka in the first place (easily done, given all the time they will have at home to think).


  • #605
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    can you not see the irony in us proving we're the sort of society which doesn't have any truck with arbitrary rules on dress code, by introducing rules on dress code?


  • #606
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Everyone who wears it is being coerced into wearing it.
    this line is continually trotted out. you don't like it, so you dismiss it as coercion, which is a nice pat way of dealing with it. the answer to a woman who would claim she chooses to wear it is to dismiss her opinions as not being her own.
    i've no illusions that in a significant number of cases, it is coercion. but you've decided to assume it's coercion, because that's the way it makes most sense to you. was (imaginary situation) my nice elderly aunt coerced into joining a closed order?


  • Advertisement
  • #607
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    can you not see the irony in us proving we're the sort of society which doesn't have any truck with arbitrary rules on dress code, by introducing rules on dress code?

    Pity thats not whats happening. we are showing that we are not the sort of society that accepts opression, so we counter it by countering the oppressors arbitrary rules on what not to wear.


  • #608
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    it's like dealing with people who advocate censorship of free speech by censoring them. it's that simple.


  • #609
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    this line is continually trotted out. you don't like it, so you dismiss it as coercion, which is a nice pat way of dealing with it. the answer to a woman who would claim she chooses to wear it is to dismiss her opinions as not being her own.
    i've no illusions that in a significant number of cases, it is coercion. but you've decided to assume it's coercion, because that's the way it makes most sense to you. was (imaginary situation) my nice elderly aunt coerced into joining a closed order?

    You are very impressed with your mind reading abilities aren't you? Thing is, thats not the case at all. I haven't decided that its coercion because I dont like, I have come to the conclusion that it is coercion because of the complete and total lack of anything even resembling a coherent argument for the burka. That includes both religiously (its not in the quran) and logically (by so totally hiding your sexuality in such an expressive way, you cant help but encourage even more of the attention you dont want - its like "whats the first thing that comes into your head when I say "dont think about elephants"?", you just reverse psychology yourself into aggravating the problem thats there).


  • #610
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I have come to the conclusion that it is coercion because of the complete and total lack of anything even resembling a coherent argument for the burka.
    your decision to control other peoples' behaviour is disturbingly close to the rationale they use. you're applying your values to what someone else wears, because it fits with your world view. and you don't see the irony.


  • #611
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    your decision to control other peoples' behaviour is disturbingly close to the rationale they use. you're applying your values to what someone else wears, because it fits with your world view. and you don't see the irony.

    These are not my values. This is simple logic. Tell someone not to think about elephants and whats the first thing in their heads? Elephants. Completely cover up because you want to be treated equally as men and to not tempt them and all you do is reinforce the idea that you need to be treated fundamentally different than men and tempt men who cant help but wonder what it is you are actually covering up.
    Do you have any reasonable or logical argument that contradicts this, or are you going to resort to emotive semantic nonsense?


  • Advertisement
  • #612
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    i don't need a counter argument for that because i see nothing there which warrants a ban on an item of clothing.

    you're mistaking common sense and rights. just because something is nonsensical does not warrant a ban on it.


  • #613
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    there are plenty of people who would argue that sadomasochistic acts are of no benefit, are harmful, and clearly show a unbalanced mind which infers that the practitioners are unable to make a judgement call on why they seek to perform those acts. but there is no mass movement to have those acts banned, certainly none that i am aware of.

    if it is legal for a woman to (for example) choose to be suspended from the ceiling from meat hooks through the skin on her back, i can't see how you can then tell that same woman that she cannot wear a piece of cloth which covers her face in public.

    afaik, there's a fairly straightforward concept in law that if a particular act has a context in which it is legal and moral, then you do not ban it even if there is also a context in which it is illegal. otherwise they'd have banned the download of all MP3s, considering most MP3 downloads are probably 'illegal'. the same goes for wearing the burka - everyone accepts that there is a context where a woman wearing a burka is a reflection of an odious practice, but because a woman can also choose to wear a burka out of her own free will, we cannot ban it as the law is too blunt a tool to distinguish between the two.


  • #614
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    i don't need a counter argument for that because i see nothing there which warrants a ban on an item of clothing.

    you're mistaking common sense and rights. just because something is nonsensical does not warrant a ban on it.

    The lack of common sense shows that the women who say they have chosen to wear the burka haven't applied any of the normal thought processes to the decision, so their decision cant be taken as uncoerced. Because no logical answer can be given for the reasoning behind the burka, we have to recognise the source as being the unelected mysoginistic barbarian religious leaders who we should not support by allowing the burka here in the west.


  • #615
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    The lack of common sense shows that the women who say they have chosen to wear the burka haven't applied any of the normal thought processes to the decision, so their decision cant be taken as uncoerced.
    ever do something nonsensical?
    if so, it was obviously coerced and should be banned.

    your authoritarian tone - i don't like it, so i want to ban it - would sit well in one of the theocracies mentioned above.


  • #616
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    there are plenty of people who would argue that sadomasochistic acts are of no benefit, are harmful, and clearly show a unbalanced mind which infers that the practitioners are unable to make a judgement call on why they seek to perform those acts. but there is no mass movement to have those acts banned, certainly none that i am aware of.

    Sadomasochists dont try to convert everyone to their beliefs, and threaten their own adherents with an eternity of no pain (hell for sadomasochists, I assume) if they dont follow some proclamation made by a far away non elected clearly biased leader.
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    if it is legal for a woman to (for example) choose to be suspended from the ceiling from meat hooks through the skin on her back, i can't see how you can then tell that same woman that she cannot wear a piece of cloth which covers her face in public.

    The same way we can tell her not to speed. Because of its effect on society. Like we have said before (and that you lot, arguments from incredulity aside, have failed to counter) the burka is not just something you wear. Its something which shows support for an outdated barbarian world view which should not be supported, as its support undermines our world.
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    afaik, there's a fairly straightforward concept in law that if a particular act has a context in which it is legal and moral, then you do not ban it even if there is also a context in which it is illegal. otherwise they'd have banned the download of all MP3s, considering most MP3 downloads are probably 'illegal'. the same goes for wearing the burka - everyone accepts that there is a context where a woman wearing a burka is a reflection of an odious practice, but because a woman can also choose to wear a burka out of her own free will, we cannot ban it as the law is too blunt a tool to distinguish between the two.

    The ban is on wearing burkas, not wearing clothes outright, get on the same page, will you.


  • #617
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,826 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    ever do something nonsensical?
    was it coerced?
    should it be banned?

    Not incessantly, and thats part of teh point. If I do something nonsensical, I can realise (or be shown) the errors of my ways and improve myself. These women cannot. They have not developed their beliefs rationally and hold to them unquestioningly. This undermines our society.
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    your authoritarian tone - i don't like it, so i want to ban it - would sit well in one of the theocracies mentioned above.

    My tone is that of "it makes absolutely no sense, and its enacting inadvertently (if you believe the women) supports a world view that needs to be stamped out".


  • #618
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Sadomasochists dont try to convert everyone to their beliefs, and threaten their own adherents with an eternity of no pain (hell for sadomasochists, I assume) if they dont follow some proclamation made by a far away non elected clearly biased leader.
    that's all immaterial for a basis on which to ban it.


  • #619
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    The same way we can tell her not to speed.
    speeding in a car can lead to death. sure, ban burkas while driving, on safety grounds, but there are no consequences of wearing a burka which are injurious to the wearers or others.


  • #620
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 53,105 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I'm religious and support the ban
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-10684359


  • #621
    Moomoo1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,960 ✭✭✭Moomoo1


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Then why allow the burka? They do it, for reasons described before (domination and subjigation of women under the guise of religious duty). Why should we emulate them and encourage it, or even allow it all?

    because you cannot give people human rights by taking human rights away. That's a bit like trying to feed people by taking food away from them.


  • Advertisement
  • #622
    Moomoo1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,960 ✭✭✭Moomoo1


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Its already explained how the burka can harm society, so unless you have something beyond incredulity, you have no comeback.

    your explanation fell down in several places. Once again, a garment cannot harm society.

    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Everyone who wears it is being coerced into wearing it. Either through immediate physical coercion(relative forcing them), or through indocrinated coercion (being lied to that it is necessary, otherwise they will be punished in hell).

    by your logic, we are all coerced into wearing clothes by law, so we should ban clothes because they constitute coercion? We are coerced into wearing modest clothing in a Christian church, so the state should ban modest clothing because it is coercion?

    but anyway, so the solution is to ban it and force the people wearing it to stay at home?

    If you think that God will punish you for not wearing a burka, what do you think will happen to a woman who is wearing a burka at the moment if a ban is introduced? Tell me.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    You can treat both you know, or are you in favour of removing pain killers from hospitals, as they only treat symptoms?

    if those painkillers could cause more harm than good to a large number of patients then the answer has to be 'yes'.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I've explained this time and tyime agian. By wearing the garment, it shows support for people other than the elected officials. It encourages people to unquestioningly support the religious who made up the rule for the burka (seriously unquestioned, there is nothing in the quran about the burka, and even a brief logical thought on the point leads to the conclusion that it only aggravates the problem it supposedly solves).

    false argument. So if I wear a Man Utd kit then it shows support for people other than elected officials? So Man Utd kits should be banned?

    What if I wear an England football shirt. That's even worse: I show support for a foreign power! One that oppressed Ireland no less! Surely that encourages me to unquestionably support the Evil English, and should be banned also!

    Seriously, arguing like this you can ban anything at all. It's a free country: I should be able to show support for whoever the hell I like. In fact, to not let me do this is a restriction of my FREE SPEECH!
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I dont need to know everyones case. Because I know the case of the religious leaders who made up the rule, and I know that the basis of the case of everyone who wears the burka is religious.

    of course you need to know everyone's case. You are claiming that having X people banned from wearing the burka will make their lives better. On what grounds are you making that claim, without even knowing them?
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Besides do we need to know if everyone who speeds will crash in order to make it illegal to keep everyone safe?

    apples and oranges. Wearing a burka does NOT make you unsafe.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    So we cant fix everything in one foul swoop, so lets not fix anything?

    by banning the burka you are making things MORE DIFFICULT for those women. How hard is that to understand? Instead of fixing your are making things WORSE.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Besides, the other things you mention here, are also based on the same teachings and teachers that prescribed the burka. To interfere anywhere else will through up the same counter arguments - that these women choose their positions.

    Are you familiar with how law works? Beating someone up is illegal no matter what the victim chooses. You commit crimes before the state, not before the victim. So those counter-arguments will be invalid.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Would make its easy to discount us, wouldn't it? If we were just racists. Its a kind of racism in of itself, you know, to automatically cry racist when someone contradicts something you hold to.

    who mentioned racism? Islam is not a race. I am just saying that many people do not like Islam and want to see less Muslims around. And so they propose laws that would make Muslims leave European countries, justifying them with things like 'liberation of women'. But you simply cannot liberate someone by banning things.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    How many of them do you think would be allowed? The same forces that hold them to wearing the burka will hold them away from these educational and support groups. You cant force these people into the groups, you will still have people coerced into saying they dont want to go, followed by religious leaders claiming discrimination and asking what right the state has to interfere in religious matters.

    and banning the burka will change nothing here except make the lives of a number of women a misery.

    and the people I am talking about are people who are already TRYING to get away, but can't, through circumstances. Let's help people who actually want to get out first, shall we?
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Evidence please.

    Beruthiel's link

    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    The burka is abuse. Saying the burka is not abuse, is like saying self flagilation is not abuse. Just because you convince someone to abuse themselves, doesn't mean that you aren't abusing them too.

    But wearing the burka is NOT the same as flagellation. You are just repeating 'burka is abuse' without justification. How can a garment constitute abuse if worn willingly? Can you prove to me that a large number of women do not wear it willingly? Surely not allowing people to wear a garment is a lot more abusive? In a way the French state is doing exactly what radical muslim men are doing by trying to control women's clothing.

    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Banning the burka will at least show that we dont support them.

    That's a big price to pay for something so insignificant. Do you think a muslim husband will think 'hey, I have less support from the state, so I won't beat my wife today'? Naive. If you attack Islam in such a lame way it will increase radicalisation, as people will go on the defensive.
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    It will make them question the point of the burka in the first place (easily done, given all the time they will have at home to think).

    another statement without basis. Go back to quote no. 2: you say that those women think that not wearing the burka will send them to hell: do you REALLY think that they will question its point so easily?

    I come from Russia, a country that tried to eradicate religion for 73 years. They failed: they pushed it underground, but in the end only made it stronger. Religious beliefs flourish in adversity.


  • #623
    Moomoo1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,960 ✭✭✭Moomoo1


    I'm religious and support the ban
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    this line is continually trotted out. you don't like it, so you dismiss it as coercion, which is a nice pat way of dealing with it. the answer to a woman who would claim she chooses to wear it is to dismiss her opinions as not being her own.
    i've no illusions that in a significant number of cases, it is coercion. but you've decided to assume it's coercion, because that's the way it makes most sense to you. was (imaginary situation) my nice elderly aunt coerced into joining a closed order?

    by the sort of logic he uses 99% of the actions we take are a result of coercion...

    in a way he does exactly what muslim men do and assumes women are objects with no mind or say of their own. He assumes that just because a muslim woman does X, then X must have been forced on her, that she didn't choose to do X. That's a very wrong and a very dangerous assumption.


  • #624
    Moomoo1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,960 ✭✭✭Moomoo1


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    You are very impressed with your mind reading abilities aren't you? Thing is, thats not the case at all. I haven't decided that its coercion because I dont like, I have come to the conclusion that it is coercion because of the complete and total lack of anything even resembling a coherent argument for the burka. That includes both religiously (its not in the quran) and logically (by so totally hiding your sexuality in such an expressive way, you cant help but encourage even more of the attention you dont want - its like "whats the first thing that comes into your head when I say "dont think about elephants"?", you just reverse psychology yourself into aggravating the problem thats there).

    is there a coherent argument for the jewish skullcap? For a tie? For halloween pumpkins?

    NO. So it's coercion to wear ties?

    Just have more respect for people's choices. If a woman chooses to wear a burka, accept that it may just be a personal choice, don't be so arrogant to think that you know better than her what's good for her. That's not what Western society is about.


  • #625
    Moomoo1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,960 ✭✭✭Moomoo1


    I'm religious and support the ban
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    The lack of common sense shows that the women who say they have chosen to wear the burka haven't applied any of the normal thought processes to the decision, so their decision cant be taken as uncoerced. Because no logical answer can be given for the reasoning behind the burka, we have to recognise the source as being the unelected mysoginistic barbarian religious leaders who we should not support by allowing the burka here in the west.

    oh dear. Psychology is not your strong point, is it?

    So if I choose to wear a wizard's hat I must have been coerced into it by JK Rowling?
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Not incessantly, and thats part of teh point. If I do something nonsensical, I can realise (or be shown) the errors of my ways and improve myself. These women cannot. They have not developed their beliefs rationally and hold to them unquestioningly. This undermines our society.

    By that logic ANY religion, even belief in Santa, undermines society? So why focus on just Islam?
    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    My tone is that of "it makes absolutely no sense, and its enacting inadvertently (if you believe the women) supports a world view that needs to be stamped out".

    And by banning the burka you will make support for this world view stronger in adversity.


  • #626
    barochoc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 293 ✭✭barochoc


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    Absolutely appalled that people in here don't support this ban. The sooner the better.

    My girlfriend can't walk around in a Muslim country without at least covering up, mainly because she's a 2nd class citizen. But they can come here & expect to do as they wish & stick to their beliefs.

    If you want to wear a Burka, stay in your own country. If you don't, you're welcome to come here.

    Oh, and while you're here, please refrain from complaining about the Angelus at 6PM every day on RTE 1 before the news. It's just a tradition for the catholics in this country. Yeas that's right, tradition.


  • #627
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    I'm religious and support the ban
    barochoc wrote: »
    Absolutely appalled that people in here don't support this ban. The sooner the better.

    My girlfriend can't walk around in a Muslim country without at least covering up, mainly because she's a 2nd class citizen. But they can come here & expect to do as they wish & stick to their beliefs.

    If you want to wear a Burka, stay in your own country. If you don't, you're welcome to come here.

    Oh, and while you're here, please refrain from complaining about the Angelus at 6PM every day on RTE 1 before the news. It's just a tradition for the catholics in this country. Yeas that's right, tradition.

    I would be absolutely amazed if anyone in this thread arguing in support of the ban agreed with a single thing you said there (apart form the "the sooner the better" comment).


  • #628
    ColmDawson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭ColmDawson


    I'm religious and support the ban
    barochoc wrote: »
    Absolutely appalled that people in here don't support this ban. The sooner the better.

    My girlfriend can't walk around in a Muslim country without at least covering up, mainly because she's a 2nd class citizen. But they can come here & expect to do as they wish & stick to their beliefs.

    If you want to wear a Burka, stay in your own country. If you don't, you're welcome to come here.

    Oh, and while you're here, please refrain from complaining about the Angelus at 6PM every day on RTE 1 before the news. It's just a tradition for the catholics in this country. Yeas that's right, tradition.
    So you want a sort of tit for tat intolerance of foreign cultures? Sounds great.


  • #629
    barochoc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 293 ✭✭barochoc


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    ColmDawson wrote: »
    So you want a sort of tit for tat intolerance of foreign cultures? Sounds great.

    Hi, I'm from Colombia. I like to do drugs. Why do you stop me from enjoying this marvelous recreational activity? I'm not harming anyone?


  • #630
    ColmDawson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭ColmDawson


    I'm religious and support the ban
    barochoc wrote: »
    Hi, I'm from Colombia. I like to do drugs. Why do you stop me from enjoying this marvelous recreational activity? I'm not harming anyone?
    I think drug laws ought to be relaxed, as a matter of fact. What's your point?


  • Advertisement
  • #631
    barochoc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 293 ✭✭barochoc


    I'm non-religious and do not support the ban
    ColmDawson wrote: »
    I think drug laws ought to be relaxed, as a matter of fact. What's your point?

    My point is very straight forward & simple.

    It's legal to carry any drug for personal use in Columbia so it should be ok for a Columbian to carry any drug he sees fit (as long as it's for personal consumption) while here in Ireland.

    Just as long as we're talking about tolerance of foreign cultures here. We have to respect all of them right? Or is it just the ones we don't like? :confused:


Advertisement