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

Should France be allowed to ban the Burka?

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    gozunda wrote: »
    A huge issue with what has been called the 'burka ban' is that the hysterical reaction is in fact a deliberate misnomer. I personally believe that many of the extreme Muslims groups are using this issue simply as an excuse to cry discrimination - When in reality it is far from anything of the sort.

    The law as enacted states with certain small exceptions, anyone in France "covering their face on the street and in parks, on public transportation, in public institutions such as train stations and town halls, and in shops, restaurants and movie theaters, will be subject to a fine of €150." Exceptions to the ban on 'head coverings' include covering of one's face with a motorcycle helmet whilst on a motorcycle, sunglasses, a bandage, using a welding mask, a fencing mask or a fancy dress mask.

    As French nationals or guests of that nation any one in France is by virtue of their residency in that country should be obliged to obey the laws of the land especially where such laws relate to serious and ongoing security concerns.

    not especially where such laws relate to serious and ongoing security concerns at all. they have no more of a reason to obey the laws which were only brought in to apease the rabel rousers

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #123
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    AlanS181824 wrote: »
    I think given the recent events of the last few days in France the least thing they're going to be doing for Muslim people is upholding their dress code.

    yeah, there may potentially be a lot of rabel rousing and other such nonsense.
    AlanS181824 wrote: »
    They've every right to keep it banned too

    they don't.
    AlanS181824 wrote: »
    they're not a Muslim country.

    and? no, i'l think you will find they are a free democratic one. where such nonsense banns have no place

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #124
    Tugboats
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,011 ✭✭✭Tugboats


    end of the road wrote: »
    yeah, there may potentially be a lot of rabel rousing and other such nonsense.



    they don't.



    and? no, i'l think you will find they are a free democratic one. where such nonsense banns have no place

    Is there no Hollyoaks omnibus on for you?


  • Options
    #125
    Lau2976
    Registered Users Posts: 1,030 ✭✭✭Lau2976


    So we should allow it because it's based on religion.

    It's a security issue. That's plain and simple.

    I understand being the religious minority can be very difficult, I grew up in a Jewish home, but being a different religion accounts for nothing. There should be fair treatment across the board. France is a secular country. You leave your religion at the door whe you leave your home and pick it back up in certain private property.


  • Options
    #126
    NewYork1979
    Registered Users Posts: 129 ✭✭NewYork1979


    Your religion is between you, yourself and you. Obey the laws of the country you go to.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Lau2976 wrote: »
    It's a security issue. That's plain and simple.

    .

    I look at is as a sign of provokation. Like a show of strength..... or civil disobedience in a country that gave them refuge.


  • Options
    #128
    Smiles35
    Registered Users Posts: 1,749 ✭✭✭Smiles35


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    I look at is as a sign of provokation. Like a show of strength..... or civil disobedience in a country that gave them refuge.

    It certainly is now anyway.


  • Options
    #129
    UCDVet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,894 ✭✭✭UCDVet


    Banning the Burka would be inappropriate and an attack on all religions.

    Banning clothing that conceals your identity in public would be totally acceptable.

    In fact, a lot of places already have such laws.


  • Options
    #130
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    end of the road wrote: »
    not especially where such laws relate to serious and ongoing security concerns at all. they have no more of a reason to obey the laws which were only brought in to apease the rabel rousers

    I can only presume you are attempting to be deliberately provoctive with such ill defined statements. At least make some attempt to define who you think the 'Rabel (sic) rousers" are. :rolleyes:

    Just on case you missed it - the law on headcovering has been already detailed and it is clear that the law accounts for all types of headcovers that deliberately conceal the face and is applied across the board.

    Don't want to obey the law? Get a free go to jail card or leave. It's a fairly staight forward choice imo.


  • Options
    #131
    Clermont1098
    Closed Accounts Posts: 102 ✭✭Clermont1098


    This Original Post is stupid. Who can stop France? The whole discussion about should they be allowed is ridiculous.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Lau2976 wrote: »
    It's a security issue. That's plain and simple.

    its not. just made out to be by rabel rousers.
    Lau2976 wrote: »
    I understand being the religious minority can be very difficult, I grew up in a Jewish home, but being a different religion accounts for nothing.

    well, i don't have a religion
    Lau2976 wrote: »
    There should be fair treatment across the board.

    yeah, so either they get to practice the religion or they don't. so getting to practice it it is then.
    Lau2976 wrote: »
    France is a secular country. You leave your religion at the door whe you leave your home and pick it back up in certain private property.

    not at all

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #133
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    NewYork1979 wrote: »
    Your religion is between you, yourself and you. Obey the laws of the country you go to.
    not at all. if its a law like this one, break it away as it doesn't deserve to be obeyed

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #134
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    I look at is as a sign of provokation. Like a show of strength..... or civil disobedience in a country that gave them refuge.
    if it is, then good. if france is the democratic country it claims to be, then it wouldn't implement nonsense waste of money banns

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #135
    reprise
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭reprise


    end of the road wrote: »
    if it is, then good. if france is the democratic country it claims to be, then it wouldn't implement nonsense waste of money banns

    Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité != Anarchy.


  • Options
    #136
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Clermont1098 wrote: »
    This Original Post is stupid. Who can stop France? The whole discussion about should they be allowed is ridiculous.

    The OP hasn't been back since his statement on terrorists using Burkas was overturned. The French law has already been ratified by the EU Court of Human Rights. Unfortunately there seems to be some others intent to continue stirring up this issue whilst ignoring the facts ...


  • Options
    #137
    Clermont1098
    Closed Accounts Posts: 102 ✭✭Clermont1098


    gozunda wrote: »
    The OP hasn't been back since his statement on terrorists using Burkas was overturned. The French law has already been ratified by the EU Court of Human Rights. Unfortunately there seems to be some others intent to continue stirring up this issue whilst ignoring the facts ...

    If France wants to do it, it can do it.


  • Options
    #138
    123balltv
    Registered Users Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭123balltv


    Growing up in plain old Ireland France has always been my dream destination
    to show off a fashion gown or a new hat I don't want to see versions of the dark ages dressed in all black
    I'll go to the desert if I want to see that crap.

    France is free to do what it wants and it will show tomorrow over a million
    expected to march they got pride.


  • Options
    #139
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    It's a security concern and poses a risk. Here it's used as a disguise to carry out an attack and kill 49 people yesterday




    http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/suicide-bomber-dressed-woman-kills-49-central-yemen

    Suicide bomber dressed as woman kills 49 in central Yemen
    A security source told AFP the bomber had been wearing a woman's black abaya and veil when he detonated his suicide belt.


  • Options
    #140
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Clermont1098 wrote: »
    If France wants to do it, it can do it.
    no, they can't. they have done it anyway. but still it is a bigoted waste of money law and any attempt to discredit it is welcomed.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #141
    COYVB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,660 ✭✭✭COYVB


    end of the road wrote: »
    it is a bigoted waste of money law and any attempt to discredit it is welcomed.

    It's the same law for everyone, muslim or not - you can't hide your face in certain situations. Nothing biggotted about it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    end of the road wrote: »
    no, they can't. they have done it anyway.

    conditional and past tense in the one sentence .....seems like its a done deal.


  • Options
    #143
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    bjork wrote: »
    It's a security concern

    no its not. only in the minds of rabel rousers and other types. not in the minds of those of us with common sense. the "security risk" nonsense is just made up to justify wasting such vast amounts of money on a bann which could be spent on the poor, education, hospitals, and so on.
    bjork wrote: »
    and poses a risk.

    it poses no risk.
    bjork wrote: »
    Here it's used as a disguise to carry out an attack and kill 49 people yesterday

    sadly that attack would have happened whether it exists or not.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #144
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,997 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    conditional and past tense in the one sentence .....seems like its a done deal.
    maybe not, it could be overturned in years to come for all we know

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #145
    Lau2976
    Registered Users Posts: 1,030 ✭✭✭Lau2976


    end of the road wrote: »

    Okay so il just walk into my bank with a balaclava on then. Everybody will feel super safe.


  • Options
    #146
    Zack Morris
    Registered Users Posts: 137 ✭✭Zack Morris


    end of the road wrote: »
    no, they can't. they have done it anyway. but still it is a bigoted waste of money law and any attempt to discredit it is welcomed.

    What makes this law a bigoted one?


  • Options
    #147
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    end of the road wrote: »
    no its not. only in the minds of rabel rousers and other types. not in the minds of those of us with common sense. the "security risk" nonsense is just made up to justify wasting such vast amounts of money on a bann which could be spent on the poor, education, hospitals, and so on.



    it poses no risk.



    sadly that attack would have happened whether it exists or not.

    Why did he bother wearing it if it isn't a useful disguise? Was it because he liked the colour? Do you think nobody would have tried to stop him if it was obvious he was carrying a bomb and even if it did happen less lives lost? or are we supposed to shrug our shoulders and go "ah, well sure it would have happened anyway" wtf?


  • Options
    #148
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    end of the road wrote: »
    maybe not, it could be overturned in years to come for all we know

    Pointless speculation is pointless, right now the law stands there is no viable legal opposition to it and the EU has ratified it.

    Your point that they can't do whatever they want on this issue is simply wrong and adding idle speculation about what might happen in the future adds zero to your argument.


  • Options
    #149
    T-K-O
    Registered Users Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭T-K-O


    end of the road wrote: »
    no its not. only in the minds of rabel rousers and other types. not in the minds of those of us with common sense. the "security risk" nonsense is just made up to justify wasting such vast amounts of money on a bann which could be spent on the poor, education, hospitals, and so on.



    it poses no risk.



    sadly that attack would have happened whether it exists or not.

    Yes it does. A simliar risk to a ski-mask or a motorcycle helmet.

    Sadly, the poor will always be poor, education / hospitals underfunded and so on..


  • Options
    #150
    Zack Morris
    Registered Users Posts: 137 ✭✭Zack Morris


    end of the road wrote: »
    no its not. only in the minds of rabel rousers and other types. not in the minds of those of us with common sense. the "security risk" nonsense is just made up to justify wasting such vast amounts of money on a bann which could be spent on the poor, education, hospitals, and so on.



    it poses no risk.

    Google "Thieves wearing burka" and you'll see that it has been used for crimes, so it obviously is a risk.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Piliger
    Registered Users Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    The truth is that this veil is an instrument of oppression of women by a deeply misogynist religion allied with being demeaning and insulting to those encountering women wearing it.

    It is a complete flipping of logic not to recognise that the removal of a woman's very identity in such a totalitarian way is completely against every essence of the principles of tolerance and freedom. It is also insulting to be faced with a women in this appalling garb in a social or official situation, not knowing who they are, if they are a man or woman, if they are carrying a weapon or a bomb, if they are shackled or in pain or anything else.

    Are we to allow a religion to impose handcuffs on women ? shackles ? where does it stop ?

    We in Europe should be standing up and demanding that this outrageous clothing be banned in public immediately !! In private they can wear what they chose.


Advertisement