Burka ban

magicbastarder · 18-08-2016 10:12AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

Would you or an elderly person not be suspicious of the two examples on the street or in the park?

should a commuting cyclist who wears a helmet, shades, and smog mask be prevented from doing so?

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:13AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

OK so what safety reasons are there for a Burka?

*edit spelling. Stupid auto correct

magicbastarder · 18-08-2016 10:14AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

I'm talking about popular holiday destinations like turkey..........

the point stands. are you arguing that another country using an unnecessarily restrictive law gives us licence to follow their example?

magicbastarder · 18-08-2016 10:16AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

OK so what safety reasons are there for a Burka?

you really are missing the point. i should not have to justify to the government why i wear a smog mask if i am cycling. regardless of my reasons. if i choose to wear a smog mask as a fashion statement, it makes no odds to whether i should be allowed wear one.

Lux23 · 18-08-2016 10:21AM

I'm religious and support the ban

I don't like burkas, but I don't think banning them is the answer either. I think this banning of burkinis in France is ludicrous too.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:21AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

magicbastarder wrote:

the point stands. are you arguing that another country using an unnecessarily restrictive law gives us licence to follow their example?

I am saying that in Ireland we have a certain culture. We drink and get rowdy in the streets.

If we tried that in a Muslim country we would be deported.

If we tried to walk around topless we would be jailed.

Why is it inconceivable that people from countries that advocate these rules should have to follow rules set by this country?

Surely not covering up your identity is a very small rule.

if you got on a bus and a guy had his face covered with a ski mask would you not be cautious?

A Burka has no place in society. In fact all religious things should be banned from public domain. That would certainly ease tensions between the divides

Absolam · 18-08-2016 10:22AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

Would you or an elderly person not be suspicious of the two examples on the street or in the park?

We might both be extraordinarily suspicious, and mutter darkly about young people and motorcycling hooligans, neither of which happened in our day. But that doesn't answer my question.

magicbastarder · 18-08-2016 10:23AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

In fact all religious things should be banned from public domain.

there you go. you're a completely illiberal totalitarian.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:26AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

magicbastarder wrote:

you really are missing the point. i should not have to justify to the government why i wear a smog mask if i am cycling. regardless of my reasons. if i choose to wear a smog mask as a fashion statement, it makes no odds to whether i should be allowed wear one.

Listen usually I would be the one on your side of the argument. Most of my family and friends would be shocked about my side here.

That being said. Yes you should have to answer if you are concealing your identity.

If you are wearing safely equipment fair enough. But if you are hiding your face you pose a risk to national security and everyone who advocates for you rights are the reason why we are all easy targets now.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:29AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Lux23 wrote:

I don't like burkas, but I don't think banning them is the answer either. I think this banning of burkinis in France is ludicrous too.

The burkini should of course be banned for violations against fashion.

I don't care about them to be honest.

By the way..... I have no problem with the Burka. I would be OK with it as long as the face is not covered

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:34AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

magicbastarder wrote:

there you go. you're a completely illiberal totalitarian.

Actually I am very liberal

I just see that in our world today we are walking targets. The war is on our front door step and waiting to kill us.

We are targets whether we are in Ireland or on holiday in France Tunisia Spain turkey USA bla bla bla.

There is real danger out there and one small measure to stop it is stopping people from being allowed to conceal their identity.

Why can't you conceal your identity in a government building? Then why allow it elsewhere?

18-08-2016 10:38AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

Listen usually I would be the one on your side of the argument. Most of my family and friends would be shocked about my side here.

That being said. Yes you should have to answer if you are concealing your identity.

If you are wearing safely equipment fair enough. But if you are hiding your face you pose a risk to national security and everyone who advocates for you rights are the reason why we are all easy targets now.

What an outrageously OTT statement.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:39AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Absolam wrote:

We might both be extraordinarily suspicious, and mutter darkly about young people and motorcycling hooligans, neither of which happened in our day. But that doesn't answer my question.

Motorcyclists can't wear their headgear in any premises. Now sometimes they do but I can tell you in places I have worked we would not deal with someone covering their identity. Same goes for hoodies.

I did mention in the reply to you and another that local government have talked about banning hoodies for years now

Qs · 18-08-2016 10:40AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

I did mention in the reply to you and another that local government have talked about banning hoodies for years now

Which is more fascistic nonsense.

mrkiscool2 · 18-08-2016 10:43AM

I'm religious and support the ban

looksee wrote: »

Where in that does it state that the hands and face should be covered? (It does suggest that keeping slaves and castration are acceptable though, are you prepared to argue as enthusiastically for those?)

Qur'an, Surah 24 (An-Nur), Verse 31. Right there. And no, I wouldn't stand behind them and you know why? Because those things oppress other people, which in a free society, we should not and do not allow. In a free country, you have rights and those rights end when they harm other people. Wearing a burqa hurts nobody, as long as that women wants to wear it she should be allowed to.

recedite wrote: »

Are you sure it was a burqa and not just a headscarf?
There is a big difference.

It was definitely a burqa, not a headscarf.

Mr.H wrote: »

I am saying that in Ireland we have a certain culture. We drink and get rowdy in the streets.

If we tried that in a Muslim country we would be deported.

If we tried to walk around topless we would be jailed.

Why is it inconceivable that people from countries that advocate these rules should have to follow rules set by this country?

Surely not covering up your identity is a very small rule.

if you got on a bus and a guy had his face covered with a ski mask would you not be cautious?

A Burka has no place in society. In fact all religious things should be banned from public domain. That would certainly ease tensions between the divides

You are comparing an oppressive country to a free one. There is no comparison. Try to equate them is silly. It's like trying to say that a water gun and a missile launcher are the same thing. You know going to that country what the laws are, hence you can make a choice to either go there or not. If you choose to go there, you have to abide by their laws, no matter how oppressive they are.

And if I got a bus and saw a guy in a ski mask I would be concerned but I have no right to tell him he can't wear it. Just because I am concerned about something doesn't mean that it should be banned. If that was the case all men would be put in jail by feminists because they are all "potential rapists".

And again, banning religions from the public domain is literally violating a human right.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:45AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Deleted User wrote:

What an outrageously OTT statement.

Unfortunately it's not

In real Muslim countries we do hear of bombs going off all the time. The reason why has been put down to concealed clothing.

It's impossible for security in these regions to tell one person from another so it allows people to plant bombs or wear bombs.

Security experts have said that if faces where not covered it would reduce greatly the amount of explosions. Purely because they could actually identify people

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:46AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Qs wrote:

Which is more fascistic nonsense.

So you think I'm making it up or that the idea is nonsense?

Qs · 18-08-2016 10:51AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

So you think I'm making it up or that the idea is nonsense?

The idea, I know you're not making it up.

looksee · 18-08-2016 10:57AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Qur'an, Surah 24 (An-Nur), Verse 31. Right there. And no, I wouldn't stand behind them and you know why? Because those things oppress other people, which in a free society, we should not and do not allow. In a free country, you have rights and those rights end when they harm other people. Wearing a burqa hurts nobody, as long as that women wants to wear it she should be allowed to.

That is the quote we were discussing. Some translations specifically mention 'except hands and face and feet' and others say (and you quoted)

and not to display their beauty except what is apparent of it,

So what does that exception include?

It was definitely a burqa, not a headscarf.

Would you like to give us a definition of a burqua? Precisely? I suspect you are confusing it with hijab.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 10:59AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

mrkiscool2 wrote:

And again, banning religions from the public domain is literally violating a human right.

Religion affects human rights more than helps

mrkiscool2 wrote:

And if I got a bus and saw a guy in a ski mask I would be concerned but I have no right to tell him he can't wear it. Just because I am concerned about something doesn't mean that it should be banned. If that was the case all men would be put in jail by feminists because they are all "potential rapists".

Well I think you shouldn't have to tell him to take off his ski mask as he shouldn't be wearing it

mrkiscool2 wrote:

You are comparing an oppressive country to a free one. There is no comparison. Try to equate them is silly. It's like trying to say that a water gun and a missile launcher are the same thing. You know going to that country what the laws are, hence you can make a choice to either go there or not. If you choose to go there, you have to abide by their laws, no matter how oppressive they are.

My comparison is purely to justify why it shouldn't be a big deal to ban anything.

I'm not saying we should deport the foreigners or anything. Just that we should be less naive about security concerns

looksee · 18-08-2016 10:59AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Incidentally, where were you teaching that had a woman in a full burqa and presumably unaccompanied, and you as a male in the room with her?

18-08-2016 11:01AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

Unfortunately it's not

In real Muslim countries we do hear of bombs going off all the time. The reason why has been put down to concealed clothing.

It's impossible for security in these regions to tell one person from another so it allows people to plant bombs or wear bombs.

Security experts have said that if faces where not covered it would reduce greatly the amount of explosions. Purely because they could actually identify people

This is what you wrote and what I've said is outrageously OTT

Mr.H wrote: »

Listen usually I would be the one on your side of the argument. Most of my family and friends would be shocked about my side here.

That being said. Yes you should have to answer if you are concealing your identity.

If you are wearing safely equipment fair enough. But if you are hiding your face you pose a risk to national security and everyone who advocates for you rights are the reason why we are all easy targets now.

There are countless examples each day of people all over the world 'hiding their faces' without posing any risk whatsoever to national security.

If the vast majority of examples suggest otherwise, then yes indeed your scaremongering is outrageously OTT.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 11:05AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

Deleted User wrote:

There are countless examples each day of people all over the world 'hiding their faces' without posing any risk whatsoever to national security.

The fact that there are so many people who do cover there face alone makes it easy for the few who are a risk to blend in also covering their face.

How do you identify someone who had their face covered?

mrkiscool2 · 18-08-2016 11:07AM

I'm religious and support the ban

looksee wrote: »

That is the quote we were discussing. Some translations specifically mention 'except hands and face and feet' and others say (and you quoted)
So what does that exception include?

Would you like to give us a definition of a burqua? Precisely? I suspect you are confusing it with hijab.

My understanding of that quote is that the headwear should cover down from her head to her bosoms, which would be from the top of her head to her breasts, which is a burqa. And yes, it was a hijab, my apologies.

Mr.H wrote: »

Religion affects human rights more than helps

I never denied that was the case. Again, I believe in a secular state but I also believe that there is room in a secular state for people to practice and express their religious beliefs in whatever way they see fit, as long as it is not harming anyone else

Well I think you shouldn't have to tell him to take off his ski mask as he shouldn't be wearing it

Maybe, but who am I to tell him otherwise? Who are you, or the Government?

My comparison is purely to justify why it shouldn't be a big deal to ban anything.

I'm not saying we should deport the foreigners or anything. Just that we should be less naive about security concerns

I don't see how banning the burqa helps with our security in Ireland to be honest? If you could tell me how it does, I'm all ears.

looksee wrote: »

Incidentally, where were you teaching that had a woman in a full burqa and presumably unaccompanied, and you as a male in the room with her?

It was a hijab, I do get those two confused, but even so, it's Ireland. She has the right to go anywhere she wants without some accompanying her. Also, I only saw her in the staff room. I didn't talk to her but I was told by the teacher on duty she was a student of that woman (I forgot her surname unfortunately)

magicbastarder · 18-08-2016 11:07AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

I just see that in our world today we are walking targets. The war is on our front door step and waiting to kill us.

i dunno, the luas seemed pretty quiet this morning, but admittedly, this was after having to climb over all the rubble and dead bodies on grafton street to get to it.

Absolam · 18-08-2016 11:13AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

Actually I am very liberal

Mr.H wrote: »

My comparison is purely to justify why it shouldn't be a big deal to ban anything.

I think we may have a fundamental difference of opinion about what 'liberal' is.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 11:14AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

mrkiscool2 wrote:

I never denied that was the case. Again, I believe in a secular state but I also believe that there is room in a secular state for people to practice and express their religious beliefs in whatever way they see fit, as long as it is not harming anyone else

I have no problem with people having religion or other groups. But it should be kept private and out of the public domain and that includes Christians ceremonies.

mrkiscool2 wrote:

Maybe, but who am I to tell him otherwise? Who are you, or the Government?

The government are the ones who we elect the responsibility of deeming what is acceptable behavior in our society

18-08-2016 11:15AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

The fact that there are so many people who do cover there face alone makes it easy for the few who are a risk to blend in also covering their face.

How do you identify someone who had their face covered?

I don't have an answer for this.

That I don't have an answer for this does not in any way whatsoever invalidate my statement, or support yours.

Recall, you suggested that if you cover your face you are a threat to national security.

magicbastarder · 18-08-2016 11:19AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Mr.H wrote: »

The government are the ones who we elect the responsibility of deeming what is acceptable behavior in our society

i have a hunch that there won't be a government elected which will implement what you deem acceptable.

Mr.H · 18-08-2016 11:21AM

I'm non-religious and do not support the ban

magicbastarder wrote:

i dunno, the luas seemed pretty quiet this morning, but admittedly, this was after having to climb over all the rubble and dead bodies on grafton street to get to it.

When the beaches of Tunisia were mowed down by gunmen my brother and his girlfriend where on holiday there. They were not hit or anything as they where lucky enough to be in the next hotel up the beach.

When the Paris attacks happen I had friends who live there.

London 7/7 who doesn't have family or friends from there?

There are so many attacks in Europe now that it's become an actual threat.

Osama Bin Laden's nephew was living in Dublin FFS.

A leading Isis commander threatened Ireland for aiding American troops.

Ireland have bid to host the rugby world cup in a couple of years. Do you think we won't get be under some sort of threat of we get it?

So tell me, apart from your smart comments, how are we not in danger?

Burka ban

Comments