Burka ban

recedite · 24-08-2016 01:36PM

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

What size of truncheons, normal or extra large?

smacl · 24-08-2016 03:05PM

I'm religious and support the ban

magicbastarder wrote: »

the photos appearing this morning really are ludicrous though. armed police ordering women to take clothing off.

Love the WWN burkini response guide

starshine1234 · 24-08-2016 04:43PM

Some cultures just don't mix.

A culture which states it will not compromise with anybody, and will kill all outsiders, can't be reasoned with, or compromised with.

An example of such a culture might be the Nazis.

Multiculturalism cannot work if intolerant and uncompromising cultures exist. The intolerant and uncompromising cultures can only be kept at arms length or destroyed utterly.

Keeping a violent culture at arms length is reckless, foolhardy and dangerous.

smacl · 24-08-2016 05:11PM

I'm religious and support the ban

starshine1234 wrote: »

The intolerant and uncompromising cultures can only be kept at arms length or destroyed utterly.

Interestingly enough, Elizabeth the First came to a similar conclusion about the Irish, where her preferred option was genocide. She wasn't alone, ethnic cleansing has reared its ugly head quite regularly in history, and is why xenophobia should not be tolerated as it is just this type of attitude that it leads to.

starshine1234 · 24-08-2016 05:39PM

Were the Nazis destroyed?

Do they exist today?

Are they banned?

Can you wear a swastika in Germany or Austria today?

The only way to deal with totalitarian and uncompromising beliefs and cultures is to destroy them utterly.

Did we make a mistake in the second world war?
Should we have opened a dialogue with the Nazis and constantly apologised for them?

We tried that in the 1930's. It was called appeasement. That policy made the eventual war the most destructive war in history.

We should repeat those mistakes should we?

We certainly have a huge group of people who apologise and cover up all sorts of bad behaviour.

smacl · 24-08-2016 05:59PM

I'm religious and support the ban

The closest analogy I can find to WWII here is the striking similarity of your intolerance of Muslims with the Nazi intolerance of Jews.

Edit: And in case you didn't notice, the rest of Europe didn't seek to utterly destroy Germany post WWII.

magicbastarder · 24-08-2016 06:01PM

I'm religious and support the ban

starshine1234 wrote: »

Multiculturalism cannot work if intolerant and uncompromising cultures exist. The intolerant and uncompromising cultures can only be kept at arms length or destroyed utterly.

You're talking about the french, yeah?

starshine1234 · 24-08-2016 06:04PM

smacl wrote:

The closest analogy I can find to WWII here is the striking similarity of your intolerance of Muslims with the Nazi intolerance of Jews.

Well, you're not very good at this if so.

What about ISIS's total contempt for what you hold dear?

ISIS need to be stamped out.

Many muslims agree with ISIS.

Many muslims think gays should be killed, and apostates should be killed.

I refuse to tolerate intolerant backward beliefs.

You can tolerate everything if you wish but you do so out of cowardice. It is difficult to tell the truth, and even more difficult to stand up for your beliefs. It is easy to refuse to act and to pretend to be blind.

Ultimately, it is cowardice which motivates many people. Many people ignore bullies in the hope that the bully will pick on someone weaker.

Eventually they will come for you. Have your rainbows and cupcakes ready.

recedite · 24-08-2016 07:55PM

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

smacl wrote: »

..in case you didn't notice, the rest of Europe didn't seek to utterly destroy Germany post WWII.

Of course not. It was their nazi ideology that was destroyed, along with its leading proponents.
A loss of "diversity" yes, but then diversity is not always a good thing in itself.

smacl · 24-08-2016 08:51PM

I'm religious and support the ban

starshine1234 wrote: »

I refuse to tolerate intolerant backward beliefs.

Maybe stop spouting them so.

jackofalltrades · 24-08-2016 09:20PM

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

magicbastarder wrote: »

it does add a bit to the power of the image.

It doesn't really though, you have to look hard at the picture to see the gun.
And at that stage you'd probably realise that this is normal in a country where the police are usually armed.
This isn't some specialist armed unit, it's the local police in shorts.

This seems to be a case of hyping up this story as much as possible.
As well as "armed" some publications/comments also throw in "men","surrounded" and "strip" for added effect.

magicbastarder · 24-08-2016 10:20PM

I'm religious and support the ban

jackofalltrades wrote: »

some publications/comments also throw in "men","surrounded" and "strip" for added effect.

such derogatory terms.
'men' is perfectly legit, especially as i would have thought it'd be common sense for them to include a female officer in such patrols.

you can see how a photo of police (armed or not) in a supposedly secular state ordering women to dress differently because 'society doesn't like how you dress' could carry a lot of weight, surely?

Akrasia · 25-08-2016 09:49AM

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

starshine1234 wrote: »

Well, you're not very good at this if so.

What about ISIS's total contempt for what you hold dear?

ISIS need to be stamped out.

Many muslims agree with ISIS.

Many muslims think gays should be killed, and apostates should be killed.

I refuse to tolerate intolerant backward beliefs.

You can tolerate everything if you wish but you do so out of cowardice. It is difficult to tell the truth, and even more difficult to stand up for your beliefs. It is easy to refuse to act and to pretend to be blind.

Ultimately, it is cowardice which motivates many people. Many people ignore bullies in the hope that the bully will pick on someone weaker.

Eventually they will come for you. Have your rainbows and cupcakes ready.

Many christians also believe that gay people should be killed.

(the term many being entirely vague)
Only about half (54%) of all Christians in 2014 agreed that homosexuality should be accepted by society, but 7 years earlier, only 44% of christians felt this way. People change their positions based on the society that they live in. Muslims will be more liberal if they live in a liberal society and are integrated and treated with dignity.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/18/most-u-s-christian-groups-grow-more-accepting-of-homosexuality/
There will always be the hardcore fundamentalists, just like there are with christians, but the numbers do not justify discriminating against the entire religious or ethnic group as a whole.

This is why the Burka ban makes sense, it only affects the most extremist form of Islamic belief but has zero effect on the moderates who would never dream of wearing a Burka.

smacl · 25-08-2016 10:44AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Akrasia wrote: »

This is why the Burka ban makes sense, it only affects the most extremist form of Islamic belief but has zero effect on the moderates who would never dream of wearing a Burka.

Agreed. It is also questionable whether grouping such a huge and diverse population as 'Muslims' and treating them as a generic group makes any sense. Many of the Muslims we see in Ireland are middle class, well educated moderates, with nothing whatsoever in common with militant extremists in the middle east.

IMHO, treating people like terrorist scumbags purely on the basis of their ethnicity is hateful, and will only lead to them becoming that way at some point in the future.

Tabnabs · 25-08-2016 10:48AM

I'm religious and support the ban

It's like I've strayed into the anti muslim league with this thread.

One rule for them, another for us...

liberty, equality, fraternity anyone?

magicbastarder · 25-08-2016 11:47AM

I'm religious and support the ban

genuine question - are they nuns?

Tabnabs · 25-08-2016 11:47AM

I'm religious and support the ban

Yes, widely reported in international media.

silverharp · 25-08-2016 11:50AM

Tabnabs wrote: »

Yes, widely reported in international media.

I don't get the apparent contradiction, work uniform surely?

Tabnabs · 25-08-2016 12:35PM

I'm religious and support the ban

Fascism, pretty clearly.

looksee · 25-08-2016 12:40PM

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

Well I for one am not anti Muslim - league or otherwise. I think the burkini ban is ridiculous and wrong. However a burkini is not a burqa. It does not hide the face, and that is my only issue, otherwise I don't care what people wear. I could prefer that women (of any culture) would not wear leggings with short tops, but I don't want to ban them.

The burkini wearers are themselves twisting the rules to suit themselves, in that the burkini does not hide the shape of the body, which is the intention of the burqa and similar garments. They could wear a wet suit with the same results. Someone is going to start promoting them as protection from melanomas though, then they will be fine.

recedite · 25-08-2016 01:08PM

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

magicbastarder wrote: »

genuine question - are they nuns?

Only the ones on the left of the picture are nuns.

Qs · 25-08-2016 01:54PM

I'm religious and support the ban

Akrasia wrote: »

This is why the Burka ban makes sense, it only affects the most extremist form of Islamic belief but has zero effect on the moderates who would never dream of wearing a Burka.

In a free society you should be perfectly entitled to hold extreme opinions and beliefs.

smacl · 25-08-2016 02:04PM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

Only the ones on the left of the picture are nuns.

You never know though... :pac:

starshine1234 · 25-08-2016 02:17PM

Qs wrote: »

In a free society you should be perfectly entitled to hold extreme opinions and beliefs.

Holding extreme views in your head would appear to be fine and perfectly legal. The alternative would be thought crime.

Expressing your viewpoint is very different.

In a multicultural society all public expression of culture or of religion must be banned. It can lead to public unrest and that can impact on public safety. In our PC world, safety trumps everything; therefore, all religious and cultural expression must be banned, for public safety reasons.

The alternative is not to have a multicultural society, which is what I'd prefer.

People express their culture and their religion in many ways. Clothing is very important. I agree that banning all clothing based cultural expression is futile in the end. It cannot work.

But perhaps we should try anyway.

An example I'd give of non-bannable clothing expression is colours of clothing, like for example the Bloods Gang in America, who wear red clothing as far as I know.

Could the colour red be banned?

silverharp · 25-08-2016 02:33PM

Qs wrote: »

In a free society you should be perfectly entitled to hold extreme opinions and beliefs.

it depends I guess. you wouldn't ban or close down a group of people because they were for example communists because in the normal course of things ideas come and go and the children of communists are more likely to have a different set of opinions by the time they grow up plus in the meantime they get on with being normal citizens. However if a society thought it was seriously at risk of being overthrown ie to change the nature of the state for the worse, the "free society" should not just tie its hands behind its back and go "well that's democracy for you!"
A free society ought to fight to stay free.

Delirium · 25-08-2016 02:48PM

I'm religious and support the ban

motokini :pac:

https://twitter.com/wordfreeland/status/768747484327870464

looksee · 25-08-2016 04:30PM

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

That is a noble effort, you would be cooked in that lot! Fair play to them though.

mrkiscool2 · 25-08-2016 04:53PM

I'm religious and support the ban

starshine1234 wrote: »

Holding extreme views in your head would appear to be fine and perfectly legal. The alternative would be thought crime.

Expressing your viewpoint is very different.

In a multicultural society all public expression of culture or of religion must be banned. It can lead to public unrest and that can impact on public safety. In our PC world, safety trumps everything; therefore, all religious and cultural expression must be banned, for public safety reasons.

The alternative is not to have a multicultural society, which is what I'd prefer.

People express their culture and their religion in many ways. Clothing is very important. I agree that banning all clothing based cultural expression is futile in the end. It cannot work.

But perhaps we should try anyway.

An example I'd give of non-bannable clothing expression is colours of clothing, like for example the Bloods Gang in America, who wear red clothing as far as I know.

Could the colour red be banned?

Wut? We should ban culture in a multi-cultural society? How does that even make sense? Should I, an Irish person living in Ireland, be forced to not be able to express my culture in public? So, if I wanted to sing an Irish song in Irish, I shouldn't be allowed to? Or I shouldn't be allowed to speak my native language? I get that you are trying to use this as a point for the burqa ban (which I still don't agree with) but it's not a point at all.

Plus, we already have laws in place which means you can't commit violence against anyone...full stop. People should have the right to wear what they want. I can understand most people's points on here as to why we should ban the burqa (not enough to make me agree, but I get it) but your suggestion is totalitarian to an extreme.

starshine1234 · 25-08-2016 05:08PM

No, it's not. My suggestion is not totalitarian.

The Ulster Pride march was banned in Dublin.

The reason?

The Irish State couldn't guarantee the safety of the participants.

Like I said, public safety trumps everything, and public safety can be used as an excuse to ban anything.

Was the Irish State totalitarian to ban the Ulster Pride march?

Should the state allow events to go ahead even if violence is certain to occur?

Michael OBrien · 25-08-2016 05:18PM

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

Tabnabs wrote: »

It's like I've strayed into the anti muslim league with this thread.

One rule for them, another for us...

liberty, equality, fraternity anyone?

Just a note. Swimming in non swimwear (not designed for that purpose) that includes heavy fabric, especially loose clothes can be dangerous. It can increase the risk of drowning. This is one reason why people don't wear lots of loose clothes when swimming.
Leaving aside religion entirely if I saw anyone going above ankle depth in the sea I would consider it irresponsible and alert a lifeguard or garda as they are endangering themselves and potentially others as rescue can be hampered by such clothes too, endangering the rescuer.

Burka ban

Comments