Burka ban

recedite · 21-03-2017 12:07AM

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

smacl wrote: »

It is also worth remembering that many European countries have had large Muslim populations for many generations who are at this point indigenous.

You don't get to be an indigenous people after just a couple of generations, and living in your own little sub-culture.

Indigenous peoples, also known as first peoples, aboriginal peoples, native peoples, or autochthonous peoples, are ethnic groups who are descended from and identify with the original inhabitants of a given region, in contrast to groups that have settled, occupied or colonized the area more recently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples There is nothing wrong with not being indigenous IMO, if you are willing to chip in with things and get along, but lets not change the meaning of words for purely PC reasons.

smacl · 21-03-2017 08:32AM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

You don't get to be an indigenous people after just a couple of generations, and living in your own little sub-culture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples There is nothing wrong with not being indigenous IMO, if you are willing to chip in with things and get along, but lets not change the meaning of words for purely PC reasons.

Fair enough not indigenous, bad choice of words on my part, but once you're born and raised in a given country you're every bit as much a local as anyone else. You come from the country you're born in, not the country your grandparents were born in, so if that happens to be France for example you are as French as any other French person. While I realise you're not a fan of multiculturalism, the fact is that many European societies have been multicultural for some generations, and even from a pragmatic basis I can't see this being easily changed. Better in my mind that different cultures naturally integrate over time rather than allowing minority cultures become isolated and ghettoised. So while the ECJ legislation seems fair and reasonable from the point of view of the employer, implementing it in most cases works towards stratifying society on the basis of religion rather than integrating it. The fact that it also really only effects women, it is also clearly anti-egalitarian. You also have to ask what career Muslin women who are (through fault of their religion) excluded from the workplace going to do with their lives? Maybe have more kids in poorer areas who feel discriminated against and ideal fodder for the extremists. Not clever at any level.

smacl · 21-03-2017 09:08AM

I'm religious and support the ban

silverharp wrote: »

reds under the bed? sounds preferable , it's unlikely to be as sticky as a culture of Islamofascism. xenophobia? thats a general dislike of foreigners so no that doesnt apply. As for your last point Im not sure how that is relevant?
so would that mean you are in favour of balkinisation and ghettoisation of parts of some European cities? because meh it would be rude to do anything about it? even though already doing nothing is causing stress for certain countries membership of the EU?

The probability of Islamofacism ever occurring in European countries where Muslims remain a small minority is effectively zero, however much like the imaginary reds under the bed in the McCarthy era, it seems like a good enough scare tactic to whip up a witch hunt. Xenophobia is a fear of strangers and all things foreign, so if we start identifying Muslims as a single group of people who are catagorically different to us, it is clearly xenophobic. Xenophobia in turn leads to ghettoisation, where stronger intercultural integration, such as happens in the workplace, obviates it.

Samaris · 21-03-2017 09:38AM

I'm religious and support the ban

There is also the question of would anyone have noticed or cared if we hadn't just had several years of lurking fear of Muslims (and Islam)?

I don't think we would. If it wasn't for the war and the ISIS attacks, we probably wouldn't be noticing that much. Muslims aren't a new thing as pointed out before by others. We've been pretty okay with them for the most part and where problems have arisen, it has tended to be down to something else and the religion was more a coincidence than a cause - like Moroccans and Algerians in France. It wasn't that they were -Muslim- that was a problem specifically, it was underlying tensions about immigrants in general, especially ones that didn't look European, and a messy underbelly of post-colonialism and people following them home, as Tommy Tiernan once put it.

So, just assuming that for a moment, and I realise it's a simplistic way to look at it; there -are- problems in Islam and incompatibilities, I just suspect we wouldn't care so much in other circumstances, same way as we don't care about Sikhs wearing their turbans. What does that mean for banning articles of clothing that disproportionately affects Muslims? (and if it comes to that, what does this do to Sikh men that have nothing to do with the whole thing, who are presumably also now hit with the Hob's choice of "offend my own culture and sense of rightness or offend European culture which has never minded me before - and what harm is my turban doing anyway, it's not jumping up and biting people!")

In the case of the headscarf (which has recently been banned in a couple of countries), it suggests to me that it's down to fear. Make them look more similar. I don't want to see a Muslim on a bus and be afraid she's carrying a bomb under her..uh..headscarf. Etcetera. Fear is a poor basis for a law that disproportionately affects one portion of the population. It breeds understandable resentment in the innocent and gives the guilty an excuse. And right now, with the sort of talk that we hear fairly regularly about banning Muslims, about the general evil of Muslims, about how they're backward and follow a nasty religion with no redeeming features, about how they should be wiped out in the cases of some of the more disgusting views out there, it is very hard not to see it as a knee-jerk reaction to fear and something for Muslims to be alarmed and resentful of.

I think there's a slightly better argument to be made for the burqa in our societies, especially as it's not been around for that long for many Islamic countries and it does put an actual barrier down between Muslim women and European society in a way that the hijab doesn't. I do feel sorry for those women who are used to it, who like it and wear it by choice, and who will feel exposed and nervous of being out without it. It's going to be tough on them, and tougher still if they do get disapproval from their own countrymen around them. To have to offend either your own sense of right or your culture's (meaning the culture of the country one lives in) is not a fun choice. Bit ironic from the point of view of the ads and the notion we push in our cultures of individuality and "just be yourself", mind you. Just be yourself - BY CONFORMING TO MY EXPECTATIONS OR ELSE. Express your individuality - and you better look convincingly European about it! Bet some of those ads and articles are pretty galling to see, all things considered.

silverharp · 21-03-2017 09:49AM

smacl wrote: »

The probability of Islamofacism ever occurring in European countries where Muslims remain a small minority is effectively zero, however much like the imaginary reds under the bed in the McCarthy era, it seems like a good enough scare tactic to whip up a witch hunt. Xenophobia is a fear of strangers and all things foreign, so if we start identifying Muslims as a single group of people who are catagorically different to us, it is clearly xenophobic. Xenophobia in turn leads to ghettoisation, where stronger intercultural integration, such as happens in the workplace, obviates it.

i dont accept your use of the term but anyhoo, its muslims by and large that are self segregating but it then becomes 2 way ie that locals know where its not safe to live and which schools not to send their kids to.
its certain that a lack of leadership will create politics downstream that you wont be happy with.

smacl · 21-03-2017 11:10AM

I'm religious and support the ban

silverharp wrote: »

i dont accept your use of the term but anyhoo, its muslims by and large that are self segregating but it then becomes 2 way ie that locals know where its not safe to live and which schools not to send their kids to. its certain that a lack of leadership will create politics downstream that you wont be happy with.

My use of the term comes straight from the Merriam-Webster dictionary;

Merriam-Webster wrote:

Definition of xenophobia
: fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign

That aside, I would suggest that there are significant external as well as internal factors that lead to the segregation of Muslims from the rest of society in Europe, where banning the hijab from the workplace can reasonably be seen as both. You also find that in many places in Europe, Islam correlates with ethnicity and lack of wealth, so I think it is incorrect to assert that where Muslims have become ghettoised it is entirely due to their own desire to self segregate.

silverharp · 21-03-2017 12:47PM

smacl wrote: »

My use of the term comes straight from the Merriam-Webster dictionary;

That aside, I would suggest that there are significant external as well as internal factors that lead to the segregation of Muslims from the rest of society in Europe, where banning the hijab from the workplace can reasonably be seen as both. You also find that in many places in Europe, Islam correlates with ethnicity and lack of wealth, so I think it is incorrect to assert that where Muslims have become ghettoised it is entirely due to their own desire to self segregate.

it tends to mean in general ie you would have the same opinion of Polish or Chinese and it wouldn't matter if they were all brain surgeons. I think its very rational to have an issue with large numbers of uneducated people arriving with a religious/political culture that they wont drop by and large which leads to self segregation and the creation of hostile and toxic attitudes towards the host country.
Lots of people come to Europe with just a few hundred euros in their pockets. Do you think people from the Philippines, India, South America or China bring wealth with them when they come to Europe? they are also different ethnic groups yet they become invisible by and large

recedite · 21-03-2017 03:48PM

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

smacl wrote: »

So for example, say you have a Muslim women who is a doctor, and following on from this legislation she feels she must resign her position and stop working, society is down a much needed doctor ...

smacl wrote: »

I'd be more intolerant of the imams who do little in terms of ostracising the radicals and condemning their actions than the women who wear a hijab into work.

These hypothetical examples seem to describe a relatively modern and "liberated" Muslim woman. She has studied hard, as a teenager she resisted the pressure to consent to an arranged marriage to an older man, gone to university, and now she works in an environment where she is exposed to "strange" men (ie not her brothers or husband).

So this woman is not wearing Islamic headgear “because she feels she has no choice”. It must be more of a statement of cultural identity, or maybe even a fashion statement. If that is so, then she does not deserve any exemption from the normal professional dress requirements.

On the other hand, the illiterate Somali woman who appears in the shopping mall once a week in full Islamic gear, walking 5 paces behind her husband, with 4 small kids in tow, and carrying all the shopping, probably feels she has little choice in what she wears. But a special exemption from workplace headgear rules for her is not going to provide any more choices in her life.

And BTW, don't hold your breath waiting for Imams (or any other religious leaders) to preach to and implore their flock to be less fundamentalist in the practice of their religion. That's not their job.

smacl · 21-03-2017 04:14PM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

These hypothetical examples seem to describe a relatively modern and "liberated" Muslim woman. She has studied hard, as a teenager she resisted the pressure to consent to an arranged marriage to an older man, gone to university, and now she works in an environment where she is exposed to "strange" men (ie not her brothers or husband).

So this woman is not wearing Islamic headgear “because she feels she has no choice”. It must be more of a statement of cultural identity, or maybe even a fashion statement. If that is so, then she does not deserve any exemption from the normal professional dress requirements.

So we have a female Muslim doctor who has contributed to society all her working life and worn the hijab while doing so being told she can no longer wear the hijab because of the actions of some terrorists that she has no relationship to whatsoever other than sharing the same faith? Seems both petty and bigoted from where I'm sitting no to mention being of no practical social value while having many possible negatives.

On the other hand, the illiterate Somali woman who appears in the shopping mall once a week in full Islamic gear, walking 5 paces behind her husband, with 4 small kids in tow, and carrying all the shopping, probably feels she has little choice in what she wears. But a special exemption from workplace headgear rules for her is not going to provide any more choices in her life.

Quite right, a workplace exemption for the hijab will have no benefit for her. A burqa ban will, assuming that's what you mean by 'full Islamic gear', which is why I am in favour of a burqa ban as stated right throughout this thread.

And BTW, don't hold your breath waiting for Imams (or any other religious leaders) to preach to and implore their flock to be less fundamentalist in the practice of their religion. That's not their job.

True of course, but they should still be a focus for those looking for change. A ban on hijabs in the workplace isn't going to have any effect other than polarising those on both sides.

smacl · 21-03-2017 04:25PM

I'm religious and support the ban

silverharp wrote: »

it tends to mean in general ie you would have the same opinion of Polish or Chinese and it wouldn't matter if they were all brain surgeons. I think its very rational to have an issue with large numbers of uneducated people arriving with a religious/political culture that they wont drop by and large which leads to self segregation and the creation of hostile and toxic attitudes towards the host country.
Lots of people come to Europe with just a few hundred euros in their pockets. Do you think people from the Philippines, India, South America or China bring wealth with them when they come to Europe? they are also different ethnic groups yet they become invisible by and large

If you look at a history of race riots across Europe, you'll see that there evenly spread between immigrants of various ethnicity and religion. You assertion that the problem is specific to Muslim migrants seems entirely specious.

recedite · 21-03-2017 04:44PM

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

smacl wrote: »

If you look at a history of race riots across Europe,

What has a history of race riots got to do with this discussion?

smacl · 21-03-2017 05:02PM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

What has a history of race riots got to do with this discussion?

The assertion by silverharp that migration of other non-Muslim ethnic groups into Europe is somehow more successful than that of Muslim ethnic groups, where this clearly isn't the case. Race riots between a given ethnic migrant group and the rest of the community are the final outcome of tensions between these groups and are clearly indicative of a failure to integrate or even co-exist in the same area.

recedite · 22-03-2017 12:27AM

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

Come back to us when you can report a bunch of Chinamen bursting into a rock concert and spraying the crowd with bullets.

smacl · 22-03-2017 09:19AM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

Come back to us when you can report a bunch of Chinamen bursting into a rock concert and spraying the crowd with bullets.

So your argument actually boils down to giving Muslim women in the workplace a hard time because they share the same nominal religion as ISIS terrorist? Reminds me of getting abuse in London for being Irish when the IRA were going around blowing people up, and me neither Catholic not nationalist.

silverharp · 22-03-2017 11:23AM

smacl wrote: »

The assertion by silverharp that migration of other non-Muslim ethnic groups into Europe is somehow more successful than that of Muslim ethnic groups, where this clearly isn't the case. Race riots between a given ethnic migrant group and the rest of the community are the final outcome of tensions between these groups and are clearly indicative of a failure to integrate or even co-exist in the same area.

so what other "ethnic" tensions are there today in Europe, are Poles in Ireland asserting Polish culture and keeping their kids separated? should we be worried about the Chinese?
Its clearly possible to tell on a group level who will assimilate and who wont , why invite problems?

robindch · 22-03-2017 12:26PM

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

recedite wrote: »

Come back to us when you can report a bunch of Chinamen bursting into a rock concert and spraying the crowd with bullets.

Reminds me of a comment some christians say when their religion is mocked or criticized - "You wouldn't say that about islam, would you?"

smacl · 22-03-2017 12:53PM

I'm religious and support the ban

silverharp wrote: »

so what other "ethnic" tensions are there today in Europe, are Poles in Ireland asserting Polish culture and keeping their kids separated?

No, but then the Polish are by and large Catholics and can lay their hands on the baptismal cert needed to get into the local school. The ET secondary my daughter goes to has a lot of Muslim kids in it who clearly have no issues with mixing with the locals. Yes, they also have some state funded Muslim ethos schools, and personally I'd disagree with this on the grounds of the state funding any religious ethos school. While Polish in Ireland do get a certain amount of flak, notably from the 'taking our jobs' line from people who weren't bothered or capable of doing those jobs before the Poles arrived, they tend to blend in on the basis of not being readily identifiable until you talk to them.

There have been Muslim communities in Europe for decades if not centuries, and the only issues up until the ISIS attacks have been those common to all other ethnic minorities. To suggest we should vilify all Muslims for the actions of ISIS is patently ridiculous, in much the same way as suggesting we should vilify all Catholics or all Irish people for the atrocities committed by the IRA.

silverharp · 22-03-2017 03:03PM

smacl wrote: »

No, but then the Polish are by and large Catholics and can lay their hands on the baptismal cert needed to get into the local school. The ET secondary my daughter goes to has a lot of Muslim kids in it who clearly have no issues with mixing with the locals. Yes, they also have some state funded Muslim ethos schools, and personally I'd disagree with this on the grounds of the state funding any religious ethos school. While Polish in Ireland do get a certain amount of flak, notably from the 'taking our jobs' line from people who weren't bothered or capable of doing those jobs before the Poles arrived, they tend to blend in on the basis of not being readily identifiable until you talk to them.

There have been Muslim communities in Europe for decades if not centuries, and the only issues up until the ISIS attacks have been those common to all other ethnic minorities. To suggest we should vilify all Muslims for the actions of ISIS is patently ridiculous, in much the same way as suggesting we should vilify all Catholics or all Irish people for the atrocities committed by the IRA.

it comes down to concentration of numbers. Ireland isnt an issue for now because there arent any parts of big cities that could be described as Muslim but where there is around europe this is where there is cultural extremism the tail end of which being terrorism or open support for it
Also as a more general point, its not me you have to convince , im just suggesting that if people have to rub against islamic culture around Europe the locals will vote in the ballot box for this to change at some point. call it a hunch or something that is inevitable

smacl · 22-03-2017 04:14PM

I'm religious and support the ban

silverharp wrote: »

it comes down to concentration of numbers. Ireland isnt an issue for now because there arent any parts of big cities that could be described as Muslim but where there is around europe this is where there is cultural extremism the tail end of which being terrorism or open support for it

You're implying a cause and effect there in terms of the very existence of Muslim communities in Europe leading to the ISIS attacks, yet there have been Muslim communities in Europe for many decades and this is a relatively recent phenomenon. There have also been a number of wars in the Middle East that have featured Western involvement, which I think most people would consider have been the more likely cause for the rise of ISIS and ensuing terrorism. The tail end of isolating and ghettoising ethnic minorities of any significant size tends to be race riots which are not unique to Muslims.

Also as a more general point, its not me you have to convince , im just suggesting that if people have to rub against islamic culture around Europe the locals will vote in the ballot box for this to change at some point. call it a hunch or something that is inevitable

No doubt, particularly with the rise of the far right in many countries. Whether this will solve the problem or make it worse is a different matter. I suspect the latter.

silverharp · 22-03-2017 04:28PM

smacl wrote: »

You're implying a cause and effect there in terms of the very existence of Muslim communities in Europe leading to the ISIS attacks, yet there have been Muslim communities in Europe for many decades and this is a relatively recent phenomenon. There have also been a number of wars in the Middle East that have featured Western involvement, which I think most people would consider have been the more likely cause for the rise of ISIS and ensuing terrorism. The tail end of isolating and ghettoising ethnic minorities of any significant size tends to be race riots which are not unique to Muslims.

No doubt, particularly with the rise of the far right in many countries. Whether this will solve the problem or make it worse is a different matter. I suspect the latter.

the argument doesn't stand or fall on terrorists attacks unless they really get out of hand. its the day to day stuff, women feeling less safe out and about because of increased harassment , gang culture in schools that have high numbers of Muslims, competition for low end housing , perceptions of high criminality and high use of welfare.
As for your last point who knows, let numbers rise an do nothing means more of the problems that have got peoples attention and people in the end turn away from doing nothing and want to see a response

smacl · 22-03-2017 05:15PM

I'm religious and support the ban

silverharp wrote: »

the argument doesn't stand or fall on terrorists attacks unless they really get out of hand. its the day to day stuff, women feeling less safe out and about because of increased harassment , gang culture in schools that have high numbers of Muslims, competition for low end housing , perceptions of high criminality and high use of welfare.

You could make the same point about just about any ethnic minority with high unemployment though, from travellers in Limerick to afro-Caribbeans in 1980s Brixton. I'd suggest that the issue with Muslims at this point in time is very much the perceived link with ISIS terrorism in Europe.

silverharp · 22-03-2017 05:43PM

smacl wrote: »

You could make the same point about just about any ethnic minority with high unemployment though, from travellers in Limerick to afro-Caribbeans in 1980s Brixton. I'd suggest that the issue with Muslims at this point in time is very much the perceived link with ISIS terrorism in Europe.

partially but its also economic , the 90's were a boom time so people don't care once things are going well. when the economy turns downs people start worrying about where their taxes are going. And still leading politicians in Europe aren't giving clear leadership.
Its clear that there is a perceived divide, the "elites" want to flood Europe with rocket surgeons from the middle east , "big business" is happy with this as its more cheap labour (although the recent arrivals are pretty much useless in terms of skills) and customers yet the little guy is saying whats in it for me except higher taxes and higher rents and a reduction in civic standards.

smacl · 22-03-2017 06:11PM

I'm religious and support the ban

Again, same is true of pretty much any economic migrant population. You hear regular gripes about Polish people coming over here, taking our jobs, using up accommodation, using our taxes by going on the dole, etc... (Seem to remember someone here talking about Schrodinger's Immigrant, taking our jobs and going on the dole

)

As per Rec's previous comment, the bigger concern is a bunch of terrorists randomly attacking civilians. I'm guessing today's London attack will more likely than not get linked back to ISIS.

recedite · 22-03-2017 07:28PM

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

smacl wrote: »

So your argument actually boils down to giving Muslim women in the workplace a hard time because they share the same nominal religion as ISIS terrorist? Reminds me of getting abuse in London for being Irish when the IRA were going around blowing people up, and me neither Catholic not nationalist.

smacl wrote: »

To suggest we should vilify all Muslims for the actions of ISIS is patently ridiculous, in much the same way as suggesting we should vilify all Catholics or all Irish people for the atrocities committed by the IRA.

smacl wrote: »

I'd suggest that the issue with Muslims at this point in time is very much the perceived link with ISIS terrorism in Europe.

smacl wrote: »

You hear regular gripes about Polish people coming over here, taking our jobs, using up accommodation, using our taxes by going on the dole, etc... (Seem to remember someone here talking about Schrodinger's Immigrant, taking our jobs and going on the dole..

You're really going all out with the strawman arguments today, aren't you

The point being made re the recent EU ruling was that Islam should not be given an exemption to dress codes that apply to others. So far you have criticised the ruling, but failed to offer a single reason why muslims should be given this derogation.

Your constant reference to "ISIS" being the source of all the problems for Islam in Europe is facile. Islamic State has been just one short-lived incarnation of Islamic Fundamentalism. IS has been steadily eroded in size and capability, and if Donald J Trump's efforts come to fruition, it is unlikely to last beyond this year.
Who, or what, will you blame then, when jihadi terrorists continue to spring up?

smacl · 22-03-2017 09:06PM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

So far you have criticised the ruling

Nope

smacl wrote: »

technically I have no issue with businesses being able to dictate a dress code that does not make concessions for items of clothing such as the hijab or turban

but failed to offer a single reason why muslims should be given this derogation.

Again, nope.

smacl wrote: »

The outcome is more of a concern as the net effect of this is that you will force many Muslim women out of the workforce. Sure some will bite the bullet and drop the hijab, but many more won't. The latter will experience significant increased hardship as a result (which you could perhaps argue is of their own making but that is by the by). Increased hardship and poverty will no doubt breed resentment and if anything deepen the fault lines that exist in these societies between Muslims and non-Muslims, which in turn creates an ideal breeding ground for the next bunch of home grown terrorists

Your constant reference to "ISIS" being the source of all the problems for Islam in Europe is facile. Islamic State has been just one short-lived incarnation of Islamic Fundamentalism. IS has been steadily eroded in size and capability, and if Donald J Trump's efforts come to fruition, it is unlikely to last beyond this year.
Who, or what, will you blame then, when jihadi terrorists continue to spring up?

ISIS, Al-Qaeda, the Taliban or whoever it is next in line for the militarised free west to wage their war on terror on, the name doesn't really make a whole lot of difference. Donny is going to solve the problem just like Dubya and his daddy did before him. Spout off about the axis of evil, bomb the living bejasus out of a huge bunch of troublesome ragheads, and then start wondering why there are terrorist attacks on home soil. Never worked before, but maybe if The Donald works his magic charm, who knows...

...but hey, if we can stop their womenfolk from wearing scarves to work, that'll help, right? :pac:

recedite · 23-03-2017 12:56PM

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

You say you did not criticise the ruling, but then quote yourself saying "the net effect of this is that you will force many Muslim women out of the workforce.... The latter will experience significant increased hardship as a result... Increased hardship and poverty will no doubt breed resentment ...which in turn creates an ideal breeding ground for the next bunch of home grown terrorists"
So which is it? Do you agree with the ruling of not?

"Make concessions, or feel the righteous wrath" seems to be where your line of thinking leads to.

smacl · 23-03-2017 01:34PM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

So which is it? Do you agree with the ruling of not?

I have no problem with the ruling, if a business wishes to enforce a dress code at their discretion it is their prerogative to do so. What I'm saying is that from pragmatic point of view, if businesses use this legislation solely as a mechanism to force their female Muslim employees to choose between their livelihood or their hijab it will to the detriment of all concerned. It also runs contrary to the spirit of the legislation which is not to discriminate against a single group on religious grounds.

recedite · 23-03-2017 01:55PM

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

So you agree with the law in theory, but not with applying it.
A peculiarly Irish sort of position to take

smacl · 23-03-2017 02:14PM

I'm religious and support the ban

recedite wrote: »

So you agree with the law in theory, but not with applying it.
A peculiarly Irish sort of position to take

Laws as often as not dictate the limits of what is acceptable rather than what we should aspire to. e.g. just because the legal limit might let me drive with one drink taken doesn't mean I should consume that one drink each and every time before driving.

Hotblack Desiato · 24-03-2017 02:08AM

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

Can we collectively take a step back and remind ourselves -

The court judgement is not sexist.

It's islamic dress codes which are sexist.

Burka ban

Comments