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

Denmark bans full face veils.

Options
1234689

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    thebull85 wrote: »
    I dont recall saying it would help anyone,

    You replied to my question, do pay attention to what you reply to now.
    thebull85 wrote: »
    if the danish people are happy with this law being brought in then good for them. If Muslims in Denmark have a problem with it they can go elsewhere.

    Again, dodging the question I asked. Why do you bother reply, when you completely ignore what your replying to?

    So again, how are women who are forced to wear the face veil helped by being fined and potential jail time? Its a simple question.

    If you don't want to answer or more likely can't provide a decent answer, you can just choose not to reply.


  • Options
    #153
    ED E
    Registered Users Posts: 36,167 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    Marlow wrote: »
    And other nordic countries will cause you even worse troubles than Denmark as an immigrant.

    I got the impression that Finland is still quite cushy for migrants, incorrect?


  • Options
    #154
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Do you think men should be allowed to force women to wear face veils? That's domestic violence and shouldn't be tolerated.

    I am clearly against it, hence the question. Pretty bad effort at a strawman there I have to say.
    meeeeh wrote: »
    So if woman wearing face veil is arrested and she says she was forced into it, the person forcing her should be arrested.

    Yet, I see no such law being proposed. Just a face veil ban. Also, the women in question could be scared to name the person who did it, and now she goes to jail.

    Again, I don't see how this law protects women being forced to wear the face veil at all.
    meeeeh wrote: »
    Should society really turn a blind eye domestic violence and to women's freedoms being curtailed in name of religious freedom.

    Did anyone say otherwise? Who are you arguing with, exactly?


  • Options
    #155
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users Posts: 35,859 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    Malaysia is a Muslim country and they don't allow full face veils.
    They do with this.

    RebeccaLewis-July2014-muslim-businesswomen-hijab-malaysia-shutterstock.jpg

    That is what Denmark wants too. Nothing wrong with that.


  • Options
    #156
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    wes wrote: »
    There being forced to wear them, remember. So yes they could be fined and imprisoned. So its not that simple at all. You are supporting a situation were women who are forced to wear the face veil could go to prison. Your womens right argument simply doesn't make any sense at all. As you support punishing the victims.
    I think there's certainly a valid point in here in fairness. How to address it? First off, I think the need for the law is greater than any wrong done by the penalty. So the law should stay - the question then is who to punish. Do you - as you suggest - punish the husband/father? Maybe. It's not an easy question.

    It could be argued that the mindset that wears/enforces wearing of the burka is similar to that which views the wife as the husband's property. On that basis, fining the wife is fining the husband - so no issues there.

    But fundamentally, it needs to be demonstrated that this behaviour is simply not acceptable here. I would certainly go as far as to deport repeat offenders. Muslim immigrantshave a track record as being poor integrators (last month's National Geographic singles out Bangladeshis and I think Pakistanis as having a poor record of integration in England, for example). This is not helpful.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Very often financial incentives / disincentives trump social cultural preferences, hence many Moslems choosing to live in the West despite the culture clash.

    Significant fines for the wearing of the burqa and niqab will cause financial pressure on the males who impose the requirement and will very likely eventually lead to them changing their behaviour.

    Using fines as a way of modifying/limiting aberrant behaviour is effective, which is why they are used widely in all legal systems.

    The fines won't be levied on the men, but on the Women being force to wear them. They are also the ones facing prison time. I don't think the type of man who will force a woman to wear a face veil, will give a crap about her being fined or facing prison.

    A far better law would be aimed at the men forcing women to wear the face veil and not have innocent women being dragged through the legal process. A law that targets the victim of a crime by punishing them, to apparently protect them an utterly absurd law.

    Again, form a womens right pov, the law make 0 sense at all.


  • Options
    #158
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,161 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    10000maniacs wrote: »
    For security and inclusivity reasons it should be banned here too.
    We say we are an inclusive multicultural nation. Surely one of the key aspects of this is at the very least being able to see someone's face in a government building, in the street, in the mall, in a police station.
    Inclusivity is a two way street.
    Also, the reasoning behind the burqa is it's necessary because men cannot control their sexual urges when they see a woman’s lips, her cheeks or smile.
    However in this country, we don't need the burqa because we have the Gardaí.

    No-ones shown me how it's a security issue. have we had multiple bank robberies because of this? And if someone was banned from entering a bank with a full veil on, and they intend to rob it, does anyone think they wouldn't just wear a different mask?

    I really want to know how banning someone from walking around in one of these improves security. It implies that there's a need to ban this to prevent crimes that aren't actually happening. Also, there's no outcry to ban any other face covering. Where's the people who want to ban Halloween masks?


  • Options
    #159
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users Posts: 35,859 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    burka.jpg?w=736&e=b981241a63b04252a7d7fc99eab35f2a

    These veils in Europe don't make sense, and remember if Europeans go to Muslim countries they are expected to change way they dress too as to not offend, so has to work both ways.


  • Options
    #160
    ED E
    Registered Users Posts: 36,167 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    Grayson wrote: »
    Then you have to ban everything that covers a face. Halloween costumes, motorbike helmets, joke fake beards etc... You also have to show that these face coverings have impeded the security forces/police in their job.

    Yeah, and we ask them to be removed when appropriate.

    ps1438_g.gif

    If your local bank put up a hijab version of this they'd end up being burned down.


  • Options
    #161
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    cdeb wrote: »
    I think there's certainly a valid point in here in fairness. How to address it? First off, I think the need for the law is greater than any wrong done by the penalty. So the law should stay - the question then is who to punish. Do you - as you suggest - punish the husband/father? Maybe. It's not an easy question.

    Punishing the perpetrator is the norm for crime. I see no reason for this case to be different.
    cdeb wrote: »
    It could be argued that the mindset that wears/enforces wearing of the burka is similar to that which views the wife as the husband's property. On that basis, fining the wife is fining the husband - so no issues there.

    Sorry, but that is really silly. The woman will have the criminal record, not the husband. She is being punished not him. Trying to justify punishing the actual perpetrator by proxy doesn't make a lot of sense.
    cdeb wrote: »
    But fundamentally, it needs to be demonstrated that this behaviour is simply not acceptable here. I would certainly go as far as to deport repeat offenders. Muslim immigrantshave a track record as being poor integrators (last month's National Geographic singles out Bangladeshis and I think Pakistanis as having a poor record of integration in England, for example). This is not helpful.

    You mixing religion and nationality here. There 2 different things. I understand that for many people Religion is just a proxy for nationality or race, but its best not to have the law enforce such notions.

    Also, deporting someone for violating the state dress code is incredibly authoritarian, and the simple fact is that some people couldn't be deported.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    wes wrote: »
    I am clearly against it, hence the question. Pretty bad effort at a strawman there I have to say.



    Yet, I see no such law being proposed. Just a face veil ban. Also, the women in question could be scared to name the person who did it, and now she goes to jail.

    Again, I don't see how this law protects women being forced to wear the face veil at all.



    Did anyone say otherwise? Who are you arguing with, exactly?


    All those are excuses to continue practice that clearly limits lifestyle of the women. It makes a stand that that type of treatment is not allowed n secular society. I have no problem with head scarves but I do have problem with body mutilation or severe restriction in the movement of women. Can't society make a stand against that kind of culture. Its not just about immigrants it's about children born in the Europe and forced to conform to cruel religious traditions all in the name of religious freedom. If we make something unacceptable it will hopefully disappear with time or at least not increase.


  • Options
    #163
    HydroTendonMan
    Registered Users Posts: 186 ✭✭HydroTendonMan


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    burka.jpg?w=736&e=b981241a63b04252a7d7fc99eab35f2a

    These veils in Europe don't make sense, and remember if Europeans go to Muslim countries they are expected to change way they dress too as to not offend, so has to work both ways.

    At the same time the argument must be made that we Europeans bemoan the fact that we are asked to change how we dress when visiting certain countries.


  • Options
    #164
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    ED E wrote: »
    If your local bank put up a hijab version of this they'd end up being burned down.

    Hijab doesn't cover the face :rolleyes:.


  • Options
    #165
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,161 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

    These veils in Europe don't make sense, and remember if Europeans go to Muslim countries they are expected to change way they dress too as to not offend, so has to work both ways.

    Let's examine that logic.

    Premise: When europeans go to certain mulsim countries there are laws about what people can/can't wear.

    Conclusion: We should start banning clothing that they like to stick it to them?

    How does the premise lead to the conclusion? They like eating falafel and kebabs there? should we bring in a law banning falafel kebabs?

    And sorry if it seams like I'm picking you out for this. Loads of other people have made the same argument.

    It's just that i don't see the logic behind it.


  • Options
    #166
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    meeeeh wrote: »
    All those are excuses to continue practice that clearly limits lifestyle of the women. It makes a stand that that type of treatment is not allowed n secular society. I have no problem with head scarves but I do have problem with body mutilation or severe restriction in the movement of women. Can't society make a stand against that kind of culture. Its not just about immigrants it's about children born in the Europe and forced to conform to cruel religious traditions all in the name of religious freedom. If we make something unacceptable it will hopefully disappear with time or at least not increase.

    But you're pushing your views on people who might want to live a religious life. Who are you to tell someone that they can't live by their religious beliefs, all in the name of tolerance.


  • Options
    #167
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,161 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    ED E wrote: »
    Yeah, and we ask them to be removed when appropriate.

    ps1438_g.gif

    If your local bank put up a hijab version of this they'd end up being burned down.

    Nope. I posted a few pages back that i have no problem with private institutions, like banks, asking people to remove head coverings. However I don't see anyone asking for that to be made into a law that's applicable everywhere.

    If a bank says that you can't enter with your head covered that's one thing. they should be allowed do that for security reasons. However no-one is asking for all motor cycle helmets or halloween masks to be made illegal everywhere.


  • Options
    #168
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    Grayson wrote: »
    Let's examine that logic.

    Premise: When europeans go to certain mulsim countries there are laws about what people can/can't wear.

    Conclusion: We should start banning clothing that they like to stick it to them?

    How does the premise lead to the conclusion? They like eating falafel and kebabs there? should we bring in a law banning falafel kebabs?

    And sorry if it seams like I'm picking you out for this. Loads of other people have made the same argument.

    It's just that i don't see the logic behind it.
    It doesn't make sense. I don't agree with comparing Europe to Middle Easts and stating we are doing it because they do it. Europe worked hard to get out of religious fundamentalism and I don't think it should be acceptable for fundamentalists dictate how people in western society should live.


  • Options
    #169
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    meeeeh wrote: »
    All those are excuses to continue practice that clearly limits lifestyle of the women.

    I am making no excuses. I am against forcing people to do stuff that they don't want to do. All I see are excuse for authoritarianism.
    meeeeh wrote: »
    It makes a stand that that type of treatment is not allowed n secular society.

    Punishing the victim does no such thing.

    Secularism is separation of church and state. A secular society should keep religion out of government.
    meeeeh wrote: »
    I have no problem with head scarves but I do have problem with body mutilation or severe restriction in the movement of women. Can't society make a stand against that kind of culture.

    A face veil is not comparable to genital mutilation. You are now talking about a completely different topic.
    meeeeh wrote: »
    Its not just about immigrants it's about children born in the Europe and forced to conform to cruel religious traditions all in the name of religious freedom. If we make something unacceptable it will hopefully disappear with time or at least not increase.

    How many women wear the face veil in Europe? Is it an epidemic problem? You have any numbers on this?


  • Options
    #170
    thebull85
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,030 ✭✭✭thebull85


    wes wrote: »
    You replied to my question, do pay attention to what you reply to now.



    Again, dodging the question I asked. Why do you bother reply, when you completely ignore what your replying to?

    So again, how are women who are forced to wear the face veil helped by being fined and potential jail time? Its a simple question.

    If you don't want to answer or more likely can't provide a decent answer, you can just choose not to reply.


    Im not of the opinion it would help them at all. Has the law been brought in to specifically help muslim women? I doubt it.

    If they want to live in Europe then they can obey the law.

    There are plenty of womens organisation in Denmark to help women who are being abused by their partners/husbands.

    They dont have to stay with their husbands anymore than an irish woman does.

    This is Europe not some islamic kip.


  • Options
    #171
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I don't think it should be acceptable for fundamentalists dictate how people in western society should live.

    Doesn't the face veil do exactly that? Dictate to people how they should live?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    O'Neill
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭O'Neill


    It amazes me to be honest that everyone keeps going on about the burka and yet no one seems to question forced circumcission in young boys, due to their religion. Surely that's more abhorrent than what someone wears!


  • Options
    #173
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    thebull85 wrote: »
    Im not of the opinion it would help them at all. Has the law been brought in to specifically help muslim women? I doubt it.

    Ok that is fair enough. I will say I appreciate the honesty.


  • Options
    #174
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    wes wrote: »
    Sorry, but that is really silly. The woman will have the criminal record, not the husband. She is being punished not him. Trying to justify punishing the actual perpetrator by proxy doesn't make a lot of sense.
    Is this to be a criminal offence? Or just a fine?

    I do agree with you that there is a question to be looked at here. But probably bringing in clauses where you have to prove who made someone wear something here would be impractical, and even limit the effectiveness of the law by providing technicalities to escape under (the example of honour killings in Britain shows that Muslim communities can really clam up in cases of them v the police). I think in this case, a slightly faulty law is better than an ineffective onevene.
    wes wrote: »
    Also, deporting someone for violating the state dress code is incredibly authoritarian, and the simple fact is that some people couldn't be deported.
    I agree it's authoritarian. But I don't see an issue with that. I agree not all people could be deported (and again, I'm talking about repeat offenders here), but that's no reason not to deport immigrant repeat offenders. Certain Muslim attitudestowards women have no place in our society and need to be tackled head on rather than be let fester.


  • Options
    #175
    Mutant z
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Mutant z


    Good it should be banned everywhere no to the islamism of Europe.


  • Options
    #176
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    But you're pushing your views on people who might want to live a religious life. Who are you to tell someone that they can't live by their religious beliefs, all in the name of tolerance.

    I'm much closer to French line of thinking where religion is part of private life. I'm not a fan of religion being in public schools, state institutions and yes I think cruelty done in the name of religion should be banned. I'm not anti muslim or anti any other religion but I don't believe religious norms should supersede the general norms of society. As I said before not many complained to ban of walking around Marbella just in swimming costumes.


  • Options
    #177
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Grayson wrote: »
    Nope. I posted a few pages back that i have no problem with private institutions, like banks, asking people to remove head coverings. However I don't see anyone asking for that to be made into a law that's applicable everywhere.

    If a bank says that you can't enter with your head covered that's one thing. they should be allowed do that for security reasons. However no-one is asking for all motor cycle helmets or halloween masks to be made illegal everywhere.

    All shopping centres, shops, transport providers, and most buildings are privately owned, as such they generally all hold the right to refuse admission, for any reason.

    Motobike helmets are legally compulsury when on/near a running motorbike. They simply aren't worn at any other times. Haloween is a cultural fabric of this land, it occurs once per year and rarely are full face coverings used.


  • Options
    #178
    Mutant z
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Mutant z


    O'Neill wrote: »
    It amazes me to be honest that everyone keeps going on about the burka and yet no one seems to question forced circumcission in young boys, due to their religion. Surely that's more abhorrent than what someone wears!

    None justify the other barbarism of any sort done in the name of religion needs to be outlawed.


  • Options
    #179
    take everything
    Registered Users Posts: 9,804 ✭✭✭take everything


    wes wrote: »

    You mixing religion and nationality here. There 2 different things. I understand that for many people Religion is just a proxy for nationalist or race, but its best not to have the law enforce such notions.

    Couldn't help but notice this.
    So Islam isn't a race when it suits.
    And is a race when it suits.

    We've been hit over the head that attacks/criticism of Islam is racist. At least we've established it's not a race now.

    Got it.


  • Options
    #180
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    wes wrote: »
    Doesn't the face veil do exactly that? Dictate to people how they should live?

    So do all the laws. Red light dictates how you should drive, speed limits, school uniforms, paying taxes. You are safe from society dictates only on a deserted island with the population of one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    cdeb wrote: »
    Is this to be a criminal offence? Or just a fine?

    They can be jailed for repeat offenses.
    cdeb wrote: »
    I do agree with you that there is a question to be looked at here. But probably bringing in clauses where you have to prove who made someone wear something here would be impractical, and even limit the effectiveness of the law by providing technicalities to escape under (the example of honour killings in Britain shows that Muslim communities can really clam up in cases of them v the police). I think in this case, a slightly faulty law is better than an ineffective onevene.

    I don't see the law as being effective at all. All it does is punish a tiny minority of women for no good reason that I can see.
    cdeb wrote: »
    I agree it's authoritarian. But I don't see an issue with that. I agree not all people could be deported (and again, I'm talking about repeat offenders here), but that's no reason not to deport immigrant repeat offenders. Certain Muslim attitudestowards women have no place in our society and need to be tackled head on rather than be let fester.

    Sorry, but deporting someone for violating the state dress code is truly absurd, and just as bad as the problem you are trying to tackle. I think the old adage of those who fight monsters should be wary of becoming them in doing so, and I feel your suggestion very much falls into that category.

    Authoritarianism is never the answer imo, even when its well meaning.


Advertisement