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
1234568

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    jaxxx
    Registered Users Posts: 3,230 ✭✭✭jaxxx


    Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »
    For basic security and ID, full face coverings are probably not suitable. A partial or full ban is worth considering.

    Are you saying the more multi-cultural states such as France have got it all wrong?

    59653981ae07c.jpg


    Are Ireland, Portugal, etc no longer part of Europe??? :eek:


  • Options
    #213
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    quintana76 wrote: »
    Some of those burka wearers would frighten the ghouls at Halloween.

    Worth noting, the party-goers at out age-old pagan tradition of Haloween, are only too happy and expected to remove any face coverings when entering their primary location (bars/clubs) when asked for ID by the bouncer. Also when availing of services (drinks) of bar staff. And also partaking in social interactions, simply due to practicality.


  • Options
    #214
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    jaxxx wrote: »
    Are Ireland, Portugal, etc no longer part of Europe??? :eek:

    No data available I guess, pending legislation, or haven't given it any real thought perhaps.

    Worth noting the partial bans are more or less full bans, with only very select situations allowing their use.


  • Options
    #215
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    take everything wrote: »
    You seem very defensive and triggered.
    Just be nice.

    All I saw was Islam is a race sometimes and not other times.

    Look, I am talking about simple criticism of religion not hatred of people.

    Any criticism of Islam is often met with accusations of racism. It can't be criticised or pilloried or satirised like people satirise or pillory Christianity or Judaism without someone invoking racism and race.

    That's the issue.

    Hatred of Muslims is another issue.

    But a religion that ingrains itself so deeply into culture is always going to be a slippery target, something that can't be touched (and invoking calls of racism) and other times it's just a religion.

    That's my issue.

    Yeh, I’m pretty sure that’s not that common.


  • Options
    #216
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,171 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »
    For basic security and ID, full face coverings are probably not suitable. A partial or full ban is worth considering.

    Are you saying the more multi-cultural states such as France have got it all wrong?

    59653981ae07c.jpg

    That's an argument from authority. And yeah, I'm saying they got it wrong. Unless you can show me how it's a security concern and other face covering are not a danger? Like I've said, I realize that in certain situations a full face covering is a security concern. Like in banks or at an airport. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it should be banned on the street.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    greencap
    Registered Users Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭greencap


    jaxxx wrote: »
    Are Ireland, Portugal, etc no longer part of Europe??? :eek:

    I was hoping someone would know the full details of veil bans in Europe and worldwide. (google is my friend i know, just lazy)

    It seem to be becoming more and more popular, and accepted.

    I recall hearing about places like France and Austria, and Quebec, and possibly even Poland(uncertain).

    So could we be next in line?

    discussion/2058195983/russia-threadbanned-users-in-op/p3135

    😁



  • Options
    #218
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    take everything wrote: »
    You seem very defensive and triggered.
    Just be nice.

    Again, you clearly have an axe to grind, and I have better things to do, than be dragged off topic. I get someone said something mean, and now you just have to say something to someone, anyone about it. Sorry, not going to be that for you. Will bow out. You can have the last word.


  • Options
    #219
    take everything
    Registered Users Posts: 9,805 ✭✭✭take everything


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Yeh, I’m pretty sure that’s not that common.

    Jews laugh at themselves all the time.
    They joke about the Holocaust for god sake.

    Jewish culture is something that is frequently made fun of and criticised.

    Curb your enthusiasm does it all the time.
    I can't think of an equivalent in Islamic culture which mocks itself.

    If you dare to publish a satirical cartoon of their prophet you risk death FFS. Long way from Father Ted.

    The point is it doesn't seem to be a culture open to criticism, reasonable mature debate, satire, change etc.

    And more dangerously it's nebulously a religion one minute and a culture or race the next. As I say, it's anything you want it to be, when it suits.

    It's versatile, I'll give it that.


  • Options
    #220
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I'm not defending what Serbs did in Bosnia but that is a bit more complicated than religious hatred.

    I should have been clearer. The people we refer to as Bosniaks now, were once referred to solely as Muslims in the past. Yes, your right it is a complicated situation and I wasn't very clear.

    You can read more here:
    http://www.seep.ceu.hu/issue22/dimitrovova.pdf


  • Options
    #221
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    I'm against paying tax. Should I be able to opt out??

    Ok that is a good one. The difference is we require taxes to pay for all the services etc needed to run the country. The face veil ban serves no such purpose, but nice effort there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Grayson wrote: »
    That's an argument from authority. And yeah, I'm saying they got it wrong. Unless you can show me how it's a security concern and other face covering are not a danger?

    Like I've said, I realize that in certain situations a full face covering is a security concern. Like in banks or at an airport. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it should be banned on the street.

    What 'other' face coverings? If you're referring again back to the Irish tradition of (once-per-year) haloween, it's a poor argument. And it's nothing to do with 'danger' it's for Identity purposes and societal norms.

    You should probably write a strongly worded letter to the French (of whom about 8% are muslim) yet still live under this law of their land.


  • Options
    #223
    take everything
    Registered Users Posts: 9,805 ✭✭✭take everything


    wes wrote: »
    Again, you clearly have an axe to grind, and I have better things to do, than be dragged off topic. I get someone said something mean, and now you just have to say something to someone, anyone about it. Sorry, not going to be that for you. Will bow out. You can have the last word.

    Something mean?
    Nobody said anything to me.
    You seem to be projecting something that isn't there onto me.

    I just voiced a simple opinion about the nature of Islam of religion/culture/race (delete as appropriate; actually definitely delete the race bit as it's not a race) more as an observation than anything else and you seem to get quite upset and defensive.

    I don't want the last word tbh.
    Anyway that's my 2c


  • Options
    #224
    Lux23
    Registered Users Posts: 7,134 ✭✭✭Lux23


    I absolutely hate face veils, they make me really uncomfortable, but I don't see the point in banning them. What good does it do?


  • Options
    #225
    NoviGlitzko
    Registered Users Posts: 2,580 ✭✭✭NoviGlitzko


    Go Denmark!


  • Options
    #226
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »
    What 'other' face coverings? If you're referring again back to the Irish tradition of (once-per-year) haloween, it's a poor argument. And it's nothing to do with 'danger' it's for Identity purposes and societal norms.

    You should probably write a strongly worded letter to the French (of whom about 8% are muslim) yet still live under this law of their land.

    Nuns definitely used to wear veils. I think some women in mourning too.


  • Options
    #227
    RebelButtMunch
    Registered Users Posts: 2,378 ✭✭✭RebelButtMunch


    Lux23 wrote: »
    I absolutely hate face veils, they make me really uncomfortable, but I don't see the point in banning them. What good does it do?

    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.secularism.org.uk%2Ffull-face-veil-should-it-be-bann.html


  • Options
    #228
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Nuns definitely used to wear veils. I think some women in mourning too.

    This century, in Europe?


  • Options
    #229
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »
    This century, in Europe?

    Century is young.

    Probably though, at least for nuns.


  • Options
    #230
    Odhinn
    Registered Users Posts: 8,075 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Century is young.

    Probably though, at least for nuns.

    Nun years run differently to people years.


  • Options
    #231
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Century is young.

    Probably though, at least for nuns.

    Would be understandable for any women in mourning, but this wouldn't be a 'lifestyle choice', as such.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    wes wrote: »
    I should have been clearer. The people we refer to as Bosniaks now, were once referred to solely as Muslims in the past. Yes, your right it is a complicated situation and I wasn't very clear.

    You can read more here:
    http://www.seep.ceu.hu/issue22/dimitrovova.pdf
    1. Your link is written 10 years after the start of war in Yugoslavia.
    2. It discusses Muslim origin population in Montenegro.
    3. It points out that since 1971 Muslim was category of nationality in Yogoslavian census to define ancestors of those who became Muslims under Turkish rule. It confirms my point that at the time Muslim was defined nationality in Yugoslavia and did not necessarily correspond to religious belief.


  • Options
    #233
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,171 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    take everything wrote: »
    Jews laugh at themselves all the time.
    They joke about the Holocaust for god sake.

    Jewish culture is something that is frequently made fun of and criticised.

    Curb your enthusiasm does it all the time.
    I can't think of an equivalent in Islamic culture which mocks itself.

    If you dare to publish a satirical cartoon of their prophet you risk death FFS. Long way from Father Ted.

    The point is it doesn't seem to be a culture open to criticism, reasonable mature debate, satire, change etc.

    And more dangerously it's nebulously a religion one minute and a culture or race the next. As I say, it's anything you want it to be, when it suits.

    It's versatile, I'll give it that.

    When exactly did curb your enthusiasm say that Hasidic jews were sexist and backwards? When did it tackle the abuse that occurs within the hasidic community in new york? Curb your enthusiasm poked light hearted fun as some aspects of jewish society and there's muslims comedians that do the same but it's nothing compared to the vitriol that is spewed against muslims in the west.

    Look at the last two weeks of AH. Or any two weeks in the last year. Anti muslim threads outnumber threads about pretty much any other subject (except maybe the load of abortion ones that appeared after the referendum). When you start seeing people talking about muslims are a risk to children or they don't respect other cultures or that allah was a paedophile, you gotta realise that this isn't criticism. That's hatred right there.


  • Options
    #234
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    wes wrote: »
    Ok that is a good one. The difference is we require taxes to pay for all the services etc needed to run the country. The face veil ban serves no such purpose, but nice effort there.

    So you aren't "against forcing people to do stuff that they don't want to do."?? You cherry pick things you are against forcing people to do


  • Options
    #235
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    meeeeh wrote: »
    1. Your link is written 10 years after the start of war in Yugoslavia.
    2. It discusses Muslim origin population in Montenegro.
    3. It points out that since 1971 Muslim was category of nationality in Yogoslavian census to define ancestors of those who became Muslims under Turkish rule. It confirms my point that at the time Muslim was defined nationality in Yugoslavia and did not necessarily correspond to religious belief.

    Here is an example of Canada from the turn of the century of Bosniaks being used interchangeable with Muslims:

    Yugoslavia: Treatment of Bosniaks (Muslims) living in, and born and raised in, Serbia by the state and society in general (1999-May 2000)


    Here is a news story from 1992, where Bosniaks are exclusively referred to as Muslims:
    The Bosnia Crisis: Serbs, Croats and Muslims: who hates who and why: Tony Barber in Zagreb traces the ancient roots of a culture clash that has shattered what was Yugoslavia into warring pieces


  • Options
    #236
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    So you aren't "against forcing people to do stuff that they don't want to do."?? You cherry pick things you are against forcing people to do

    Your taking the piss pretty clearly. Comparing paying taxes an necessity for society to function, to banning someone from wearing a face veil.

    Again, its an amusing attempt, don't get me wrong. Its almost clever, but not something that can really be taken seriously. Again, nice try but hardly the same thing, paying taxes and having a state mandated dress code.


  • Options
    #237
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,094 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    I see the unholy alliance of the modern progressives and the Islamofascists is going well in this thread.
    Keep up the good fight for likes of the Muslim Brotherhood, The Taliban and ISIS all you 'woke' progressives.

    You will win one day, right before you are put before a wall and be shot.
    Useful idiots and all that.


  • Options
    #238
    SSr0
    Registered Users Posts: 299 ✭✭SSr0


    markodaly wrote: »
    I see the unholy alliance of the modern progressives and the Islamofascists is going well in this thread.
    Keep up the good fight for likes of the Muslim Brotherhood, The Taliban and ISIS all you 'woke' progressives.

    You will win one day, right before you are put before a wall and be shot.
    Useful idiots and all that.

    I would have laughed at this post a few years ago, but now myself and a lot of other people are thinking the same thing.


  • Options
    #239
    meeeeh
    Registered Users Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    wes wrote: »
    Here is an example of Canada from the turn of the century of Bosniaks being used interchangeable with Muslims:

    Yugoslavia: Treatment of Bosniaks (Muslims) living in, and born and raised in, Serbia by the state and society in general (1999-May 2000)


    Here is a news story from 1992, where Bosniaks are exclusively referred to as Muslims:
    The Bosnia Crisis: Serbs, Croats and Muslims: who hates who and why: Tony Barber in Zagreb traces the ancient roots of a culture clash that has shattered what was Yugoslavia into warring pieces
    And the first link is five years after Dayton. Second link is use of term as was accurate at the time. Muslim was ethnicity in Yugoslavia, killings in Bosnia were not because of religious prosecution it was ethnic prosecution. I know a bit about this because I was born in Yugoslavia (Slovenia) and was 13 when the whole thing exploded. The topic is not relevant for this thread, I just don't like historical inaccuracies. Violence in Yugoslavia is always defined as ethnic not religious cleansing.


  • Options
    #240
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,251 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Good move by Denmark.
    Non verbal ques are an essential part of communications in most parts of the world.
    Covering yourself from head to toe is going to make it very hard for others to communicate with you or for you to communicate with them.
    That's no good for society.
    Also if you've migrated from another part of the world to Denmark, it shows that you have no intention of integrating in your host country.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    Odhinn wrote: »
    Nun years run differently to people years.

    Are they like dog years?


Advertisement