nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Should Dublin ban Burqas and Hijabs?

Skinhead Kane

Greetings guys and girls,

I have been thinking about this topic for quite some time now and have yet to make a real judgement on what truly would be a correct answer. If were to go to a country populated by the Muslim community we would be asked to cover up and follow their religious procedure.

Therefore in Britain and Ireland I believe we are within our rights to ban something that isolates woman and was made by men to oppress them. If I were to show my hair/head in their countries, I would be seen as obscene.

Recently came back from a trip and had some female friends been told by locals to cover their arms and legs as well as hair before entering out of the city centre areas. It was a very aggressive approach to and almost demanded 'or we leave the country' type of attitude. Now not using this as a reason or motive to make this topic, but it has however got me thinking.

If I could vote on it, I would ban burqas and possibly hijab.

What's your take on this guys?

Regards,

Sk

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Franz Von Peppercorn

Discodog wrote: »

You progress by educating not banning.

What’s that mean? Are you hoping for an Irish education system that attacks conservative Muslim dress?

cournioni

Discodog wrote: »

We should ban one faith schools & remove any religious ceremony from schools. But we should teach children about all religions & give them the confidence to challenge & decide what they want in adult life.

What makes you think that this is the right thing to do? Why are you right and religious people wrong?

Before you say it I’m not a religious person. I just find your point of view a little far fetched, and quite arrogant.

Malayalam

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Plenty of people do in fact justify FGM on that “it’s their culture” basis. Arguing that it’s a choice to wear a burka is a deflection: people brought up in historically ultra Christian societies often forgo their freedoms in what looked like “choice” but was dictated by the religion they were born to.

What gets me about some traditional dress (like the abaya in Saudi) is that’s its mandated as black in an extremely hot country. The men are in white.

Yeah, I know re FGM. I don't understand this cultural relativism thing when there is obvious abuse going on. Long long before all this stuff surfaced and people became scared stiff to say anything about extremist theocratical practices I witnessed some of that culture from the inside. As a hitch hiker in Turkey in the 1980s, for example, I saw women whipped from their beds, literally lashed and slapped at in their homes, to get up in the middle of the night to cook food, or bring drink or make up extra beds for pals. There were mostly noble good high-minded people who would never dream of mistreating their women folk, but the cultural norms enabled that portion of assholes, degenerates and retards that every society has to act out their brutality with free reign and religious and societal justification

suicide_circus

banning would just make them a subversive mark of defiance and make the women prosecuted into martyrs.

there is no doubt that they are absolutely f*cked up and a tool for the subjugation of women but some clever imams have marketed them as a symbol of liberation for Muslim women and i just dont see banning as the answer.

blinding

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I think because the first one is associated with criminality / bank robberies, the second one not so. Could be wrong though.

A criminal that shot a Police woman in England used a burka as part of his efforts to escape Police hunting him .

A woman in London used a Burka to hide her identity as she followed a woman and then sprayed that woman with acid .

A terrorist used a burka to escape a mosque that was being watched by authorities .

These are three that I know of off the top of my head .

The Burka was a highly dangerous security risk in these three situations .

I suppose it will only be when some far right group use burkas to hide themselves ( possibly to attack muslims ) that this crazy Burka security threat will be stopped .

Beechwoodspark

all the anti Christian/catholic posters of boards must be really really Reallllly against Islam as it is even more anti women. Different league entirely

timthumbni

Re education If you look at Islamic schools in England you will see just how progressive they are.

Unless you think that killling infidels (ie. ourselves) and throwing gay people off the roof is progressive of course.

blinding

Edgware wrote: »

While we are at it lets ban families taking their daughters from school at 16 and marrying their cousins, then dropping kids for the next 20 years while living in a caravan on welfare

And some people say women have it hard . Obviously they are having hard some of the time .

cournioni

suicide_circus wrote: »

banning would just make them a subversive mark of defiance and make the women prosecuted into martyrs.

there is no doubt that they are absolutely f*cked up and a tool for the subjugation of women but i just dont see banning as the answer.

I think all clothing that doesn’t allow reasonable identification of a person in public should be banned. The hijab is fine, the niqab and burqua not fine.

zapitastas

blinding wrote: »

Is that ok for suicide bombs like the guy at the Arianna Grande Concert ?

Was the person that carried out that attack wearing a Burka or just carrying a backpack?

blinding

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

all the anti Christian/catholic posters of boards must be really really Reallllly against Islam as it is even more anti women. Different league entirely

They are scared of Islam because they don’t want to be thrown off buildings . Violence works for Islam .

blinding

zapitastas wrote: »

Was the person that carried out that attack wearing a Burka or just carrying a backpack?

I’m guessing he wouldn’t have been against wearing a suicide bomb for fashion reasons .:eek:

suicide_circus

cournioni wrote: »

I think all clothing that doesn’t allow reasonable identification of a person in public should be banned. The hijab is fine, the niqab and burqua not fine.

the danger is that banning could lead to consequences far worse for society than a few women being unidentifiable. I don't know. let's watch France and Denmark for a while and see what happens there.

TheQuietFella

They would be more in line by banning the beggars and tramps that frequent the city and harass the general populous!

timthumbni

suicide_circus wrote: »

cournioni wrote: »

I think all clothing that doesn’t allow reasonable identification of a person in public should be banned. The hijab is fine, the niqab and burqua not fine.

the danger is that banning could lead to consequences far worse for society than a few women being unidentifiable. I don't know. let's watch France and Denmark for a while and see what happens there.

What consequences?

blinding

suicide_circus wrote: »

the danger is that banning could lead to consequences far worse for society than a few women being unidentifiable. I don't know. let's watch France and Denmark for a while and see what happens there.

Will the muslims use violence ?

Violence works for Islam .

It kinda goes against that Mantra ....Violence doesn’t work .

Islam makes short work of that mantra .

theballz

RustyNut wrote: »

So you think the Muslim way is right? People should only be able to dress the way the government say? I'd prefer to let people choose to wear whatever they want.

If we are going to ban certain people wearing certain items of clothing then I propose that we ban obviously non sporting people from wearing track suits.

Fairly silly comparison right there.

The religion of peace and love, telling you to behead those who insult it. Women can't wear bikinis in their countries so no burqas in ours they don't integrate anyway it's against the Koran they will always find something to give out about

Hijab is fine in my opinion, like any turban or nun’s habit. The burqa is not required or even advised in the quran, only modesty and headscarves. Not covering the face. It’s an old cultural practice, similar to women wearing corsets. It isn’t necessary and comes from sexist expectations. These feel like if they are not covered then they won’t go outside! That’s perverse! How is that freedom? It’s clearly sexist bullsh*t and yet people keep defending it - generally they just don’t understand it

suicide_circus

timthumbni wrote: »

What consequences?

the consequence of making ourselves an authoritarian society. maybe the thing we ban next is something you love. I think the government should tell people what to do as little as possible.

blinding

timthumbni wrote: »

What consequences?

The Muslims will use the threat of violence and violence to get their way .

These two keep so many that would be critical of Islam , Schtum .

If other organisations or churchs had the practices of Islam the usual suspects would be critically all over it . Islam's violence keeps these hypocrites Schtum .

[Deleted User]

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Actually there are laws on what you can’t wear. Like wearing nothing is illegal for instance. Dressing as a cop. Probably more.

Can you point me to the law that states being naked is illegal please?
Also dressing as a guard is not illegal, maybe you mean impersonating one?

Wibbs

Discodog wrote: »

You progress by educating not banning.

What does that even mean? It sounds great as a comforting soundbite but it has little value behind it. Tell me: How do you "educate" against a 1500 year old set of codes that have proven themselves extremely resilient and fault tolerant that will resist such "education" from any source it sees as a threat? You're applying a post Reformation Western worldview onto something that is very different and it's at best naive, at worst bloody dangerous.

Oh sure go back a few years and places like Iran and Afghanistan some women threw off the headscarfs in a brief hint at modernism. But here's another hint; it didn't last very long did it?

So I say yes, ban them. If someone doesn't want to adhere to the codes and mores of Western culture then they should not be encouraged in flaunting their dissent.

blinding

bubblypop wrote: »

Can you point me to the law that states being naked is illegal please?
Also dressing as a guard is not illegal, maybe you mean impersonating one?

Try being naked in O’Connell street .

Wibbs

suicide_circus wrote: »

the danger is that banning could lead to consequences far worse for society than a few women being unidentifiable. I don't know. let's watch France and Denmark for a while and see what happens there.

Indeed SC and this is a symptom of the failure of the experiment in "multiculturalism". Fear. When a society is afraid of an alien minority that blatantly advertises its intolerance to that society to the degree that it pussyfoots around actually confronting it, that society is weak.

dav3

I'm not sure how banning things in only one county in Ireland will work.

But f*ck it why not. Ban everything in Dublin, including the OP who is a fraud and a bullsh*tter.

suicide_circus

Wibbs wrote: »

Indeed SC and this is a symptom of the failure of the experiment in "multiculturalism". Fear. When a society is afraid of an alien minority that blatantly advertises its intolerance to that society to the degree that it pussyfoots around actually confronting it, that society is weak.

I'm fearing what we would have become rather than violence, although that can't be ruled out. that's how they really win, is it not? by turning us into them.

cournioni

suicide_circus wrote: »

the consequence of making ourselves an authoritarian society. maybe the thing we ban next is something you love. I think the government should tell people what to do as little as possible.

That’s all well and good, but allowing a garment that covers up identifiable features just because of their culture or religion is just as dangerous. What makes them any different from an avid motorcyclist who likes to wear their helmet into shops?

Creating one rule for one person and another for a person just based on their religion is absolutely wrong. The whole pastafarian thing summed it up nicely.

Sardine

Travellers treat women like dirt yet all we do is give them money and houses. Why not focus on them instead, an issue that is actually affecting irish citizens?

Wibbs

mike_ie wrote: »

And yet I don't see people standing outside churches as headscarves old women go to mass, denouncing it as a tool of oppression? Whether you care to see it or not, for many Muslim women, it is a personal choice, for reasons of their own choosing.

No, it's a cultural choice. One that is reinforced from the cradle. Those who choose not to follow that cultural choice are the minority and one that is regularly punished for it. Old women wearing headscarves for mass is again a cultural choice, but in a culture that was capable of change. Hence it's only the old - and few enough of them - who hang on to that.

But the thing is, that's not what I said. I didn't say I wanted (some) women to wear the burka/hijab/niqab. What I said was that I wanted them to have the choice to wear it, if that was what they wished. People are crying out that forcing a woman who doesn't want to wear this garment to wear one is oppression? Surely that argument should work both ays then, no?

That's a silly argument. As I point out it's a cultural choice. Secondly we "oppress" individual choice all the time through our codes of law and cultural and social norms.

beertons

Yes, they should be banned here.

suicide_circus

listen lads, I agree that the multiculturalism experiment in europe has utterly failed and perhaps strong stances such as banning the Burka are the only solution I really don't know.