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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

French politician angered by veiled Muslim at beach

12467

Comments

  • #92
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    johnty56 wrote: »
    Theoretically yes. However, what if that freedom of religious expression impinges on the freedoms of others?


    But we aren't talking about such a case. We're talking about a veiled woman on a beach.


  • #93
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,907 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    johnty56 wrote: »
    Theoretically yes. However, what if that freedom of religious expression impinges on the freedoms of others?

    The burka doesn't impinge on anyone else's freedom. If it did, I'd say ban it.


  • #94
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    johnty56 wrote: »
    That has nothing to do with what I was saying, and you know it. Diversionism.

    You seem to think banning things makes them go away. It doesn't, as evidenced by the example I gave.


  • #95
    johnty56
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 822 ✭✭✭johnty56


    Nodin wrote: »
    You seem to think banning things makes them go away. It doesn't, as evidenced by the example I gave.

    No, your example wasn't an example. It was verging on nonsense.


  • #96
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,132 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »

    I never said they wear bikinis anyway my point is there are Muslim counties where you can wear a bikini. Which is what I said.

    I don't believe that TBH. Muslim women don't do that. Unless they can find a man free beach!

    Bikinis in Muslim countries are for tourists. And that's why there are so many love rats there too!


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,733 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    I don't believe that TBH. Muslim women don't do that. Unless they can find a man free beach!

    Bikinis in Muslim countries are for tourists. And that's why there are so many love rats there too!

    Again. I never said that Muslims wear bikinis. Of course bikinis are for tourists. I said you could if you wanted to in reply to your comment that you can't wear one in Saudi . I don't know why I am still arguing with you when I am not in disagreement with you that Muslims don't wear them...


  • #98
    keith16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Women are free and equal unless they wear stuff we don't like

    Seriously bluewolf, can you say that you are happy with women wearing a very obvious symbol of oppression?

    It's a difficult one for me. Sure, wear what you want. But does that mean I can strut around wearing a KKK robe on the same beach??


  • #99
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    johnty56 wrote: »
    No, your example wasn't an example. It was verging on nonsense.


    Catholicism was discriminated against by the British for a very long period of time, both here and in Britain. It would be advantageous for people to abandon it, and various offices could not be held by a member of the catholic faith. Yet when we look at the start of the 20th century, the large majority of the population was catholic. Its therefore safe to say that simply banning something via law, or a series of laws, will not of itself cause that to wither.


  • #100
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,733 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    keith16 wrote: »
    Seriously bluewolf, can you say that you are happy with women wearing a very obvious symbol of oppression?

    It's a difficult one for me. Sure, wear what you want. But does that mean I can strut around wearing a KKK robe on the same beach??

    Many women don't see it as a symbol of their repression they see it as an expression of their religion. They are not hurting anyone. Its nobody's business what you wear. I might not like it but its up to them and its none of my business what another person wears.


  • #101
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    keith16 wrote: »
    Seriously bluewolf, can you say that you are happy with women wearing a very obvious symbol of oppression?

    It's a difficult one for me. Sure, wear what you want. But does that mean I can strut around wearing a KKK robe on the same beach??


    Unless a racist group in Burkas has a history of lynching French people, I'm not seeing where you're going here.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Packrat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,723 ✭✭✭Packrat


    Nodin wrote: »
    If we ban one backward notion, logic dictates we ban them all. That doesn't sound too enlightened to me.

    The 'muslim Europe' thing has been debunked numerous times.

    Those two articles prove very little apart from that some internet video used impossible figures.

    I have a question for you: Who here used linked or quoted that video you are attacking?

    Strawman much?

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • #103
    keith16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    Nodin wrote: »
    Unless a racist group in Burkas has a history of lynching French people, I'm not seeing where you're going here.

    Neither can I tbh (can't see through my new hood!)


  • #104
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,132 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    Again. I never said that Muslims wear bikinis. Of course bikinis are for tourists. I said you could if you wanted to in reply to your comment that you can't wear one in Saudi . I don't know why I am still arguing with you when I am not in disagreement with you that Muslims don't wear them...

    OK. We are in agreement. That must be a first on here!

    Even if we have differences....

    I salute you.


  • #105
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Packrat wrote: »
    Those two articles prove very little apart from that some internet video used impossible figures.

    ........

    O. Well here's a more general piece.
    http://www.newsweek.com/dispelling-myth-eurabia-81943

    You did bring up the 'muslim Europe' notion, didn't you? That's why I linked them. That's why I'm linking the above.


  • #106
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    Nodin wrote: »
    Catholicism was discriminated against by the British for a very long period of time, both here and in Britain. It would be advantageous for people to abandon it, and various offices could not be held by a member of the catholic faith. Yet when we look at the start of the 20th century, the large majority of the population was catholic. Its therefore safe to say that simply banning something via law, or a series of laws, will not of itself cause that to wither.

    We need to keep up the ridicule of it as a religion. And the state and media need to stop pussyfooting around it. Trying to be o so sensitive and considerate of their backward ways.

    So what if muslims find nudity offensive or alcohol consumption, or men and women mixing socially, or non halal meat etc etc.


  • #107
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    Nodin wrote: »
    O. Well here's a more general piece.
    http://www.newsweek.com/dispelling-myth-eurabia-81943

    You did bring up the 'muslim Europe' notion, didn't you? That's why I linked them. That's why I'm linking the above.

    Quote from the link: 'Italy is now in the process of approving a bill that will jail landlords for leasing properties to undocumented immigrants'.


    Quite impressive.


  • #108
    Packrat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,723 ✭✭✭Packrat


    Nodin wrote: »
    Hi, and welcome to the 21st century. Today we're talking about the right of French Women to wear what they want. We realise that you've been pulled straight from a 15th century Tavern argument in Albania about just how evil the Ottoman empire is, but hope that given time you'll get the gist of things as they are today.

    And with that stunning rebuttal, I'm out. Yet another poster who will not engage you (note that I hadn't at the point that you wrote this bile)

    Well done Nodin, way to debate. Insults are the way forward....

    “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command”



  • #109
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    The veil is a symbol of oppression - irrespective of personal choice.

    France is standing up for its secularism by banning such oppressive symbols.

    Should we, for example, tolerate other symbols of oppression? No.

    Personal choice doesn't come into it when you look at it from this perspective.

    Can we get rid of those horrible little 'grotto' things with the awful, tacky Mary statues that present in every village and town?

    And the crucifixes and holy water dipping things on the the walls of my kids school?


  • #110
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    woodoo wrote: »
    We need to keep up the ridicule of it as a religion. And the state and media need to stop pussyfooting around it. Trying to be o so sensitive and considerate of their backward ways.

    So what if muslims find nudity offensive or alcohol consumption, or men and women mixing socially, or non halal meat etc etc.


    No idea what that's all about.


  • #111
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Packrat wrote: »
    And with that stunning rebuttal, I'm out. Yet another poster who will not engage you (note that I hadn't at the point that you wrote this bile)

    Well done Nodin, way to debate. Insults are the way forward....


    Been getting tips and hints have we?


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,733 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    woodoo wrote: »
    We need to keep up the ridicule of it as a religion. And the state and media need to stop pussyfooting around it. Trying to be o so sensitive and considerate of their backward ways.

    So what if muslims find nudity offensive or alcohol consumption, or men and women mixing socially, or non halal meat etc etc.

    Or maybe if they are not hurting you, you should mind your own business. Nobody is forcing you to eat halal meat etc. etc.


  • #113
    Shakespeare's Sister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,412 ✭✭✭Shakespeare's Sister


    woodoo wrote: »
    So what if muslims find nudity offensive or alcohol consumption, or men and women mixing socially, or non halal meat etc etc.
    I'm not sure we're capitulating to any of the above though? Non halal meat and alcohol are still sold/eaten/drunk in abundance, men and women mix socially, there is no ban on publications that feature nudity (well there was a ban on Playboy up to 1995 but that was because of the catholic church!)


  • #114
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,909 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I don't like when I see women in Ireland wearing a burqa, I'll be honest enough to admit that. It doesn't mean I have to want it banned.


  • #115
    Shakespeare's Sister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,412 ✭✭✭Shakespeare's Sister


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I don't like when I see women in Ireland wearing a burqa, I'll be honest enough to admit that. It doesn't mean I have to want it banned.
    'zact same here.


  • #116
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    Or maybe if they are not hurting you, you should mind your own business. Nobody is forcing you to eat halal meat etc. etc.

    I'm talking about the ridiculous sensitivity to their ways, so much so that a dinner lady in England was sacked because she accidentally served Muslim children non halal food.


  • #117
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    woodoo wrote: »
    I'm talking about the ridiculous sensitivity to their ways, so much so that a dinner lady in England was sacked because she accidentally served Muslim children non halal food.

    Source?


  • #118
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,733 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    woodoo wrote: »
    I'm talking about the ridiculous sensitivity to their ways, so much so that a dinner lady in England was sacked because she accidentally served Muslim children non halal food.

    yeah because that really happened.


  • #119
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    Nodin wrote: »
    Source?

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/418878/Dinner-lady-sacked-for-accidentally-serving-pork-to-a-Muslim-child


  • #120
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,733 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    woodoo wrote: »
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/418878/Dinner-lady-sacked-for-accidentally-serving-pork-to-a-Muslim-child

    Wow, that is so stupid


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    jam_mac_jam wrote: »
    Wow, that is so stupid

    That is the deference this religion gets.


Advertisement