It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Time to ban the Burqa?

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
There is only a few places where it should be banned
1) Driving a car.
2) Inside banks
3) License photo, or any photo ID
4) Airports
5) Schools.




posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Bruqa's are awesome!



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
The burqa is a religion-related garment. Being Britain with official religions, people in wigs in important places, and people using clothing as a symbol of rank, including crowns, to ban a burqa would be out of the ordinary. What next, no yarmukles for Jewish men? No habits for nuns? No turbans for sikhs? Do you see where it could go?

The woman isn't hiding a bomb in her burqa. It was in her purse, as the post claims. It would be better to ban purses, if people were so stupid to make a law off of one sensational event in Britain.

Who was the fool who called in the bomb threat? And how did he or she know ahead of time? There is the problem.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sandalphon
The burqa is a religion-related garment. Being Britain with official religions, people in wigs in important places, and people using clothing as a symbol of rank, including crowns, to ban a burqa would be out of the ordinary. What next, no yarmukles for Jewish men? No habits for nuns? No turbans for sikhs? Do you see where it could go?

The woman isn't hiding a bomb in her burqa. It was in her purse, as the post claims. It would be better to ban purses, if people were so stupid to make a law off of one sensational event in Britain.

Who was the fool who called in the bomb threat? And how did he or she know ahead of time? There is the problem.


None of those things you listed, cover the face and identity.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Openeye
And what right has the right to wear religious clothing that covers the face infringed upon? The right to know what someone looks like? Last time I checked that wasn't a right.


The right to see someone's face when they can see yours.


I must have missed that part of the constitution.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
I don't mind if people walk around with their faces covered, but when entering a place of business the business owner has a right to what they can see on camera.

Like i said earlier, we do not let people in hoods, or with their faces covered into our convenience store. I am sure most business owners do not want people on their premises they cannot identify via surveillance cameras. That is the business aspect of things.

The political. . .especially in the UK, they have surveillance cameras damned near everywhere. If you can't identify someone, it is useless. No religious aspect. Although most people take it that way..

If i was adamant clown. . and dresses in clown make up everywhere i go, and people all over the world started killing people dressed as clowns. .. me, being dressed as a clown would probably get some ridicule too!



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DavidWillts

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Openeye
And what right has the right to wear religious clothing that covers the face infringed upon? The right to know what someone looks like? Last time I checked that wasn't a right.


The right to see someone's face when they can see yours.


I must have missed that part of the constitution.


You've missed what the constitutions is about then. It is supposed to be a continuous document, changes made to it as seen fit by society. Its not supposed to be a "written in stone" document, that never changes for any reason. Just because its not in the constitution, doesn't make it unconstitutional.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
Those of us living in the 21st century require identification.


Papier Bitte.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Legion2024
There is only a few places where it should be banned
1) Driving a car.
2) Inside banks
3) License photo, or any photo ID
4) Airports
5) Schools.


I would personally extend that list to include all gov buildings, public transport service stations etc, if a general member of the public can't hide their face in these places why make an exception for a minority? Show your face or stay out.
I don't like it but if people "freely" choose to wear it then whatever. I would however prefer people didn't because one thing that helps us asses/(looking for the right word) a person is facial expressions.
Another important issue would be how do you know who is forced to wear it, if the woman is that abused/controlled how can she turn around & say I don't want to wear it she has been conditioned since birth and would be to scarred to say anything.
The religious argument for it is invalid it is not required by Islam & there are other options.

Two reasons I would be for banning it:
1 If the overwhelming majority are for a ban then aren't the laws supposed to reflect what the majority wants, not a small minority.
2 It allows for instances like this,
A Muslim woman who accused a Sydney police officer of ripping off her burka to see her face has had her jail sentence overturned after a judge decided the woman's identity could not be verified.

Carnita Matthews, 47, was initially sentenced to six months in jail for deliberately making a false declaration to police.

She alleged an officer had removed her burqa to confirm her identity after pulling her over while she was driving near Campbelltown despite a police in-car camera recording that confirms the officer did no such thing.

However, Judge Clive Jeffreys said that he could not be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the woman who made the complaint to police was Mrs Matthews.

The judge said the signatures on Mrs Matthew's license and the signature on the statement given to police were completely different.

Jeffreys added that the person who gave the statutory declaration to police was wearing a burqa at the time, making it difficult to confirm that the person making the declaration was in fact Mrs Matthews.

Here is the legal side if I can't make you remove it then I can't identify you, then you walk away free even if you go out of your way to try and ruin a police officers rep/career, then have your moron friends start trouble with the usual Alah Akbar bull*#*, only after this did they modify the law and not enough.
The New South Wales Government responded to the case by extending powers to demand the removal of face coverings for identification purposes.

Previously police only had the power to demand the removal of coverings during the investigation of serious offences.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
I think we need to ban banning things. Geez, if we keep banning stuff because we don't like certain people, behaviors or customs, we will have no civil rights nor room for individualism left.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 01:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

The religious argument for it is invalid it is not required by Islam & there are other options.


That is very true. The Koran merely tells women to dress conservatory. The burqa is a symbol of Arabic culture, not Islam.


Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

Two reasons I would be for banning it:

1 If the overwhelming majority are for a ban then aren't the laws supposed to reflect what the majority wants, not a small minority.


Polls constantly show a majority of Europeans want a ban.

Pew Research
Pew Global
YouGov


Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

2 It allows for instances like this,

Carnita Matthews, 47...
...alleged an officer had removed her burqa to confirm her identity after pulling her over while she was driving in Campbelltown


I remember that case. The Muslim women accused the policeman of ripping off her burqa. He didn't. She wasn't aware that the police car was filming the whole non incident.

Burqa woman Carnita Matthews says sorry for accusing police of racism

Macarthur-Chronic le-Campbelltown

She is a nasty piece of work. Her facebook page, apparently has content such as


• “Allah akbar, may all the pigs burn in hell inshallah”.

• videos of Osama bin Laden,

• slurs against infidels and “Kufaars” (non-Muslims),

• “American pig savages” and “Zionist dogs”.

• A video also appears with the title “8 US soldiers killed in Iraq” accompanied by the message from Ibrahim: “Keep them Comming (sic)”.

sheikyermami.com...


She is a nasty Islamic supremacist.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danimaltl
Bruqa's are awesome!


They are so awesome that they cause rickets.



Rise in rickets linked to ethnic groups that shun the sun

"Every pregnancy, you use up your vitamin D stores and if you're not making enough to replenish them, you gradually get more and more depleted.

By your third or fourth child, that child is born already without enough vitamin D.

So they'll be presenting with rickets at around 18 months."

www.independent.co.uk...


edit on 15-3-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   
____________________

Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer wore burkas ?
The system is the problem not the face/scarf ,
get a grip people




Originally posted by ollncasino
they cause rickets.

The same schizophrenics would make
sunblock a crime

____________________




edit on 15/3/12 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by ToneDeaf
Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer wore burkas ?
The system is the problem not the face/scarf ,
get a grip people



That as it may, most Europeans prefer to be able to see other peoples' faces, hence the support in Europe for banning the burqa


• Britain in 2011 - 66%
• Spain in 2010 - 59%
• France in 2010 - 82%
• Germany in 2010 - 71%

Pew Research
Pew Global
YouGov



edit on 15-3-2012 by ollncasino because: Fix error



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:25 AM
link   
_______________________

Most European women would rather eat
chocolate than have sex, and your point ?
Should Europe ban sex ?

_______________________



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by ToneDeaf
_______________________

Most European women would rather eat
chocolate than have sex, and your point ?
Should Europe ban sex ?

_______________________


Well most European women would perhaps prefer to eat chocolate than have sex with you.


Perhaps you shouldn't generalise so much form your own negative experiences with European women.

It could also be observed that no one in Europe is suggesting a ban on chocolate or sex so your post, while perhaps revealing a deep personal tragedy on your part, is quite irrelevant and irreverent.

On the other hand, support for banning the burqa is very high.

So high in fact that the burqa has already been banned in France, while in Italy anything dress which hides the face is illegal. A law of similar effect was passed in the Netherland in Jan 2012. Belgium is also in the process of banning the Burqa.

en.wikipedia.org...





edit on 15-3-2012 by ollncasino because: formatting



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 

Someone with nothing better to do at that beach decided to have some fun and maybe recorded it. Decided to call the cops to report a suspicious character in a burga and enjoy the drama being played out. The Olympics is just around the corner so its better to be safe than sorry. My take is no one should walk around all covered up and that is for security reasons but the tourism board of many countries would beg to differ cos Mideast tourists are high rollers. When these Mideastern families go overseas on holidays, only the mother wears the burga whereas their teenage daughters would be in jeans and tees. Guess they want to feel normal like everyone else except they can't do that in their home country.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
Well most European women would perhaps prefer to eat
chocolate than have sex with you.

Perhaps you shouldn't generalise so much form
your own negative experiences with European women.


Considering I'm a actually a Canadian woman, you
really have made a fool out of yourself by showing
point proof how you stereotype people and jump
to bigoted speculations based on ignorance. you
need not say no more.



* puts ollncasino on ignore list for being ignorant *

_____________________



edit on 15/3/12 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Openeye
It doesn't matter where I moved I would still act and dress the way I want to...


Try that in Iran...


Secondly, you're right. Cultures DO change over time. But not by FORCE. Islam comes to Europe and the West for one thing: To make YOU cater to THEM. They supposedly come to find a new life, to be free. Yet, they live just like they did and make no effort to adhere to their countries laws, culture or customs. I'm not talking about everyone everywhere, but MANY of them.

If you can't see what's going on, you've been brainwashed by liberal media telling you the same la-la land story that "everything is fine". Open your eyes man, seriously.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:33 AM
link   
What's to stop a man wearing a burqa and entering into the public toilets for women? Nothing. So, I think that Muslim women should be allowed to wear burqas in public but not 'inside' any public place. I think that's a fair compromise.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join