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.

 

Muslim Woman Asked to Remove Headscarf in NJ Mall

page: 17
16
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by mysterioustranger
 


What an idiot.

2nd




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by draco49
 


Why are you so angry with everyone who disagrees with you? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And that's all it is in this thread. No one is going around ripping clothes off of people. They're just giving their opinions.

Tolerance does not mean falling in love with everyone's actions or lifestyles.


I'm not angry, I'm an a$$hole. I find value in everyone's opinions, especially the ones that are different from mine. Argumentative discourse is just my way of communicating and solidifying ideas. I don't mean any ill-will towards anyone. If I offended anyone, I'm sorry.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Expand burka ban, says Muslim group


Burkas and niqabs are not only a “security hazard,” they are also symbols of gender inequality and Islamic extremism, Khan said.

“Invoking religious freedoms to conceal one’s identity and promote political ideology is disingenuous,” she said.

Khan and others said women who hide their faces do so for cultural reasons, not religious purposes, so it should not be protected under the country’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Toronto Sun


Canadian Muslims are stating what the vast majority of posters on this thread are saying.

Burqas are

- A security hazard
- Promote political ideology not religious freedom
- Symbols of gender inequality and Islamic extremism

When normal Muslims don't support extremist Islamic fanatics wearing burqas, isn't it time for a ban?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Have to go with the security guard on this one

Malls are private property not public

Meaning the mall's security has the right to ask this.

Some banks already ask this ( nohat... no shades... no hoodies)

If you do not like it do not shop their...


From a consultants view it is anti theft... force this to be allowed.. watch theives start wearing them..



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by snarky412
All right, smart azz....

Have you ever notice the Kiosks that set up in the middle of the Mall??? That's what we do, we are self-employed Vendors who deal with the public in all kinds of environments. Malls, Rodeos, Festivals, Fairs, etc..... So don't try to lecture me about stuff that you haven't the foggiest idea about.

YES, all Malls have their set of rules... for EVERY ONE. If you don't abide, you get escorted out. That simple...

We deal with security EVERY day in our line of work, so don't preach to me about "rights" or about being a good little follower. We don't live a sheltered life like most people. If it wasn't for security and their thoroughness about watching people, we and our friends couldn't be out here trying to make a living with out being robbed or hassled.

So if you have a problem with what the Mall did, oh well. That's the real world.......

This isn't the Brady Bunch Era any more. Things have changed and it will never go back to the "simple" life.

Crime in general has gone up and that is the main reason for a tougher security.

Have you ever been robbed? We have.... so, yeah I think the Mall is acting in their rights to do as they please in THEIR building to provide a safer environment for everyone. The Mall itself has a laundry list of rules to abide by.

You are not going to change any thing by being ugly to me about this, but I deal with this sh#t every day. So you can take your little speech some where else, like the garbage disposal.....


Easy there... I didn't know you were one of the people that sell crap jewelry and toy helicopters. My bad. Seriously, I know I come off as antagonistic. It's kinda just my thing. I have been robbed, and it sucks. But that's life. Regarding the rules of the mall, I know they exist and, for the most part, they are in place to ensure customer safety. My point was that the mall, while a private building, is a public environment and the law doesn't stop at the door.

As for your claim that we don't live in a simple world anymore, that's just nonsense. You think life was simple for the people who found the courage to fight for freedom and liberty, and break away from England? No matter what changes, the rights protected by the Constitution are INALIENABLE (i.e. timeless and undeniable). The Constitution doesn't give us those rights and freedoms, it PROTECTS them. As I've said before, it's not the government's job to make sure everyone feels safe and free from all dangers. We have the power to take care of that ourselves. Creating laws and regulations based on the premise of protecting the People from fear is wrong, and is anathema to the values and tenets of the Constitution.

Regarding the burqas, I just don't care. Whether they want to wear them or not doesn't have anything to do with me or my life. It's their choice, and their right. Personally, I think they're kinda ridiculous, just as every organized religion's dogma and traditions are ridiculous. But since I'm a patriot who supports the Constitution, I have to let people be as they are, and go about my business in my own way. That's the way freedom works. We weren't meant to live canned, pre-fabricated lives, in a world defined by others. If it suits you to live that re-run in a protected little shell, at the expense of your civil liberties, so be it. But you cannot have it both ways. You can't pick and choose which civil liberties we keep, and which ones we sacrifice for the sake of feeling safe.

The time will never come, and the situation will never arise that justifies relinquishing the rights and freedoms that are inherent in all Men (I capitalize that to specify humanity, not the gender). Every morning, millions of children say the Pledge of Allegiance. Every soldier and every elected official swears an oath to support and defend the Constitution. All of that is meaningless if we cower in fear and give up, or downplay those rights everytime something scares us. The Revolutionary War, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights are real, tangible things. Not like the mystical stories and lore of the organized religions. We don't Pledge Allegiance to the Bible. We Pledge Allegiance to the Flag. You'd do well to remember that the next time you bend over and let someone strip away more of your freedoms and civil liberties.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


The fact that this is even an issue goes to show you how effective our 'regularly scheduled programming' is in the US. Propaganda machines have thoroughly dehumanized a target group so that people need not be a sociopath to feel apathy towards killing them.

If someone wants to change the appearance of their face with fabric, knock yourself out. "American" women do as much with cosmetics, radically changing the appearance of their faces with pigments and augmentations. Should we start going after clowns too?

I think that the woman was within her right to put on anything she wants so long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Rabid claims of 'public safety' is a fascist cop out for mental midgets to excuse their xenophobic ways. What is next,going after people with thick beards and long hair at the airport because it obscures bone structure?

This makes me think of times when hippies or colored people weren't allowed in businesses for very similar sentiments. Xenophobia and bigotry, nothing more. Some things never really change.

The whole 'durrhurr sharia invasion' argument is a load of horse # as well. The US has had blue laws on the books for ages, forbidding the sale of socks and alcohol on "God's Day." Theocratic corruption of law is already here but nobody complains about that.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
isn't this an obvious case of discrimination? this is not acceptable in my opinion.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by BAMstomper
Have to go with the security guard on this one

Malls are private property not public

Meaning the mall's security has the right to ask this.

Some banks already ask this ( nohat... no shades... no hoodies)

If you do not like it do not shop their...

From a consultants view it is anti theft... force this to be allowed.. watch theives start wearing them..


Kowtowing to fear of what might be seems to be a common theme on this board. Honestly, I never imagined that a forum like this would be so full of spineless people, just ready to follow orders and accept what is laid out. I swear, this nation would still be a British colony if the Founding Fathers had the attitude of the majority of the people in this thread. Honestly, as Americans (those of you who are), you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Obviously, the mall management has a bit more backbone than the jackass security guard does, since they formally apologized and censured the rent-a-cop for his intolerance and lack of respect for the religion and faith of a customer.

From a purely pragmatic point of view, I can also relate to how difficult it must be for mall operators to keep up with providing a safe and comfortable atmosphere for its customers. Obviously, nobody wants to be robbed. But dictating what people wear will have zero effect on loss-prevention. The idea that someone with bad intentions "could" dress up in traditional Muslim garments to cloak their identity is no excuse for enforcing what is, essentially, a dress code for its patrons. Laws and rules are not to be created to address the symptoms, but instead the causes of our problems. Do you honestly believe that forbidding women from wearing burqas is going to put a dent in retail theft? Or baggy jeans, or hoodies? If so, you are truly living a life of cognitive dissonance.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
Expand burka ban, says Muslim group


Burkas and niqabs are not only a “security hazard,” they are also symbols of gender inequality and Islamic extremism, Khan said.

“Invoking religious freedoms to conceal one’s identity and promote political ideology is disingenuous,” she said.

Khan and others said women who hide their faces do so for cultural reasons, not religious purposes, so it should not be protected under the country’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Toronto Sun


Canadian Muslims are stating what the vast majority of posters on this thread are saying.

Burqas are

- A security hazard
- Promote political ideology not religious freedom
- Symbols of gender inequality and Islamic extremism

When normal Muslims don't support extremist Islamic fanatics wearing burqas, isn't it time for a ban?

that doesn't seem to promote freedom of religion to me.....



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
I don’t think people care if she wants to wear a burka. The owners of this mall and many others have security cameras as a deterrent. If someone is concealing their identity, they neutralized the deterrent. You can say it’s because she is being discriminated against because she is Arabic but not necessarily so. If twenty shoplifter enter the mall all with burkas, how is the security deterrent effective? The owner of the mall has a responsibility to the renters. The owner also has the right to refuse entrance. The best thing that could happen would be that every Islamic woman would quit wearing their burkas tomorrow and join us and in the rest of society. The burka is nothing more that the symbol of a man’s dominance over a woman.




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by redneck13
I don’t think people care if she wants to wear a burka. The owners of this mall and many others have security cameras as a deterrent. If someone is concealing their identity, they neutralized the deterrent. You can say it’s because she is being discriminated against because she is Arabic but not necessarily so. If twenty shoplifter enter the mall all with burkas, how is the security deterrent effective? The owner of the mall has a responsibility to the renters. The owner also has the right to refuse entrance. The best thing that could happen would be that every Islamic woman would quit wearing their burkas tomorrow and join us and in the rest of society. The burka is nothing more that the symbol of a man’s dominance over a woman.



Would it be any different than 20 shoplifters entering dressed up as elvis?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SanguineDenial
 


If the 20 Elvis were wearing masks they would call the police before they got in the door



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
Canadian Muslims are stating what the vast majority of posters on this thread are saying.

Burqas are

- A security hazard
- Promote political ideology not religious freedom
- Symbols of gender inequality and Islamic extremism

When normal Muslims don't support extremist Islamic fanatics wearing burqas, isn't it time for a ban?


What would be the end goal of this ban? What would it accomplish? It's like burning books you don't approve of. If history has taught us anything, it's that banning or prohibiting something doesn't accomplish ANYTHING with the exception of making criminals out of people who previously were not. Look at Prohibition. They made alcohol illegal because people who thought like you figured that if they just banned it, people would stop drinking. But that didn't happen. What did happen was that organized crime took over the booze business, and people were forced to become "criminals" to enjoy a drink. It didn't work out the way they planned. Look at the "War on Drugs". They took a medical and social issue and criminalized so harshly that millions of people who did nothing but choose to use a mind-altering substance became felons and lifelong criminals, stuck in a system that encourages repeat offense, while failing to address the fact that drug addiction is an illness. The drug business is one ruled by organized drug cartels, not unlike the gangsters that ran the booze during Prohibition. It's those drug cartels that are the biggest proponents of continued criminalization. Why? Because if the drugs are decriminalized, they go out of business.

As long as the burqa is a part of the Islamic religion, it CANNOT be banned, because the Constitution prohibits the legislature from passing any law that respects or oppresses any religion. If you disagree with the whole burqa concept, you should get involved with the groups who are against it and work to change the Islamic policies. It's a social issue, not a regulatory issue suitable for governmental intervention.

Finally, it doesn't make one bit of difference what any other country does. They are not us, and we are not them. Citing Canada as an example only serves to weaken your argument. Canada is a socialist colony of the British Empire, organized under a completely different governmental ideology than the United States. But hey, if you like what they're doing up in Canada, there's nothing stopping you from moving.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by redneck13
reply to post by SanguineDenial
 


If the 20 Elvis were wearing masks they would call the police before they got in the door


And what if rather than an obvious mask it was facial augs and cosmetic putty that to an untrained eye looked like normal flesh? What then? The security system is only as good as the $8.00 an hour guy monitoring it. This is easily outsmarted by a determined antagonist.

What if 20 asians came in all dressed the same, I mean they all look alike already.


Where do we set the bar on what freedoms to take away in the name of security?
edit on 25-5-2012 by SanguineDenial because: GH



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
There is a separation of church and state here. The key factor in the modernization in the western world. In Islam there is not, since religion and law of the land are one, the only possible way out is make it easy for them to leave their religion if they choose. In other words, without being killed for offending the man’s honors. Most of these women are trapped



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Freedom of Religion must always bend to the safety of the general public.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
double post on accident...
edit on 25-5-2012 by esteay812 because: remove redundancy produced by double post



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join