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.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Thunder heart woman
Although a few people have said they are offended by the Burqa, the point of this thread was specifically wearing it inside the mall. I don't think you'll find very many people that will say they should never be worn, but they should abide by the local rules and laws. Like I and others have said, we've all been asked to remove hats and sunglasses. It is fairly common these days. Banks and Courthouses are the most common places that require you to remove your hat and sunglasses.
You're throwing out a strawman and taking the words of a few extremists and applying those words to everyone that argues against you. That isn't fair, and it is exactly the same thing that people do when they demonize the whole Muslim religion based off just a few extremists.
By the way, I have specifically responded to you several times now, and you keep ignoring it and choosing to only argue with the most outlandish claims. Is it possible you just want to argue, and you have no intention of discussing anything civilly?
Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by Thunder heart woman
Wearing a head covering and a burqa are not the same thing. If God commands you to cover you hair go for it. But it's not safe to have women walking around like ninjas. In the dc area we have had a rash of bank robberies where men dress up in burqas as a disguise, they nobody will say anything to them, unlike a ski mask.
So get your facts in order and then speak. Masks shouldnt be allowing "down the street" either.
Originally posted by MegaMind
The Right to Refuse Service: Can a Business Refuse Service to Someone Because of Appearance, Odor or Attitude?
The Right to Refuse Service: Can a Business Refuse Service to Someone Because of Appearance, Odor or Attitude?
Leanne Phillips - Oct 2007
Is it a violation of your civil rights for a business to refuse to serve you because of the way you look, the way you smell, or the way you act? The answer is...it depends.
The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."
The right of public accommodation is also guaranteed to disabled citizens under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which precludes discrimination by businesses on the basis of disability.
In addition to the protections against discrimination provided under federal law, many states have passed their own Civil Rights Acts that provide broader protections than the Federal Civil Rights Act. For example, California's Unruh Civil Rights Act makes it illegal to discriminate against individuals based on unconventional dress or sexual preference.
In the 1960s, the Unruh Civil Rights Act was interpreted to provide broad protection from arbitrary discrimination by business owners. Cases decided during that era held that business owners could not discriminate, for example, against hippies, police officers, homosexuals, or Republicans, solely because of who they were.
So just because a business is privately owned doesn't mean the owners can discriminate against their customers willy nilly. "place of public accommodation"edit on 25-5-2012 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)
That isn't really discrimination though. That is a genuine concern for security. I know that she probably wasn't going to rob the place but would you feel comfortable if I wore ski masks to banks? I doubt the bank would like that very much either.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by draco49
It is splitting hairs, and I believe it goes against the spirit of the religious tolerance laws. I could call my hat and sunglasses a religious rite. I could make my own religion, I could pay $25 on the internet to ordain myself, and I could even pay $350 to set up a 501(c)(3) corporation and be 100% legit, and my religion could be hats and sunglasses. That goes totally against the spirit of the law.
Personally, I don't think the rules to force uncovering of the face make any sense, because if I'm going to rob a bank or shoot up a courthouse, I'm not too worried about breaking their rules. So, I disagree with the effectiveness of the rule, BUT, if it is a rule, then there should not be any special consideration for religions.
In fact, I was raised, in a religious household, to be offended by anyone wearing a hat indoors. If a Jewish man wears his little beanie inside a building, it is offensive to many people not because he is a Jew, but because he is being rude in not removing his headdress in doors. So, whose religion wins? Do we cater to the one offended by not being allowed to wear it, or the one offended by allowing him to wear it? There is no easy answer, except to completely ignore the religious aspect and enforce the rules as they are written.
Originally posted by LoveisanArt
reply to post by smyleegrl
For those acting like this is a god darn crime to ask this woman to remove the mask that has hidden her true beauty her entire life... you are completely LOST.
First off.. no human being (especially the WOMAN) should hide their faces and indentity, they should be free to express themselves and thier inner beauty like the rest of the World. The religions that deny woman to expose their selves.. is F'n ridiculous! I dont care why, its sick.
This is a compliment if anything to ask this young woman to take off her mask... she has been innerly destroyed (As all these females who are forced too hide themselves) her whole life!
Asking her to reveal herself is a good thing in my eyes, it hsould be un-acceptable to force any female to hide their true beauty... if anything its the males who should hide themselves
~ Love is an art
Originally posted by mysterioustranger
Lets try this: After reaing all these pages it comes down to just the ISSUE..not the PERSON.
No one should hide their identities for any reason. Thats why you cant go into a bank that way without the cops coming.
It just makes sense. Not predudicial, not discrimatory, not judgemental against ANYONE ok?
Just an issue of SAFETY. ONLY. SAFETY For those around the person in question.
Overly so? Perhaps. But in this day and age...necessary. And as other countries and states and places of business are adopting this attitude...then I am not alone in my opinion.