Amadeus Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Belgian lawmakers vote to ban burka Belgian lawmakers voted on Wednesday to ban the full Islamic veil from public places in the country. The vote could pave the way for the first clampdown of its kind in Europe and comes shortly after France's State Council suggested the burka could be outlawed in some public places for security reasons. The federal parliament’s home affairs committee voted unanimously to impose the ban on any clothes or veils that do not allow the wearer to be fully identified. This ban includes the full-face nikab and burka. The draft bill says that people who ignore the ban would be fined 15-25 euros as well as risk a prison sentence of up to seven days, unless police give special permission to wear the garments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 This is really bad. A really stupid way of tackling an issue. It is a sign of female sexual repression and man's control over women. However, how you can you talk of the values of democracy and liberalism when you ban what people wear? It makes sense to not allow it when employing someone to work in a school or, for example, when taking a passport photo and similarly identifying yourself to others, but a ban removes the freedom to look the way you wish, which is something that should everyone should have. How dare people tell others what to wear. This Denis Ducarme sounds like a cunt to be proud of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Totally agree with you LDV. It exposes the hypocrisy of so called freedom and democracy to then make rules about how people have to dress. They'll be banning sunglasses and hats next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Sorry, I have to agree with the ban in this case. I feel that this would never have arisen as a problem had the aggrieved parties been a bit more flexible in their thinking. There are practical and security issues but with a bit of give and take there wouldn't have been a problem. It seems that sections of the community just want to push the boundries of common sense and that inevitably leads to loss of freedoms in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digga Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 we as british citizens have to remove hats and crash helmets when you enter a bank or petrol stations or if asked by a police officer, if the towel heads would agree to remove the head dress when required there would be no arguments but because they stubbornly refuse to do so this has brought on this vote against them, its their own fault get over it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 if the towel heads would agree to remove the head dress when required there would be no arguments The fact that you dismiss people as "towel heads" reflects what you are like. I wouldn't want to be part of your society either. I would be equally unhappy to live under any version of islamic law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digga Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 The fact that you dismiss people as "towel heads" reflects what you are like. I wouldn't want to be part of your society either. I would be equally unhappy to live under any version of islamic law. they have no one to blame but their own ideals, get over it, sheesh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaipyr Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 we as british citizens have to remove hats and crash helmets when you enter a bank or petrol stations or if asked by a police officer, if the towel heads would agree to remove the head dress when required there would be no arguments but because they stubbornly refuse to do so this has brought on this vote against them, its their own fault get over it Don't like the term 'towel heads' but agree with the ban. The UK is riddled with CCTV cameras - why should everyone else be able to be identified except women in full Islamic headgear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Sorry, I have to agree with the ban in this case. I feel that this would never have arisen as a problem had the aggrieved parties been a bit more flexible in their thinking. There are practical and security issues but with a bit of give and take there wouldn't have been a problem. It seems that sections of the community just want to push the boundries of common sense and that inevitably leads to loss of freedoms in the end. Oh dear. Make a choice. Either you want a democratic, liberal society or you do not. I really find yours an outlook and attitude one that reflects just how poorly many people adhere to the principles and values that they wish to live by, which are based on everyone sharing them, but then will be happy to allow some power in society to remove some people freedoms which renders that values and principles worthless. Ok, so you might think that one group in society has inflexible thinking - aren't they allowed to be inflexible in a liberal society? What makes you think anyone has the right to deal with that by taking away their freedoms in particular? If you're not happy with such inflexible then deal with it in a different way that doesn't create a situation where people have basic freedoms removed. Digga we as british citizens have to remove hats and crash helmets when you enter a bank or petrol stations or if asked by a police officer, if the towel heads would agree to remove the head dress when required there would be no arguments but because they stubbornly refuse to do so this has brought on this vote against them, its their own fault get over itWho cares whether as a British citizens we have to remove such things - what does this have to do with a government created a law? We are not forced to remove such things by law. That's such a poor excuse. You as a British citizen who lives in a British society run a particular way are supposed to cherish democracy and some basic liberal values. It's you fault when you condone governments removing freedoms in such a society and then complain when governments take cavalier undemocratic and illiberal action which affects you greatly. You'd have no credibility when complaining about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digga Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 We are not forced to remove such things by law. try see how far you get, if you approach the banking counters you will be asked to remove it, if you refuse they will not serve you, end of , if you remain in the bank once refused service demanding to be served as 'it's Your right' the police will be called and you will be escorted away, why should everyone else be able to be identified except women in full Islamic headgear? thats what i'm saying, how do you know it's a woman and not a terrorist , the other argument is how do we know that under these flowing robes there is not a bomb, in these current times it is of their own making that everyone else is so suspicious of their type so who's to blame, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Well LDV this does really suprise me, you are actually condoning a religion to exploit women and treat them as second class citizens by forcing them to wear a Burka, I would say this instead of this ban being bad it is actually a way of helping these women to prevent the imams forcing their laws on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 [ why should everyone else be able to be identified except women in full Islamic headgear? Why should anyone be remotely identifiable? it is of their own making that everyone else is so suspicious of their type so who's to blame, Nobody is to blame. Conflict between different factions is inevitable because the world is complex and chaotic. No belief or control system is morally superior. Banning certain types of clothing will not make a society any safer. Would you ban briefcases or sports bags which can just as easily be carried into a crowd ? The people who bombed London in 2005 were not dressed in flowing robes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mæŋksmən Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 The people who bombed London in 2005 were not dressed in flowing robes. what have israelis got to do with burkas??. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 I agree they should be banned, for very similar reasons to Digga. LDV, before you start talking about the right to dress as you want, please take off all your clothes and walk down Strand Street - see how far you get before you are arrested. Burkas, etc. should be banned by an emergency anti-terrorism law ASAP, before a bunch of suicide bombers do a Moscow anywhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mæŋksmən Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Moscow was alledgedly chechens, not a burka insight. Alledgedly as false flag more likely because russia want/needs bonefidi reason by world standards to occupy chechen territories for. n May 2007 the US Energy Information Administration projected that by 2015 Caspian basin energy production could reach 4.3 million bpd, concluding that in addition to the region's proven reserves of 17 billion-49 billion barrels, comparable to Qatar at the lower estimate and Libya on the high end, the region could contain an additional hydrocarbon reserves up to 235 billion barrels of oil, roughly equivalent to a quarter of the Middle East's total proven reserves. Nor is oil the only energy deposit there. The Caspian's potential natural gas reserves are as large as the region's proven gas reserves and could yield another potential 328 trillion cubic feet of gas. http://arabnews.com/economy/article37636.ece They are only doing what america did in 2001 and britain in 2005 and many other times for all 3 countries. Life is extremely cheap when it comes up against trillions of dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.