British public back a ban on burqa by two to one, poll finds - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986208]Those who arrive in other countries should deal with the customs of that country, no matter what.[/quote] There have been Muslims in Europe for centuries, not everyone is a first generation immigrant. [quote]Why do white women who are tourists try to cover themselves up (in Tunisia it is slutty to wear skirts and stuff like that - women tourists don't do that as not to offend anyone). If we are talking about tourists, what about those who live in foreign countries? It's not us who should deal with other cultures, it's them who should be dealing with it.[/quote] Since this is brought up all the time, and I have yet to see a convincing answer, why are we competing with illiberal countries? If enforcing clothing restrictions is wrong in one country (as you imply) then it's wrong in all countries. [quote]They, the outsiders, should integrate to our society and not the other way around.[/QUOTE] Have you had to change your life in any way at all to adapt for the culture of 'outsiders'? And why should integration extent to clothing preferences? As long as someone abides by the law and does their civic duty I think they have integrated just fine. They haven't [i]assimilated[/i], but that is a completely different thing. The real radical change in culture that I think is happening here is the abandonment of religious freedom, which most of the West aspired to maintain in the past. [editline]1st September 2016[/editline] Also, just to clarify, your reason for banning burkas is that they originate from an outside culture?

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986208]Those who arrive in other countries should deal with the customs of that country, no matter what. Why do white women who are tourists try to cover themselves up (in Tunisia it is slutty to wear skirts and stuff like that - women tourists don't do that as not to offend anyone). If we are talking about tourists, what about those who live in foreign countries? It's not us who should deal with other cultures, it's them who should be dealing with it. Sorry if it sounds xenophobic, but it seems like this pol correct stuff is killing Europe. They, the outsiders, should integrate to our society and not the other way around. All in all, burqas should be banned.[/QUOTE] The countries that force women to wear these things are also in the wrong. If you think that we should look up to Saudi Arabia as an example of social ideals, then I don't know what to tell you

[QUOTE=phaedon;50986261]There have been Muslims in Europe for centuries, not everyone is a first generation immigrant. Since this is brought up all the time, and I have yet to see a convincing answer, why are we competing with illiberal countries? If enforcing clothing restrictions is wrong in one country (as you imply) then it's wrong in all countries. Have you had to change your life in any way at all to adapt for the culture of 'outsiders'? And why should integration extent to clothing preferences? As long as someone abides by the law and does their civic duty I think they have integrated just fine. They haven't [i]assimilated[/i], but that is a completely different thing. The real radical change in culture that I think is happening here is the abandonment of religious freedom, which most of the West aspired to maintain in the past. [editline]1st September 2016[/editline] Also, just to clarify, your reason for banning burkas is that they originate from an outside culture?[/QUOTE] The problem is not within clothing, but it's withing culture. Why should we bow down to them, who try to integrate the so called "religious freedom" while it is so one sided? If I were a woman, I couldn't wear the clothes that I preffer just because it's not according to their customs (which, by the way, are religious). How come we have to deal with their preferences while they don't have to deal with ours? And the argument of Muslims living in Europe for centuries is invalid as this is not the Medieval or even earlier times anymore, we should look at the current situation, not to what happened in the past. How hard is it to understand that, I repeat myself, it's not us who should integrate to foreign influence, but those who come from foreign countries should integrate to ours. By the way, was there never a question in Muslim countries about the integration of European people? Because we adapt to their culture. That's all. If an European woman gets married there, she gets accustomed to their culture and there's no problem. Why can't it be the same here, in Europe?

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986208]Those who arrive in other countries should deal with the customs of that country, no matter what. Why do white women who are tourists try to cover themselves up (in Tunisia it is slutty to wear skirts and stuff like that - women tourists don't do that as not to offend anyone). If we are talking about tourists, what about those who live in foreign countries? It's not us who should deal with other cultures, it's them who should be dealing with it. Sorry if it sounds xenophobic, but it seems like this pol correct stuff is killing Europe. They, the outsiders, should integrate to our society and not the other way around. All in all, burqas should be banned.[/QUOTE] I agree, we should force everyone else to conform and if they don't wear the appropriate government-mandated dress code they should be arrested. Britain has more freedoms than Saudi Arabia and the UAE and Iran. I'd like to keep it that way, not stoop down to their backwards level of legislating [i]clothing[/i] in the name of "culture" or "morality" or "decency." The west should be [I]priding[/I] itself on our high degree of freedom - mandatory government-legislated dress codes are fundamentally contradictory to those freedoms. The largest part of the culture of liberalism in the west is [i]liberalism[/i], freedom of public expression, those abstract ideas that form our cultural ideology. Not what kind of clothing you wear. If you want to ban types of clothing and public expression, go to the Middle East, you'll fit in better there.

[QUOTE=da space core;50986315]The countries that force women to wear these things are also in the wrong. If you think that we should look up to Saudi Arabia as an example of social ideals, then I don't know what to tell you[/QUOTE] Burqas ain't our thing, I don't look up to anything for social ideals, but those things are not our problem. Burqas should be left in muslim countries, it's their thing what they do, they should not try to use them here, in Europe. I agree that forced burqas are bad, but it's their thing, it's not our thing.

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986318]The problem is not within clothing, but it's withing culture. Why should we bow down to them, who try to integrate the so called "religious freedom" while it is so one sided? If I were a woman, I couldn't wear the clothes that I preffer just because it's not according to their customs (which, by the way, are religious). How come we have to deal with their preferences while they don't have to deal with ours?[/QUOTE] if a woman is forced against her will to wear a burqa, then what would a ban do to fix that? their husband would still be a misogynist. he would act exactly the same way in private, if it even changes how he acts in public to begin with. this is some kind of nonsense hypothetical where Muslim men are fanatical but also very quick to abandon their values if the government steps in

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986330]Burqas ain't our thing, I don't look up to anything for social ideals, but those things are not our problem. Burqas should be left in muslim countries, it's their thing what they do, they should not try to use them here, in Europe. I agree that forced burqas are bad, but it's their thing, it's not our thing.[/QUOTE] Why do you have to decide what articles of clothing are and aren't your thing? Why can't your thing be "have the freedom to wear whatever you want" It's a much better thing. Also free the nipple. edit: And it seems like no one here wanting a ban knows what piety is like. Some people really believe what they say they believe. If you don't think people should be able to practice their beliefs in a way they see fit, provided they aren't harming anyone, then I really can't understand you. I come from a country built on religious freedom.

[QUOTE=Cone;50986365]if a woman is forced against her will to wear a burqa, then what would a ban do to fix that? their husband would still be a misogynist. he would act exactly the same way in private, if it even changes how he acts in public to begin with. this is some kind of nonsense hypothetical where Muslim men are fanatical but also very quick to abandon their values if the government steps in[/QUOTE] The burqas were thought out by men, so what are we discussing about now, religious freedom or women's rights? Women have no right of word in their culture.

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986386]The burqas were thought out by men, so what are we discussing about now, [B]religious freedom or women's rights?[/B] Women have no right of word in their culture.[/QUOTE] both, banning burqas is stupid because it restricts religious freedom while also not only discriminating against women's rights to wear burqas but failing to adress the issue of women who are forced to wear burqas

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986318]The problem is not within clothing, but it's withing culture. Why should we [b]bow down to them[/b],[/quote] We are not at all. Also, a lot of 'them' have been European citizens for generations. [quote]who try to integrate the so called "religious freedom" while it is so one sided? If I were a woman, I couldn't wear the clothes that I preffer just because it's not according to their customs (which, by the way, are religious). How come we have to deal with their preferences while they don't have to deal with ours?[/quote] Because those measures are wrong and backwards regardless of country? Again, why do we want to compete in backwardness with less developed countries? With the exception of dual citizenships, these are [i]our[/i] citizens and we should do right by them. They are not Tunisian or Saudi Arabian subjects. There is literally zero reason to 'reciprocate' any kind of discrimination Europeans have received in those countries. [quote]And the argument of Muslims living in Europe for centuries is invalid as this is not the Medieval or even earlier times anymore, we should look at the current situation, not to what happened in the past. How hard is it to understand that, I repeat myself, it's not us who should integrate to foreign influence, but those who come from foreign countries should integrate to ours.[/quote] You are missing my point. Muslims who have been in Europe for centuries/generations can't be regarded as outsiders. They are inhabitants of Europe as much as anyone else. [quote]By the way, was there never a question in Muslim countries about the integration of European people? Because we adapt to their culture. That's all. If an European woman gets married there, she gets accustomed to their culture and there's no problem. Why can't it be the same here, in Europe?[/QUOTE] lol I'm Pontic Greek. You can bet I object to the forced homogenization of the Ottoman Empire, as well as any other attempts of forced assimilation in other Muslim-majority countries.

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986386]The burqas were thought out by men, so what are we discussing about now, religious freedom or women's rights? Women have no right of word in their culture.[/QUOTE] There are single women who convert to Islam as adults who want to wear burqas. You think they shouldn't be able to because why exactly? edit; This reminds me so much of that [URL="https://moonmetropolis.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/sjw-comic.jpg"]one sjw comic[/URL] I decided to spend way too much time on my own edit: [thumb]http://i.imgur.com/pzmCk5R.png[/thumb]

[QUOTE=Ringo_Satu;50986330]Burqas ain't our thing, I don't look up to anything for social ideals, but those things are not our problem. Burqas should be left in muslim countries, it's their thing what they do, they should not try to use them here, in Europe. I agree that forced burqas are bad, but it's their thing, it's not our thing.[/QUOTE] This isn't Britain, but as far as Germany goes it actually is 'our thing', indirectly. That's mostly because of the 'do whatever you want as long as you don't unreasonably inconvenience anyone else'-culture here though. It plainly falls under the really wide range of freedom of (un)dress here, which is situationally limited only as other fairly specific situations arise.

[QUOTE=maxolina;50983048]I don't know the situation outside of europe, but in Italy it's illegal to go around dressed like this: [img]http://oxford-products.com/us/product_images/n/004/Balaclava_eyes__92353_zoom.jpg[/img] So I don't see a reason why you should be allowed to go around like this: [img]http://thepolar.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/face_28915c.jpg[/img] I see absolutely no difference..[/QUOTE] banning either plays directly into an irrational paranoid fear, which is something no country's law should ever do. it just fosters and entrenches it, on an individual and potentially even cultural level.

[QUOTE=maxolina;50983048]I don't know the situation outside of europe, but in Italy it's illegal to go around dressed like this: [img]http://oxford-products.com/us/product_images/n/004/Balaclava_eyes__92353_zoom.jpg[/img] So I don't see a reason why you should be allowed to go around like this: [img]http://thepolar.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/face_28915c.jpg[/img] I see absolutely no difference..[/QUOTE] One's a garment that holds religious significance, one isn't. That's a pretty good difference. Do you object to Sikhs wearing [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirpan"]Kirpans[/URL]?

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50988384]One's a garment that holds religious significance, one isn't. That's a pretty good difference. Do you object to Sikhs wearing [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirpan"]Kirpans[/URL]?[/QUOTE] My religion demands i wear a working atom bomb on my back at all times. religious demands should not be respected just for 'being religious' [B]you are doing the same as those guys that want to ban the burka...[/B] what is allowed normally should be allowed normally, no discrimination and no favoritisms... so yes, if carrying knives is illegal then so should the kirpans

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50988398]My religion demands i wear a working atom bomb on my back at all times. religious demands should not be respected just for 'being religious' [B]you are doing the same as those guys that want to ban the burka...[/B] what is allowed normally should be allowed normally, no discrimination and no favoritisms... so yes, if carrying knives is illegal then so should the kirpans[/QUOTE] I get carrying knives is illegal, but are you really fucking comparing them to an atom bomb.

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50988398]My religion demands i wear a working atom bomb on my back at all times. religious demands should not be respected just for 'being religious' [B]you are doing the same as those guys that want to ban the burka...[/B] what is allowed normally should be allowed normally, no discrimination and no favoritisms... so yes, if carrying knives is illegal then so should the kirpans[/QUOTE] If you carry a knife for religious reasons, you're far less likely to use it in a criminal manner. If you're carrying a knife otherwise, you're probably planning to use it for illegal purposes. Similarly, if you wear a ski mask into a bank, you're probably doing it because you don't want anyone to see your face, whereas if you wear a burka into a bank, you're probably doing it out of piety.

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50988417]If you carry a knife for religious reasons, you're far less likely to use it in a criminal manner.[/QUOTE] irrelevant [QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50988417]If you're carrying a knife otherwise, you're probably planning to use it for illegal purposes.[/QUOTE] Irrelevant (and wrong, most knives are still tools to do a certain job... a chef cant walk around in public with knives on his belt for example...) [QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50988417]Similarly, if you wear a ski mask into a bank, you're probably doing it because you don't want anyone to see your face, whereas if you wear a burka into a bank, you're probably doing it out of piety.[/QUOTE] irrelevant The law is the law, as soon as you give certain religions exceptions, you are picking sides on religion... and are no longer a secular state. [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Olanov;50988411]I get carrying knives is illegal, but are you really fucking comparing them to an atom bomb.[/QUOTE] both are equally illegal, was going to say a stick of dynamite, but i didn't want people to focus on 'omg you think all terrorists are muslism ur a racist' or shit like that. nuclear bombs are bizarre enough that its clear enough what i mean without context baggage.

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50988421]irrelevant x2[/QUOTE] ...Not really. The law is there to prevent crime. If you have a valid reason to be doing something, even if it's criminal, you can largely avoid prosecution. There's a principle in English law called 'social utility'; it's the same principle that's allowed people to acquitted of manslaughter and grievous bodily harm. [quote]Irrelevant (and wrong, most knives are still tools to do a certain job... a chef cant walk around in public with knives on his belt for example...)[/quote] Yes they can. If you're carrying knives for a non-criminal purpose, like cheffing, or if you're a warehouse worker with a boxcutter, or any other job where you'd need to have a knife, you have a defence. I used to reenact, and I was once stopped by a policeman who asked why I was carrying a sword. I explained and I went on my way. Similarly, the British Transport Police have been very understanding when I went to the Lord Mayor's Show in London carrying a musket. If I was carrying a stiletto without a valid reason, I'd be arrested. [quote]The law is the law, as soon as you give certain religions exceptions, you are picking sides on religion... and are no longer a secular state.[/quote] A secular state, to my mind, is one that doesn't inhibit the individual's practise of his religion. It's not 'picking sides', it's giving everybody a level playing field.

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;50988455]A secular state, to my mind, is one that doesn't inhibit the individual's practise of his religion. It's not 'picking sides', it's giving everybody a level playing field.[/QUOTE] Ignoring for a second all your other points, i dont see how you can mentally unify what you said here. first of all, allowing a religion to do something that is illegal for everyone else is 'picking a side' [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularity[/URL] Its not about 'not inhibiting an individuals religion', else this [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge6TSF2Ok3w[/URL] would be legal... its about not inhibiting or benefiting someone based on the religion they subscribe too... so to take my extreme example, it is not allowed to have a nuclear bomb with you on the streets. my religion asks me to do that as a religious practice. in a secular state it should still be illegal... you can argue its (by your word) legal to carry knives if you have a non-criminal reason, and therefore the Sikhs wearing knives for religious reasons (non criminal) should be allowed to carry them. But then so should people be legally allowed to wear them for the reason of 'they are a fashion statement', or for 'transporting the knife from a to b.' and i doubt that is the case, so no, thats not a secular stance of the UK and they are giving favorite treatment to the Sikhs + some other people like reenactors.

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50988477]Ignoring for a second all your other points, i dont see how you can mentally unify what you said here. first of all, allowing a religion to do something that is illegal for everyone else is 'picking a side' [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularity[/URL] Its not about 'not inhibiting an individuals religion', else this [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge6TSF2Ok3w[/URL] would be legal... its about not inhibiting or benefiting someone based on the religion they subscribe too... so to take my extreme example, it is not allowed to have a nuclear bomb with you on the streets. my religion asks me to do that as a religious practice. in a secular state it should still be illegal... you can argue its (by your word) legal to carry knives if you have a non-criminal reason, and therefore the Sikhs wearing knives for religious reasons (non criminal) should be allowed to carry them. But then so should people be legally allowed to wear them for the reason of 'they are a fashion statement', or for 'transporting the knife from a to b.' and i doubt that is the case, so no, thats not a secular stance of the UK and they are giving favorite treatment to the Sikhs + some other people like reenactors.[/QUOTE] Knives aren't a fashion statement, though. As I said, it's a question of social utility. Carrying a knife for fashionable purposes provides no social benefit, whereas carrying one for work (or indeed transporting a knife from A to B) does - it allows you to do your job, and both are legal. [QUOTE](4) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had good reason or lawful authority for having the article with him in a public place. (5)[...]it shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had the article with him — (a)for use at work; (b)for religious reasons; or (c)as part of any national costume[/QUOTE] It's not necessarily picking a side, it's just allowing religious reasons to be considered a valid reason to carry a certain item - disguising your face in public is entirely legal, except during a protest (and the police are allowed to ask you to remove religious headwear during such protests). You're allowed to wear a balaclava in public if you want to, and you're allowed to wear a burka if you want to. There are no defences for carrying a nuclear bomb on the street - there are defences to carrying knives. Religious observance is one of them. There are no defences to beating a child (barring what's called 'lawful chastisement', available to anyone). Your example doesn't compare like with like.

The example of motorcycle helmets is quite stupid. It is something you wear not out of your choice but for safety. And once the person gets out of their vehicle, you dont see them walking around with their helmet on. Meanwhile, the burka is worn either by your own choice or forced upon you depending on the case. Either way, a motorcycle helmet is a safety measure, while a burka is something you wear by choice (yours or someones elses). Comparing the two is moronic.

[QUOTE=Gizmodo456;50983008]If the government decided denim was illegal as it promoted complete concealment of a booty we would all be outraged. Governments don't get to dictate how we dress. We do that to children in schools. That is where it should remain.[/QUOTE] Uhhh if I'm not mistaken [url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calico_Acts[/url]

[QUOTE=TheDestroyerOfall;50992112]Uhhh if I'm not mistaken [url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calico_Acts[/url][/QUOTE] 300-year-old legislation on textile imports is about as big of a stretch on "there's precedent to ban certain clothing styles" as you could possibly get. The US had the Alien and Sedition acts 200 years ago but that's not a justification for policy [i]now[/i]. We had slavery 200 years ago but that's still not justification or precedent for how [i]modern[/i] policy should work. Banning clothes is authoritarian and fundamentally opposed to all of western society's ideas on human rights, individual freedoms, and liberty. The people who value [i]clothing style[/i] as "culture" and insist on tearing down the actual values that create that culture belong in the Middle East far more than somebody wearing a niqab. Because their cultural and societal values of [i]using government as a sledgehammer against individual freedoms[/i] is contradictory to everything western society finds important. Basically, individual freedoms are far more important to British culture than making sure everyone wears peacots and top hats with monocles yelling tally-ho on the trolley.

The British public continues to vote poorly. [sp]I fully realize that if they did a poll like this in America and included the south we'd have the same results.[/sp]

If your country arbitrarily bans a garment of clothing for "security purposes" then you don't live in a free country. Period. Claiming anything else is the mewling of a slave trying to rationalize why he wears a collar. There's a compromise that preserves people's rights and also affords law enforcement the tools they need, we have it here in the United States and we're doing A-OK as far as security and safety is concerned. [editline]4th September 2016[/editline] Oh, and for the record I am well aware that some people in my country would enthusiastically agree with a ban. There's a lot of people who would enthusiastically agree with a ban on a lot of things, but we have legally recognized rights so those people can fuck off.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50998800]If your country arbitrarily bans a garment of clothing for "security purposes" then you don't live in a free country. Period. Claiming anything else is the mewling of a slave trying to rationalize why he wears a collar. There's a compromise that preserves people's rights and also affords law enforcement the tools they need, we have it here in the United States and we're doing A-OK as far as security and safety is concerned. [editline]4th September 2016[/editline] Oh, and for the record I am well aware that some people in my country would enthusiastically agree with a ban. There's a lot of people who would enthusiastically agree with a ban on a lot of things, but we have legally recognized rights so those people can fuck off.[/QUOTE] The U.K. has not ever been a free country. Try wearing a balaclava or bike helmet into a bank or betting shop and you will be taken into custody within 15 minutes but wear a full body veil and suddenly it's okay. It won't be long before criminals are wearing them to conceal weapons etc

[QUOTE=Ishwoo;50998818]The U.K. has not ever been a free country. Try wearing a balaclava or bike helmet into a bank or betting shop and you will be taken into custody within 15 minutes but wear a full body veil and suddenly it's okay. It won't be long before criminals are wearing them to conceal weapons etc[/QUOTE] That's not the case. There's no anti mask statute in English law; you won't be arrested for wearing s balaclava or a bike helmet into a bank. What might happen is the security staff will approach you and ask you to either remove the headgear or leave the bank - and any shop can do that, regardless of what you're wearing. If a private shop says they won't serve you because you're wearing a shirt the owner finds distasteful, he's well within his right to ask you to leave. If you refuse, he can then call the police because you're trespassing. The police can only legally oblige you to remove gloves, hats, and outer jackets when you're in public, and only if they have reasonable suspicion that you're doing something illegal. The only time they can force you to remove a balaclava or other face concealing garment is at a protest, and they can also oblige you to remove burkas under the Terrorism Act. This is of course irrelevant because this ban isn't just in banks and betting shops, it's a universal ban.

If you ban burqas, the women who are forced to wear them will just be forced to stay inside instead. It fixes nothing. You are fighting symptoms instead of the cause.

[QUOTE=Ishwoo;50998818]The U.K. has not ever been a free country. Try wearing a balaclava or bike helmet into a bank or betting shop and you will be taken into custody within 15 minutes but wear a full body veil and suddenly it's okay. It won't be long before criminals are wearing them to conceal weapons etc[/QUOTE] People still rob banks and shops wearing bike helmets and balaclavas. I don't think I've heard of any crime being committed by someone in a body veil.