the burka (thing where you can only see their eyes)

Skittles! · Post by **Skittles!** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 4:36 am

:/ Isn't the burka just like what Catholic women had to wear during mass about 30 years ago?

Yeah, don't go on about one religion when another religion did it WAY before that religion came about.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 7:03 am

Dancing Mustard wrote:If a law was created explicitly outlawing Burkas then there'd be nothing the HRA1998 could do about it. A declaration of incompatibility could be made, but the law would still be 100% binding...

(Not saying I agree, just keeping things legally accurate in here)

I thought the whole point of your common law system was that any idiot judge could decide whether or not to uphold the Human Rights Act or the law on burqas.

MeDeFe · Post by **MeDeFe** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 8:04 am

Banning it? That would be no different from banning t-shirts, or from the law favouring boxers over briefs or vice versa. As long a the woman herself chooses to wear it it's fine, if she's being told to do so by her husband or whoever it's an other matter.

brooksieb · Post by **brooksieb** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:56 am

Skittles! wrote::/ Isn't the burka just like what Catholic women had to wear during mass about 30 years ago?

Yeah, don't go on about one religion when another religion did it WAY before that religion came about.

do you even understand? the catholic headscarf is way different to the burqa, with tha catholic headscarf you can still see the women's face, with the burqa you can't see their face, see i dont mind the hijab but when they where the burqa it makes me feel uncomfortable

brooksieb · Post by **brooksieb** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:59 am

MeDeFe wrote:Banning it? That would be no different from banning t-shirts, or from the law favouring boxers over briefs or vice versa. As long a the woman herself chooses to wear it it's fine, if she's being told to do so by her husband or whoever it's an other matter.

but how do you know? she cud say its her choice to wear it, when actually it's their husbands forcing them...... they can't talk to other men or women only aloud to talk to their family members, husband and children...... you say oh its ok its ok its their culture but when they come over to ur country start taking the piss and making you feel uncomfortable....... save urselves while you still can!

MeDeFe · Post by **MeDeFe** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:35 am

I say it's ok for them to wear it if they like, if you'd pay attention I'm also saying that it's not ok to force anyone to wear one, but it's also not ok to force someone to wear jeans, sneakers and a t-shirt who wants to wear a suit.

And along the same lines, how do you know she really fell down the stairs? Maybe her husband is coercing her and forcing her not to tell anyone. It's not like repressing women is something exclusively Islamic, it occurs in a lot of cultures.

And why would a person who is different from me make me feel uncomfortable? On the worldview spectrum my friends and acquaintances range from atheists, over the religiously completely uninterested, to the guy who's studying to become a catholic priest and also practicing Muslims. Getting upset and nervous over an other person's religion, cultural heritage or nationality is silly.

Dancing Mustard · Post by **Dancing Mustard** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:22 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:I thought the whole point of your common law system was that any idiot judge could decide whether or not to uphold the Human Rights Act or the law on burqas.

Well then you were wrong...

greenoaks · Post by **greenoaks** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:52 pm

greenoaks wrote:burkas should be banned. no islamic woman should be allowed to wear one in public.

except of course fat woman. a law should be passed forcing them to cover up, regardless of their religion.

i would like to amend my vote.

ugly women should also be made to cover up. they offend my sensitive eyes.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:54 pm

Dancing Mustard wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:I thought the whole point of your common law system was that any idiot judge could decide whether or not to uphold the Human Rights Act or the law on burqas.
Well then you were wrong...

I was under the impression, Mustard, that if any such conflict arose, a judge could make the law. This being, as far as I know, the basis upon which British common law functions: judges make the law.

Dancing Mustard · Post by **Dancing Mustard** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 1:24 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:I was under the impression, Mustard, that if any such conflict arose, a judge could make the law. This being, as far as I know, the basis upon which British common law functions: judges make the law.

You impression is wrong. 'As far as you know' appears to be not particularily far at all.

Sory Nap, but you're just batting at a losing wicket with that particular 'theory' of law. For simplicity's sake I'd stick with the usual explanation given to laypersons of 'judges just interpret law'. It'll keep this thread on topic for all concerned, and it'll save us a great deal of time.

When you're old enough to get enroled on a law degree, then we'll chat about this (fairly interesting field of jurisprudence) further; but for the while: no that is not how English Law functions, judges do not (by any logical conception) make law.
Good day to you.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 1:48 pm

Dancing Mustard wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:I was under the impression, Mustard, that if any such conflict arose, a judge could make the law. This being, as far as I know, the basis upon which British common law functions: judges make the law.
You impression is wrong. 'As far as you know' appears to be not particularily far at all.

Sory Nap, but you're just batting at a losing wicket with that particular 'theory' of law. For simplicity's sake I'd stick with the usual explanation given to laypersons of 'judges just interpret law'. It'll keep this thread on topic for all concerned, and it'll save us a great deal of time.

When you're old enough to get enroled on a law degree, then we'll chat about this (fairly interesting field of jurisprudence) further; but for the while: no that is not how English Law functions, judges do not (by any logical conception) make law.
Good day to you.

No, no of course...I don't want to make any positive assertions, I'm just trying to understand an alien system Mustard...

d.gishman · Post by **d.gishman** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:50 pm

MeDeFe wrote:I say it's ok for them to wear it if they like, if you'd pay attention I'm also saying that it's not ok to force anyone to wear one, but it's also not ok to force someone to wear jeans, sneakers and a t-shirt who wants to wear a suit.

but jeans, sneakers, and a t-shirt doesn't cover someone's whole face, concealing their identity to everyone. the purpose of the burka was so that the husbands could prevent other men from looking at his wife's body and face, but in a modern society where women have to interact with other people, the burka is prohibitive.

Frigidus · Post by **Frigidus** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 8:06 pm

d.gishman wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:I say it's ok for them to wear it if they like, if you'd pay attention I'm also saying that it's not ok to force anyone to wear one, but it's also not ok to force someone to wear jeans, sneakers and a t-shirt who wants to wear a suit.

but jeans, sneakers, and a t-shirt doesn't cover someone's whole face, concealing their identity to everyone. the purpose of the burka was so that the husbands could prevent other men from looking at his wife's body and face, but in a modern society where women have to interact with other people, the burka is prohibitive.

By modern do you mean Western and by have do you mean want? As I said earlier the burka is no more obstructive to society than a scarf. Should we ban ski masks too? If the women want to wear a burka they can and if they don't then don't. If their husband wants them to they can make their own choice.

greenoaks · Post by **greenoaks** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 8:48 pm

it is against the law to wear a motorcycle helmet into a bank as it obscures the face. as i no longer work in a bank branch i do not know if a burka must also be removed. does anyone know ?

d.gishman · Post by **d.gishman** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:14 pm

Frigidus wrote:By modern do you mean Western and by have do you mean want? As I said earlier the burka is no more obstructive to society than a scarf. Should we ban ski masks too? If the women want to wear a burka they can and if they don't then don't. If their husband wants them to they can make their own choice.

Can you take a passport picture with a ski mask?

Frigidus · Post by **Frigidus** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:22 pm

d.gishman wrote:
Frigidus wrote:By modern do you mean Western and by have do you mean want? As I said earlier the burka is no more obstructive to society than a scarf. Should we ban ski masks too? If the women want to wear a burka they can and if they don't then don't. If their husband wants them to they can make their own choice.

Can you take a passport picture with a ski mask?

Are you constantly taking passport pictures?

Heimdall · Post by **Heimdall** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:00 pm

Tough call... The burka should not be banned but obligating women to wear it either by force or by "brain washing" should be however. Hard to control that.

hiitsmestevie1 · Post by **hiitsmestevie1** » Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:33 pm

it shouldn't be banned.. but i think comic had the best idea.. that it be removed for security purposes (if need be in front of women)

if they WANT to or even are being "forced" to .. thats their choice. (they chose to be wife#?

brooksieb · Post by **brooksieb** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:14 pm

hiitsmestevie1 wrote:it shouldn't be banned.. but i think comic had the best idea.. that it be removed for security purposes (if need be in front of women)

if they WANT to or even are being "forced" to .. thats their choice. (they chose to be wife#?

no, arranged marriages, look it up

brooksieb · Post by **brooksieb** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 12:15 pm

d.gishman wrote:
Frigidus wrote:By modern do you mean Western and by have do you mean want? As I said earlier the burka is no more obstructive to society than a scarf. Should we ban ski masks too? If the women want to wear a burka they can and if they don't then don't. If their husband wants them to they can make their own choice.

Can you take a passport picture with a ski mask?

well for all you know that could be george bush showing up a picture of me

HungrySomali · Post by **HungrySomali** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:58 pm

An Islamic lady down here in Florida was suing the DMV because they wouldnt let her take her drivers license photo without her ninja mask on. If its okay for them to wear that scary shit then its okay for me to stay at least 100 meters from where they are at all times.

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:31 pm

HungrySomali wrote:An Islamic lady down here in Florida was suing the DMV because they wouldnt let her take her drivers license photo without her ninja mask on. If its okay for them to wear that scary shit then its okay for me to stay at least 100 meters from where they are at all times.

Thats where I draw the line with religious tolerance, everybody is entitled
to their personal faith but nobody should expect it to overide the laws of the land. It happens all the time though, why should people expect others not to have a drink on a Sunday simply because it is a religious day to them ?

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:36 pm

comic boy wrote:
HungrySomali wrote:An Islamic lady down here in Florida was suing the DMV because they wouldnt let her take her drivers license photo without her ninja mask on. If its okay for them to wear that scary shit then its okay for me to stay at least 100 meters from where they are at all times.

Thats where I draw the line with religious tolerance, everybody is entitled
to their personal faith but nobody should expect it to overide the laws of the land. It happens all the time though, why should people expect others not to have a drink on a Sunday simply because it is a religious day to them ?

Because it's the law of the land, dipshit.

greenoaks · Post by **greenoaks** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:38 pm

comic boy wrote:
HungrySomali wrote:An Islamic lady down here in Florida was suing the DMV because they wouldnt let her take her drivers license photo without her ninja mask on. If its okay for them to wear that scary shit then its okay for me to stay at least 100 meters from where they are at all times.

Thats where I draw the line with religious tolerance, everybody is entitled
to their personal faith but nobody should expect it to overide the laws of the land. It happens all the time though, why should people expect others not to have a drink on a Sunday simply because it is a religious day to them ?

i don't understand why it is a religious day

Frigidus · Post by **Frigidus** » Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:39 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
comic boy wrote:
HungrySomali wrote:An Islamic lady down here in Florida was suing the DMV because they wouldnt let her take her drivers license photo without her ninja mask on. If its okay for them to wear that scary shit then its okay for me to stay at least 100 meters from where they are at all times.

Thats where I draw the line with religious tolerance, everybody is entitled
to their personal faith but nobody should expect it to overide the laws of the land. It happens all the time though, why should people expect others not to have a drink on a Sunday simply because it is a religious day to them ?

Because it's the law of the land, dipshit.

Are you referring to the no beer on Sundays bit? I'm pretty sure that that is less law of the land and more the law of Christianity.

the burka (thing where you can only see their eyes)

should the burka be banned?