First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Should full-face veils and burqas be banned?
27265 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 8/26/16
Looking at the issue from an integration perspective there doesn't seem to be a solution, since

- If you ban full-faced veils, it would be called discriminatory
- If you don't ban full-faced veils, those wearing them would hardly seem to be integrating into the rest of the society anyways

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/19/europe/burqa-burkini-bans/index.html

35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 8/26/16 , edited 8/28/16
As this is a matter of free exercise of religion I say they ought to be allowed if people want to wear them. Nuns' habits shouldn't be banned, and neither should those. With that said, I also personally view things like burqas as unnecessary, repressive, and unfashionable besides, and I would not wear one.
33510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 8/26/16 , edited 8/28/16

BlueOni wrote:

As this is a matter of free exercise of religion I say they ought to be allowed if people want to wear them. Nuns' habits shouldn't be banned, and neither should those. With that said, I also personally view things like burqas as unnecessary, repressive, and unfashionable besides, and I would not wear one.

^

More or less the exact response I was thinking of.
27265 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 8/26/16

BlueOni wrote:

As this is a matter of free exercise of religion I say they ought to be allowed if people want to wear them. Nuns' habits shouldn't be banned, and neither should those. With that said, I also personally view things like burqas as unnecessary, repressive, and unfashionable besides, and I would not wear one.


I personally would find a fully covered face somewhat off-putting because it would feel as if the person has walled herself off to me and everyone else- although that's not the intention it may have that kind of effect.

From the linked article:


Though, Ali said she feels that while living in a non-Muslim country, not wearing a headscarf has helped her better interact with the community because she is no longer "displaying her religion."
"Friends and colleagues told me they thought I was a very serious person (when I wore the hijab), they had a certain perception of me," said Ali.
"But now my non-Muslim friends and colleagues find me more approachable."
31139 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 8/26/16 , edited 8/28/16
No. As stated, (inside the U.S.) a ban would be a clear 1st Amendment violation.

To my knowledge, there is also no explicit duty for immigrants to integrate seamlessly. We want them to. We encourage them to. We help them to, but there's no requirement that they must dress in the same fashions, speak with the same accents, get the same style of haircuts, etc. in order to blend in with their neighbors perfectly.

The German ban has more of a security / identification lean to it. I think the 1st Amendment would still probably win in court except for specific circumstances / settings where public safety holds more weight than individual religious liberty.

I don't see their appeal, and can't understand why anyone would willingly wear one, but that's irrelevant. /shrug
608 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/26/16 , edited 8/28/16
Nope. I see no valid reason as to why they should be banned.
Azver 
32280 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Forest, Finland
Offline
Posted 8/26/16 , edited 8/29/16
Considering there's laws against covering ones face in protests/rallies (In Finland, anyway), what happens if a lady in one finds herself in a protest/rally?

Honestly, wear a thong if you want, wear a tarp if you want. But the moment someone says you HAVE to wear it, I take issue with it. Proving that tho, is a whole different matter. So honestly I haven't got a clue what's the best way to go about it, maybe allow it to anyone of full age, and thus being able to consent to it? Maybe make religion equal to hard liqueur, so +21?

I'd go for that.
33363 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Socal
Offline
Posted 8/26/16 , edited 8/26/16
First thing I thought when I saw her



"UTINI" - random Jawa
Posted 8/26/16
They already are.
18 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / England
Offline
Posted 8/27/16 , edited 8/29/16
One reason why it is so difficult to promote integration is because it is very difficult to do so without restricting individual liberty, and the general view is that the goal is not of such importance that it justifies such restriction. I share that view, especially when it comes to religious freedom.

Another reason I disapprove of banning the burqa etc. is that doing so strikes me as disrespectful to women. You might say that these coverings embody attitudes which are even more disrespectful to women, and I would agree with you, but the state should not decide that it knows what is best for people and require them to behave accordingly. Freedom must include the freedom to make mistakes.
I remember that when France was debating a ban on the burqa, we heard that many women were forced by family/husbands to wear them, but if that is oppression (and it is) how is it less oppressive to force the reverse? It seemed like trying to legislate away the most obvious sign of the problem, rather than dealing with the serious issue that some women have so little control over their own lives.

The only legitimate explanation I've heard for these laws is that they are necessary for security purposes. I admit that I find that a strong but troubling argument. Of course, some sacrifice of liberty is necessary for security, but to what extent? In any case, I'm sure the same goal could be accomplished with a non-discriminatory law, such as those Hrafna just mentioned.
20805 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 8/27/16 , edited 8/29/16
Nope imo but i think you should be able to wear anything to cover your face in public.

fuck if i wanna wear a mask in public that should be my right.
4500 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
UK
Offline
Posted 8/27/16 , edited 8/29/16
If you need to show ID there should be no reason not to remove the veil temporarily to another woman screened off from the public, then it can be put back on again. There is the issue with working with young children who will need to see eye contact and facial expression as part as their learning and development but again the veil can be replaced after you're finished dealing with the children. Other than that you may wear what you wish.
18584 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18
Offline
Posted 8/27/16 , edited 8/29/16
No that's just indecent and rude. If people wanna wear it then let them wear it, it's not like it harms anyone. But that doesn't mean they can't/don't have to take it off for necessary security reasons.
24263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 8/27/16 , edited 8/27/16
No, until the day a woman blows herself up in the middle of New York or London. Then you can ban it for safety reasons.
1035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / F
Offline
Posted 8/27/16
There are some shows that use full face veils, so no.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.