France Muslim face veil ban?

[burzerker]

+1 to Kren

I find it funny at how people can spew hatred of Christianity for supposedly preaching slavery is OK and wife beating is OK (none of which are practiced by any Christians I know) yet when Muslims degrade their women by forcing them to wear sacks with 2 little eye holes they get defended for the practice. It's this extreme practice of Islam that is behind the stoning of women because they were raped, I don't see how this group can be defended for it's barbaric practices.

[Matt-Chicago]

Man did really nobody get my point?
I said longer than the white man in AMERICA - which believe it or not was founded well after the 5th century. That was only in response to people who have attitudes about Muslims somehow being OUTSIDERS in France. I was pointing out the absurdity of the "go back where you came from" style arguments.

Saying "the Muslims"... what is that supposed to mean? Do you honestly think there is just some big group of people who all agree with things like burqas and stonings? Do you really think that a Muslim in France who's family comes from Africa centuries ago is somehow responsible for the injustices of the Taliban or the religious police of Saudi Arabia? If you really do hold that view, I hope you never have to look in the mirror at your own heritage, race, religion, etc or be held responsible for views you don't hold or actions you don't take.

I haven't even said what I thought of the law, only pointed out how prejudice seems to cloud the debate.

As far as terrorists, does covering your face really give you that much of an advantage? What about a big fake beard/mustache, maybe with some sun glasses? Should that be banned too? If I have the flu, can I wear a respiratory mask? Does a certain percentage of my real face/hair have to be showing? What should that be legislated as?

[mrjamwin]

Man did really nobody get my point?
I said longer than the white man in AMERICA -

That's what I was trying to find out from you and I still don't see how your point relates to the question at hand. I don't think this discussion has anything to do with who was where first in what country. It's about whether or not a government should have the right to pass a law that prohibits a person from exercising their religious freedom and should a country have the right to protect its own culture and soverignty.

[burzerker]

It doesn't er how long they have been there or not, a study was taken in which the majority of the Muslims in Great Britain want Shariah law to rule there. They bring their oppressive culture with them wherever they go. Islam isn't just a religion it's also has a system of government that it embodies as well that is very oppressive, women, homosexuals etc.. have virtually zero rights, why should they be un-opposed by freedom loving people.

[Corpse]

Matt and Nargotah are the only people whose posts I've read and thought "good point" so far.

[SWINE FLU]

Matt and Nargotah are the only people whose posts I've read and thought "good point" so far.

Just because Muslim countries do not let us follow Christianity, does not mean that we have to ban Muslim's veils, WD.

[(SWGO)Kren]

Man did really nobody get my point?
I said longer than the white man in AMERICA - which believe it or not was founded well after the 5th century. That was only in response to people who have attitudes about Muslims somehow being OUTSIDERS in France. I was pointing out the absurdity of the "go back where you came from" style arguments.

Saying "the Muslims"... what is that supposed to mean? Do you honestly think there is just some big group of people who all agree with things like burqas and stonings? Do you really think that a Muslim in France who's family comes from Africa centuries ago is somehow responsible for the injustices of the Taliban or the religious police of Saudi Arabia? If you really do hold that view, I hope you never have to look in the mirror at your own heritage, race, religion, etc or be held responsible for views you don't hold or actions you don't take.

I haven't even said what I thought of the law, only pointed out how prejudice seems to cloud the debate.

As far as terrorists, does covering your face really give you that much of an advantage? What about a big fake beard/mustache, maybe with some sun glasses? Should that be banned too? If I have the flu, can I wear a respiratory mask? Does a certain percentage of my real face/hair have to be showing? What should that be legislated as?

France has had a vote on if concealment of the face should be allowed and the majority of people have indicated there should be no concealment. In a democratic society this has been done correctly.

If you have a law of one country and then another group wants a separate law just for them then that would be a very dangerous way to govern a country plus those people are then segregating themselves from the main body of that country by that very act. If a country allows freedom to worship, build temples and wear different attire can they then can they not also state they do not think certain elements of a religion has no place in their own country? If not then you have an Islamic mini state (as an example) within another country and before you know it that state begins to grow, request more rights and the minority becomes the majority and the heritage of one country could be eroded and so could democracy itself.

You also need to look at the French-style integration model, based on acceptance of their society’s values and how concealment of the face does not fit to the constitutional model in France. The French think that concealment violates human dignity and equality which is not in the best interest of the French people.

There is religious tolerance across the world but if you attempt to compare religious tolerance in France with Saudi Arabi then you cannot. France allows worship, building of mosques etc but is that the case in the proportion of Islamic state across the world. If France has indicated one element of that religion is not conducive to the population then they are in their rights to do this.

When you look at how an Islamic state governs the people do you really see other religions or groups of people being allowed their own laws and freedom to worship and spread the word of that religion? The Islamic majority indicate ‘you live here and you abide by our rules’ however in some of these countries they go even further and put financial or personal penalties (including death) upon anyone violating their sovereign/religious laws.

France is stating they don’t want concealment as it is not want the people want, it divides and or segregates a percentage of the population, it is not in the best interest of women and that country has got their way, so far. There is still the human rights element and European law to wade through as I have no doubt that there will be pressure from these groups to lift the concealment ban.

Just because Muslim countries do not let us follow Christianity, does not mean that we have to ban Muslim's veils, WD.

Equally so SwineFlue does it mean France need to allow Muslims to wear veils if not in the best interest of the population?

I think that Jamwin, burzerker, MinasThirith, WD-40 and Yanoda have reiterated a number of these points made in this thread also in their threads and others also are in agreement with why France has passed such a law.

Regards,

Kren

[WD-40]

Just because Muslim countries do not let us follow Christianity, does not mean that we have to ban Muslim's veils, WD.

They shouldn't ban veils, just for the sake a banning veils. But you're missing the point. For security reasons, it is necessary. Their [m'kay] up so-called religion started it. Identifying suspects, is hard to do when a bunch of Muslims are running around in big, long black cloaks and burka tops with mini-radiator grills to look out (You can't see in). Seriously, there's alot of skinny male Muslim terrorists and suspecs that could easily climb into a burka costume pretending to be female, freely roaming the streets or evading law enforcement. Is that acceptable to you?… to anyone?…They can blame the radical wing of their sect.

[SWINE FLU]

I still disagree with you. The whole religion in France should not suffer because of a small minority. I also disagree with what you called their religion.

[(SWGO)Kren]

I still disagree with you. The whole religion in France should not suffer because of a small minority. I also disagree with what you called their religion.

So instead the majority should suffer due to the minority? If they have voted on this subject and it is not acceptable to the majority then how is this so wrong. You still are not taking into account how tolerant Christian nations are and have been to other religions. As I state if the roles were reversed do you really think that another faith would be as tolerant/acceptable towards another religion? Why should a nation have to back down when it is not in their best interests?

On a similar subject this is how tolerant another nation is towards females:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375168/Sharia-Law-A-woman-whipped-having-affair.html

Put to death due to changing religions:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/3179465/Hanged-for-being-a-Christian-in-Iran.html

Other examples:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7250532.stm
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=6222

....So the question is why is France so wrong based upon previous postings and the above?

Regards,

Kren