|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Should countries outlaw the hijab, niqab and burka? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 295 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
Blue Jay
"You took a hardliner "majority rules" stance against me, and then pulled out "the majority is not always right" against Ringo." Does the majority not rule where you live? If yes then the first is correct. Do laws never get repealed or changed in your country? Yes they do which means that the majority who initiated the first law were not right. So what is your problem with what I said? ----------- "Clearly, this tells me that you are not actually a hardliner "majority rules" guy, which makes me suspect that you haven't been debating honestly with me." Clearly, your opinion is wrong unless you can refute what I put above. ------------ "both of us seem to recognize that neither a strict "majority rules" or a loose anarchy is desirable:" No I do not. I gave the reasons for tyrannical majority rule in a reply above. Respect of law. I did not mention anarchy at all but that would be stupide. ------------ As to the burka ban. I recognize that a few women will not shake of the shackles of slavery easily. Too bad for them. I do not like the speed restrictions on the road but have to live with it due to the benefits of the many. RegardsDL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3985 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.2 |
GIA writes: OmnivorousI am the mirror image of what I loathe because as a Gnostic Christian, I tie equality to righteousness and if you do not, you are not a moral man. Omnivorous writes: That's what I thought--"holy me and evil thee" really is all you've got. GIA writes: Omnivorous"holy me and evil thee" Are you saying that you do not believe in equality and that just because you think you are in the majority that that makes you moral? Nope."If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads." Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.-Terence
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 295 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
Bliyaal
"Niqab = Pedophilia. I'll have to remember that." Only the smallest of minds would have put that = sign in that statement. It was not me. The wearing of the apparel in question and the harm done is spoken of by a Muslim woman in the link I put in the O.P.. View it if you wish. RegardsDL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2719 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined:
|
Hi, GIA.
GIA writes: Blue Jay writes: You took a hardliner "majority rules" stance against me, and then pulled out "the majority is not always right" against Ringo." Does the majority not rule where you live? If yes then the first is correct. Please try to keep up. I'm not criticizing you for saying "majority rules": I'm criticizing you for saying that "majority rules" is a good and moral thing. For example, when I asked for evidence that Muslim women are better off under a burqa ban, you said this in Message 80:
quote: So, you say people are better off when the majority imposes its will on the minority. And, in Message 109 you say that tyranny of the majority is a good thing. Then, you turn around and say this to Omnivorous in Message 111:
quote: You're attacking him for what you perceived (wrongly, as it turns out) to be an appeal to "majority rules." The exact same appeal you made in your discussion with me. Now, we're back at square one, where I ask you to show that Muslim women are better off burqa bans. And, this time you need to provide something other than "because everyone is better off when the majority rules," because you forfeited the right to use that appeal when you criticized someone else for it.-Blue Jay, Ph.D.* *Yeah, it's real Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
I've been trying to stay out of this because I know I'm going to get clobbered. I also don't like the idea of siding with GIA on absolutely anything since I positively abhor and despise the majority of his opinions.
HOWEVER, this topic is basically the same as the topics on Multiculturalism where I'm with the conservatives who argue that a society cannot survive by hosting and tolerating different cultures that challenge the basic principles of that society. You can have all sorts of interesting ethnic color but you can't have actually competing philosophies or the society is going to self-destruct. Which ours is well on the way to doing. SO. As for the burqa it challenges western society in the first place by making it impossible to identify the wearer, as on drivers' licenses. This is innsane and can't help but undermine an essential part of our social order. It also represents a whole ideology that is inimical to western freedoms. The burqa itself, if a woman could wear it in such a way as to allow personal identification, as merely a cultural artifact, I see nothing to object to if she wants to wear it. ABE: But if it represents to her the superiority of Sharia law over American or western law then no, she shouldn't wear it. And I suppose that's often the case. I think France is well within its rights to ban the hijab on the ground that it represents a principle alien to French culture. The majority SHOULD rule, that's part of the American Constitution too, if anybody cares. What's happened is that the rights of minorities, which have to be enforced in many cases, have been allowed to overwhelm the majority where they have no right to do so. /ABE Back to the burqa: AND if she's being coerced by her subculture in ways that violate the concept of western freedom, no, she should be able even to bring legal action against her family or subculture to free her from it. HOWEVER, the problem with Islamic culture is that it has the nasty habit of maiming and murdering its uppity women. THERE's the contradiction with western freedoms, and if we are stuppid enough to ignore all that, ignore their practice of Sharia law, which they DO want to impose on all of us and certainly will if they ever get into a position to do that, then unfortunately we deserve what is coming. As usual I chalk it all up to God's judgment though it really hurts to see us go down under what is nothing more than the dogmas of Political Correctness, which were designed as leftist propaganda to destroy American/western civilization and are well on their way to doing so. Western civilization really was once great. Multiculturalism is part of the PC program to destroy it. Foreigners should be instructed in the principles and laws of OUR society and required to conform to them. Citizenship is sealed with an oath, isn't it? If they wear interesting garb, have interesting foods, have interesting rituals and entertainments that don't challenge the foundations of our society, fine, that's the melting pot. But PC doesn't melt, it tolerates undigested alien and subversive worldviews. You can't tolerate an alien form of government with alien laws and alien principles of human value in our midst, involving the place of women in the family and in society among other things, unless you are dedicated to social and cultural suicide. Which I think the whole PC battalion is. Now clobber me. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bliyaal Member (Idle past 2389 days) Posts: 171 From: Quebec City, Qc, Canada Joined: |
Only the smallest of minds would have put that = sign in that statement. Now you're left with insults... thanks! At least we know you don't have an argument.
It was not me. It was you who brought pedophilia in the discussion remember. Let's review your "argument"...
ringo writes: I want to protect the rights of Muslim WOMEN to wear what THEY decide. I quoted a woman who WANTS to wear they hijab but YOU would prevent her. you writes: Every law has people on either side of it and every law discriminates negatively against one of the sides. There are men who want the right to be pedophiles. Pretty clear cut to me, you equate the desire to wear a niqab to men wanting the right to be pedophiles.
The wearing of the apparel in question and the harm done is spoken of by a Muslim woman in the link I put in the O.P.. No, the oppression hurts her, not the apparel. You've been shown a testimony of a woman who wants to wear it. Is she a masochist?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bliyaal Member (Idle past 2389 days) Posts: 171 From: Quebec City, Qc, Canada Joined:
|
The majority SHOULD rule, that's part of the American Constitution too, if anybody cares. Not when it comes to the rights of a minority. Did you know that in 1967, when interracial marriage was made legal everywhere in the US, over 70% of the population was against it? Edited by Bliyaal, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Greatest I am writes:
We have laws against pedophilia to prescribe how we punish pedophiles that are caught. How do you propose to punish women who are caught wearing the hijab?
There are men who want the right to be pedophiles.Shall we protect their right to be and repeal the laws against it? Greatest I am writes:
Then the "free women" who are doing the assaulting are the ones who should be punished, not the victims.
Women are being assaulted as we speak by free women in Canada and elsewhere who are incensed by the garb in question. Greatest I am writes:
You are the one who is advocating abuse of women.
Shall we just allow that abuse of Muslim women to continue along with the slavery that that garb denotes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 295 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
Blue Jay
Pay attention. In a society where the majority is to rule, the majority have decided that it is moral to have the majority rule. This does not translate into the majority is moral or always moral. It is just saying that the majority thinks that it is moral to have the majority rule. If the majority was always moral then no law would ever be repealed and we have some of those laws that are repealed as the standards or morality change. "I'm criticizing you for saying that "majority rules" is a good and moral thing.` It is to the majority or they would vote it down. If you do not think that majority rule is a good rule, what do you suggest to replace it? RegardsDL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 295 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
Faith
Well pick me up off the floor. One atta girl for you. Here is a link that shows a bit of what you spoke of in action. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kOiaXN-egg&feature=em-su... Welcome to the right side of this issue. RegardsDL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 295 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
Bliyaal
"You've been shown a testimony of a woman who wants to wear it. Is she a masochist?" No. She is a slave to a culture, tradition and or religion and insulting anyone who lives in a free country. She may as well be wearing a slave collar. -------- "Pretty clear cut to me, you equate the desire to wear a niqab to men wanting the right to be pedophiles." Then you are an idiot as no one indicated such an idiocy. I just gave an example of immoral people who would want to enact immoral laws. You went for a cheap and false point and just seem like a fool. RegardsDL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 295 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
ringo
"You are the one who is advocating abuse of women." Is it abuse to make people drive the speed limit? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6c3OTr6yA --------- "How do you propose to punish women who are caught wearing the hijab?" France has a fine. $150.00 I think. The French are a white race. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_bsPAAy80U&feature=playe... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7b3fvsVtA&feature=playe... RegardsDL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bliyaal Member (Idle past 2389 days) Posts: 171 From: Quebec City, Qc, Canada Joined:
|
No. She is a slave to a culture, tradition and or religion and insulting anyone who lives in a free country. She may as well be wearing a slave collar. And now you have the power to be in her head? Beside, a country isn't free if she's not free to exercise her religion as she wants as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. The niqab doesn't hurt anyone, including her.
Then you are an idiot as no one indicated such an idiocy. More insults! But yes in the end you indicated such an idiocy.
I just gave an example of immoral people who would want to enact immoral laws. You brought pedophilia as an example of a right we should deny like we should deny the right to wear a niqab thus equating them.
You went for a cheap and false point and just seem like a fool. And you went for a cheap and false analogy and got caught. Who's the fool? To deny a right to someone, like limiting the driving speed (another bad analogy you used), you must have good reasons like you know... protecting people from injuries or death. Is is the piece of clothing a serious problem or is it the abusive man forcing her? We know the answer, it's the man. Why don't you focus on the real problem instead of the false image you made up in your head?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bliyaal Member (Idle past 2389 days) Posts: 171 From: Quebec City, Qc, Canada Joined: |
The French are a white race. Wow! That makes you sound like a racist who could be against interracial marriage. Please tell you didn't mean that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3985 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.2
|
Faith writes: But PC doesn't melt, it tolerates undigested alien and subversive worldviews. Our Constitution tolerates alien and subversive worldviews. To my undying gratitude, we don't prosecute thought crimes. On the other hand, perhaps we should round up the Amish, the Dominionists, the Catholics, the Hassidim, polygamous Mormons, hippies in communes without personal property rights, Protestants and Catholics who swear fealty to Something other than the rule of constitutional law in our secular republic--but, gosh, we'd be busy! And who would be left?
HOWEVER, the problem with Islamic culture is that it has the nasty habit of maiming and murdering its uppity women. You know, we began this thread discussing GIA's concerns about the freedom of Muslim women in Canada. If we're going to concern ourselves about violence against women in Canada, we should look at the big picture. From the Canadian Women's Foundation: The Facts About Violence Against Women quote: The statistics on the economic status of women in Canada are just as abysmal. I'm confident the relative numbers of victimized women in the U.S. are just as horrific, if not worse; the absolute numbers are staggeringly higher. GIA doesn't give a fig for Muslim women, wanting to criminalize that which now only faces intolerance. Maybe you should concern yourself a little more with the disastrous failure for women of the Western principles you so esteem. Maybe you should wonder what GIA would impose on you. Finally, of course, the wearing of the burqa here in the U.S. is protected by the Constitution. Are there other people you wish to deprive of Constitutional rights that you enjoy?"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads." Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.-Terence
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024