Should countries outlaw the hijab, niqab and burka?

Fair enough, thanks.

... and to a land where they could practice their flavor of religion, in their religious community without interference from the other guy's bishops. To save us from an over-powering state-sponsored religion leaving the individual free to pursue his/her own religious conscience without interference from state-sanctioned bishops.Islam, Christianity, US history, the First Amendment.Freedom of conscience for all people to practice their religion as their view of their god dictates (with the caveat that they do no harm to others and their free conscience).Do you understand any of the above? It does not appear you do. Well, you got one right. A lucky error I suspect.

It seems to me that in your 'effort to fight for the oppressed', you have become the oppressor in and of yourself.

quote:

---

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

---

Remember this? It's always been a big thing in my country. There are inalienable rights, we govern ourselves and the purpose of that government is to secure and protect these inalienable rights.One of which is the freedom of conscience and that includes the freedom to practice our individual religions as we determine our individual gods dictate. In my country the government is also not allowed to act if it affects an individual's right to freedom of conscience unless the reason is compelling to protect society from a clear and present danger. Your proposal to ban the hijab contains no such weight. It is born only of malice and bigotry. I live in a society with a secular government that is honor and duty bound by law to protect individual religious conscience and individual religious practice from those who would usurp our civil rights. That is your interpretation. Your interpretation means nothing. To the devout Muslim woman this Sura may be the voice of her god instructing her on how to be modest in dress. Actually, I like my cock. I'll hang on to it ... often.Edited by AZPaul3, : title

AZPaul3"The hijab is my only focus as it seems to be GIA's focus."Really?When I open with -- Should countries outlaw the hijab, niqab and burka?My focus was signs of oppression and slavery and that includes all the garb that Muslim women are forced to wear.Regards
DL

AZPaul3Her God has a prophet called Jesus who said that such displays of piety and modesty done for God should be done in private.Thanks for showing what you don't know of Christianity and Islam.Regards
DL

AZPaul3"Freedom of conscience for all people to practice their religion as their view of their god dictates (with the caveat that they do no harm to others and their free conscience)."Your reading comprehension is faulty.What you are saying is that religions are free to follow the secular rules and that they can believe but not act on the garbage they believe.That is governments controlling religions and what they teach. Religions are just corporate entities and have the same limitations as all other citizens.For instance, some European Muslim schools have been closed because they were teaching their children to be antiemetic.Somewhat like Christians teach their children to be anti-gay and misogynous.Regards
DL

ramossNot a willing one but yes, I will do what I must to promote right thinking. It is the moral thing to do.In this case, I will oppress the few women who are voluntarily wearing their slave garb so as to free the many oppressed by Islam and Muslim men.You might remember that every law you follow is designed to oppress evil. In that sense, we are all oppressors if we follow the law.Every law is permission and in fact compulsion to discriminate negatively against some group within our societies.Regards
DL

AZPaul3You are learned but have never used your brain to think."One of which is the freedom of conscience and that includes the freedom to practice our individual religions as we determine our individual gods dictate."Try stoning a fornicator and see how quickly you are brought down.No right is inalienable when you live under a government that has power over you. Rhetoric is not reality.Regards
DLEdited by Greatest I am, : No reason given.

Well thank Allah for that, I've been sick as a dog all weekend.I would recommend that anyone planning on reading GIA's "white race" thread first acquire one of these miraculous children.Mutate and Survive

I'm saying that laws imposing a dress code on Muslim women are not legitimate. I have a problem with "nuanced" discrimination. When you say, "The full body covering is a symbol of non-integration with the prevalent culture," it sounds like an intent to shoehorn newcomers into "our" culture.

So the devil made you do it? I've already said:
1. If ONE woman voluntarily chooses to wear the hijab, she should be allowed to do so.
2. If any women are being forced to wear the hijab, banning the hijab will not prevent their husbands from oppressing them in other ways. You can't end oppression by banning the symptoms of oppression.

I don't give a flying f**k if people are made uncomfortable by somebody else's clothing or skin colour or whatever. I'm against assimilation. Look what happened when we tried to assimilate aboriginal children by forcing them into residential schools. We need less forced assimilation, not more.

ringoIf they are coming to our land to live in our culture, should we not expect that they do so because they like our culture, and if not, why would we want them and why would they want to live where they do not want to fit in?Give that some thought instead of returning with one of your flippant answers.Regards
DL

RingoWe will not end oppression and slavery while accepting the signs of it.You have no idea if it would work or not.Nice to know though that you would not make laws that suit the many just to maintain a Muslims man pride of ownership.The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.That is an irrefutable moral position.Regards
DL