fugtifino Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 Afaic, pretty much all religious practices are primitive, we're simply talking about letting people wear what they want to wear. so I guess in the name of diversity you'd accept an Afghan knocking his wife about in the middle of Bridge St No, because that would be against the law here. You're over complicating things again, this is another one that's really simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 There all fairly simple to those who can't see past the coke on the end of their nose; that's why we they finish up becoming complicated. So, whilst we can argue whether or not a ban on the burkha should be law; if it were made law you'd accept it "cos it's the law" - what no liberal lefty direct action etc?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 2, 2010 Report Share Posted May 2, 2010 You've done it again obs: tied yourself up in knots so tight you can only wibble into the void. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 3, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 keep kidding yourself kid! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 http://www.bobpitch.com/anon/Turbo-Belm.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 3, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Sorry, I don't use links - they may be contaminated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 - be contaminated. + expose me to ideas that challenge my blinkered views. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 That is a startling admission though, must mean you don't get to, er, observe much. All you need is a decent firewall and anti virus to be able to use one of the most powerful information research tools available, seems crackers to me to have it and not use it. And I would never knowingly post a dodgy link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 3, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Been exposed to ideas right - left and centre; been through them all, and back again - and in the end, it comes down to logic or common sense: so enjoy your trip through experience! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Sorry, I don't use links - they may be contaminated! And often rather odd and meaningless to many Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 3, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 The more theoretical and accademic, the more meaningless! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 3, 2010 Report Share Posted May 3, 2010 Been exposed to ideas right - left and centre; been through them all, and back again in the end, it comes down to logic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2h0Df6QBLI enjoy your trip through experience! Thanks pops! I will, because: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYMNaFqh1bs The more theoretical and accademic, the more meaningless! Yeah! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O9sLkn3nz0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 4, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 Well that was a wasted post! I tell you, I don't do links, and back you come with nothing but - obviously don't listen thus don't learn! Try a little original thought, rather than plagerising the net! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 That is a startling admission though, must mean you don't get to, er, observe much. Well, why would he need to - he knows everything already. Indeed one wonders occasionally why he needs a DISCUSSION forum.... I can only conclude it's missionary work amongst lesser beings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 With regards to the banning of the Burkha.... apparently it has been illegal to cover your face in public in Italy since the 1970's because of some terrorists threats back then. Recently a local mayor of the town of Novara in Italy revived the law and re-introduced it. Subsequently a muslim woman was spotted wearing a burkha in a post office and has been find 500 Euros. Her husband said on the matter "We knew about the law and I know that it's not against my religion but now Amel will have to stay indoors. I can't have other men looking at her." So there you go, a muslim woman expressing her right to do as she wishes and wear what she wants and without pressure from her husband...... yes of course it is! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 Yup, ban the burqa and strike a blow for liberation! Amel will have to stay indoors Oh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 4, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 "stay in doors"? - she can join the smokers then! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 Her husband said on the matter "We knew about the law and I know that it's not against my religion but now Amel will have to stay indoors. I can't have other men looking at her." Actually, that quote doesn't make HER opinion clear at all, Baz. Obviously, nobody asked her. But let's assume you are right and he is making choices for her. Now she has a dominant husband and no chance of leaving the house at all. How has this improved things for her? At least with a burka she could go shopping or to the pictures, or go round to her friends' houses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 Her husband said on the matter "We knew about the law and I know that it's not against my religion but now Amel will have to stay indoors. I can't have other men looking at her." Actually, that quote doesn't make HER opinion clear at all, Baz. Obviously, nobody asked her. But let's assume you are right and he is making choices for her. Now she has a dominant husband and no chance of leaving the house at all. How has this improved things for her? At least with a burka she could go shopping or to the pictures, or go round to her friends' houses. Was this a serious reply LP or are you just havin' a laugh? Just supposing you were being serious; it now makes it OK to bully your wife into wearing something she may not wish to wear because at least she can go out!!!! And do you really think the muslim dominating husband would allow her to go to the cinema or to a friends house? (even assuming she has friends) Don't think we are likely to agree on this one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 I don't know whether she even has a dominant husband, Baz. You're making the assumptions. What I am saying, and I don't see how you can disagree, is that where a woman has a dominant husband, who only allows her outside wearing a burka, then banning the burka is not striking a blow for her rights, it is merely taking away what little freedom she does have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 4, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 Doesn't our current law confine nudists to their own homes or private camps - in the interests of public decency: so why this liberal bleating over a fashion (not even a requirement of Islam) - in the interests of security and social cohesion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 4, 2010 Report Share Posted May 4, 2010 You think a burqa ban would enhance social cohesion? Sheesh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted May 5, 2010 Report Share Posted May 5, 2010 Doesn't our current law confine nudists to their own homes or private camps - in the interests of public decency: so why this liberal bleating over a fashion (not even a requirement of Islam) - in the interests of security and social cohesion. No. Our current laws don't confine anyone anywhere or prohibit public nudity. We've just had a bloke line up 1000 naked people at the Lowry, Obs - did you miss that? Not only was it legal, it was Art and the photos will be on public display. The Police will politely ask someone to cover up if complaints are made. Streakers are a national tradition and they rarely get fined. But make your mind up - you want her covered or not? Can't go out naked, can't go out in a burka - are we heading towards you personally checking every UK lady for suitability of dress? What if I wear a Zorro mask? Not a burka. WWII gas mask? Not a burka. Hat with a veil? Not a burka. Wig with a really long fringe - or indeed grow my own hair to completely obscure my face? Still not a burka. Will you have new bans for these? How about banning beards? They obscure the face..... it's not that I am liberal - it's just that a ban on burkas is a flaming stupid, pointless, wasteful idea that there are a million ways to get around. Deal with security issues by putting rules in place, but other than that, leave people alone. Specifically, confine your interest in ladeis' clothing to your own wardrobe! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 5, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2010 Think all face coverings, ski masks etc in public places, would enhance security and allow recognition on CCTV - common sense. Indecent exposure is illegal, so is smoking in an enclosed public place - but if no one complains, you don't expect our hard pressed police to get out of their cars do you! And while you liberal luvvies are waxing on about an anachronistic religious practise from the M/East; our Islamic cousins in Egypt appear rather less liberal and tolerant - they've banned Elton John! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted May 5, 2010 Report Share Posted May 5, 2010 would enhance security and allow recognition on CCTV Your'e trying to use the idea that CCTV is good at tackling crime when it isn't, in fact it's rubbish: "Last summer an internal Met Police report concluded that for every 1,000 cameras in London, less than one crime is solved per year." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/6867008/Number-of-crimes-caught-on-CCTV-falls-by-70-per-cent-Metropolitan-Police-admits.html Indecent exposure is illegal This is true, but entirely irrelevant to this discussion, as is this: they've banned Elton John! That's just indicative of good taste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.