Banning the Burqini...

[del mar]

E

Countdown said:

del mar said:

Executing people for being gay is an Extreme interpretation of what their religious texts say. You are correct it is not acceptable and we should educate people that Extremist Islam is not acceptable in Western Societies.

Dressing head to toe in black clothing whilst swimming is an Extreme interpretation of "women should dress modestly". We should educate people that extremist Islam is not acceptable in Western Societies.

Sorry but that's two completely ridiculous comparisons.

The first one is an example of imposing "your" views on another person.

The second one is an example of an individual choosing to wear what "they" want.

What category do you think the "Burkini ban" falls into?

It falls into the category of banning / controlling extreme interpretation of Islamic rules / guidance etc - Islamic extremism.

[del mar]

Countdown said:

del mar said:

Kim has choices, A, B C D E F all the way to Z, she could wear the full Hijab if she wanted.

The Saudi athlete also has choices, she has A or A, or punishment. Oh how we celebrate her freedoms...

But Kim no longer has the choice to wear a burkini on some french beaches....one step closer to the Saudi ideal.

That is correct she can not follow an extreme interpretation of Islamic rules in France.

If she wants to follow extremist Islam she can always go to Saudi - if they would have her.

[Alpinestars]

popeyewhite said:

Alpinestars said:

Jesus wept.

All lorry drivers will be asked to bathe naked on the beach next. Just in case.

Saints alive, another poster who can't be bothered to read a thread before commenting!

Hail Mary!

[Alpinestars]

s3fella said:

I think it is a ridiculous law too, but ironic that you mention French Towns implementing this "facist racist law" when they have allowed themselves to become segregated with huge concentrations of Muslim areas, little prospect of any meaningful integration, all on the back of a left wing open tolerance and acceptance agenda.

It seems as though, just as the case in Brussels / Belgium, the head in the sand attitude never worked and is now coming home to roost, and the only way to quell the people now pointing out the obvious shortcomings of such "tolerant" policies is to veer massively to the right.
st or bust, never works.

But this will only further ghettoise people like her. She was integrating, and what this is likely to do is stop her going to the beach.

It's a total own goal, whatever the intention was.

[JagLover]

popeyewhite said:

Loving the melodrama BJG1.

If you'd read my posts properly instead of taking the odd one out of context to launch your histrionics you'd have noted I said the ban was a 'knee-jerk reaction', and made no comment on what I personally thought on the matter.

But without the melodrama how would some posters have been able to jump in to repeat their tired claim that PHs is some sort of Far-right website?

I don't agree with the ban either but there is no harm in talking about it and I can see how some would see the ban as a symbol of secularism.

It is the constant cries of racism whenever anyone tries to talk about the principle issues of the day that are wearisome.

A large part of the so called "drift toward extremism" in Europe is a smug, self satisfied, elite declaring the views of tens of millions of ordinary citizens to be now extreme and beyond the pale.

[del mar]

BJG1 said:

Its not a case of accepting extreme interpretations or not though. You can not accept killing gays but accept a woman has a right to dress as she sees fit ffs.

I don't disagree that some Muslim women have less choice than other women but banning them from wearing burkinis doesn't liberate them it just banishes them from one more public place.

Also burkinis aren't head to toe black garments.

banning the burkini does not force women out of public places, it forces an extreme islamic interpretation out of public places - which surely has to be a good thing ?

They have to dress modestly.

[s3fella]

Alpinestars said:

s3fella said:

I think it is a ridiculous law too, but ironic that you mention French Towns implementing this "facist racist law" when they have allowed themselves to become segregated with huge concentrations of Muslim areas, little prospect of any meaningful integration, all on the back of a left wing open tolerance and acceptance agenda.

It seems as though, just as the case in Brussels / Belgium, the head in the sand attitude never worked and is now coming home to roost, and the only way to quell the people now pointing out the obvious shortcomings of such "tolerant" policies is to veer massively to the right.
st or bust, never works.

But this will only further ghettoise people like her. She was integrating, and what this is likely to do is stop her going to the beach.

It's a total own goal, whatever the intention was.

Yes, I agree.
It's absurd and stinks of tokenism too.

[Boosted LS1]

BMRuss said:

Alpinestars said:

So let me get this right, it's ok to have a dress code as long as you don't find it objectionable (on whatever grounds), but it's not ok for someone to exercise their own free will to dress how they want to?

Your sounding like the big lion now. No religious garb, unless it's my religious garb.

Where do nuns fit into your world?

How ironic, chap takes someone to task over their grammar and fails miserably

+1, lol.

[Countdown]

del mar said:

E

Countdown said:

del mar said:

Executing people for being gay is an Extreme interpretation of what their religious texts say. You are correct it is not acceptable and we should educate people that Extremist Islam is not acceptable in Western Societies.

Dressing head to toe in black clothing whilst swimming is an Extreme interpretation of "women should dress modestly". We should educate people that extremist Islam is not acceptable in Western Societies.

Sorry but that's two completely ridiculous comparisons.

The first one is an example of imposing "your" views on another person.

The second one is an example of an individual choosing to wear what "they" want.

What category do you think the "Burkini ban" falls into?

It falls into the category of banning / controlling extreme interpretation of Islamic rules / guidance etc - Islamic extremism.

So the first one then. Anything that extremist Islam can do, we can do better.

[Boosted LS1]

Hardly, the French aren't throwing gays from the top of the Eiffel tower. They're just setting out a few laws and adhering to them. The west is tolerant on the whole and look where it's got us. The muslim lands can be very intolerant.

[Countdown]

Boosted LS1 said:

Hardly, the French aren't throwing gays from the top of the Eiffel tower. They're just setting out a few laws and adhering to them. The west is tolerant on the whole and look where it's got us. The muslim lands can be very intolerant.

Indeed they can. And what the French are doing is showing that they can be just as intolerant.

[Countdown]

Boosted LS1 said:

Hardly, the French aren't throwing gays from the top of the Eiffel tower. They're just setting out a few laws and adhering to them. The west is tolerant on the whole and look where it's got us. The muslim lands can be very intolerant.

Indeed they can. And what the French are doing is showing that they can be just as intolerant.

[rich85uk]

To those outraged by this please answer the following:

Is this more outrageous than the women raped/gang raped in the UAE and were sent to prison for having sex outside of marriage and charged for being drunk

Is this more outrageous than the couple sent to prison for 4 weeks after a kiss on the lips in a resturaunt in the UAE

Is this more outrageous than a possible prison sentence for couples who share a hotel room who aren't married in the UAE

I do not support this law but the outcry is huge, UAE imposes some extreme laws which are far worse yet the overwhelming opinion is those are the rules you must obey

[Alpinestars]

Boosted LS1 said:

Hardly, the French aren't throwing gays from the top of the Eiffel tower. They're just setting out a few laws and adhering to them. The west is tolerant on the whole and look where it's got us. The muslim lands can be very intolerant.

Do you think this will achieve better integration?

[Alpinestars]

Boosted LS1 said:

+1, lol.

+ to

[GT03ROB]

rich85uk said:

To those outraged by this please answer the following:

Is this more outrageous than the women raped/gang raped in the UAE and were sent to prison for having sex outside of marriage and charged for being drunk

Is this more outrageous than the couple sent to prison for 4 weeks after a kiss on the lips in a resturaunt in the UAE

Is this more outrageous than a possible prison sentence for couples who share a hotel room who aren't married in the UAE

I do not support this law but the outcry is huge, UAE imposes some extreme laws which are far worse yet the overwhelming opinion is those are the rules you must obey

I would hope that the west is not in a race to demonstrate who can be the most intolerant.

[PRTVR]

Alpinestars said:

Boosted LS1 said:

Hardly, the French aren't throwing gays from the top of the Eiffel tower. They're just setting out a few laws and adhering to them. The west is tolerant on the whole and look where it's got us. The muslim lands can be very intolerant.

Do you think this will achieve better integration?

A better question is do people want to integrate ?

[Mothersruin]

Alpinestars said:

Boosted LS1 said:

Hardly, the French aren't throwing gays from the top of the Eiffel tower. They're just setting out a few laws and adhering to them. The west is tolerant on the whole and look where it's got us. The muslim lands can be very intolerant.

Do you think this will achieve better integration?

Because they, muslims, have integration as their top goal?

[Countdown]

rich85uk said:

To those outraged by this please answer the following:

Is this more outrageous than the women raped/gang raped in the UAE and were sent to prison for having sex outside of marriage and charged for being drunk

Is this more outrageous than the couple sent to prison for 4 weeks after a kiss on the lips in a resturaunt in the UAE

Is this more outrageous than a possible prison sentence for couples who share a hotel room who aren't married in the UAE

I do not support this law but the outcry is huge, UAE imposes some extreme laws which are far worse yet the overwhelming opinion is those are the rules you must obey

Do you think that trying to emulate countries which have backwards laws is a good thing?

There's a good reason why there's an outcry. It's because we are (for the most part) an educated liberal advanced society and we aren't keen on imposing fascist laws.

[PRTVR]

Countdown said:

rich85uk said:

To those outraged by this please answer the following:

Is this more outrageous than the women raped/gang raped in the UAE and were sent to prison for having sex outside of marriage and charged for being drunk

Is this more outrageous than the couple sent to prison for 4 weeks after a kiss on the lips in a resturaunt in the UAE

Is this more outrageous than a possible prison sentence for couples who share a hotel room who aren't married in the UAE

I do not support this law but the outcry is huge, UAE imposes some extreme laws which are far worse yet the overwhelming opinion is those are the rules you must obey

Do you think that trying to emulate countries which have backwards laws is a good thing?

There's a good reason why there's an outcry. It's because we are (for the most part) an educated liberal advanced society and we aren't keen on imposing fascist laws.

But things are changing due to the situation that the west finds themselves in, the liberal advanced society feels under attack, liberal attitudes are being seen as a weakness by people who would wish us harm, this is a reaction to events, not an event in isolation.