A crime or a right? Some Danish Muslims defy face veil ban

[Credo]

Pretty much every country sets out some arbitrary standards about dress in public.  The rules are arbitrary, but make managing the public easier.   Whether it is 'No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service", or women walking around topless, it makes life in public easier for everyone.   

 

The face veil falls within the same category and if the Danish people prefer that it not be allowed, then that is their decision.   I respect it.   

 

There is no religious reason for wearing it, so it is just drawing unnecessary attention to someone.  

[duanebigsby]

48 minutes ago, Credo said:

 

 

There is no religious reason for wearing it, so it is just drawing unnecessary attention to someone.  

Whether religious or cultural, one should still have the right to wear what clothes they wish.

[stevenl]

8 hours ago, RocketDog said:

I don't know about others. I talk about it because it is relevant.

 

Perhaps I don't have all the facts.

 

If the current law specifically bans face coverings when entering banks and other high security areas then that particular point is invalid and I withdraw it.

 

But that was not really my main point.

Again, it is simply human nature to distrust people when you can't see what they are hiding or even be sure they are human.

I welcome your rebuttal on this primary thesis.

 

Actually I think you are sensitive to the bank thing because it is indeed a  most relevant point and you can think of no logical way to refute it.

"If the current law specifically bans face coverings when entering banks and other high security areas then that particular point is invalid and I withdraw it."

It doesn't have to, since banks are private property and the ban is about public places. So the situation regarding banks has not changed. Same with airports, talking about that is simply not applicable here and not relevant.

 

"Again, it is simply human nature to distrust people when you can't see what they are hiding or even be sure they are human.

I welcome your rebuttal on this primary thesis."

Maybe your nature, not necessarily human nature. You may not like it, others don't mind. I'm not getting in an argument about this.

 

Edited August 5, 2018 by stevenl

[Grouse]

12 hours ago, duanebigsby said:

That's absurd. Many find man-buns and backwards baseball caps offensive. Should they be banned?

Banning clothing choices is ridiculous.

Facial communication is a key part of human interaction. Anything specifically designed to hide the face should be illegal. If you want to cover your head go ahead. If you want to look a complete c*** that's your right. If its bloody freezing and you want to wear a balaclava, hoodie, scarf, hat or whatever, fine but not indoors out of common courtesy. No, the burka is noxious and makes the world uglier. Ban them. If muslims feel less welcome, less comfortable, then good; integrate or leave.   

[duanebigsby]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 If you want to cover your head go ahead. If you want to look a complete c*** that's your right. 

It is your right.

It shouldn't be banned. I don't like burkas but I also believe in the right to choose my own clothes.

[Opl]

7 minutes ago, duanebigsby said:

It is your right.

It shouldn't be banned. I don't like burkas but I also believe in the right to choose my own clothes.

 

 

[ChiangMaiLightning2143]

 

Veils should be allowed but for security reasons should not be allowed in a bank, a store, a stadium, etc.Terrorists and criminals use them to disguise the face from police investigation,  and disguise themselves as women as well

 

However any girl forced to wear one or undego Female Genital Mutilation should be protected from their family and given asylum and relocation by the relevant authorities. I am not for supporting creeping Islamization the difference is when Muslims outbreed whites in Europe  (25-30 years maximum) every woman  will be FORCED to wear veils as sharia  is imposed. Sorry this is a demographic certainty. All the freedoms enjoyed now will be voted away.

 

For now it is just a style, people should wear what they want. Try to  go to Japan or Korea in the winter half the country wears surgical masks.

 

Edited August 5, 2018 by ChiangMaiLightning2143

[VocalNeal]

13 minutes ago, duanebigsby said:

Islam,....is just a religion which the vast majority are peaceful.

Disagree. Islam is a set of rules for a way of life or politics cloaked in religion. Agreed most are peaceful and not even remotely religious but that should not deter from the fact that the most outspoken people have an agenda. 

I can walk into a bank wearing a full face religious garment but cannot walk into a bank wearing a full face crash helmet? There is no difference in the intent. Both are there to obscure the face and avoid facial recognition. 

One could agree that covering up one's women avoids women snatching raids from neighboring tribes which was probably the original intent or maybe to stop one's own neighbor from coveting your wife (Biblical reference) but in modern western societies there are different reasons for the opposite and that is baring ones face for recognition.

Edited August 5, 2018 by VocalNeal

[duanebigsby]

10 minutes ago, giddyup said:

Do you protest as much when women in some countries are forced to wear a burka, or when they are refused an education because they are a woman? Or is it only the ban in Denmark that upsets you?

YES I do protest just as much!

I'm absolutely disgusted by women forced to wear the burka or refused an education. They are being denied a choice which is what the ban in Denmark is, a denial of choice.

Edited August 5, 2018 by duanebigsby

[Ron19]

A large number of trolls, off topic posts as well as large dose of bickering posts  

and answers to them have been removed in a topic cleanup.

 

This is the topic subject, 

A crime or a right? Some Danish Muslims defy face veil ban

 

Watch this space there are more to follow.

[Opl]

1 hour ago, duanebigsby said:

YES I do protest just as much!

I'm absolutely disgusted by women forced to wear the burka or refused an education. They are being denied a choice which is what the ban in Denmark is, a denial of choice.

you can't even be sure someone wearing a burqa is a women after all.

[cmsally]

If you look at pictures of many of these Muslim countries post 2nd World War (50's,60's,70's), you do not see such a high prevalence of face coverings. A very high percentage of women in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan were in higher education. These countries as well as some of the others were far more secular in the past. It seemed to go rapidly downhill in the 90's.

 

It could well be argued that with the rise of islamification in the 90's and after, came the breakdown of many of these societies and hence the mass immigration. That is why the majority of them are in Europe, either because of the breakdown of their own society or for better economic opportunities. Now they are looking to recreate the very same society in their new home that they came from (in simple Thai style Eng. "same same but different passport") ! 

My hypothesis would be that, their society was unsustainable where they came from and it will be so when relocated. Why should the West be so accommodating to those from a failed social model?

[ivor bigun]

I can only talk about Britain,all i know is that in my old home town there were quite a few Muslims,i wont say they integrated but they dressed like us never ever ever saw a burkha,they lived in one area and slowely opened more shops.many years ago a mosque wads built. Everything changed,it now looks like another country ,women covered head to toe, the areas they live are not where you would go at night ,integrate ,you must be joking ,i was even told by one i did business with many years ago .that i was not of their faith so never trust us,and he laughed.how right he was,such a shame so many areas are now no longer England.

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[simple1]

1 hour ago, cmsally said:

If you look at pictures of many of these Muslim countries post 2nd World War (50's,60's,70's), you do not see such a high prevalence of face coverings. A very high percentage of women in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan were in higher education. These countries as well as some of the others were far more secular in the past. It seemed to go rapidly downhill in the 90's.

 

It could well be argued that with the rise of islamification in the 90's and after, came the breakdown of many of these societies and hence the mass immigration. That is why the majority of them are in Europe, either because of the breakdown of their own society or for better economic opportunities. Now they are looking to recreate the very same society in their new home that they came from (in simple Thai style Eng. "same same but different passport") ! 

My hypothesis would be that, their society was unsustainable where they came from and it will be so when relocated. Why should the West be so accommodating to those from a failed social model?

Where on earth did you get the figures that the majority of Muslims from Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran or indeed from any other Muslim country live in Europe? You do know the vast majority of Muslim refugees live in Muslim majority countries?

 

BTW if you are interested be good idea to research some colonial / foreign policy / economic history which generated the context for initial influx and ongoing of Muslims into the West. It is interesting to note the beginning of Islamist Salafi ideology actually commenced in the late 19th Century in British controlled Egypt which went on to influence a number of today's Islamist terror groups.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement

Edited August 5, 2018 by simple1

[duanebigsby]

1 hour ago, Opl said:

you can't even be sure someone wearing a burqa is a women after all.

Who cares?

Do you now want to ban cross dressing?

I can't always tell if someone in drag is male or female either. Big deal.

[dick dasterdly]

2 hours ago, duanebigsby said:

YES I do protest just as much!

I'm absolutely disgusted by women forced to wear the burka or refused an education. They are being denied a choice which is what the ban in Denmark is, a denial of choice.

But why would they insist on wearing something that represents oppression?

 

They find it more comfortable?  They're so beautiful that they're worried about being preyed upon by men? ?

 

It makes no sense to me.

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, cmsally said:

If you look at pictures of many of these Muslim countries post 2nd World War (50's,60's,70's), you do not see such a high prevalence of face coverings. A very high percentage of women in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan were in higher education. These countries as well as some of the others were far more secular in the past. It seemed to go rapidly downhill in the 90's.

 

It could well be argued that with the rise of islamification in the 90's and after, came the breakdown of many of these societies and hence the mass immigration. That is why the majority of them are in Europe, either because of the breakdown of their own society or for better economic opportunities. Now they are looking to recreate the very same society in their new home that they came from (in simple Thai style Eng. "same same but different passport") ! 

My hypothesis would be that, their society was unsustainable where they came from and it will be so when relocated. Why should the West be so accommodating to those from a failed social model?

To be fair, it's only a tiny percentage of moslem women that insist on wearing the burka.  Why?  God (?) only knows!

[duanebigsby]

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

But why would they insist on wearing something that represents oppression?

 

They find it more comfortable?  They're so beautiful that they're worried about being preyed upon by men? ?

 

It makes no sense to me.

Makes no sense to me either.

I think it's patriarchal oppression from ancient times twisting religious dogma.

But I also think if it's their choice, it's their right.

 

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, duanebigsby said:

Makes no sense to me either.

I think it's patriarchal oppression from ancient times twisting religious dogma.

But I also think if it's their choice, it's their right.

 

"Makes no sense to me either.

I think it's patriarchal oppression from ancient times twisting religious dogma."

 

Agree entirely.

 

"But I also think if it's their choice, it's their right."

 

Disagree entirely, as Western women fought very long and hard to obtain something close to equal rights - and there is no good reason IMO, to let a few extremists try to bring back the old patriarchal oppressive 'rules' as acceptable in our societies.

[duanebigsby]

5 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

"Makes no sense to me either.

I think it's patriarchal oppression from ancient times twisting religious dogma."

 

Agree entirely.

 

"But I also think if it's their choice, it's their right."

 

Disagree entirely, as Western women fought very long and hard to obtain something close to equal rights - and there is no good reason IMO, to let a few extremists try to bring back the old patriarchal oppressive 'rules' as acceptable in our societies.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree there. I don't think the Danish women were Muslim extremists.

 

I do believe, given time, Muslim women will abandon the veil without abandoning their faith, but it needs to be done on their own accord.

Edited August 5, 2018 by duanebigsby

[cmsally]

Just as some "extremist Islam" movements could be argued to be partially the result of "Western Imperialism"; logically there will be movements sprouting up in the West which will push against the islamification of our society.

Absolutely some of reasons for the conditions in the Middle East have been created by the West, but certainly not all. Just as it is argued that the Muslims rejected westernisation by becoming extreme, you will find that will work in the other direction. Major changes appearing in the west through mass migration will see an extreme reaction from the native population.

[cmsally]

36 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Where on earth did you get the figures that the majority of Muslims from Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran or indeed from any other Muslim country live in Europe? You do know the vast majority of Muslim refugees live in Muslim majority countries?

 

BTW if you are interested be good idea to research some colonial / foreign policy / economic history which generated the context for initial influx and ongoing of Muslims into the West. It is interesting to note the beginning of Islamist Salafi ideology actually commenced in the late 19th Century in British controlled Egypt which went on to influence a number of today's Islamist terror groups.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement

Quote

came the breakdown of many of these societies and hence the mass immigration. That is why the majority of them are in Europe,

I was referring to only the populations in Europe. Therefore the majority of those in Europe (not the muslim population as a whole).

[Opl]

30 minutes ago, duanebigsby said:

Who cares?

Do you now want to ban cross dressing?

I can't always tell if someone in drag is male or female either. Big deal.

who cares.. you oppose the ban and defend women's dress choice .. it's a little bit more significant than garment free choice  right,

just days ago, 

"He put the death toll at 29, with 81 wounded, adding that the victims included children. Provincial police chief Gen. Raz Mohammad Mandozai confirmed the presence of two suicide bombers, adding that the assailants were wearing burqas to hide their weapons and explosives.

http://afghanistan.asia-news.com/en_GB/articles/cnmi_st/features/2018/08/03/feature-04

Edited August 5, 2018 by Opl

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, duanebigsby said:

I think we'll have to agree to disagree there. I don't think the Danish women were Muslim extremists.

 

I do believe, given time, Muslim women will abandon the veil without abandoning their faith, but it needs to be done on their own accord.

They can abandon the burka (and comparing it to a veil is disingenuous) NOW, without meaning that it's " abandoning their faith".

[duanebigsby]

2 minutes ago, cmsally said:

Just as some "extremist Islam" movements could be argued to be partially the result of "Western Imperialism"; logically there will be movements sprouting up in the West which will push against the islamification of our society.

Absolutely some of reasons for the conditions in the Middle East have been created by the West, but certainly not all. Just as it is argued that the Muslims rejected westernisation by becoming extreme, you will find that will work in the other direction. Major changes appearing in the west through mass migration will see an extreme reaction from the native population.

Agreed.

I worry about both the extremism from the Muslim community and the reaction of the Western countries. Both are over the top reactions by minority radicals. I dislike the word "islamification" when the EU population of muslims is 4-5%. That just doesn't seem like the word applies.

[duanebigsby]

5 minutes ago, Opl said:

who cares.. you oppose the ban and defend women's dress choice .. it's a little bit more significant than garment free choice  right,

just days ago, 

"He put the death toll at 29, with 81 wounded, adding that the victims included children. Provincial police chief Gen. Raz Mohammad Mandozai confirmed the presence of two suicide bombers, adding that the assailants were wearing burqas to hide their weapons and explosives.

http://afghanistan.asia-news.com/en_GB/articles/cnmi_st/features/2018/08/03/feature-04

In Afghanistan, a country in full civil war,  where the burka is mandatory and everyone has one.

 

In Denmark approximately 250-300 regularly wear a hijab and there isn't widespread violence.

 

Apples and oranges.

[Opl]

4 minutes ago, duanebigsby said:

Agreed.

I worry about both the extremism from the Muslim community and the reaction of the Western countries. Both are over the top reactions by minority radicals. I dislike the word "islamification" when the EU population of muslims is 4-5%. That just doesn't seem like the word applies.

"over top reaction by minority radicals"

such as ..

"ISIS bans women from wearing burkas after chiefs attacked by veiled assassins "

https://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/isis-bans-women-from-wearing-burkas-after-chiefs-attacked-by-veiled-assassins/news-story/5356534a06f3213389835f34281ecf80

Edited August 5, 2018 by Opl

[Opl]

1 minute ago, duanebigsby said:

In Afghanistan, a country in full civil war,  where the burka is mandatory and everyone has one.

 

In Denmark approximately 250-300 regularly wear a hijab and there isn't widespread violence.

 

Apples and oranges.

you do not need thousands of fanatics to cause heavy fatalities, refer to the last events in Europe, 

[duanebigsby]

1 minute ago, Opl said:

over top reaction by minority radicals;;

"ISIS bans women from wearing burkas after chiefs attacked by veiled assassins "

https://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/isis-bans-women-from-wearing-burkas-after-chiefs-attacked-by-veiled-assassins/news-story/5356534a06f3213389835f34281ecf80

See my previous post.

Why don't you just come out and say you hate all Muslims and anything they wear will set you off in angry hysteria.

[duanebigsby]

1 minute ago, Opl said:

you do not need thousands of fanatics to cause heavy fatalities, refer to the last events in Europe, 

Which kind of makes my point.

There is a small number of extremists causing a lot of damage.

You are condemning a billion Muslims for the actions of perhaps 100,000.