It's a Crime,,,, We westerners Aren't allowed to wear a Hat,Cap/Scarf/Helmet,Sunglasses when entering a Government Building/Bank/Service station/ Airport Security ,,,And now a Passport Photo one Can't wear Prescription glasses(Australia from 1/7/2018)   So if it's good for Identification/Security for the rest of the World .It's a Crime if they Hide their Faces for National Security.   

4 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

OK, but I guess the pertinent question is, are you willing to accept government's defenition of which is which?

No, the pertinent question is do I accept that a blanket ban on veils is acceptable. 

 

The answer is no. 

28 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

You can drink in Dubai. 

 

A blanket ban on citizens wearing a clothing item and a ban in a place of worship are not the same thing.

 

You can wear shorts in most places in Thailand, there is no blanket ban on wearing them. 

 

I would agree they can wear it in a place of worship. You can't wear what you like in Thailand, try wearing a republican t-shirt. In places where they wear this veil woman are not free not to wear one. We'll have to disagree on this one and I haven't even got into security issues.

1 minute ago, BobBKK said:

 

I would agree they can where it in a place of worship. You cant wear what you like in Thailand, try wearing a republican t-shirt. In place where they wear this veil woman are not free not to wear one. We'll have to disagree on this one and I haven't even got into security issues.

Women should be free to choose to wear a veil if they wish. 

 

Yes, we will have to disagree on this issue. 

18 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Women should be free to choose to wear a veil if they wish. 

 

Yes, we will have to disagree on this issue. 

 

They should be free to wear a bikini to the coffee shop in Tehran too, but guess what.... It ain't gonna happen without a stoning ?

5 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

They should be free to wear a bikini to the coffee shop in Tehran too, but guess what.... It ain't gonna happen without a stoning ?

They should be able to.

 

 The fact they cannot does not justify the actions of the Danish govt. 

I am not a PC type. I despise the PC crap. But having said that I am definitely not a conservative, and do not have a racist bone in my body. I adore people of color, and think that is the best thing about America. Having said all that, I do believe that assimilation is a positive thing for society. And the lack of assimilation can be a destructive one. Especially when you have a people where a minority believe in and buy into extremist nonsense.

 

So, I have a proposal for all Muslim families. Some will say it is unreasonable. But, I think it establishes a desire to assimilate.

 

After 12 months of living on a conditional visa, a Muslim family needs to prove that they are at least attempting to learn the local language. After 24 months, there needs to be some proof that the kids are mixing it up with the local kids. After 36 months, another language test, and proof that the teenage girls in the family have participated in at least one bikini contest. Nothing lewd. Just a swimsuit. It is a modest attempt at assimilation, and completely reasonable. 

 

Lastly, though I am not opposed to a head scarf, I am totally opposed to the burka. It is inane, it is middle age nonsense, and it is an attempt by the men, to keep a woman from exposing herself. Why the need for that? There is so much that is wrong with the niqab or burka. It is the polar opposite of assimilation. 

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

They should be able to.

 

 The fact they cannot does not justify the actions of the Danish govt. 

 

No it doesn't but it just goes to show it's a one way street, where Islam is concerned...

13 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

They should be free to wear a bikini to the coffee shop in Tehran too, but guess what.... It ain't gonna happen without a stoning ?

Has Tehran been relocated to Denmark? If not, why mention it in this thread?

17 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

They should be free to wear a bikini to the coffee shop in Tehran too, but guess what.... It ain't gonna happen without a stoning ?

Disagree. Even in a beach destination like Phuket that is not done.

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Has Tehran been relocated to Denmark? If not, why mention it in this thread?

 

Because I want to... It's a thread about assimilating into the country that you choose to live.

Muslims expect to bring whatever "customs" they wish and have them accepted as normal practice.

Well if that's the case, reciprocate that to people of different faiths living in Muslim countries.

Just now, stevenl said:

Disagree. Even in a beach destination like Phuket that is not done.

 

See plenty of bikinis in Phuket and never seen anyone stoned, well not that type of "stoned" ?

1 minute ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

See plenty of bikinis in Phuket and never seen anyone stoned, well not that type of "stoned" ?

Not at coffeeshops.

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

And this is relevant how to the assertions that Muslims are already a majority in the UK?

"The UK "guests"....that were the religious minority...have now become the religious majority"

 

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Has Tehran been relocated to Denmark? If not, why mention it in this thread?

You mentioned the UK, are your rules different to everybody elses.

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

 

You mentioned the UK, are your rules different to everybody elses.

I was replying to someone who mentioned the UK. I didn't initiate it. But you're right. I did fall for a deflection that time. But it's not incumbent upon me to do it again nor not to criticize someone's post on the grounds of irrelevance.

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Not at coffeeshops.

 

Oh it happens... But no-one gets stoned....

4 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

And who exactly are these women, defending their right to choose, imposing the veil upon?

 

Oh and if you read the article you will see some of those interviewed are Danish born citizens.

 

Not “guests” (whatever that means) but citizens defending their right to choose. 

Maybe you should see it away from religion?I as a man am not allowed to wear a skimask when i enter a shop,gasstation or other public place.

Could it have something to do with security?

Freedom of religion is fine with me but if it interferes with safety issues they should oblige with the law of the land they choose to live in and take it off.

it is a crime like in france, austria etc denmark has finally woken up to the fact that muslim integration the wishful thinking of left wing dreamers, having no touch with reality. muslim imgration leads to rising anisemitism as in sweden, germany, canada, france, austria ec..

 

wbr

roobaa01

I look at it from an other angel, they might be depriving some woman who voluntarily wear a head scarf, but now that its illegal an other group who was forced to wear it does not have to wear it anymore. 

 

I am not sure where i really stand as those head scarfs and other stuff really are not good for integration and in many of the more progressive Muslim states they are not the rule.  I like freedom to wear what you want but that also means that others can force people to wear head-scarfs because there is no law against it and they will have to be good Muslim woman.

 

I worked with a Turkish woman, great lady never a headscarf real modern but a Muslim but never a problem with it. Religion IMHO the greatest poison there ever was. That said I have no problem with religion being done at home, but why bring it out too and why judge others based on what your religion allows not allows. 

50 minutes ago, jvs said:

Maybe you should see it away from religion?I as a man am not allowed to wear a skimask when i enter a shop,gasstation or other public place.

Could it have something to do with security?

Freedom of religion is fine with me but if it interferes with safety issues they should oblige with the law of the land they choose to live in and take it off.

I think it's valid to frame it as a security issue.

3 hours ago, Ks45672 said:

Why not allow 70 million UK people to wear balaclavas in public ..... 

 

Society has progressed and Muslims will have to conform to the standards of the free world or go back to where they came from

 

 

In Canada about 1/2 the population can't be identified outside for half the year because of weather... i know what you mean, it makes me scared.

 

 

 

???????

3 hours ago, Ks45672 said:

Nobody is allowed in a bank wearing a helmet, baseball cap, sunglasses or scarves

For security reasons 

 

Same at many immigration desks

 

There is no reason to make exceptions for anyone

Ive walked into a bank wearing all those things (on different visits!!). So wouldn't a rational law b that it's fine to wear a "veil" as long as you raise it when necessary?

3 hours ago, pokerface1 said:

I my opinion it's all about the right to hiding your identity vs the technology of the facial recognition. Whats the point of governments investing millions of dollars on a system that doesn't work 100% of the time.

It would not matter which religious group you belonged to, even if a bike group were wearing hoods to covered their faces they would have to comply just a minority of Muslims has to.

Big brother has his eye on everyone there is no escape until your in a pine box.?

So u r of the opinion that soon govts will take away my ability to stay warm, or wear a full face motorcycle helmet? Wear a hoodie with the hood up? Something tells me they won't b going after these transgressions of "security"...

3 hours ago, TPI said:

In Birmingham the white (non muslim) population is down to 54%, check it out....be horrified!

Why would i b horrified?

 

Oh, I get it, change is scary.

5 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

And who exactly are these women, defending their right to choose, imposing the veil upon?

 

Oh and if you read the article you will see some of those interviewed are Danish born citizens.

 

Not “guests” (whatever that means) but citizens defending their right to choose. 

In the interests of security, no one should be allowed to have their face covered up in public. People will stand up for the Muslim womens "right" to cover their faces until one of their own family is affected by some kind of criminal act caused because some person/persons could not be recognised because their face was covered.

2 hours ago, BobBKK said:

I agree they should be allowed to do so in their own cultural setting.  I'd like a drink in Dubai but not allowed and I accept it. I'd like to go to the Wat with shorts on - not allowed and I accept it.

Many others in both situations u spoke of do not have your good grace. 

 

I'd argue they should b allowed to do so in all situations other than high security.

I'm going to start walking around in a mankini and full faced helmet.... Freedom....

Most of the type who want to wear this kind of head covering are either from or born to parents who come from countries where if you are unlucky enough to have to go or are stupid enough to go to will jail people for having a christian bible in their luggage or on their person.

It's all always 'one sided' and that is their side which is not negotiable.

11 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Why would i b horrified?

 

Oh, I get it, change is scary.

Change for the worse is scary.