French burqa ban upheld by European courts

[simple1]

Great work by the British legal team and France for accepting it's citizens religious right.

It's sad to see how only few limited shallow minded people passes racial comment over other religion. Let us learn to respect people and their religion. It's a matter if their faith and belief, we have no right to criticize their belief. We don't own them, do we?

Right,

In Belgium Muslims are trying to forbid Christian holidays and artifacts.

Brussels cancelled it's 2012 Christmas tree to show respect for others people religion.

Voices are up to condemn Holland's and Belgium's zwarte piet for the folkloric Sinterklaas. Theyu were at it again just this week for 2014 Sinterklaas.

Since when has Belgium become a Muslim state???

Any Islamic extremism or attempts to undermine society to cause conflict, should be prosecuted. However, the alledged Xmas tree ban was a right wing beat up & in fact not true. Nearly all similar accounts, once you research the reality, are more often than not, incitement attempts by right wing groups & others. e.g. One of the most notorious examples of scare stories was the widely reported claim that Birmingham city council had banned Christmas, replacing it with Winterval to avoid offending non-Christians, even though it was untrue.

"There have been attempts to stir racial tensions, with some falsely blaming the switch from the usual real Christmas tree on offended Muslims" And a rumour to be found widely across the web, mostly originated from the right wing website Gatewaypundit, says that Muslims were to be blamed for this new installation.

http://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/muslim-intervention-results-in-brussels-banning-christmas-tree-exhibit/

[7by7]

As for the examples of Thai's working and Chinese wearing respirators, they don't wash. I can see that woman in the picture above, see her skin color, eye color, eyes, face shape etc. enough to ID her. Silly comparison.

You can later pick out a stranger from a group of other strangers just from their eyes, hair and skin colour?

Of course you can!

[7by7]

It is as simple as this: you have the right to show your ass but you don't have the right to cover your body...........Do what you want with your body but please don't cover it...well done France .....keep on dividing your people

What a silly post, to the extreme

where do you have the right to show your ass

Lots of nudist beaches in France, and every European county.

Where dont you have the right to cover your body

Well, as this law shows, in France for one.

That is, you don't have the right to cover it as you wish.

Surely this is about not showing your face when in a bank or airport.

I bet the french have to take off hats and sunglasses

No, it is about covering your face anywhere in public.

This woman is French.

I'm not; but have worn both a hat and sunglasses in a French bank.

[7by7]

To answer post #65,

As an atheist, I have no interest in what may lie in a book written/chopped and chapters omitted for religious political expediency.

Too be perfectly honest I would ban the lot of them for making public declarations of their faith, I find them all equally offensive, what they choose to do behind closed doors is none of my concern.

So, because the beliefs of other's, i.e. their having a religion offends you, you would ban religion?

How very liberal and democratic of you; not!

"What type of Muslims would you be referring to?"

The type of Muslim who believes that modesty is a requirement of her religion and so demands she covers her face and head as well as the rest of her body.

Many, probably the majority, of Muslims don't believe this; but who are you, I or they to dictate to someone else what they should and should not believe?

"I asked a question that as of yet no one can answer, I doubt very much if the grand ayatollah of wherever could answer it, for the simple reason, its nothing to do with the religion."

I used Christians wearing crosses as an example before; yet nowhere in the New Testament does it say that they should. Yet, many Christians see it as an expression of their faith; just as some Muslims see wearing a burqa as an expression of theirs.

However, most Christians don't see the need to wear one, just as most Muslims don't see the need to wear a burqa.

"Heres another question for you, how is wearing a burqa expressing faith?

As mentioned before, perhaps drawing on your Middle East experience (you have lived there I take it) you could answwe why there is no RELIGIOUS requirment to wear a burqa in say, Jordan, Egypt, The Emirates, do you want me to go on, heck even the Thai Muslims dont wear it.

Nothing to do with religion.

Next time you see one wearing one in good old blighty why dont you ask why they wear it, and where its written that they must.

I am more interested in hearing of where its written they must."

See above.

[chuckd]

<snip>

As mentioned before, perhaps drawing on your Middle East experience (you have lived there I take it) you could answwe why there is no RELIGIOUS requirment to wear a burqa in say, Jordan, Egypt, The Emirates, do you want me to go on, heck even the Thai Muslims dont wear it.

Nothing to do with religion.

Having lived in Iran and Saudi for many years, I would simply suggest you try walking through one of the many malls in Riyadh on a Thursday evening with your wife and she is not wearing the abaya with her head and hair uncovered.

My prediction is you will be faced by at least one Muttawah accompanied by The Religious Police before you are told to leave.

Try to make your argument in Saudi Arabia or Iran that it has nothing to do with religion.

[7by7]

I did not say what you have attributed to me; I quoted it from another poster.

Try reading what I have posted rather than attributing what others have posted to me. Then I will be happy to answer any questions you may wish to ask me.

[chuckd]

I did not say what you have attributed to me; I quoted it from another poster.

Try reading what I have posted rather than attributing what others have posted to me. Then I will be happy to answer any questions you may wish to ask me.

You might try using the "quote" boxes, or at least quotation marks, like nearly all other posters in order to not be misquoted.

Changing your font type from sentence to sentence is hardly conducive to readability by other posters.

I apologize for my confusion in failing to understand your confusing ways to quote others.

[transam]

Bit off topic, but years ago my old friend back in the UK went into Tesco with his m/c gear on, yeh crash helmet. He was told to leave or remove the crash hat (was not full face). He turned around and left...........

[uptheos]

Anyone know the name(s) of the British lawyers who fought this ridiculous case?

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted.

[7by7]

I did not say what you have attributed to me; I quoted it from another poster.

Try reading what I have posted rather than attributing what others have posted to me. Then I will be happy to answer any questions you may wish to ask me.

You might try using the "quote" boxes, or at least quotation marks, like nearly all other posters in order to not be misquoted.

Changing your font type from sentence to sentence is hardly conducive to readability by other posters.

I apologize for my confusion in failing to understand your confusing ways to quote others.

Unfortunately, forum software only allows a limited number of quotes per post; I needed more than this.

So blame the forum software, not I.

Look again, I did enclose the quoted remarks inside quotation marks.

I am not the only poster who does this in order to post more quotes than the forum software allows; I am surprised you have not seen it before from others.

Apology accepted; but will you be redirecting your comments to rgs2001uk; the person who actually posted the remarks you seem to object to?

[rgs2001uk]

To answer post #65,

As an atheist, I have no interest in what may lie in a book written/chopped and chapters omitted for religious political expediency.

Too be perfectly honest I would ban the lot of them for making public declarations of their faith, I find them all equally offensive, what they choose to do behind closed doors is none of my concern.

So, because the beliefs of other's, i.e. their having a religion offends you, you would ban religion?

How very liberal and democratic of you; not!

"What type of Muslims would you be referring to?"

The type of Muslim who believes that modesty is a requirement of her religion and so demands she covers her face and head as well as the rest of her body.

Many, probably the majority, of Muslims don't believe this; but who are you, I or they to dictate to someone else what they should and should not believe?

"I asked a question that as of yet no one can answer, I doubt very much if the grand ayatollah of wherever could answer it, for the simple reason, its nothing to do with the religion."

I used Christians wearing crosses as an example before; yet nowhere in the New Testament does it say that they should. Yet, many Christians see it as an expression of their faith; just as some Muslims see wearing a burqa as an expression of theirs.

However, most Christians don't see the need to wear one, just as most Muslims don't see the need to wear a burqa.

"Heres another question for you, how is wearing a burqa expressing faith?

As mentioned before, perhaps drawing on your Middle East experience (you have lived there I take it) you could answwe why there is no RELIGIOUS requirment to wear a burqa in say, Jordan, Egypt, The Emirates, do you want me to go on, heck even the Thai Muslims dont wear it.

Nothing to do with religion.

Next time you see one wearing one in good old blighty why dont you ask why they wear it, and where its written that they must.

I am more interested in hearing of where its written they must."

See above.

Never claimed to be either a liberal or democrat, my Amercian friends would refer to me as a Republican, my Ozzy friends would refer to me as a Liberal, strange old world we live in.

"What type of Muslims would you be referring to?"

The type of Muslim who believes that modesty is a requirement of her religion and so demands she covers her face and head as well as the rest of her body.

So as of yet no one has been able to come with any verse or hadith that requires it.

I am more interested in hearing of where its written they must."

See above.

See above, couldnt have written it better myself, neither you nor anyone else has been able to come up with any text/source of a religious requirment to do so.

So, because the beliefs of other's, i.e. their having a religion offends you, you would ban religion?

Everyone and anyone has the right to believe in whatever they want, I have no problem with that, my problem stems from the fact when someones elses beliefs impinge on my personal freedom, then I have a problem.

Wont get started on such contensious issues such as , a womans right to an abortion, contraception, gay marriage (yes how very liberal and democratic of some religions isnt it), or assisted suicide/euthanasia.

Where is my right to assisted suicide in the UK, where is my partners right to assist me and not be prosecuted?

It dont exist, because of draconian laws drawn up by religious types.

[rgs2001uk]

<snip>

As mentioned before, perhaps drawing on your Middle East experience (you have lived there I take it) you could answwe why there is no RELIGIOUS requirment to wear a burqa in say, Jordan, Egypt, The Emirates, do you want me to go on, heck even the Thai Muslims dont wear it.

Nothing to do with religion.

Having lived in Iran and Saudi for many years, I would simply suggest you try walking through one of the many malls in Riyadh on a Thursday evening with your wife and she is not wearing the abaya with her head and hair uncovered.

My prediction is you will be faced by at least one Muttawah accompanied by The Religious Police before you are told to leave.

Try to make your argument in Saudi Arabia or Iran that it has nothing to do with religion.

I have never heard of any non Muslim women having to wear a burqa in Saudi.

You are correct wear an abaya, thats it, many western women will walk around wearing an abaya, but the head and hair will be uncovered.

Funny you should mention Riyadh, that place has a reputation that even the Saudis laugh at.

I heard a rumour it was known as "headbanger central" eg HQ of the religious schools that pump out these pathetic religious police/muttawa.

Having lived in Saudi for many years and in various provinces, I would say Riyadh is probably the most oppressive of all cities in Saudi.

Heck they used to make fun of me because of the Arabic I spoke, they knew exactly what part of the kingdom in which I lived.

They used to ask me if I was a Qatani taxi driver.

Yes strange old place, will be forever grateful to them, paid me well.

A walk in the corniche in Jeddah will be a differing experience to anything in Riyadh.

As for women cant drive in Saudi, I watched as a Tihamah women pulled up at a gas station with an M16 strapped across her back and told the "jingly" to fill it up, she wasnt wearing any burqua, and there was no-one there dare saying anything to her for fear of sparking a tribal confrontation

[chuckd]

<snip>

As mentioned before, perhaps drawing on your Middle East experience (you have lived there I take it) you could answwe why there is no RELIGIOUS requirment to wear a burqa in say, Jordan, Egypt, The Emirates, do you want me to go on, heck even the Thai Muslims dont wear it.

Nothing to do with religion.

Having lived in Iran and Saudi for many years, I would simply suggest you try walking through one of the many malls in Riyadh on a Thursday evening with your wife and she is not wearing the abaya with her head and hair uncovered.

My prediction is you will be faced by at least one Muttawah accompanied by The Religious Police before you are told to leave.

Try to make your argument in Saudi Arabia or Iran that it has nothing to do with religion.

I have never heard of any non Muslim women having to wear a burqa in Saudi.

You are correct wear an abaya, thats it, many western women will walk around wearing an abaya, but the head and hair will be uncovered.

Funny you should mention Riyadh, that place has a reputation that even the Saudis laugh at.

I heard a rumour it was known as "headbanger central" eg HQ of the religious schools that pump out these pathetic religious police/muttawa.

Having lived in Saudi for many years and in various provinces, I would say Riyadh is probably the most oppressive of all cities in Saudi.

Heck they used to make fun of me because of the Arabic I spoke, they knew exactly what part of the kingdom in which I lived.

They used to ask me if I was a Qatani taxi driver.

Yes strange old place, will be forever grateful to them, paid me well.

A walk in the corniche in Jeddah will be a differing experience to anything in Riyadh.

As for women cant drive in Saudi, I watched as a Tihamah women pulled up at a gas station with an M16 strapped across her back and told the "jingly" to fill it up, she wasnt wearing any burqua, and there was no-one there dare saying anything to her for fear of sparking a tribal confrontation

Yeah, Jeddah is considerably different from Riyadh...as is Dammam/Khobar.

I had an abaya specially made for the wife that had a hood.sewed on. If she got yelled at by some nut job, she merely flipped the hood up and we were good to go. I've had problems in all areas with the hair covering.

One time some Saudi yelled across a crowded electronics store for my wife to cover her head. I yelled back, pretending he was talking to me and said I didn't need to cover my head. All the sales people laughed and he went away...but he wasn't a muttawa with 5-6 religious police with him.

Spending lots of time in the Eastern Province, saw lots of the bedouin women driving around the desert. It happens.

[7by7]

So, because the beliefs of other's, i.e. their having a religion offends you, you would ban religion?

How very liberal and democratic of you; not!

Never claimed to be either a liberal or democrat, my Amercian friends would refer to me as a Republican, my Ozzy friends would refer to me as a Liberal, strange old world we live in.

I used a small 'l' and small 'd'. If you don't understand the difference this makes, there are plenty of schools who will teach you English grammar.

"What type of Muslims would you be referring to?"

The type of Muslim who believes that modesty is a requirement of her religion and so demands she covers her face and head as well as the rest of her body.

So as of yet no one has been able to come with any verse or hadith that requires it.

I am more interested in hearing of where its written they must."

See above.

See above, couldnt have written it better myself, neither you nor anyone else has been able to come up with any text/source of a religious requirment to do so.

And you have not been able to come up with any Christian texts saying that Christians must wear a cross!

You keep banging on about this point as if it were a revelation on a par with Newton's laws or Einstein's theory of relativity!

It isn't.

Some Muslim women believe that wearing a burqa, or other, less restrictive head coverings, preserves their modesty and is a sign of their devotion; others don't.

The same as some Christian women believe that wearing modest clothing, i.e. no short skirts, skimpy tops or similar, means the same thing; others don't.

I went to school with a brother and sister whose parents belonged to some obscure Christian sect who believed that radio and TV were the work of the devil! Wont find that anywhere in the bible!

It's as simple as that; a matter of personal choice.

So, because the beliefs of other's, i.e. their having a religion offends you, you would ban religion?

Everyone and anyone has the right to believe in whatever they want, I have no problem with that, my problem stems from the fact when someones elses beliefs impinge on my personal freedom, then I have a problem.

So tell us; how does a woman wearing a burqa impinge upon your personal freedom?

The rest of your post is an argument against religion; the Abrahamic ones especially; but irrelevant to this topic.

(N.B. The quotes of previous posts have been edited for clarity and to comply with the number of quotes allowed by the forum software.)

[Chicog]

In case anyone hasn't mentioned it, the Koran does not mandate covering a woman's face.

So anyone who says it's a religious requirement is simply making it up and can **** off.

[7by7]

Chicog,

I suggest that you read the whole topic before commenting.

The point you are trying to make has been covered ad nauseam!

[Scott]

I've read the entire thread. I wouldn't necessarily suggest that anyone read the entire thing before commenting. It's really not all that enlightening.

[Chicog]

I've read the entire thread. I wouldn't necessarily suggest that anyone read the entire thing before commenting. It's really not all that enlightening.

I didn't think it would be, which is why I said "in case".

[DiamondKing]

Great work by the British legal team and France for accepting it's citizens religious right.

It's sad to see how only few limited shallow minded people passes racial comment over other religion. Let us learn to respect people and their religion. It's a matter if their faith and belief, we have no right to criticize their belief. We don't own them, do we?

Right,

In Belgium Muslims are trying to forbid Christian holidays and artifacts.

Brussels cancelled it's 2012 Christmas tree to show respect for others people religion.

Voices are up to condemn Holland's and Belgium's zwarte piet for the folkloric Sinterklaas. Theyu were at it again just this week for 2014 Sinterklaas.

Since when has Belgium become a Muslim state???

It will be soon

Belgium is doomed

[7by7]

As Simple1 said when this lie was first posted in this topic:

Great work by the British legal team and France for accepting it's citizens religious right.
It's sad to see how only few limited shallow minded people passes racial comment over other religion. Let us learn to respect people and their religion. It's a matter if their faith and belief, we have no right to criticize their belief. We don't own them, do we?

Right,

In Belgium Muslims are trying to forbid Christian holidays and artifacts.
Brussels cancelled it's 2012 Christmas tree to show respect for others people religion.
Voices are up to condemn Holland's and Belgium's zwarte piet for the folkloric Sinterklaas. Theyu were at it again just this week for 2014 Sinterklaas.

Since when has Belgium become a Muslim state???

Any Islamic extremism or attempts to undermine society to cause conflict, should be prosecuted. However, the alledged Xmas tree ban was a right wing beat up & in fact not true. Nearly all similar accounts, once you research the reality, are more often than not, incitement attempts by right wing groups & others. e.g. One of the most notorious examples of scare stories was the widely reported claim that Birmingham city council had banned Christmas, replacing it with Winterval to avoid offending non-Christians, even though it was untrue.

"There have been attempts to stir racial tensions, with some falsely blaming the switch from the usual real Christmas tree on offended Muslims" And a rumour to be found widely across the web, mostly originated from the right wing website Gatewaypundit, says that Muslims were to be blamed for this new installation.

http://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/muslim-intervention-results-in-brussels-banning-christmas-tree-exhibit/

As old saying has it: a lie is halfway round the world before the truth has got it's boots on!

No one in Belgium or the Netherlands wants to ban any Christian festival.

The fuss last year over Zwarte Piet had nothing to do with Muslims; it was started by a Jamaican UNESCO employee, without authorisation from her bosses, as a protest over representations of slavery. UN drops Black Pete 'racism' charge against the Dutch.

Previous and continuing protests over Zwarte Piet are based on this; nothing to do with Muslims.

But don't let the truth interfere with your prejudice!

[rgs2001uk]

To answer post #107, TV quote jinx strikes yet again.

The plaintiff, identified only by her initials SAS, had described herself as a "devout Muslim and she wears the burqa and niqab in accordance with her religious faith, culture and personal convictions".

Taken from opening post of this thread.

You keep banging on about this point as if it were a revelation on a par with Newton's laws or Einstein's theory of relativity!

Quite ironic really when I as an infidel know more about her religion than she does.

Perhaps she needs to study here religion more.

As has already been discussed and agreed upon, there is no religious need to do so.

And you have not been able to come up with any Christian texts saying that Christians must wear a cross!

Dont think think I have ever argued they should or must, ergo why should I provide a link.

If you want to know, suggest you ask a Christain.

Personally I believe its a throwback to when Christainity was superimposed on top of Paganism as a way of selling it to the masses, in pretty much the same way as Christains believe Jesus was born on 25 Dec.

I do believe the cross predates Christianity, not being a Christain I dont concern myself about what Christains believe.

I used a small 'l' and small 'd'. If you don't understand the difference this makes, there are plenty of schools who will teach you English grammar.

See my answer,
"Never claimed to be either a liberal or democrat,"

You will note the use of the apostrophe, before I went onto explain.

I went to school with a brother and sister whose parents belonged to some obscure Christian sect who believed that radio and TV were the work of the devil! Wont find that anywhere in the bible!

Yes I can well believe it and dont doubt what you say.

[7by7]

rgs2001uk, I will attempt to explain this one more time for you.

Persons of all religions have different interpretations of their faith.

Some Muslim women believe that wearing a burqa is an expression of their faith; others don't.

Some Christians believe that wearing a crucifix is an expression of their faith; others don't.

In both instances, there is nothing in any religious writings to say that they must do so.

Indeed, in the case of a crucifix, some Christians argue that it is idolatry and so forbidden by the 2nd commandment!

As you quote from the OP says, it is a matter for someone's personal " religious faith, culture and personal convictions."

You go on to say "not being a Christain I dont concern myself about what Christains believe." Yet you seem very concerned with what Muslims believe; does this mean you are, in fact, a Muslim?

BTW, what apostrophe? You naming political parties in the US and Australia have no relevance to my original comment nor the actual meaning of the words liberal and democratic (note that meaning 4 of the latter does relate to the American political party, but requires the use of a capital initial letter).

If you are claiming to be neither liberal nor democratic, that is quite an admission to make; but, like a woman choosing to wear a burqa, your right.

[rgs2001uk]

rgs2001uk, I will attempt to explain this one more time for you.

Persons of all religions have different interpretations of their faith.

Some Muslim women believe that wearing a burqa is an expression of their faith; others don't.

Some Christians believe that wearing a crucifix is an expression of their faith; others don't.

In both instances, there is nothing in any religious writings to say that they must do so.

Indeed, in the case of a crucifix, some Christians argue that it is idolatry and so forbidden by the 2nd commandment!

As you quote from the OP says, it is a matter for someone's personal " religious faith, culture and personal convictions."

You go on to say "not being a Christain I dont concern myself about what Christains believe." Yet you seem very concerned with what Muslims believe; does this mean you are, in fact, a Muslim?

BTW, what apostrophe? You naming political parties in the US and Australia have no relevance to my original comment nor the actual meaning of the words liberal and democratic (note that meaning 4 of the latter does relate to the American political party, but requires the use of a capital initial letter).

If you are claiming to be neither liberal nor democratic, that is quite an admission to make; but, like a woman choosing to wear a burqa, your right.

You go on to say "not being a Christain I dont concern myself about what Christains believe." Yet you seem very concerned with what Muslims believe; does this mean you are, in fact, a Muslim?

Already stated but will repeat, I am an atheist, an infidel or whatever else someone may label me as.

My concern is more to do with religious ignorance amongt the believers of whatever religion.

If the believers themselves cant agree on what their religion requires, how do they expect to sell it to me as a non believer?

If you are claiming to be neither liberal nor democratic, that is quite an admission to make;

Well that would depend on you interpretation of what these words mean.

I accept that sometimes the state has to apply laws for the good of the majority.

I accept the fact that sometimes these laws are wrongly implemented, case in point would be the personal use of cannibas for at home recreational use.

I accept the fact that sometimes these laws are correct, eg, not having the right to walk up down my local high street in a Nazi unifrom.

As for democratic, that means different things in different parts of the world.

I accept the fact that the democratic model as known in the West cant be applied elsewhere.

Egypt for example, the crowds take to the streets asking for a military dictatator to be overthrown, shortly afterwards, after their love affair with the democratic process wears off, the same crowds are back on the streets demanding a freely elected leader be overthrown and replaced by yet another military dictator.

You really couldnt make this up.

The liberal democrats in the West cant grasp this, Saddam and Gaddafi did, sometimes for the greater good, the democratic model has to be put to one side.

The West has a history of dealing with undemocratic autocratic dictatorships and regimes, but thats veering off onto another topic.

[transam]

rgs2001uk, I will attempt to explain this one more time for you.

Persons of all religions have different interpretations of their faith.

Some Muslim women believe that wearing a burqa is an expression of their faith; others don't.

Some Christians believe that wearing a crucifix is an expression of their faith; others don't.

In both instances, there is nothing in any religious writings to say that they must do so.

Indeed, in the case of a crucifix, some Christians argue that it is idolatry and so forbidden by the 2nd commandment!

As you quote from the OP says, it is a matter for someone's personal " religious faith, culture and personal convictions."

You go on to say "not being a Christain I dont concern myself about what Christains believe." Yet you seem very concerned with what Muslims believe; does this mean you are, in fact, a Muslim?

BTW, what apostrophe? You naming political parties in the US and Australia have no relevance to my original comment nor the actual meaning of the words liberal and democratic (note that meaning 4 of the latter does relate to the American political party, but requires the use of a capital initial letter).

If you are claiming to be neither liberal nor democratic, that is quite an admission to make; but, like a woman choosing to wear a burqa, your right.

You cannot hide a bomb to kill infidels under a crucifix...........

[7by7]

But you can under a nun's habit or a monk's robe.

Today is the anniversary of the 7/7/ bombings in London.

None of the four perpetrators of that outrage were wearing burqas! Does this mean you support a ban on rucksacks and other forms of luggage?

[7by7]

You go on to say "not being a Christain I dont concern myself about what Christains believe." Yet you seem very concerned with what Muslims believe; does this mean you are, in fact, a Muslim?

Already stated but will repeat, I am an atheist, an infidel or whatever else someone may label me as.

My concern is more to do with religious ignorance amongt the believers of whatever religion.

If the believers themselves cant agree on what their religion requires, how do they expect to sell it to me as a non believer?

I doubt that a Muslim woman in a burqa or a Christian wearing a cross is particularly trying to sell their religion to you; they're merely expressing their belief in their own way.

You said previously that their doing so somehow oppressed you; I asked you how; any answer to that?

If you are claiming to be neither liberal nor democratic, that is quite an admission to make;

Well that would depend on you interpretation of what these words mean.

Click on the links in my previous for the standard definitions.

Do you disagree with them?

Look up freedom while you're at it.

[transam]

But you can under a nun's habit or a monk's robe.

Today is the anniversary of the 7/7/ bombings in London.

None of the four perpetrators of that outrage were wearing burqas! Does this mean you support a ban on rucksacks and other forms of luggage?

Christian folk don't want to blow up the innocent in Malls. The 7/7 bombers were blokes who can wear what they like...............

[7by7]

Christian folk don't want to blow up the innocent!

Tell that to the victims of the IRA, UDF, NLFT, NSCN, Iron Guard etc., etc.

[transam]

Christian folk don't want to blow up the innocent!

Tell that to the victims of the IRA, UDF, NLFT, NSCN, Iron Guard etc., etc.

Think you are twisting stuff.........My old English pal many years ago was told in Tesco to remove his crash helmet because their cameras could not see his face, he told them to fugg off and left, soooooooooo, why should folk that you seem to protect be treated differently. ?