French burqa ban upheld by European courts

[7by7]

Twisting stuff? How so?

Are you saying that the organisations I listed are not Christians, not terrorists or neither?

You may like to believe that all terrorists are Muslims, but that is simply not true.

As for the rest of your post, I refer you to my first post in this topic

About time that there being called a halt to the suppression of people by the Muslims in a foreign country.

How does this woman's desire to wear a burqa oppress anyone in France?

She hasn't been identified, so how do you know she is living in a foreign country and not French?

Finally some common sense, Go to a Muslim country and try an impose your religious views and they will probably stone you to death, Our Governments need to grow a set and stop pandering to these minorities.

She wasn't trying to impose her religious views on anyone; merely wear a burqa as an expression of her own faith.

Now, before the resident Islam haters get on my case, having said that the court did, I think, get it right as the law is not discriminatory per se.

From Wikipedia

The 2004 French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools......forbids the wearing of any "ostensible" religious articles by students, but does not cite any item; yet, ministerial instructions appear to target the Islamic veil, the Jewish kippa, and large Christian crosses. Instructions permit discreet signs of faith, such as small crosses, Stars of David, and hands of Fatima. The law does not apply to parents or to students attending universities. However, teachers and other school personnel are also prohibited to display their religious affiliation on the basis of "public service neutrality". Similar policies are occasionally applied in other state organizations, such as personnel working in public hospitals.
.......
In September 2010, it became illegal to wear face coverings unless specifically needed to perform a function. It is illegal to wear the burqa in public in France. Fines are 150 euro for women wearing it and 30,000 euro for men forcing their wives to wear it, with up to one year in prison.

So, as the law on religious symbols in schools covers all religions and as the 'burqa ban' is not a ban on burqas but a ban on all face coverings except those needed to perform a function (ski masks on the piste?) then it cannot be discriminatory.

Edited July 7, 2014 by 7by7

[Naam]

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

and all infidels will burn in hell

[Naam]

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???

BS does not become truth no matter how often it is repeated!

In a highly meaningful twist of irony, a decision by the Brussels city council to erect a “modern art” Christmas Tree made of glass TV screens has been mistakenly blamed on Muslims objecting to Christmas traditions.

The reason for the move, it was claimed, was that local Muslims—who now make up nearly 50 percent of Brussel’s population—had objected to the Christian undertones.

Now however it appears that there was never any such objection from the Muslims and that the “sculpture” which caused the stir was merely one more symptom of the degeneracy which now masquerades as “art” in the modern world.

http://www.westernspring.co.uk/brussels-christmas-tree-its-not-muslims-just-awful-modern-art/

[uptheos]

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

Are you suggesting they should be tried (one day) for treason?

It seems their names have been kept rather quiet, not sure if it's because they are morons and don't want the word to get out.

[Naam]

Wifebeaters and sox 'n sandals next

not to forget the American male burqa swimwear

[nidieunimaitre]

How in the HELL does France get itself an a position where it needs the approval of some multinational higher power to uphold its own laws?

How in the HELL do British lawyers get standing to sue France before a multinational court for passing its own laws?

How in the HELL does France give up its national sovereignty to some multinational group that the people of France don't directly elect by themselves?

What in the HELL is wrong with European countries to cede their borders to every idiot who comes along?

How in the HELL can this story be happening in the first place?

How in the HELL does the law in the US apply to every state?

Same same, not different.

[JDGRUEN]

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.

The wearing of head and face coverings and sometimes full body coverings (burqa) is nothing more than Muslim male domination and subjugation of Muslim women - done by intimidations - force and threats of force - and reinforced by the Mullahs ... If the boot heel of Muslim male domination and subjugation were removed from Muslim women -- in short order Muslim women would not be wearing head, face and body coverings ... it is simple as that. But removing - doing away with this oppression of Muslim women by Muslim men is neigh on impossible .. So governments like France have to step in and say 'NO' -- no longer shall we tolerate it ...

[bigbamboo]

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.

The wearing of head and face coverings and sometimes full body coverings (burqa) is nothing more than Muslim male domination and subjugation of Muslim women - done by intimidations - force and threats of force - and reinforced by the Mullahs ... If the boot heel of Muslim male domination and subjugation were removed from Muslim women -- in short order Muslim women would not be wearing head, face and body coverings ... it is simple as that. But removing - doing away with this oppression of Muslim women by Muslim men is neigh on impossible .. So governments like France have to step in and say 'NO' -- no longer shall we tolerate it ...

I can remember as kids going to school in the winter sometimes wearing balaclavas to keep the cold out.

If muslim women want to cover their faces in public because someone tells them they should then that's up them, as long as they accept that banks, shops, offices etc. may insist they remove them or leave the premises for security reasons.

[JDGRUEN]

@bigbamboo post #130...

But not in France as of now ... thank goodness

[Mosha]

There was a Labour Cabinet member I forget his surname Jack. In his constituency surgeries, he refused to deal with people unless he could see their faces

[rgs2001uk]

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.

If you want to discuss, Socrates, Plato or Aristotle suggest another forum.

I am nothing more than a "prostitute" or puto as discussed on another forum.

Been listening to this song for more years than I care to remember, just about sums up how I feel.

• Play Video
• Share
• Correct
• Print

I left my heart to the sappers round Khe Sanh

And my soul was sold with my cigarettes to the blackmarket man

I've had the Vietnam cold turkey

From the ocean to the Silver City

And it's only other vets could understand

Read more: Cold Chisel - Khe Sanh Lyrics | MetroLyrics

I was paid not to think, I took the money, thoughts of Western democracy didnt enter my head, others had problems and left, others stayed longer.

Have been offered various jobs, today my security and safety counts for more.

Did you ever see the video footage of poor Ken Bigley having his head chopped off with a pen knife, what a shocking way to die, no doubt it was done in gods name.

How long have you actually lived and worked in Asia for?

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose.

[rgs2001uk]

There was a Labour Cabinet member I forget his surname Jack. In his constituency surgeries, he refused to deal with people unless he could see their faces

Jack Straw was his name.

[bigbamboo]

There was a Labour Cabinet member I forget his surname Jack. In his constituency surgeries, he refused to deal with people unless he could see their faces

Jack Straw was his name.

I didn't think it was David Blunkett.

[tartempion]

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!

It's not a lie when people's perception discuss the issue as being like that.

I support Belgium for having voted a law forbidding wearing the burqa/nabib in public and the headscarf in public service.

Where did I say the Zwarte Piet aggression has something to do with Allah?

Nemesis7 posted this: Let us learn to respect people and their religion.

Note I don't need people in my country (Belgium) who come to impose THEIR religion and views and customs upon my culture.

Pushing to forbid Zwarte Piet is ridiculous.

[transam]

What happens with these folk wearing a tent at the airport immigration desk where face photos are taken ?

Do we all have to look the other way or are paper bags issued to the rest of us to put over our heads so we don't see the ladies face.?

[simple1]

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

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!

It's not a lie when people's perception discuss the issue as being like that. I support Belgium for having voted a law forbidding wearing the burqa/nabib in public and the headscarf in public service. Where did I say the Zwarte Piet aggression has something to do with Allah?

Nemesis7 posted this: Let us learn to respect people and their religion.

Note I don't need people in my country (Belgium) who come to impose THEIR religion and views and customs upon my culture.

Pushing to forbid Zwarte Piet is ridiculous.

Post removed to enable a response.

Don't believe there are currently bans, could be wrong, in Belgium for Sikhs wearing a Turban or Jews wearing head caps. Do you support a ban for all migrants & citizens publicly wearing any outward form of religious expression?

[NeverSure]

How in the HELL does France get itself an a position where it needs the approval of some multinational higher power to uphold its own laws?

How in the HELL do British lawyers get standing to sue France before a multinational court for passing its own laws?

How in the HELL does France give up its national sovereignty to some multinational group that the people of France don't directly elect by themselves?

What in the HELL is wrong with European countries to cede their borders to every idiot who comes along?

How in the HELL can this story be happening in the first place?

How in the HELL does the law in the US apply to every state?

Same same, not different.

Ignorant. The USA is one nation. It will never sign any of the biggest UN treaties or conventions and be ruled by another group.

FYI The USA is one nation with 50 states. The laws are very much different in each state due to what is called "states' rights" in all areas of authority not specifically designated to the federal government by the constitution.

So your contractor's license in California is no good in any other state nor is your license to practice medicine or law or many other things. I could go on and on about how there are more independent state laws than there are over abiding federal laws, and how in many ways the states are independent.

The US is a republic of independent states so in total:

YOU are wrong.

[chuckd]

It has been claimed that Osama Bin Laden escaped Afghanistan to Pakistan by shrouding himself in a burqa.

They can be used for nefarious reasons.

[7by7]

rgs2001uk, re your post 133; what were you on when you posted that?

I'd still like you to tell us how a woman wearing a burqa oppresses you; but know that you wont.

Admit it; your comment that it did was total pony, wasn't it?

[7by7]

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

Are you suggesting they should be tried (one day) for treason?

It seems their names have been kept rather quiet, not sure if it's because they are morons and don't want the word to get out.

Kept quiet?

How so, when he has been named in most articles on this case?

For example, this from The Guardian.

His name is Tony Muman.

For those who are interested in facts rather than hysteria and prejudice (not too many of the former here, I fear), the judgement itself can now be downloaded from here.

[tartempion]

Post removed to enable a response.

Don't believe there are currently bans, could be wrong, in Belgium for Sikhs wearing a Turban or Jews wearing head caps. Do you support a ban for all migrants & citizens publicly wearing any outward form of religious expression?

Let me make this clear to you:

a) see Legruen's comment

The wearing of head and face coverings and sometimes full body coverings (burqa) is nothing more than Muslim male domination and subjugation of Muslim women - done by intimidations - force and threats of force - and reinforced by the Mullahs ... If the boot heel of Muslim male domination and subjugation were removed from Muslim women -- in short order Muslim women would not be wearing head, face and body coverings ... it is simple as that. But removing - doing away with this oppression of Muslim women by Muslim men is neigh on impossible .. So governments like France have to step in and say 'NO' -- no longer shall we tolerate it ...

Belgium also voted such a law.

I support any Belgian ban for people in a PUBLIC function (such as townhouse, post office) to wear religious artifacts (showing they belong to such or such religion)

Edited July 8, 2014 by tartempion

[7by7]

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!

It's not a lie when people's perception discuss the issue as being like that.

But their perceptions are based on a lie. The lie, regularly spouted by right wing, racist organisations, being that certain groups want to ban Christian festivals. They don't, as has been proven.

Where did I say the Zwarte Piet aggression has something to do with Allah?

You included him in your original post: "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???"

Nemesis7 posted this: Let us learn to respect people and their religion.

Note I don't need people in my country (Belgium) who come to impose THEIR religion and views and customs upon my culture.

Pushing to forbid Zwarte Piet is ridiculous.

Your comment is the complete opposite of the tolerance expressed by Nemesis7!

It also leads us back to the lies about Muslims trying to enforce their views and ban Christian festivals which you deny are lies!

(N.B. Quotes of quotes have been removed to comply with forum software)

[tartempion]

But their perceptions are based on a lie. The lie, regularly spouted by right wing, racist organisations, being that certain groups want to ban Christian festivals. They don't, as has been proven.

It's not a lie when people's perception discuss the issue as being like that.

Since when has Belgium become a Muslim state???"

Nemesis7 posted this: Let us learn to respect people and their religion.

Note I don't need people in my country (Belgium) who come to impose THEIR religion and views and customs upon my culture.

Pushing to forbid Zwarte Piet is ridiculous.

Your comment is the complete opposite of the tolerance expressed by Nemesis7!

It also leads us back to the lies about Muslims trying to enforce their views and ban Christian festivals which you deny are lies!

(N.B. Quotes of quotes have been removed to comply with forum software)

You quote:

Your comment is the complete opposite of the tolerance expressed by Nemesis7!

Exactly: I feel no obligation whatsoever to respect people and their religion for those who have decided to come and live in my country, the contrary is true, but that won't happen.

[7by7]

What happens with these folk wearing a tent at the airport immigration desk where face photos are taken ?

Do we all have to look the other way or are paper bags issued to the rest of us to put over our heads so we don't see the ladies face.?

As far as the UK is concerned, in all cases where a woman wearing a veil, or any person wearing any face covering, has to identify themselves, then the veil has to be removed.

There is no requirement for anyone else to look away; but I'd have thought basic courtesy and respect would prevent anyone except an ignorant slob from staring at the person concerned.

This is interesting, but wont appeal to the Islamaphobes:

The random Muslim scare story generator: separating fact from fiction

The niqab

One of the most helpful exercises is to present some estimation of how many women actually wear the niqab, the face veil, in any given European country in which there is controversy about it. The estimates are so small that they cool a usually heated debate. In France, which banned them in public in 2011, it is estimated as between 400 and 2,000, ie not even 0.1% of the population. In the UK, approximations suggest that the numbers are "extremely low". Among practising Muslim women, niqab wearers are more of a minority than women who do not even wear the hijab, the head scarf. You are far more likely in the UK to meet a Muslim woman in jeans and a T-shirt than you are to meet one in a niqab. It seems embarrassing that politicians and media professional should dedicate so much time to agonising over the issue.

[transam]

What happens with these folk wearing a tent at the airport immigration desk where face photos are taken ?

Do we all have to look the other way or are paper bags issued to the rest of us to put over our heads so we don't see the ladies face.?

As far as the UK is concerned, in all cases where a woman wearing a veil, or any person wearing any face covering, has to identify themselves, then the veil has to be removed.

There is no requirement for anyone else to look away; but I'd have thought basic courtesy and respect would prevent anyone except an ignorant slob from staring at the person concerned.

This is interesting, but wont appeal to the Islamaphobes:

The random Muslim scare story generator: separating fact from fiction

The niqab

One of the most helpful exercises is to present some estimation of how many women actually wear the niqab, the face veil, in any given European country in which there is controversy about it. The estimates are so small that they cool a usually heated debate. In France, which banned them in public in 2011, it is estimated as between 400 and 2,000, ie not even 0.1% of the population. In the UK, approximations suggest that the numbers are "extremely low". Among practising Muslim women, niqab wearers are more of a minority than women who do not even wear the hijab, the head scarf. You are far more likely in the UK to meet a Muslim woman in jeans and a T-shirt than you are to meet one in a niqab. It seems embarrassing that politicians and media professional should dedicate so much time to agonising over the issue.

You only need one hiding stuff in the tent to blow folk up. If it were not for a faction of this religion killing folk senselessly nobody would give a toss what they wore, I don't.........

[7by7]

<snip>

You (7by7) quote:

Your comment is the complete opposite of the tolerance expressed by Nemesis7!

Exactly: I feel no obligation whatsoever to respect people and their religion for those who have decided to come and live in my country, the contrary is true, but that won't happen.

You have chosen to live in Thailand, so you are a member of that strange group; the anti immigration immigrant!

Do you expect Thai people to respect you, the way you choose to live and dress and your beliefs, or would you be happy for them to show you the same lack of tolerance you wish for Muslims living in Belgium?

Do you hate all Muslims living in Belgium? What are your feelings toward Marouane Fellaini, for example?

[7by7]

Transam,

It only takes one person hiding a bomb in a rucksack to blow up a tube train; would you therefore ban rucksacks?

It only takes one person to hide a bomb in a car; would you therefore ban cars?

You ignored this the last time you posted about burqas and bombs and I asked you similar; will you answer this time?

[transam]

Transam,

It only takes one person hiding a bomb in a rucksack to blow up a tube train; would you therefore ban rucksacks?

It only takes one person to hide a bomb in a car; would you therefore ban cars?

You ignored this the last time you posted about burqas and bombs and I asked you similar; will you answer this time?

Correct, but a tent hides not only what is underneath it but also covers the face, be it man or lady. I posted that in the UK my chum was told to leave Tesco cos he had a crash helmet on, they could not see his face on security cameras. What do you think about that..? He is not religious, just rides a bike.

[tartempion]

<snip>

You (7by7) quote:

Your comment is the complete opposite of the tolerance expressed by Nemesis7!

Exactly: I feel no obligation whatsoever to respect people and their religion for those who have decided to come and live in my country, the contrary is true, but that won't happen.

You have chosen to live in Thailand, so you are a member of that strange group; the anti immigration immigrant!

Do you expect Thai people to respect you, the way you choose to live and dress and your beliefs, or would you be happy for them to show you the same lack of tolerance you wish for Muslims living in Belgium?

Do you hate all Muslims living in Belgium? What are your feelings toward Marouane Fellaini, for example?

Exactly: the anti immigration immigrant!

I don't expect Thai people to respect me and they don't and I don't care they don't.

But I do dress decently following Thai dress code, I take out my shoes when visiting temples and Thai homes, even in the house I live in and paid for but can not be put into my name, that list is endless.

I understand why Thais don't want us here (taking over their country) Neither do I want Muslims to take over Europe, but that's unavoidable in the near future and I don't think farangs are that close to take over Thailand isn't?

And I travel 2x/year to Europe and Quebec to keep my sanity from the Thai madness, enjoying the best of both worlds but loathing religion.

Edited July 8, 2014 by tartempion

[7by7]

<snip>

a tent hides not only what is underneath it but also covers the face, be it man or lady. I posted that in the UK my chum was told to leave Tesco cos he had a crash helmet on, they could not see his face on security cameras. What do you think about that..? He is not religious, just rides a bike.

I answered that the first time you posted it!

As you do not appear to have read my response, here it is again. (I've had to remove some of the quotes of previous posts to comply with forum software.)

Twisting stuff? How so?

Are you saying that the organisations I listed are not Christians, not terrorists or neither?

You may like to believe that all terrorists are Muslims, but that is simply not true.

As for the rest of your post, (the crash helmet example) I refer you to my first post in this topic

<snip>

the court did, I think, get it right as the law is not discriminatory per se.

From Wikipedia

The 2004 French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools......forbids the wearing of any "ostensible" religious articles by students, but does not cite any item; yet, ministerial instructions appear to target the Islamic veil, the Jewish kippa, and large Christian crosses. Instructions permit discreet signs of faith, such as small crosses, Stars of David, and hands of Fatima. The law does not apply to parents or to students attending universities. However, teachers and other school personnel are also prohibited to display their religious affiliation on the basis of "public service neutrality". Similar policies are occasionally applied in other state organizations, such as personnel working in public hospitals.

.......

In September 2010, it became illegal to wear face coverings unless specifically needed to perform a function. It is illegal to wear the burqa in public in France. Fines are 150 euro for women wearing it and 30,000 euro for men forcing their wives to wear it, with up to one year in prison.

So, as the law on religious symbols in schools covers all religions and as the 'burqa ban' is not a ban on burqas but a ban on all face coverings except those needed to perform a function (ski masks on the piste?) then it cannot be discriminatory.