Jump to content

Recommended Posts

brum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well, putting it like that, yes. But the topic

> also...oh dear....



You can talk...with your "naughty" thread...


Personally I think this thread should be merged with my thread on Islam4UK...the two were made for each other

brum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So should we ban Nuns wearing habits too?

>

> Mick you have started something here....



Catholic woman do not cover their faces, or dress differently from other women in France - but nuns wear particular headgear, agreed.


France is a catholic country and will have to address the nun issue in the same way if it forces through these changes for muslims.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> France is apparently giving serious consideration

> to making it illegal for women to wear the Burka

> in public in France.

>

> As they say - "When in France...."

>

> Nothing wrong with that? And should we follow


> suit?

______________________________________________________



They can wear the Purka though



Which is kinda contradictory




W**F

computedshorty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> How would a bus driver know that the person

> wearing a Burka is the person entitled to the Bus

> Pass.

> Should a grouup of these ladies mug a person how

> would you pick out the assailent.

> If a person comes to live in this country they

> must conform to the ways of those who live here.

> Would we allow a native from darkest Africa who in

> his home area would only be covered in coloured

> paint to cover his nudity, walk around Dulwich?


I think we probably allow anyone to wear as little as they wanted provided it did not contradict our laws on public decency.


What is different with the Burka is that in the west many people think it demeans women. Now whilst that may be ok in other countries, demeaning women should not be allowed here, whether its based upon religion or not.


The debate will be whether wearing the burka demeans women in general and the muslim religion obviously believes this not to be the case, but France is of the view that it does and France does not want its residents being treated in this way.


Obviously if France had been a traditionally Muslim country it may come to a different conclusion.


But in my opinion its view is an objective one, for the good of all its citizens.

Devil's advocate questions ('cause I can't make up my mind on this one, though I can't work out how you would police a ban anyway))


Should hoodies be banned in shopping centres?


Should motorbike helmets be banned in banks?


Heathrow T5 relies on face recognition for controlling international and domestic travellers. Should burkas be banned from T5?

computedshorty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Would we allow a native from darkest Africa who in

> his home area would only be covered in coloured

> paint to cover his nudity, walk around Dulwich?


Sheesh.. I?ll cover up next time ok.

I agree with ????'s . It makes the assumption that all muslim women are forced to wear Burka's. I've met many muslim women who seem happy enough to be covered up.


Interestingly, a few years ago France banned the wearing of head scarves for all muslim schoolgirls, so I suppose this is a step on from that law.

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm uncomfortable with the 'state' telling anyone

> how to dress


Yes fair enough - but democratic law should overide religious practice in all cases, so if they do bring it in I think it will need to be complied with.


If they do bring it in, they need to apply the same mentality to all religions.

France is a catholic country and will have to address the nun issue in the same way if it forces through these changes for muslims.



Actually France is a secular country. Many of them are catholics but officially the state is separate from religion. This is why to get married in France you need to do it legally in the town hall before having a religious ceremony.

Izodia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> France is a catholic country and will have to

> address the nun issue in the same way if it forces

> through these changes for muslims.

>

>

> Actually France is a secular country.




In terms of a religious majority - France is a Catholic country.

I argued about the fairness and reasonableness of not being allowed to wear my helmet in supermarket when I was told that it was because they could not see my face. I said (having lifted my visor) they can not only see my face they can see what colour lipstick I am wearing and that a camera could see my bike when I drove away and I offered my Drivers Licence. I then said why don't they suspect women in full burka dress and that this was discrimatory since I do not live by a religion I can hide behind. He agreed and let me go.

computedshorty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> If a person comes to live in this country they

> must conform to the ways of those who live here.

> Would we allow a native from darkest Africa who in

> his home area would only be covered in coloured

> paint to cover his nudity, walk around Dulwich?


I'm going to bite, even though I believe that you are a (convincing) troll.

You assume that everyone choosing to wear the Burka is an immigrant.

What about those born here who choose to wear it?

By your ruling, they're exempt from the ban.


And 'darkest' Africa? Nice.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Direct link to joint statement : https://thehaguegroup.org/meetings-bogota-en/?link_id=2&can_id=2d0a0048aad3d4915e3e761ac87ffe47&source=email-pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogota-breakthrough&email_referrer=email_2819587&email_subject=pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogot_-breakthrough&&   No. 26 | The Bogotá Breakthrough “The era of impunity is over.” That was the message from Bogotá, Colombia, where governments from across the Global South and beyond took the most ambitious coordinated action since Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza began 21 months ago. Convened by The Hague Group and co-chaired by the governments of Colombia and South Africa, the Emergency Conference on Palestine brought together 30 states for two days of intensive deliberation — and emerged with a concrete, coordinated six-point plan to restrain Israel’s war machine and uphold international law. States took up the call from their host, Colombian President and Progressive International Council Member Gustavo Petro, who had urged them to be “protagonists together.” Twelve governments signed onto the measures immediately. The rest now have a deadline: 20 September 2025, on the eve of the United Nations General Assembly. The unprecedented six measures commit states to:     Prevent military and dual use exports to Israel.     Refuse Israeli weapons transfers at their ports.     Prevent vessels carrying weapons to Israel under their national flags.     Review all public contracts to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation.     Pursue justice for international crimes.     Support universal jurisdiction to hold perpetrators accountable. “We came to Bogotá to make history — and we did,” said Colombian President Gustavo Petro. “Together, we have begun the work of ending the era of impunity. These measures show that we will no longer allow international law to be treated as optional, or Palestinian life as disposable.” The measures are not symbolic. They are grounded in binding obligations under international law — including the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation unlawful, and September 2024’s UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, which gave states a 12-month deadline to act. UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory Francesca Albanese called them “a momentous step forward.” “The Hague Group was born to advance international law in an era of impunity,” said South Africa’s Foreign Minister, Ronald Lamola. “The measures adopted in Bogotá show that we are serious — and that coordinated state action is possible.” The response from Washington was swift — and revealing. In a threatening statement to journalists, a US State Department spokesperson accused The Hague Group of “seeking to isolate Israel” and warned that the US would “aggressively defend our interests, our military, and our allies, including Israel, from such coordinated legal and diplomatic” actions. But instead of deterring action, the threats have only clarified the stakes. In Bogotá, states did not flinch. They acted — and they invite the world to join them. The deadline for further states to take up the measures is now two months away. And with it, the pressure is mounting for governments across the world — from Brazil to Ireland, Chile to Spain — to match words with action. As Albanese said, “the clock is now ticking for states — from Europe to the Arab world and beyond — to join them.” This is not a moment to observe. It is a moment to act. Share the Joint Statement from Bogotá and popularise the six measures. Write to your elected representative and your government and demand they sign on before 20 September. History was made in Bogotá. Now, it’s up to all of us to ensure it becomes reality, that Palestinian life is not disposable and international law is not optional. The era of impunity is coming to an end. Palestine is not alone. In solidarity, The Progressive International Secretariat  
    • Most countries charge for entry to museums and galleries, often a different rate for locals (tax payers) and foreign nationals. The National Gallery could do this, also places like the Museums in South Kensington, the British Library and other tax-funded institutions. Many cities abroad add a tourist tax to hotel bills. It means tourists help pay for public services.
    • Having just been to Co-op to redeem a 50p off Co-op members' card voucher on an item that is now 50p more than it was last week, Tesco can't come soon enough
    • Surely that depends on the amount.  It can be quite piffling.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...