acooling08 Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 It would be the first national party to call for a total ban on the Islamic headgear; the far-right British National Party believes they should be banned from schools. Lord Pearson of Rannoch, the leader of Ukip, wants to raise the issue of the influence of Sharia law in Britain, according to a report in The Times. He told the newspaper: “We are taking expert advice on how we could do it. It makes sense to ban the burka — or anything which conceals a woman’s face — in public buildings. But we want to make it possible to ban them in private buildings. It isn’t right that you can’t see someone’s face in an airport.” He added: “We are not Muslim bashing, but this is incompatible with Britain’s values of freedom and democracy.” The newspaper said Ukip would make an announcement on Sunday describing the burka as a threat to gender equality and claiming that it marginalises women and endangers public safety because terrorists could use them to hide their identity. In the European elections last June, Ukip secured the second-largest share of the vote, more than 16 per cent. Ukip is seen as a single-issue Euro-sceptic party, but it also has a policy of bringing back grammar schools and reducing the number of school leavers attending university. In France, public opinion is opposed to women wearing full veils in schools, hospitals or government buildings but moves to impose a blanket ban have become mired in legal arguments amid fears it would be unworkable in practice. About bloody time a 'mainstream' party proposes this France has a similar ban; about time we have the same.
Jay Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 About bloody time a 'mainstream' party proposes this France has a similar ban; about time we have the same. Mainstream errr Its UKUP! Why are you pro the ban? I think a huuuuuge amount of people look like total c*nts wearing them Heidi Hat things, but I if people want to wear them then so be it, it's their choice at the end of the day
Matt Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 TBH from what i've been told by a Muslim it is not mandatory, only personal preference, You do not need to wear one covering you're face, just over you're head will suffice. I must say I do find it, not ignorant, not scary, but I can see how it could be seen as intimidating, or a threat to security. Made me laugh and i'm going back a few years here but I followed someone through security at airport who had a full face veil on, I had a cap on, she went straight through whilst I was ordered to remove my cap. I'm sure we've had this discussion on here in the past, can't quite remember. They do have a point though, I can't remember quite what happened, a year or two ago didn't a Muslim man dress up in full dress - covering face, take his sister's passport to get through security at an airport or something? As I said I can't remember but it was something like that, a prime example that they are a threat. Bring on the debate
Zingari Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 Mainstream errr Its UKUP!Why are you pro the ban? I think a huuuuuge amount of people look like total c*nts wearing them Heidi Hat things, but I if people want to wear them then so be it, it's their choice at the end of the day maybe so , maybe not . the arguments will no doubt rage for years , but i cant imagine any little girl growing up and saying to herself , " i really want to be covered from head to foot in a sheet of black tarpaulin when i grow up "
acooling08 Posted 16 January 2010 Author Posted 16 January 2010 I think the majority of the British public would favour a ban, as in France. UKIP is the first party to propose it that can be supported by the mainstream public; only other party was BNP and no one listens to them. I hate interacting with people where I can't see their faces at all, and like Matt said, they seem to be above the law as they are never told to remove them whereas people wearing hats/helmets have to.
Finnegan Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 they want to ban people from wearing something because it goes against our values of freedom? Brilliant irony from UKIP. I'm starting to grow increasingly angry with Islamophobia. I think the majority of the British public would favour a ban, as in France Based on what? only other party was BNP and no one listens to them. !! Even less people give a fuck about UKIP! but i cant imagine any little girl growing up and saying to herself , " i really want to be covered from head to foot in a sheet of black tarpaulin when i grow up " Yeah, it's alien to me too, but while I despise religion people have the right to have faith in and practice what they want unless it's inflicting on someone else's rights. And I certainly don't see how opting to wear a veil does such. I'm sure there are plenty of homosexual or pro-choice people in Christian states of the world that find the supposedly more "liberal" faith to be a far more oppresive burden on them than an Islamic woman may feel about being inclined to wear a bit of black cloth.
Phube Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 maybe so , maybe not . the arguments will no doubt rage for years , but i cant imagine any little girl growing up and saying to herself , " i really want to be covered from head to foot in a sheet of black tarpaulin when i grow up " I think the quote in the Kuran is; you should cover "that which is apparent"! Seriously WTF does that mean... But it is a cultural thing... not a religious thing!
acooling08 Posted 16 January 2010 Author Posted 16 January 2010 they want to ban people from wearing something because it goes against our values of freedom?Brilliant irony from UKIP. I'm starting to grow increasingly angry with Islamophobia. Based on what? !! Even less people give a fuck about UKIP! Yeah, it's alien to me too, but while I despise religion people have the right to have faith in and practice what they want unless it's inflicting on someone else's rights. And I certainly don't see how opting to wear a veil does such. I'm sure there are plenty of homosexual or pro-choice people in Christian states of the world that find the supposedly more "liberal" faith to be a far more oppresive burden on them than an Islamic woman may feel about being inclined to wear a bit of black cloth. I don't think it's really about Islamophobia
Finnegan Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 I don't think it's really about Islamophobia Oh right, okay, good point. And the BNP aren't racist they're just practical.
Zingari Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 they want to ban people from wearing something because it goes against our values of freedom?Brilliant irony from UKIP. I'm starting to grow increasingly angry with Islamophobia. Based on what? !! Even less people give a fuck about UKIP! Yeah, it's alien to me too, but while I despise religion people have the right to have faith in and practice what they want unless it's inflicting on someone else's rights. And I certainly don't see how opting to wear a veil does such. I'm sure there are plenty of homosexual or pro-choice people in Christian states of the world that find the supposedly more "liberal" faith to be a far more oppresive burden on them than an Islamic woman may feel about being inclined to wear a bit of black cloth. so basically , if a woman is indoctrinated young enough to "want " to do something , then it no longer can be called oppression ? and yes i'm sure there are Christians that have been, and still are using indoctrinated forms of oppression , but that really is no excuse . i don't think any religion can hide behind the evil doings of another and use it as any justification . but hey ho and, i said to myself i'm not getting involved in this again
BoneDog Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 "It makes sense to ban the burka — or anything which conceals a woman’s face — in public buildings." - Why? I've never seen one woman in a veil cause any kind of trouble for anyone. “We are not Muslim bashing, but this is incompatible with Britain’s values of freedom and democracy.” - You couldn't make it up! "A threat to gender equality." - They know nothing about Islam or Muslims if they really think this. "Terrorists could use them to hide their identity." - Using the old fear tactic to start dictating to people. It's a load of crap. If someone wants to go into town and conceal their identity they don't need a headscarf or a Burkha. A cap, scarf and glasses is more than enough. The so called July 7 bombers didn't have face coverings or masks on.
Finnegan Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 so basically , if a woman is indoctrinated young enough to "want " to do something , then it no longer can be called oppression ?and yes i'm sure there are Christians that have been, and still are using indoctrinated forms of oppression , but that really is no excuse . i don't think any religion can hide behind the evil doings of another and use it as any justification . but hey ho and, i said to myself i'm not getting involved in this again To an extent you're preaching to the choir, as I said, I hate all organized religion and I think it's all a form of control and brainwashing. But at the same time I don't think it's the role of the British government to interfere and put an outright ban on the Burka and I certainly don't think it should happen because the tabloid-reading British public feel somehow "inconvenienced" or unsettled by it.
Zingari Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 To an extent you're preaching to the choir, as I said, I hate all organized religion and I think it's all a form of control and brainwashing. But at the same time I don't think it's the role of the British government to interfere and put an outright ban on the Burka and I certainly don't think it should happen because the tabloid-reading British public feel somehow "inconvenienced" or unsettled by it. Perhaps you should read this book ; http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rage-Against-Veil-...t/dp/1573926825 if you think that any feelings of distaste i have towards religious indoctrination are based just on the feelings of the tabloid reading press . i know we ain't going to agree , so all the best eh
acooling08 Posted 16 January 2010 Author Posted 16 January 2010 To be fair Finnegan I think Islamophobia is more of a gut feeling than anything malicious.
Finnegan Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 To be fair Finnegan I think Islamophobia is more of a gut feeling than anything malicious. ...
Jay Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 To be fair Finnegan I think Islamophobia is more of a gut feeling than anything malicious. what on earth does that statement mean?
BoneDog Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 TBH from what i've been told by a Muslim it is not mandatory, only personal preference, You do not need to wear one covering you're face, just over you're head will suffice. I know Muslim families where some of the grown up women wear western clothes and others in the same household decide that they want to dress as a Muslim. Most Muslim women are not oppressed as many seem to believe. Made me laugh and i'm going back a few years here but I followed someone through security at airport who had a full face veil on, I had a cap on, she went straight through whilst I was ordered to remove my cap.They do have a point though, I can't remember quite what happened, a year or two ago didn't a Muslim man dress up in full dress - covering face, take his sister's passport to get through security at an airport or something? As I said I can't remember but it was something like that, a prime example that they are a threat. If airports let people through without checking their face with the passport then that really is pathetic security. It's not the Muslims fault if the airport security just wave them through! The only security threat at airports and on aeroplanes is weak security, not Muslim women with a veil on. If someone gets on a plane with any kind of weapon or bomb then it is all down to a security failure. We should be checking peoples faces and searching them before they step on a plane, but there is no reason to ban this religious practice in everyday life.
Thracian Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 About bloody time a 'mainstream' party proposes this France has a similar ban; about time we have the same. It certainly won't happen under Labour. They've only just welcomed the Muslim Council of Great Britain back into the discussion fold less than a year after ties were broken because one of it's leaders seemed to condone attacks on UK troops. The ban was lifted because the MCB said it opposed violence. One day Labour will understand that Muslims are quite entitled to say anything provided it furthers the cause of Islam. And from their point of view why shouldn't they say whatever is in their interests? My criticism is of the custodians of our country who seem so quick and willing to believe them on the basis of nothing more than a few words. Labour will hardly welcome the MCB back to the discussion table then ban the burka. As Finnegan well knows being such a staunch socialist. The news story was a typical reflection of Muslim reaction to opposition. They have secured their desire for a return to the discussion table while not conceding anything. You have to admire them - I try to have the same approach - but the naivity of the Labour government is pathetic to see. Finnegan is welcome to em. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...ting-Hamas.html http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/board-mu...ed-until-reform PS: I actually see nothing wrong with anyone choosing to wear a burka - any more than I'd see anything wrong with them wearing a turban or a kilt. The major difference concerns the issue of concealment and that, of course, is an entirely different and serious consideration. If Muslims or anyone else show themselves prepared to use the burka as a means of concealment they can hardly be surprised if people or a host nation seeks to defend itself against any consequences or potential consequences. It really is a problem peculiar to Muslims because abuse seems to have been at least widespread enough to have been noticed. And if the outcome is a ban then members of the Muslim community will have brought it upon themselves even acknowledging that a few non-Muslims might themselves have taken advantage of the burka's concealment qualities. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...ticle578327.ece http://www.cynicsunlimited.com/2009/10/21/...urqa-be-banned/ No-one would seriously challenge someone's right to wear a turban or a bowler hat. Yes, both could be used for concealment but there's no obvious evidence that they are.
Matt Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 I know Muslim families where some of the grown up women wear western clothes and others in the same household decide that they want to dress as a Muslim. Most Muslim women are not oppressed as many seem to believe.If airports let people through without checking their face with the passport then that really is pathetic security. It's not the Muslims fault if the airport security just wave them through! The only security threat at airports and on aeroplanes is weak security, not Muslim women with a veil on. If someone gets on a plane with any kind of weapon or bomb then it is all down to a security failure. We should be checking peoples faces and searching them before they step on a plane, but there is no reason to ban this religious practice in everyday life. I'm not saying it's people wearing veil's that are the problem, I was saying I had to laugh at security policy, However, you have to question was it because they didn't want to offend the person/people wearing veil's? And this is alot of people's problems and worries is that they will offend people of certain religions.
Finnegan Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 Yes, New Labour, that staunchly socialist regime...
Zingari Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 It certainly won't happen under Labour.They've only just welcomed the Muslim Council of Great Britain back into the discussion fold less than a year after ties were broken because one of it's leaders seemed to condone attacks on UK troops. The ban was lifted because the MCB said it opposed violence. One day Labour will understand that Muslims are quite entitled to say anything provided it furthers the cause of Islam. And from their point of view why shouldn't they say whatever is in their interests? My criticism is of the custodians of our country who seem so quick and willing to believe them on the basis of nothing more than a few words. Labour will hardly welcome the MCB back to the discussion table then ban the burka. As Finnegan well knows being such a staunch socialist. The news story was a typical reflection of Muslim reaction to opposition. They have secured their desire for a return to the discussion table while not conceding anything. You have to admire them - I try to have the same approach - but the naivity of the Labour government is pathetic to see. Finnegan is welcome to em. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...ting-Hamas.html http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/board-mu...ed-until-reform I'm glad you've come back out from under your self imposed veil
acooling08 Posted 16 January 2010 Author Posted 16 January 2010 what on earth does that statement mean? That those people don't think that way to be bad people or provoke people, it's just an innate thing. I'm not explaining myself well am I?
Finnegan Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 Sorry, what's the problem with Burkas? They're angry that they dont get the same benefits as other veterans.
Rodders Posted 16 January 2010 Posted 16 January 2010 That those people don't think that way to be bad people or provoke people, it's just an innate thing. I'm not explaining myself well am I? By that logic, being paedophile is acceptable if you're just born like that, as long as you're not molesting kids to be bad or provoking people by doing so! So, no, it's not the greatest explanation! Not at all. (Not that I'm arguing against your stance; more your justification of it.)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.