Originally posted by Mr Pee
View Post
Wearing of Burka
Collapse
X
-
-
-
Originally posted by ahinton View PostThanks for posting this, Mr Pee, for all its increasingly irritating "yebbuts"
Very good piece.
And [pedantry alert] I'm pleased to see this thread has started talking about the niqab rather than the burkha, a garment which hardly any but Afghan women wear.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Mr Pee View Post
As we've noted, not an easy subject.
Many thanks for posting.
Comment
-
-
Lectures from Tory MPs about "Feminism" .
Not really to be taken seriously.
But if she REALLY wants to deal with issues like this, perhaps bringing pressure to bear on regimes like Saudi Arabia, instead of mainly being interested in propping them up so that we can do oil and arms deals, would be a more comprehensive way of dealing with them.
Appalling autocratic/theocratic regimes are surely the problem, the big picture?I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by teamsaint View PostLectures from Tory MPs about "Feminism" .
"it is time for politicians to stop delegating this to individual institutions as a minor matter of dress code and instead set clear national guidance."
Absolutely , can't have the poor dears deciding what to wear themselves , can we , just think what it might lead to !
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
"it is time for politicians to stop delegating this to individual institutions as a minor matter of dress code and instead set clear national guidance."
Absolutely , can't have the poor dears deciding what to wear themselves , can we , just think what it might lead to !
Comment
-
-
scottycelt
This has nothing to do with 'feminism'! In any case feminists only represent a very small percentage of 'the people'. Why should they dictate to the rest of society any more than a Moslem or Christian minority? Of course feminists themselves may well be divided on the issue!
It is about whether anyone, male or female, should be allowed to cover their face in a secular court, even for religious custom reasons.
Of course they shouldn't, everyone should be expected to abide by the same rules. Why should any religious custom (after all, that's all it is) be exempted when it's clearly not appropriate in the pursuit of justice?
I'm not sure I'd go quite as far as the French, banning a face-cover in all public places ... though their concerns over security are understandable ... but certainly a court of law should be entirely in-discriminatory and seen to be open and fair.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Beef Oven! View PostYou've misunderstood what that means. I really do think you'd do better to stick with things you've already got a grip of and when you do venture into new things, start with less complicated matters ;-)
So what does it mean ? apart from she thinks that politicians should set "national guidance" which is bonkers
Originally posted by scottycelt View Post. Why should any religious custom (after all, that's all it is) be exempted when it's clearly not appropriate in the pursuit of justice?
Comment
-
-
scottycelt
Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostAre you feeling OK Scotty ? I'm a bit worried as you seem to be arguing for the opposite of what you want for the followers of beardyman (NOT the beatboxer !)
I'm not very sure what the rest of your post actually means but, if it's what I think it might mean, I've never argued any group of 'followers' should be exempt from the open and equitable pursuit of justice in a secular court.
Quite the contrary, if you re-read my earlier posts on this thread ... of course, I could well be now rather more credibly accused of repetitiveness, to which I humbly apologise!
Comment
-
Originally posted by scottycelt View PostI'm not very sure what the rest of your post actually means but, if it's what I think it might mean, I've never argued any group of 'followers' should be exempt from the open and equitable pursuit of justice in a secular court.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostSo what does it mean ? apart from she thinks that politicians should set "national guidance"
Comment
-
-
Richard Barrett
So this Telegraph article is "balanced", is it? Firstly, as teamsaint says, a lecture on feminism from a Tory MP is hardly to be taken seriously. And then: "once the niqab becomes an accepted norm" - where is the evidence that this is even a vague possibility on the horizon? Less than 5% of the population of the UK is Muslim, and of this 5% a tiny proportion are wearing the niqab. Why is this phenomenon inflated into a matter for "national debate" and front-page news? One might almost suspect it was in order to foment Islamophobia and the racism lurking behind it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Beef Oven! View PostIt makes sense to set national guidance on certain things. .
lets all decide to drive on the left hand side of the road
but what people wear of their own choice ?
Why are people so frightened of "chaos" ?
Sure, if i decide to drive my car on the other side for a change that's not a good idea BUT the assumption that somehow we need more "order" , (which usually means something imposed from outside) regardless of the context is a bit daft IMV
Comment
-
Comment