Cyclone Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Let them but not in public Not in public at all... Are there any other items of clothing you'd like to ban whilst you're being judgmental and authoritarian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Being secular has never in the past included the suppression of religious identity, which seems to be what you are suggesting?I am not suggesting, but advocating, the temporary suppression of religious identity within well-defined geographical and temporal circumstances (state school grounds at school times). Because, to my mind, state schools are the crucible of a multicultural society, wherein children of all races, faiths and cultures of a same age group come under a same roof to be educated according to a same syllabus and influenced by a same national identity. In that context, any external influence/factor apt to inhibit social integration (such as mores of extreme/proselytist religions) should be taken out altogether when feasible. I don't like the veil, or religion in general, but you can't oppress people out of oppression, which seems to be the intent of banning 'symbols' of oppression. It's a hypocritical and/or stupid idea.It is not oppression: pupils are not asked to renounce their (respective) faith, nor persecuted in any way for it. They are simply asked to leave it at the school door, until they come out again, and to concentrate on their studies in the meantime, wherein the school is considered a completely neutral ground in religious terms. As previously linked, the French national state education system has been run under this idea for the last 100+ years, and has shown over time that this "hypocritical and/or stupid" idea works very well indeed - particularly in forging a national identity transcending religious faiths. That system is entirely unbiased as regards which religion(s) (all ostentatious signs of faith are frowned upon, not just Muslims') and, if parents feel that strongly about the issue, they have always been at liberty to enrol their proselytist-by-proxy cherubs into private education instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Not in public at all... Are there any other items of clothing you'd like to ban whilst you're being judgmental and authoritarian? Yes but this is not about any other type of clothing so until I start one let's keep to the. Topic shall we Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenRivers Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Not in public at all... Are there any other items of clothing you'd like to ban whilst you're being judgmental and authoritarian? Onesies, shell suits, ugg boots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxtor Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 An affront which you think can be solved by dictating to them what the are and are not allowed to wear? Roll your eyes all you like, it ads so much to your argument Banning the burka would be the lesser of two evils. Sure banning stuff is never good but the burka is far far worse in every conceivable respect. Ban it, free these girls and let them flourish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Do they want to wear it or are they told to wear it ? Well it's a difficult question, would you replace one form of oppression with another? Banning the burka might salve our sensitivities for the women who are oppressed by their culture, but it doesn't do a jot to change that culture-that's the issue that needs to be addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxtor Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Well it's a difficult question, would you replace one form of oppression with another? Banning burka is not oppression. Its freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Let them but not in public I struggle with this proposal. If I've no need to converse or come into contact with women wearing a burka why should I worry about what she wears in public? I don't know you well ricgem, but I wouldn't ban you from wearing those synthetic fibres in garish hues you're so fond of as much as they arouse my indignation ---------- Post added 16-09-2013 at 13:02 ---------- Banning burka is not oppression. Its freedom. Freedom for who? It's not freedom for me, it's the manifestation of the state becoming involved in our personal freedoms in terms of what clothes we wear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Well it's a difficult question, would you replace one form of oppression with another?I'd replace oppression of the woman/child by the wahbabi husband/parent, by social oppression (through legal rule) upon the wahbabi husband/parent, any day of the week. Which is precisely the way the "anti-burqa" (wrong expression, really, but hey) laws in France are couched: they do not target the burqa-wearer as such, but the husband/parent in the background who forces the wearing in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxtor Posted September 16, 2013 Share Posted September 16, 2013 Freedom for who? It's not freedom for me, You arent the one being forced to cover up with threats of physical or mental abuse if you didnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.