• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

London’s Muslim Mayor Bans Sexy Women In Advertisements

Carjosse said:
Israel and France. The London law literally only applies to the London Underground which the city owns.
Click to expand...

Its not exactly a law then is it? just a refusal to accept certain buissness.
 
Re: London's new Muslim mayor loves him some censorship!

Glen Contrarian said:
So...how about you? What level of censorship do you support? Because just as with the other guy, you DO support censorship at least to some extent.
Click to expand...

I'll tell you this; I wouldn't support white Brits moving into Pakistan and demanding that they change their culture and start putting scantily clad pictures of women everywhere.

See what I'm saying? When in Rome, do as Romans do, don't threaten to behead Romans for not being exactly like you.
 
Manc Skipper said:
I've learned to recognise a photoshop when I see it.
Click to expand...

Are you denying those signs are carried in demonstations? Now please prove it is photoshoppped.
 
In the future, only women wearing Burqas will be allowed on billboards.
 
Nobody will change the world for you, you'll just have to keep up or be left behind.
 
Re: London's new Muslim mayor loves him some censorship!

truthatallcost said:
I'll tell you this; I wouldn't support white Brits moving into Pakistan and demanding that they change their culture and start putting scantily clad pictures of women everywhere.

See what I'm saying? When in Rome, do as Romans do, don't threaten to behead Romans for not being exactly like you.
Click to expand...

The level of what societies will and will not tolerate ebbs and flows over time. There was a time when London would tolerate far, far less than what it does today...and like a pendulum, it swings back and forth. Generally - and thankfully - things end up towards less censorship...but "less censorship" compared to what?

There was a time when what we would today consider child porn was acceptable in America, a famous instance of which was a certain album cover in the late 1960's - and I won't describe it any more than that. It was allowed because it was considered a work of art...but today, just about the entire nation would be screaming for the heads of the photographer, the girl's parents, the band, the publisher, you name it.

Censorship ebbs and flows, as does so much else in society. Look at Muslim countries - in the early 1970's Iran was considered very liberal when it came to how women dress. Then after the advent of Khomenei, women were forced into stricter adherence to the conservative dress code. Now, they're slowly becoming a bit more liberal again.

That's how societies change in the grand sweep of history...and the London mayor's call for a bit less skin in public ads on the tube is no exception.
 
That's it !!! I'm canceling my vacation plans in London ! If i can't be manipulated by naked women in advertisements, there's just no point.
 
BrewerBob said:
People seem to be blowing this out of proportion. It is just a ban from the city's public transportation system.
Click to expand...

No, they're not. It's the camel's nose in the tent. It's an issue of freedom of expression, and if a ban can be justified based (supposedly) on image issues then it can be broadened to other flimsy reasons.
 
Redress said:
It also has absolutely nothing to do with his being a Muslim, but we would not want to let little facts like that get in the way of their hysterical rant...
Click to expand...

How do we know that? Because Mullah Khan found a figleaf to justify it?
 
Ahlevah said:
How do we know that? Because Mullah Khan found a figleaf to justify it?
Click to expand...

Because there is zero evidence to support it. Not really sure why this is so complex to people.
 
Ahlevah said:
No, they're not. It's the camel's nose in the tent. It's an issue of freedom of expression, and if a ban can be justified based (supposedly) on image issues then it can be broadened to other flimsy reasons.
Click to expand...

Puff puff puff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom