• 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!

Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned by the Gov.?

  • Yes-banned on your own property,but not a crime.

    Votes: 1 3.6%

  • Yes-banned on your own property and a crime.

    Votes: 1 3.6%

  • Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed but not a crime.

    Votes: 1 3.6%

  • Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed and a crime.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace,but not a crime.

    Votes: 2 7.1%

  • Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace and a crime.

    Votes: 2 7.1%

  • No-The government has no business deeming any symbol illegal anywhere.

    Votes: 20 71.4%

  • Other.

    Votes: 4 14.3%
  • Total voters
    28
Kal'Stang said:
The main reason that symbols are banned in the military is not so much about "image" as it is about not wanting to offend which ever territory/country a particular soldier is in at the time. It wouldn't exactly do to send a soldier to Israel if he/she has a tattoo of a swastika on their head now would it?

And yes I know this also has to do with image...but a different kind than you were referring to.
Click to expand...

No...this is not the main reason. If it were, then crosses would be banned as well. I can get a cross on my forearm. Would that not offend Sauds during training? I kbnow it would because I know the culture and I know that it is prohibited for even us to wear crosses around our necks (showing). Nothing states that we can't get a religious tatoo.

It very much is about the "ambassador" image and good order. Hate and gang associated symbols are prohibited because it can cause disorder amongst the ranks and it doesn't look good to the civilian public for their military to look like a gang of thugs. An embassy guard with "sleeves" down his arms while in the "Charlie" or "Delta" uniform looks nasty and thusly reflects poorly on what America's image is pretended to be.
 
Last edited:
Apocalypse said:
The Nazi swastika and the original swastika(Buddhism's or what-ever's symbol), are different in their shape and appearance.
Click to expand...

This is interesting: [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika]Swastika - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Some of the examples given look very similar in shape, if not in appearance, to the symbol used by the Nazi party.

So I would agree with your statement.
 
Apocalypse said:
The Nazi swastika and the original swastika(Buddhism's or what-ever's symbol), are different in their shape and appearance.
Click to expand...

They're actually quite similar. The main difference is the red/white/black color scheme.

Of course, the swastika is also a holy symbol in my faith, and the colors red, white, and black are considered sacred, especially in combination. This is the exact reason that the Nazi party designed their flag the way they did.
 
GySgt said:
No...this is not the main reason. If it were, then crosses would be banned as well. I can get a cross on my forearm. Would that not offend Sauds during training? I kbnow it would because I know the culture and I know that it is prohibited for even us to wear crosses around our necks (showing). Nothing states that we can't get a religious tatoo.

It very much is about the "ambassador" image and good order. Hate and gang associated symbols are prohibited because it can cause disorder amongst the ranks and it doesn't look good to the civilian public for their military to look like a gang of thugs. An embassy guard with "sleeves" down his arms while in the "Charlie" or "Delta" uniform looks nasty and thusly reflects poorly on what America's image is pretended to be.
Click to expand...

The part in bold: Do the Saudis see the tatoo?

The reason that I ask this is because I have never seen someone in any branch of the military except the Airforce and Navy wear anything but long sleeves while out of their base.... Inside a base might be different but outside? And I've never seen anyone in the Navy or Airforce have any religious type tattoos. Not saying that there isn't any...just saying what I've seen. I've always been under the impression that the only tattoos really allowed were those of a persons division and or military branch.
 
Kal'Stang said:
The part in bold: Do the Saudis see the tatoo?
Click to expand...

If it is on the forearm...then......yes. Uniforms are prohibited outside of the training bases in this region. Civilian attire is worn and this involves short sleeves. This may insult the tender emotions of some Muslims, but there is no requirment to cover this tatoo up. However, a cross around the neck cannot be visible.

Only hate symbols and gang symbols are prohibited. Marines may get anything else they want as a tatoo just as long as they do not appear above the shoulders. Recently, the Marine Corps banned the "sleeves" because of appearance.
 
Last edited:
GySgt said:
If it is on the forearm...then......yes. Uniforms are prohibited outside of the training bases in this region. Civilian attire is worn and this involves short sleeves. This may insult the tender emotions of some Muslims, but there is no requirment to cover this tatoo up. However, a cross around the neck cannot be visible.

Only hate symbols and gang symbols are prohibited. Marines may get anything else they want as a tatoo just as long as they do not appear above the shoulders. Recently, the Marine Corps banned the "sleeves" because of appearance.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks for the info. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom