So all of this is just a smokescreen for the issues involved. If domestic violence really is a major issue for these women, then why not instead have the French government pass laws that make reporting of domestic violence easier, pass laws that provides for protections against women who suffer domestic violence, pass laws that allow the French government to relocate and pay for occupational training of domestic violence sufferers, or any number of other laws that would be more effective than banning a type of clothing.
I'm not against the ban because I don't want to stop domestic violence. I just think that banning the burka won't do anything to stop domestic violence.
Banning the burka to stop domestic violence is like banning bikinis to prevent rape.
Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.
I would oppose a law banning burqas in The United States.Would you favor a law banning burqas in the United States?
However, I totally oppose allowing Muslim women wearing a burqa in their driver's license photos. Allowing that is completely idiotic.
No consideration is more important than freedom. In America, if you don't like how your community is treating you, a Uhaul costs $20 bucks to rent. And if your religion forbids it, perhaps you should reconsider your life ruining dogma.
Last edited by Lachean; 04-14-11 at 10:01 AM.
Who left the fridge open?
- Colonel Paul YinglingNobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.
Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.
All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
I favour a law that bans Islam completely and any person practicing the religion should be executed in public. It's time the white-man stood up to these sand-n*****s before they are allowed to completely control our society.
Nationalism in high dosages may be hazardous to your health. Please consult a psychiatrist before beginning a regular regimen, and if feelings of elitism and douchbaggery continue, discontinue immediately before you become unable to do so on your own.
Except in circumstances mentioned previously, such as for ID purposes and the like.
Unless a rapid and highly accurate DNA scanner or some other device that servers the same purpose is developed, to the point where police can take a blood sample and compare it to DNA records n(and I don't want to think about how many changes a setup such as that would require, not to mention people who wouldn't agree to such) instead of needing to see a face for comparison to a picture.
Until then, women who keep their faces covered in most cases should be required to show their face for ID purposes, or simply not participate in any actions that would require such.
As I see it, secular law should always trump religious law, in most cases where the two come into conflict.
If not, we might have people legally performing human sacrifice (an extreme example, to be sure, but you get the point).
Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller
The fact most people voted yes disgusts me.