Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 02:55am PT
|
BR: Hey, he (McVeigh) didn't kill in the name of Christianity. You atheist f*#ks keep trying trying to bring him and the one or two abortion bombers into this crap. I never said McVeigh killed in the name of Christianity. I was merely pointing out that terrorism takes a wide variety of forms, and few of them hide under women's clothing. I agree with your suggestion that anti-abortion murderers be left out of this discussion, although I never mentioned them either. Whether what they do is terrorism is certainly something that we could discuss, though.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 02:58am PT
|
"And as for health hazards (I was challenged on that) - they suffer from a lack of Vitamin D (you need sunlight on the skin for vitamin D) and they rebreath the same air under the garment which is ALSO unhealthy."
LEB, I hope to God you don't practice medicine this way. When you were challenged, you were asked to provide support for your assertions. You are stating these things as fact. If they are facts, you should be able to provide references.
I think you are wrong about both.
|
|
Mason
Trad climber
Yay Area
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 05:24pm PT
|
All I can say is I guess it's a good thing that America is not as lame as France and allows people religious freedom to wear and practice what they want.
It's hard to argue with people who are hard headed and against other viewpoints and cultures. And also hard to argue with those that think they know everything about something just because they watch CNN or FOX news.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 06:45pm PT
|
DMT, as you'll note, one of the imperatives brought up was defense against women bombers concealing bombs in their voluminous clothes.
As to others, I found this quote relating to the issue disturbing, in it's meaning:
"For those women who have chosen the veil precisely because they wish to make a political statement, like Muslim women in the United States who took up the veil in reaction post-9/11 prejudice....."
So, this law would likely imprison women who made this political choice.
Victims of rape often have great difficulty going into public, and often wear scarves, even covering their faces. They can look forward to having these ripped off their heads by authorities, reliving their violations.
Nope, can't get behind this.
|
|
nutjob
Trad climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 07:26pm PT
|
It's hard not to project our personal values and beliefs onto other folks.
Some folks might consider women wearing high-heeled shoes and make-up and perfume to be sexy, others consider it a form of sexual exploitation and female oppression that should be outlawed. It's a health risk for women to break their ankles, mangle their toes, get metal poisoning from absorption through the skin, etc.
But hey, women do this stuff voluntarily because their self-esteem is in some way tied to what other people (and the other sex) think of them. What is so different about this versus wearing a burka? Many women are not compelled to but still choose to wear them because they enjoy the reactions from people about whom they care. I'd say a burka has less personal health impacts that high-heeled shoes and make-up.
IMHO government has no moral right to dictate these personal decisions.
But considering --- S E C U R I T Y --- reasons, we can't use facial recognition software in airports if folks go around with covered faces! Any male or female can use this disguise to bypass early detection. If someone went through the airport with a cowboy bandana over their nose, they'd get stopped. Now a religious practice is in conflict with public safety and security procedures. Separation of church and state is fine, but when state requirements exist, they should trump church/mosque/temple/gurudwara/etc.
Hindu versus Sikh: yes big difference for uneducated people who look for excuses to act badly and riot, but historically Sikhs were the defenders of Hinduism agains the encroaching Islamic folks in northern India.
I was married to the daughter of a male Kashmiri Hindu and a female Punjabi Sikh. My wedding in India was a mixture of Hindu and Sikh ceremonies with family members from both religions (but nobody from my family due to logistics, and poor planning/immaturity on my part). I was raised by a Catholic rebel and I seldom went to church. I've gone to a Gurudwara much more often than a Christian church, and various Hindu temples more often as well. My kids go to a Gurudwara fairly often, and also Hindu temples for prasad, and wear Aum or Ganesha necklaces.
All that said, I prefer a world where states are ruled via tolerance to all, coupled with an expectation and enforcement of personal responsibility. "Offending others" should not be cited as a reason to limit anyone's behavior (because there is always someone with more closed views who will be offended), but doing something that physically hurts or risks damage or externally measurable inconvenience should be subject to limits.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 07:40pm PT
|
If you read the places that France wanted to institute the ban, you may come to other conclusions. It was in gov't buildings, mass transit areas, hospitals, etc..
Couple that with the recent revelation that Al Qaeda of the Mahgrebia (North Africa) issued threats to southern Europe, saying it should be re-conquered by muslims. (There is a large N. African muslim population in France).
And couple that with recent statements from Al Qaeda in Yemen that they have prepped other suicide bombers that may not be male and may have Western appearances.
Put it all together and that may be what France was reacting to. Of course, Dingus is absolutely correct too. It's just downright oppressive. If you want to saddle your woman with chains of oppression, then move to a country with Sharia law.
Afghani women have started to throw their burqas away.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 07:45pm PT
|
All should read the teriffic SF novel by Tom Kratman" "Caliphate" before commenting further.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 07:54pm PT
|
Well, since we're not, care to mention what it says?
|
|
mojede
Trad climber
Butte, America
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:05pm PT
|
I'm going to throw this line out and see what comes of the "bites":
Imagine all women were clothed in this attire, and that a man had to get to know a woman's personality (and grow to LOVE that women for her inner self) before he could see any of her flesh. Would that not create a bond that is more than purely physical and deeper than looks?
If carried out to the nth degree of extreme, wouldn't a society be more secure and divorces non-existent this way?
Strong bond of love, strong family, strong society...
What say ye?
|
|
Gene
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:05pm PT
|
I can't accept that every Muslim woman who wears traditional garb is abused and/or forced to wear that clothing against her will.
Traditional Muslim female clothes screem abuse and anti-deluvian mores to many outside of that culture. But my guess is that many wear the veil willingly in respect of their faith.
Prove me wrong.
gm
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:06pm PT
|
DMT, the real irritating thing about your arguments, is that you advocate that this religious dress is an oppression of women, and thus, you support the French in WHATEVER they will do TO THESE WOMEN.
What a misogynistic, paternalistic point of view.
You don't punish THE OPPRESSED! You are advocating victimizing the VICTIMS!
Is your technique, the next time there is a genocide, to go in and help kill the victims quicker, and get the genocide to stop faster (Mission Accomplished!)????
Do we start beating victims of child abuse?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:12pm PT
|
Mojede, that's an interesting take. Why would men not dress the same way for the same reasons?
Traditional Muslim female clothes scream abuse and anti-deluvian mores to many outside of that culture. But my guess is that many wear the veil willingly in respect of their faith.
Gene, that may be, but shouldn't they have some respect for the culture where they have CHOSEN to go to?
And why is it that almost all children born from this immigrants don't abide by that 'respect of their faith'?
EDIT: Ken, you don't know Dingus very well, do you???
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:17pm PT
|
Nobody's saying they can't cover their bodies either. Just wear a hijab, they're only asking for the face to be exposed!!!!
|
|
Gene
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:20pm PT
|
Bluey,
Here in the USA a green card offer the holder permanent residency, not the obligatory duty to mimic the dominant culture.
gm
|
|
mojede
Trad climber
Butte, America
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:21pm PT
|
Blue, the above situation could indeed include men--but the difference between the two sexes on a general scale is that the female draws the male by mystery, and the male impresses the female by might.
Good angle to look at though, thanks for the response:-)
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:23pm PT
|
Here in the USA a green card offer the holder permanent residency, not the obligatory duty to mimic the dominant culture.
You don't have to mimic it!!!! You just need to respect it. We accept turbans, weird Indian garb, but covering your face in not acceptable unless you're in your own home.
Can't you guys get this?
Check this out, Mojede;
U.S. military unit discovers unusually high numbers of homosexual Pashtuns.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/28/afghan-men-struggle-sexual-identity-study-finds/
|
|
mojede
Trad climber
Butte, America
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:24pm PT
|
I'm a black ski-mask guy in public myself, but only practice this on Halloween!
|
|
Gene
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:26pm PT
|
I hate being afraid of veiled threats.
|
|
Gene
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:39pm PT
|
Bluey,
These burka babes got into France one of three ways. Legally, illegally, or born there (I assume birth in France conveys citizenship just like in civilized countries). If they are illegal, toss the laundry pile out. Otherwise, France has created its own issue. If they don’t like Muslim dress codes, close the immigration door and let the ones already in die out. But if France offered a howdie-doodie welcome to these gals, or if they are native born citizens, all I can say is they (France) had better deal with them as they are.
gm
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2010 - 08:45pm PT
|
Otherwise, France has created its own issue. If they don’t like Muslim dress codes, close the immigration door and let the ones already in die out. But if France offered a howdie-doodie welcome to these gals, or if they are native born citizens, all I can say is they (France) had better deal with them as they are.
That all is probably pretty accurate. But like our country, one president or Congress, has to deal with the missteps of the former, or the one before that.
They are just dealing with a perceived situation, for whatever reason. It may or may not be a good call.
BUT!!!! There is some reason why the gov't of France chose to propose this. That is undeniable. We are left to speculate...
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!