French President Sarkozy says burqas are 'not welcome' in France (1 Viewer)

[Tully B.]

It seems like a lot of people are legitimising Sarkozy's actions by saying
a.) It's not an issue of religion, but of the oppression of women.
b.) France is a secular society, so such expressions of religion can be rightfully banned.

Anyone who has been saying both of these arguments is a gronk. Actually, anyone who says the second argument AT ALL is a gronk.

 

[banco55]

The banks may decide it is worth the cost to keep muslim customers happy. I have no problem with this. The problem is sickening anti-discrimination legislation which forces them to do things like that.

I think if you did a survey of the muslims that wear the burqa in western countries you'd find the household income comes from welfare and/or the husbands have menial jobs. We are not talking about lawyers and doctors here. So in practice I can't imagine a bank would really want them as customers whatever they wear and certainly not if they had to make special arrangements for them.

 

[banco55]

It seems like a lot of people are legitimising Sarkozy's actions by saying
a.) It's not an issue of religion, but of the oppression of women.
b.) France is a secular society, so such expressions of religion can be rightfully banned.

Anyone who has been saying both of these arguments is a gronk. Actually, anyone who says the second argument AT ALL is a gronk.

I think the official french government line is that the burqa is a remnant of the inbred tribal culture rather then Islam.

 

[B_B_J]

I think if you did a survey of the muslims that wear the burqa in western countries you'd find the household income comes from welfare and/or the husbands have menial jobs. We are not talking about lawyers and doctors here. So in practice I can't imagine a bank would really want them as customers whatever they wear and certainly not if they had to make special arrangements for them.

ROFLMAO.

muslim = brick layer
so having a certain state of mind equates to a certain job. this is stereotyping of the highest order.

ffs what the fuck is this shit?

 

[katie tully]

Can anyone see the hypocrisy in 'forcing them to stop wearing something to stop them being oppressed'...

Isn't that... oppression??

 

[banco55]

ROFLMAO.

muslim = brick layer
so having a certain state of mind equates to a certain job. this is stereotyping of the highest order.

ffs what the fuck is this shit?

Ahhh no I said muslims who wear burqas aren't likely to be at the top of the income table. The wealthy muslims in western countries tend to be on the "moderate" side.

 

[JonathanM]

Anyone who has been saying both of these arguments is a gronk. Actually, anyone who says the second argument AT ALL is a gronk.

Your posts are always of a higher order, so I honestly can't understand why you've reduced your argument to this. I believe I have a valid point in reference to the 'second' argument. I've got historical references and statistics to boot, not to mention the moral superiority of the 'religion R bad' argument I am using.

 

[Holly_H]

There are 2 problems with your argument. The first being your attempt in comparing France to Dubai. Dubai has never stated that it is a emirate which believes in freedom, so such a comparison is mute.

Umm, at what point did i reference Dubai as "an emirate that believes in freedom"?I made no such comparisons of the intricacies of both nations, rather the comparison was made on religious, east vs west elements. Eg; Islam vs Secular nations. I used Dubai as it was a city i had been to.
I think your purely engaging the straw-man here.

The second fallacy is when you say "their" country. For who are you speaking of? The French people? The bureaucrats? the legislators? But even if you are speaking of one of those listed who are "they" to in anyway infringe on the rights of those who freely wish to wear the burqa? This sort of argumentation reflects a general double standard of freedom that is always applied to certain members of a state but not to anyone else.

If your going to get all picky then one could concur that the bureaucrats and the legislators are indeed "French people" and can conclusively be referred to as "their". So where indeed is the fallacy you speak of?.
Since France is a democratic nation, their arms of government are elected to represent and act on behalf of the "French" people. If the French people do not agree with the decisions made on their behalf then the representatives will be made accountable at the next election. (Reference John Howard)
Freedom is entirely relative, and in a democracy ... freedom is defined by what the majority dictate. I'm not saying whether i think this is right or wrong, its just how it is.
I'm also not saying whether i do, or don't agree with this new law. What i am saying is that it is their prerogative to do so. If Australia passed such a law we would then be able to decide, by way of election, weather we supported such a bold act. (pun intended)

I think the official french government line is that the burqa is a remnant of the inbred tribal culture rather then Islam.

This is very true. I highly recommend Benazir Bhutto's Reconciliation, she describes the the origin of the burqua just like that. She (for those who don't know, she was the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, she was assassinated) says her father swore that no daughter of his would wear such an object of ancient oppression.

 

[Freedom_]

If your going to get all picky then one could concur that the bureaucrats and the legislators are indeed "French people" and can conclusively be referred to as "their". So where indeed is the fallacy you speak of?.
Since France is a democratic nation, their arms of government are elected to represent and act on behalf of the "French" people. If the French people do not agree with the decisions made on their behalf then the representatives will be made accountable at the next election. (Reference John Howard)
Freedom is entirely relative, and in a democracy ... freedom is defined by what the majority dictate. I'm not saying whether i think this is right or wrong, its just how it is.
I'm also not saying whether i do, or don't agree with this new law. What i am saying is that it is their prerogative to do so. If Australia passed such a law we would then be able to decide, by way of election, weather we supported such a bold act. (pun intended)

post 29:
The “French” are not the government; the government is not “French.” The government does not in any accurate sense “represent” the majority of the people, but even if it did, even if 95% of the people decided to coerce 5% of the population, this will still be a form of social manipulation and oppression of a minority.

Crime is crime, aggression against rights is aggression, no matter how many citizens agree to the oppression. There is nothing sacrosanct about the majority; the lynch mob, too, is the majority in its own domain.

 

[Tully B.]

Your posts are always of a higher order, so I honestly can't understand why you've reduced your argument to this. I believe I have a valid point in reference to the 'second' argument. I've got historical references and statistics to boot, not to mention the moral superiority of the 'religion R bad' argument I am using.

Maybe my post would have remained of a "higher order" if I hadn't used the phrase gronk, or perhaps, in your opinion, if I hadn't indirectly referred to you as a gronk.

Secularism refers to the separation between laws and religion, not everyday life and religion. What it should mean is that religion does not affect the running of the country, and the general running of the country does not affect the religion. Just because France is secular doesn't mean it should be allowed to ban an item of clothing more than any other country.

EDIT: Thank you for the initial compliment, in any case.

This is very true. I highly recommend Benazir Bhutto's Reconciliation, she describes the the origin of the burqua just like that. She (for those who don't know, she was the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, she was assassinated) says her father swore that no daughter of his would wear such an object of ancient oppression.

For this, I highly respect Bhutto, and personally I agree that the burqa represents the oppression of women. It does not, however, affect my argument as to why banning the burqa would be wrong.

 

[Freedom_]

Democracy is good. But we are playing with a very fine line between democracy and Ochlocracy.

 

[B_B_J]

Bhutto was a bitch. Suck shit she is dead.

 

[Tully B.]

Bhutto was a bitch. Suck shit she is dead.

Articulate as ever, BBJ.
Why do you dislike Bhutto? I do not have extensive knowledge on her, so it would be interesting to hear your unbiased account of her life.

 

[B_B_J]

Articulate as ever, BBJ.
Why do you dislike Bhutto? I do not have extensive knowledge on her, so it would be interesting to hear your unbiased account of her life.

you will never meen a Pakistani that will support any member of the Bhutto family.

GEorge Bush has more support in The united States of America that any Bhutto family member. The whole family looted the countries though the cold war and continued to do so when she was in power. She was found guilty of corruption woth $10 million + and was kicked out of the country for ever.

F*ck her. F*ck her husband Zardari and I hope some Islamic fuck kills him too.

 

[B_B_J]

The only god damn reason people like her in the west because she was pro west. Thats it! but at what cost? she would have looted the country even more.

If I had the opportunity id shit on her grave.

 

[banco55]

you will never meen a Pakistani that will support any member of the Bhutto family.

GEorge Bush has more support in The united States of America that any Bhutto family member. The whole family looted the countries though the cold war and continued to do so when she was in power. She was found guilty of corruption woth $10 million + and was kicked out of the country for ever.

F*ck her. F*ck her husband Zardari and I hope some Islamic fuck kills him too.

Pakistan gets the leaders it deserves. Fucked up, useless, corrupt leaders for a fucked up, useless, corrupt country.

 

[Venetiad]

Clermont-Tonnere

Winner of Awesome Guy of his Century.

 

[JonathanM]

you will never meen a Pakistani that will support any member of the Bhutto family.

Lol?

oic, all of those people at the rallies must have just been impartial spectators.

 

[sam04u]

Pakistan gets the leaders it deserves. Fucked up, useless, corrupt leaders for a fucked up, useless, corrupt country.

Are you too stupid to see the correlation? It's not that the leaders are "fucked up up and useless" because the country is fucked up and useless. The country is fucked up and useless because the leaders are fucked up and useless.

 

[katie tully]

Are you too stupid to see the correlation? It's not that the leaders are "fucked up up and useless" because the country is fucked up and useless. The country is fucked up and useless because the leaders are fucked up and useless.

what do you suggest they do then, despot?