Potential French burka ban in the offing

[MadduckUK]

Not true. Make wearing helmets optional and you have more motorcycle fatalities which the police/ambulance/fire crews have to attend. And they would have a lot more grey gunk to scrape off the road. It would certainly does effect more than that single person.

as much as i want to say "let them choose, we need a little more Darwin all round really" i do agree it would be not a nice thing for others to have to endure

[Funkstar]

as much as i want to say "let them choose, we need a little more Darwin all round really" i do agree it would be not a nice thing for others to have to endure

This same argument goes some way to explaining my suicide is illegal.

[JPreston]

Not true. Make wearing helmets optional and you have more motorcycle fatalities which the police/ambulance/fire crews have to attend. And they would have a lot more grey gunk to scrape off the road. It would certainly does effect more than that single person.

I wonder whether that'd actually be the case though, or if motorcyclists would continue to wear helmets. Eg there is no requirement to wear anything other than a helmet but you rarely see anyone on a bike without proper gear head-to-toe. All The Gear, All The Time is my motto anyway . The wearing of motorcycle helmets appears to be a question of public education then, rather than one of continued legal compulsion (which was arguably necessary to attain that level of public education in the first place).

Perhaps in the future burkhas/niqabs will attain the same status - that is, any sufficiently educated individual would be appalled at the prospect of wearing one just as any sufficiently educated motorcyclist would be appalled at the prospect of riding without a helmet. But in the meantime most certainly ban them, as an affront to human dignity and equality that is completely incompatible with modern society.

[Funkstar]

I think you could repeal the bike helmet laws now (along with seatbelts for cars) and very few people would change their habits. There will be a few idiots that do though

Perhaps you are right about burkhas/niqabs, it would take a couple of generations though.

What I do think could be a positive outcome from this debate and the publicity surrounding the French decision, is it will be a lot more acceptable for employers (especially public services and government departments) to bad the wearing of them in customer/client facing roles. Positions where face to face contact is key to the job.

[Splash]

So it's now reasonable to tell people what they can and can't wear in this country?

I'm more than a little tempted to get a "The Government Is Screwing Us" t-shirt printed, see how long it is before they ban that too.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

I guess I see freedom of expression as an essential liberty, and others don't. The right for you to flail your fists ends when they touch my face - are you all seriously saying that the Burqa is such an affront to you that we should ban it?

[floppybootstomp]

I used to be able to ride my motorcycle without a crash helmet (I'm that old, lol) amongst two wheeled vehicles I owned between the ages of 16 & 17 were a Lambretta LI 150 and A Royal Enfield 250 sports.

I am also of an age where I could drive a car without a seat belt at one time.

Back in the day, I wore a crash helmet most of the time anyway, even at 16 I wasn't a complete idiot.

The compulsory wearing of a car seat belt irritated the hell outta me at the time, I hated it.

If both laws were repealed tomorrow I would voluntarily wear both a crash helmet (were I to start riding a bike again) and a seat belt.

Why? Probably cos I've got old and sensible

As for the burka thingie, are women who wear one suppressed? I wonder. They may get off on being a Stepford wife and treated to some degree as a slave, takes all sorts.

I have been thinking and I think that overall I'm in favour of the French action.

There's a part of me that worries about lack of freedom but common sense overrides that.

And for me, religion is not a consideration, I'm really not fond of religion at all, it's just the freedom to wear what you like thing.

[Saracen]

So it's now reasonable to tell people what they can and can't wear in this country? ....

It always has been. The only difference is that what society regards as "reasonable" changes.

For instance, try walking up and down outside a police station, buck naked, and see how long it is before you get arrested. Or alternatively, wear a t-shirt with a slogan proclaiming "kill all <insert unacceptable racial epithet of your choice>" and see how long it is before you get challenged, arrested or, depending on where you are, get the living poop beaten out of you. And so on.

It;s a bit like free speech. There is no such thing as absolute freedom of speech in the UK, nor in the US where it's (within limits) enshrined in the constitution as one of the central planks, and I can't think of a single country on earth where absolute freedom of speech does exist. In the UK, saying some things will get you arrested, while saying others will get you sued.

But I have a question ..... not so long ago, one woman got in trouble with her employers (British Airways) because she wanted to wear a small crucifix as an expression of her faith, and was told she couldn't, and at least the reason reported in the press was, to paraphrase in case in offends religious minorities'. I don't remember any religious minorities actually saying that, but enough people were saying it pretending to be acting in their interests. And it's only a few years ago that Muslims around the world were up in arms about Satanic Verses, to the extend of some issuing death threats. And, of course, Jerry Springer the Opera provoked protests all over the place, including BBC facilities, and they even threatened to protest outside a charity providing palliative care to cancer groups if the group accepted a donation from the show. And Sikhs don't get off scot-free either, as Behzti was cancelled after violent protests from Sikh protesters, including the three police officers that were hurt at one protest.

So, time and again, religious groups have felt quite justified in protesting, sometimes including violently, because something offends their religion, or rather, their religious belief and feelings, yet when something causes concerns and even security issues, it's defended as a religious right. Can any, and I mean ANY of these religions prove, with objective and verifiable evidence, that the God they believe in actually even exists, let alone what he says we must do? And I will say that using the sophistry of arguments like "true belief requires faith, therefore proof can't exist or faith wouldn't be required" isn't proof. It might justify faith if you believe, but is merely a circular argument to justify the unprovable if you don't.

If sufficient reason exists to ban the burqa for "public policy" reasons, then it should be banned. But only is sufficient policy reason exists.

[Funkstar]

For instance, try walking up and down outside a police station, buck naked, and see how long it is before you get arrested.

quite

http://nakedwalk.org/

[TooNice]

Or alternatively, wear a t-shirt with a slogan proclaiming "kill all <insert unacceptable racial epithet of your choice>" and see how long it is before you get challenged, arrested or, depending on where you are, get the living poop beaten out of you.

Not really racist, I actually think it's nerdishly clever, but there is a reason why I only wear this T-Shirt indoor (don't want to get stabbed):

[santa claus]

.....a Lambretta LI 150 and A Royal Enfield 250 sports.

Couldn't afford the SX200 eh but I'm impressed - Crusader or Continental GT? Mod or rocker ?

Sorry 'bout the off topic

[floppybootstomp]

Couldn't afford the SX200 eh but I'm impressed - Crusader or Continental GT? Mod or rocker ?

Sorry 'bout the off topic

The SX200 was never the best Lambretta anyway, TV 175 was always the scooter of choice, Mk III.

My bike was a Mk II lambretta Li150 with a mark III front fairing and bored out to 175. It almost managed 80mph which on a scooter you realised you were doing 80mph.

I only had the Royal Enfield 3 months, scared the crap outta me and I sold it and bought a Ford Anglia 105e when I passed my driving test first try age 17.

So I can't remember any details except it was fast. Too fast for me, I suppose.

To stay on topic: I never wore a burka when I was having running rucks with rivals at Hastings & Brighton

[Splash]

It always has been. The only difference is that what society regards as "reasonable" changes.

For instance, try walking up and down outside a police station, buck naked, and see how long it is before you get arrested.

The Naked Bike Rides tend to pass peacefully. Unless I'm much mistaken there have been a grand total of 0 arrests despite the amount of publicity they receive (local police *must* be aware of them...)

Or alternatively, wear a t-shirt with a slogan proclaiming "kill all <insert unacceptable racial epithet of your choice>" and see how long it is before you get challenged, arrested or, depending on where you are, get the living poop beaten out of you. And so on.

Does the Burqa incite racial hatred though, directly or otherwise?

<snip>

If sufficient reason exists to ban the burqa for "public policy" reasons, then it should be banned. But only is sufficient policy reason exists.

I'd be intrigued as to what the "public policy" reasons are though - the only one that's I've seen mentioned seems to be that someone could use it to disguise themselves - in which case are we to ban fancy dress costumes, makeup artists, plastic surgeons and the like?

[Funkstar]

The Naked Bike Rides tend to pass peacefully. Unless I'm much mistaken there have been a grand total of 0 arrests despite the amount of publicity they receive (local police *must* be aware of them...)

If you do organised events like that youa re very unlikely to get arrested. However, look at the site I linked to a couple of replies up, or just google for The Naked Rambler. He has a long list of arrests, and I think has been locked up for quite a while this time.

[Splash]

If you do organised events like that youa re very unlikely to get arrested. However, look at the site I linked to a couple of replies up, or just google for The Naked Rambler. He has a long list of arrests, and I think has been locked up for quite a while this time.

It's an interesting read, and suggests that the attitude of the police in Scotland is somewhat more restrictive than that of the police in England and Wales. http://stop-racist-human-skin-phobia.org/laws.html has a little info that could be of interest.

Anyhoo - we're getting dangerously off-topic I believe. Dominic Lawson sums up my thoughts pretty much here

[floppybootstomp]

I'd be intrigued as to what the "public policy" reasons are though - the only one that's I've seen mentioned seems to be that someone could use it to disguise themselves - in which case are we to ban fancy dress costumes, makeup artists, plastic surgeons and the like?

I thought you were making sense until you mentioned the surgeon's mask (I assume that's what you mean by mentioning plastic surgeons?).

You cannot compare a surgeon's mask to a burka.

A surgeon's mask is protective clothing within the work place, the surgeon does not wear his mask to his Golf Club or Heathrow Airport. Or even in his consulting office.

Welder's protective mask? Lagger's respirator?

Whereas a burka is worn for religious reasons and could also act as a disguise to aid in any number of nasty scenarios.

I do wonder what Emily Pankhurst would have made of women wearing full face veils?

[Splash]

No, I was suggesting that a plastic surgeon could be used to alter your appearance, not that you use his clothes to disguise yourself (though again, I guess that could work)


As for Emily Pankhurst - does the idea that you can liberate someone by telling them what they can and can't wear not strike you as being a tad odd? I personally feel that forcing someone *not* to wear something is surely as bad as forcing them to wear it.