Angela Merkel calls for burqa ban

[Yriel]

Exactly that changed through the last few months. The CDU is becoming more conservative, the SPD seems to become more liberal.

It is possible the CDU will try to take the green party as partner this time. Also possible is red-red-greeen ( left, SPD, green party).

And possible is also CDU / AFD.. a possibility i hope the CDU never would try. Also i am sure the AFD will not even try to become a partner of any existing party, considering the fact their people are highly incompetent and they have to fear to fail massivly in power.

The main thing the AFD is able to do is to QQ. They have no program. All they have is xenophobia..

I doubt so.
The CDU isn't really changing under Merkel. She made a few symbolic announcements (like this Burka ban) that doesn't really affect or change anything (since even here in Bonn actual Burkas are super-rare, you see a lot of Niqabs but i`ve seen like 2 Burkas this year) but are supposed to get some conservative voters back.
Everything else stays the same as far as i can see.

And no one will coalate with the AFD or the Linke, so they are complete non-factors. Maybe to set a sign for protest voters, but thats it. So i doubt there is a chance for red/red/green, especially since i see SPD at max 20%, linke at max 7% and greens around 10%. And every one of them will rather do a coalition with the CDU, especially if someone will do better than expected.

There is just no way around Merkel, she made sure of that.

[deepr]

No, you weren't being reasonable or moderate. You are trying to tell people what to wear in public.
There's a reason why only countries like Saudi Arabia have fashion police, because it's fucking retarded.
Just to make this clear: Burqa's don't belong in our culture just as forcing people what to wear doesn't belong here.usl
You're pro-ban because it's a Muslim thing. You're not fooling everyone.

I post "aggressive" because your dumb posts warrant it.


Hahaha.
"You're being intolerant to pure bigotry!"
Being intolerant to your shitty arguments is a good thing.
I call you an alt-righter because you act like one: You try to ban harmless shit because you don't like the people.

Go ahead, show your true nature, make a complete fool of yourself even more. Making yet more assumptions about me, about not liking muslims. Trying to belittle me, labelling me as some kind of right-wing extremist, bigot, racist, fascist, whatever, all because I'm pro banning a very specific piece of clothing in public. That you don't see how extreme you are makes it all the more sad.
I don't hate people based on their race, nationality, religion etc. But you would sooo like that to be true, would you? Because then I would fit in your simplistic little world view where everything is black & white, left & right and with you or against you and your self-righteous attitude.

[Deleted]

That's fine, but don't claim to promote freedom or civil rights if you want to restrict people to your own customs. "You're free to play w/e music you want, unless I don't like it."

If it doesn't harm others, stop giving a shit on what they do.
.

But it does harm others. Just not in a physical way. They see their culture invaded by values different to their own. That will create displeasure and conflict that can result in physical consequences.
I give a shit because i care. I deal with immigrants every week and i experience this first hand and i know it would be better for them if this law existed. It would help them adapt. They have to realise they aren't in a middle eastern country. They have to want to become europeans if they want to make it here.
And to be honest, i see alot of them doing that. But theres still the few that seem to engrained in the old ways. For those in particular this law would be the push they need to adapt.

Also, i can't take this talk of freedom and civil rights seriously. None of those is in question. It's an issue of integration. Theres more freedom and civil right in europe than there ever was in the middle-east. These tirades of self-righteous just serve to cloud the real issue. This is not a "lets deport everyone", but a "how can we help these people integrate in their new would-be homes". Bit of a difference there. Let's cut back on the self-righteous drama and realise that things are more complex than that.

[lonely zergling]

Imho she should focus on the over 400k people who have to leave this country first. Make deportations great again.

[Deleted]

No, you weren't being reasonable or moderate. You are trying to tell people what to wear in public.

Say again, can i wear a swastika in Germany?

[Slant]

Well those open gatherings are usually demonstrations... but you´re right.

Technically, all groups with 3 or more people are gatherings and fall under the law regarding gatherings. Sure, the big focus is protests and demonstrations, but it does apply to more than just that. Spontaneous gatherings, public events, football fans on their way from the stadium to the trainstations, charity events... all of those are applicable situations.

Ironically, one could probably make the case that a Mosque is a public space, too, the same way our churches are. Now things get interesting...

- - - Updated - - -

Say again, can i wear a swastika in Germany?

Different context. A swastika is - justifiedly - considered a threat to the constitutional values of Germany. A burqa is not.

[Spectral]

Different context. A swastika is - justifiedly - considered a threat to the constitutional values of Germany. A burqa is not.

Indeed, as we all know in the current year, hardline Islam is entirely consistent with German values.

[Spectral]

And it's totally fine to ban Burqa's with ISIS propaganda written on them.

Standard non-ISIS-issue burqas though? I'd say they're as German as schnitzel! Anyone that thinks otherwise is obviously a xenophobe.

[Slant]

Indeed, as we all know in the current year, hardline Islam is entirely consistent with German values.

Burqas are not in line with German values, hence Merkel's adjustment of her course. But please, try to stifle your anti-Muslim agenda for a second to appreciate the difference between a swastika and a piece of cloth worn around the head without symbols on it. You can differentiate between it having no place in Germany and equaling it with terrorism as you seem to do. Bit pathetic that post of yours... either you're condemning Muslims all around the world for being Muslims, which makes you a bigot, or you're trying to portray the swastika more harmlessly than it is, which makes you... well, a bigot, really. So which one is it?

- - - Updated - - -

Standard non-ISIS-issue burqas though? I'd say they're as German as schnitzel! Anyone that thinks otherwise is obviously a xenophobe.

Polemics won't get you far, dude.

[Deleted]

Different context. A swastika is - justifiedly - considered a threat to the constitutional values of Germany. A burqa is not.

Why is it exactly? The Swastika is a symbil of good fortune in Hinduism and quite common in Indian temples. If I was a Hindu in Germany, why am I forbidden to wear a cultural icon of MY chosing but a Muslim is able to wear a cowl of their chosing?

Not only that, the Swastika is one of the oldest Indo-European symbols and was also sacred in Wodanism and Norse Mythology for the same reason, hence why it was picked up by the Nazis.

Now, we're comparing a sacred symbol from dozens of cultures to a fucking shawl forced onto Muslims in the 1950ies by radical Saudi Arabians. The Burqa or even the Hajib have ZERO Muslim religous connotations, The Quran states to simply dress modestly and this is entirely up for interpretation as Ironically, a Burqa can be quite ostentatious or made out of extremely rich materials, something that ISN'T modest but Modern hardline Muslims don't care about because they focus on skin coverage.

[Spectral]

Burqas are not in line with German values, hence Merkel's adjustment of her course. But please, try to stifle your anti-Muslim agenda for a second to appreciate the difference between a swastika and a piece of cloth worn around the head without symbols on it. You can differentiate between it having no place in Germany and equaling it with terrorism as you seem to do. Bit pathetic that post of yours... either you're condemning Muslims all around the world for being Muslims, which makes you a bigot, or you're trying to portray the swastika more harmlessly than it is, which makes you... well, a bigot, really. So which one is it?

I don't really think ranting about a bunch of things I didn't say at all really warrants any sort of serious reply.

Polemics won't get you far, dude.

I do enjoy the hypocrisy of your rhetoric followed by this snippet after it though.

[Slant]

I don't really think ranting about a bunch of things I didn't say at all really warrants any sort of serious reply.

I do enjoy the hypocrisy of your rhetoric followed by this snippet after it though.

It wasn't me making these insulting accusations of "hardline islam being in line with German values", so how about you stop talking if you don't know what you're talking about? German values are more than just "Schnitzel", which pretty much sums up the ignorance in which you're bathing yourself in.

[Spectral]

It wasn't me making these insulting accusations of "hardline islam being in line with German values", so how about you stop talking if you don't know what you're talking about? German values are more than just "Schnitzel", which pretty much sums up the ignorance in which you're bathing yourself in.

What, exactly, is insulting about equating burqas with hardline Islam? Besides, if you're not an Islamophobe, what's wrong with hardline Islam? As I've been reminded repeatedly by a number of rather nice people, there's nothing wrong with Islam.

The phrase "German as schnitzel" is (obviously) intended to be amusing mirror to the phrase "as American as apple pie". No one thinks values consist solely of a food group.

[tj119]

This cunt cannot be serious, she let them in. Was the even more ignorant than we assumed and thought they would just leave their barbaric customs at home? Lol vote this stupid bitch out and move on to the next political pawn.

[Deleted]

There is just no way around Merkel, she made sure of that.

Pretty much. It's not like there are a lot of (realistic) alternatives that would stand any chance against her in the election.

[Slant]

What, exactly, is insulting about equating burqas with hardline Islam? Besides, if you're not an Islamophobe, what's wrong with hardline Islam? As I've been reminded repeatedly by a number of rather nice people, there's nothing wrong with Islam.

The phrase "German as schnitzel" is (obviously) intended to be amusing mirror to the phrase "as American as apple pie". No one thinks values consist solely of a food group.

Nothing's wrong with hardline Islam in a hardliner Islam nation like Iran. If that's how they want to do things, it's their perogative. But Germany is hardly Iran. They can be as Muslim as they want here, but they'll follow German laws. That's the point Merkel is trying to make. So banning burqas when appropriate? Good idea. Equalling burqas with swastikas? Bad idea. For obvious reasons, but the less obvious ones are: one stems from a law governing gatherings and the other stems from laws protecting constitutional values of Germany. This doesn't mean that banning burqas at gatherings is a sign of condoning them as constitutional values otherwise. It's a sign of Germany actually practicing freedom of religion while at the same time applying German regulations when appropriate.

Do you see how it's a bit more differentiated than this forum usually portrays these discussions? I'm not against what you say per se, I'm just saying you can't pull the swastika in this instance as an example, because reasons...

- - - Updated - - -

Ooh, you're going to love this post:


Buddhists and Hindus are exempt from that law since it's a different (religious) symbol.


Like other things that Germany is known for internationally, schnitzels are actually from Austria.

I wonder why not more Americans head explode when they come to Europe and realise it's a hell of a lot more complicated here than they thought it would be. A day doesn't go by where I don't see a post on this forum making assumptions about Europe that are quite ridiculous to us living here. But we endure, as always.

[Spectral]

Nothing's wrong with hardline Islam in a hardliner Islam nation like Iran. If that's how they want to do things, it's their perogative. But Germany is hardly Iran. They can be as Muslim as they want here, but they'll follow German laws. That's the point Merkel is trying to make. So banning burqas when appropriate? Good idea. Equalling burqas with swastikas? Bad idea. For obvious reasons, but the less obvious ones are: one stems from a law governing gatherings and the other stems from laws protecting constitutional values of Germany. This doesn't mean that banning burqas at gatherings is a sign of condoning them as constitutional values otherwise. It's a sign of Germany actually practicing freedom of religion while at the same time applying German regulations when appropriate.

Do you see how it's a bit more differentiated than this forum usually portrays these discussions? I'm not against what you say per se, I'm just saying you can't pull the swastika in this instance as an example, because reasons...

I'm fairly sure the poster that referenced swastikas wasn't making any point other than that Germany certainly does have precedent for banning political symbols. Whether one sees a burqa as sufficiently vile to ban isn't some new precedent, just an object level argument about a specific symbol.

FWIW, I'm not in favor of any such ban. Despite my contempt for the burqa as a symbol, I value free practice of religion and speech more than I value my personal preferences when it comes to symbols.

- - - Updated - - -

I wonder why not more Americans head explode when they come to Europe and realise it's a hell of a lot more complicated here than they thought it would be. A day doesn't go by where I don't see a post on this forum making assumptions about Europe that are quite ridiculous to us living here. But we endure, as always.

[Slant]

I'm fairly sure the poster that referenced swastikas wasn't making any point other than that Germany certainly does have precedent for banning political symbols. Whether one sees a burqa as sufficiently vile to ban isn't some new precedent, just an object level argument about a specific symbol.

FWIW, I'm not in favor of any such ban. Despite my contempt for the burqa as a symbol, I value free practice of religion and speech more than I value my personal preferences when it comes to symbols.

- - - Updated - - -

The burqa is decidely not a political symbol. It's a religious garment. Unless you are telling me a skirt is a political symbol, too? I have a lot of contempt for burqas myself, so we're in agreement on that. But as far as symbology goes, I'll stick to my guns and say it's just a piece of cloth with little meaning other than that there's a chick showing her religion... or in my head, when I say they're trying to hide from the world, because they think they're a little princess and don't want to come into contact with anything outside their apartment. You should see some women on public trains, they literally sit on one ass cheek and I wonder if they think they get ass cancer if they sit down properly. :P

And we should be thankful that some fat chicks are removed from our sight that way, as well. The recent fashion trend on leggings is pleasing to the eye with proper legs, but some of the women should really, really go back to baggy trousers... :P

[Kryos]

what are their first amendment rights in Germany?

It's called Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany.
Inspired by the determination to promote world peace as an equal partner in a united Europe, the German people, in the exercise of their constituent power, have adopted this Basic Law.

Here are the first 19 chapters:

I. Basic Rights
Article 1[Human dignity – Human rights – Legally binding force of basic rights]
Article 2 [Personal freedoms]
Article 3[Equality before the law]
Article 4[Freedom of faith and conscience]
Article 5[Freedom of expression, arts and sciences]
Article 6[Marriage – Family – Children]
Article 7[School system]
Article 8[Freedom of assembly]
Article 9[Freedom of association]
Article 10[Privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications]
Article 11[Freedom of movement]
Article 12[Occupational freedom]
Article 12a[Compulsory military and alternative civilian service]
Article 13[Inviolability of the home]
Article 14[Property – Inheritance – Expropriation]
Article 15[Socialisation]
Article 16[Citizenship – Extradition]
Article 16a[Right of asylum]
Article 17[Right of petition]
Article 17a[Restriction of basic rights in specific instances]
Article 18[Forfeiture of basic rights]
Article 19[Restriction of basic rights – Legal remedies]

Article 1 has nothing to do with this. But Article 4 does:

Article 4
[Freedom of faith and conscience]
(1) Freedom of faith and of conscience, and freedom to profess a religious or philosophical creed, shall be inviolable.
(2) The undisturbed practice of religion shall be guaranteed.
(3) No person shall be compelled against his conscience to render military service involving the use of arms. Details shall be regulated by a federal law.

That's paragraph is very broad and if you can convince the court that your religions forbids you to go swimming we need to accept that. For islam they were not able to do that.

PS: Article 16a is the reason we have to grant asylum to all those fleeing from Assad in Syria:

Article 16a
[Right of asylum]
(1) Persons persecuted on political grounds shall have the right of asylum.
(2) Paragraph (1) of this Article may not be invoked by a person who enters the federal territory from a member state of the European Communities or from another third state in which application of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is assured.

[Deleted]

I just always feel bad for the women who have to wear the Burqa, I mean either their religion discriminates them to wear it (brainwashed) or their husbands force them because they are douchebags with horrible traditions from 2000 years ago.