Angela Merkel calls for burqa ban

[Spectral]

The burqa is decidely not a political symbol. It's a religious garment...

These are not mutually exclusive. Religion and politics intersect frequently.

Unless you are telling me a skirt is a political symbol, too?

I don't understand the question. To the best of my knowledge, wearing a skirt in a Western nation is not a political act in any way. If someone chose (or tried to chose) to wear a skirt in Saudi Arabia, I would regard that as a political symbol, yes.

[Deleted]

Cool story, bro.
Fact is you still try to tell other people what to wear because you don't like it.

But you get to tell other people what to accept right?

That type of cloth in alot of situations can hide weapons and above all face .

Funny thing is that lefties wants always the others to adapt but never says that to the minorities

[Hellrime]

The Burqa is a symbol of oppression, why would anyone be against the ban? Do people even logic? Women are essentially forced to wear the covering in their home countries. Why would you flee your country to get away from oppression, just to maintain the very same oppression and promote it as being your culture? Sure you can eat up the small group of the women who say wearing it is a choice but come on, it is indeed a form of oppression when not wearing one in their home country gets you stoned to fucking death.

[Slant]

These are not mutually exclusive. Religion and politics intersect frequently.

I don't understand the question. To the best of my knowledge, wearing a skirt in a Western nation is not a political act in any way. If someone chose (or tried to chose) to wear a skirt in Saudi Arabia, I would regard that as a political symbol, yes.

You're the first that tries to tell me a burqa is a political symbol. I can't wrap my head around that, so we'll disagree here. As soon as I get a whiff of it being a politically motivated stunt, I'll be all in favour of banning that shit. I've had enough annoyance at fucking Erdogan having fanatical masses wave around Turkish flags in a political rally in fucking Cologne. But, and this has irked me for a while in this thread... we should be precise about what we're talking about:

Different variations of clothing in Islam:



The burqa is super rare. It's so rare, I can't even remember having seen one irl ever. What I've seen is a niqab a couple times. What you most commonly seen in Germany, and this is the vast, vast majority are hijabs.

Now, the burqa and niqab totally fall under "concealment" in the sense of the gathering law, and those are the ones we're discussing. The hijab, this is 90% of Muslima headwear in Germany, is not even up for debate at this point, as it's not concealing the face.

[lonely zergling]

The Burqa has nothing to do with religion. Its a cultural/politcal oppression tool used by the patriachy in some countries.

No one has any problem with hiijabs, they are fine.. you can identify the person wearing it and all are happy.

[Spectral]

You're the first that tries to tell me a burqa is a political symbol. I can't wrap my head around that, so we'll disagree here. As soon as I get a whiff of it being a politically motivated stunt, I'll be all in favour of banning that shit. I've had enough annoyance at fucking Erdogan having fanatical masses wave around Turkish flags in a political rally in fucking Cologne. But, and this has irked me for a while in this thread... we should be precise about what we're talking about:

I find it odd that you think this isn't political. Religions are inherently political. I guess I'm not sure how to reply to the idea that they're not. As said, I don't think we should ban some political statement that I don't like, but I am a bit of an extremist when it comes to free speech. A symbol as explicitly Islamic and anti-modernity as a burka is a very political statement though.
<snip>

The burqa is super rare. It's so rare, I can't even remember having seen one irl ever. What I've seen is a niqab a couple times. What you most commonly seen in Germany, and this is the vast, vast majority are hijabs.

Yes, I agree. I think this is the distinction Merkel is deceptively relying on - condemning the bee-keeper outfit that's quite rare while many people have the impression that she's saying something much stronger. It's a great example of how to appeal to multiple different views through a statement that's not technically dishonest.

[Slant]

The Burqa has nothing to do with religion. Its a cultural/politcal oppression tool used by the patriachy in some countries.

No one has any problem with hiijabs, they are fine.. you can identify the person wearing it and all are happy.

You did watch that TV show where a swiss chick argued her case in a niqab and why she wanted to wear it? She didn't sound very oppressed. She sounded fucking fanatical about it, crazy witch that she obviously is. The problem is that she's putting a dagger in your "oppression" theory quite vehemently. It's something else.

- - - Updated - - -

I find it odd that you think this isn't political. Religions are inherently political. I guess I'm not sure how to reply to the idea that they're not. As said, I don't think we should ban some political statement that I don't like, but I am a bit of an extremist when it comes to free speech. A symbol as explicitly Islamic and anti-modernity as a burka is a very political statement though.
<snip>

Yes, I agree. I think this is the distinction Merkel is deceptively relying on - condemning the bee-keeper outfit that's quite rare while many people have the impression that she's saying something much stronger. It's a great example of how to appeal to multiple different views through a statement that's not technically dishonest.

What is the political message of the burqa, then? What does it stand for?

And to the second paragraph: I keep telling people that Merkel is smarter than they think she is. But they never listen...

[Spectral]

What is the political message of the burqa, then? What does it stand for?

Control and subjugation of women and the spread of Islam.

[lonely zergling]

You did watch that TV show where a swiss chick argued her case in a niqab and why she wanted to wear it? She didn't sound very oppressed. She sounded fucking fanatical about it, crazy witch that she obviously is. The problem is that she's putting a dagger in your "oppression" theory quite vehemently. It's something else.

Some people are simply brainwashed by the culture of said countries or they simply dont know any better. It has nothing to do with Islam though. Burqa is not islamic its a regional cultural thing. And niqab =/= burqa btw.

For every woman wearing it on her own will there are 100 who are forced to wear it.

[Slant]

Control and subjugation of women and the spread of Islam.

That's hardly political, one is cultural if anything and the other is, again, religious. What's the political message? Unless me eating a banana in the morning is also a political message, I'd need something more concrete than "control of women" when half of them want this.

About the other half? The ones that get "forced"? Ban the burqas, what do you think is the next logical development? What will happen once you ban burqas?

[Hellrime]

Wrong.
The Burqa, and other stuff like it, are clothing.
Oppression is already banned, no need to oppress people and ban other things.

Please provide evidence on how I am wrong? An opinion doesn't matter. Here is evidence that I am right:

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate...tes-oppression

There are many, many more accounts as well. I mean when women are being murdered in cold blood because of a scarf slip, how is that not oppression? While I agree that a ban isn't the best course of action, in my opinion you essentially have a group of women with Stockholm Syndrome. I dispute that the item of clothing is worn out of anything more than a Pavlov's dog-esque learned behavior of fear of consequences for not wearing one in their home country.

To reach the core of your bias, answer this, if tomorrow Christian's demanded that all women wear full length skirts and long sleeve covered blouses or they would be stoned to death, how would you and the rest of the world perceive this?

[Slant]

Some people are simply brainwashed by the culture of said countries or they simply dont know any better. It has nothing to do with Islam though. Burqa is not islamic its a regional cultural thing. And niqab =/= burqa btw.

Yes, dude, thanks, I just posted that a few posts prior to you jumping in this thread. I'm well aware of the difference, and she was wearing a niqab. As for the sake of this discussion, a niqab is probably just as condemnable as a burqa with regards of the concealment regulations.

[Spectral]

That's hardly political, one is cultural if anything and the other is, again, religious. What's the political message? Unless me eating a banana in the morning is also a political message, I'd need something more concrete than "control of women" when half of them want this.

About the other half? The ones that get "forced"? Ban the burqas, what do you think is the next logical development? What will happen once you ban burqas?

I've already said that I'm not favor of a ban. I'm not sure how that's not getting through.

I have no idea why you think culture, religion, and politics are separate, discrete things. These blend together. Religion and culture are upstream of politics.

[Slant]

Please provide evidence on how I am wrong? An opinion doesn't matter. Here is evidence that I am right:

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate...tes-oppression

There are many, many more accounts as well. I mean when women are being murdered in cold blood because of a scarf slip, how is that not oppression? While I agree that a ban isn't the best course of action, in my opinion you essentially have a group of women with Stockholm Syndrome. I dispute that the item of clothing is worn out of anything more than a Pavlov's dog-esque learned behavior of fear of consequences for not wearing one in their home country.

To reach the core of your bias, answer this, if tomorrow Christian's demanded that all women wear full length skirts and long sleeve covered blouses or they would be stoned to death, how would you and the rest of the world perceive this?

The problem is that we can't do anything. Here's how the scenario plays out. The underlying conditions are that you must not discriminate religion, because you want to have the "free religion" medal in your report book at the end of the school year. You ban religious clothing solely based in Islam belief. Bzzzzt, you just failed. You move the goalposts and say it's not religious, it's political or cultural or whatever, so ding, ding, you're scot free. Except now you've forced them to live inside their four walls and never go out, because if their men are opressing them, as you say, they sure as hell won't let them go out without these garments, so bzzzt, you've just failed again, because they're even more oppressed now than they were before.

So what is your next step?

See, the solution is once more infinitely more complex and tiresome than this forum can stomach. You have to educate people, make those women realise they can wear whatever they want, not what their husband wants. And that it's okay to get a divorce and ignore religion if it doesn't suit them. This takes education, cultural influence (passive, not actively indoctrinating them, because bzzzzt, that would be a fail again) and above all.. patience, this is a development that would take generations and generations.

Countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran culturally live in an age before our Enlightenment era. Yes, that's how back they are in cultural development. Despite all the technology. You can't force them to join us in the 21st century, they will just resent any outside influence like that. So deal with them as well as you can, force them to live by our laws in our countries when they get here and tolerate their antics if they don't break any laws. Simple as that.

[petej0]

Violation of their First Amendment rights.

First Amendment Rights are not absolute. They can be denied or limited especially when the safety or yourself or others could be at risk.

[Spectral]

The problem is that we can't do anything. Here's how the scenario plays out. The underlying conditions are that you must not discriminate religion, because you want to have the "free religion" medal in your report book at the end of the school year. You ban religious clothing solely based in Islam belief. Bzzzzt, you just failed. You move the goalposts and say it's not religious, it's political or cultural or whatever, so ding, ding, you're scot free. Except now you've forced them to live inside their four walls and never go out, because if their men are opressing them, as you say, they sure as hell won't let them go out without these garments, so bzzzt, you've just failed again, because they're even more oppressed now than they were before.

So what is your next step?

See, the solution is once more infinitely more complex and tiresome than this forum can stomach. You have to educate people, make those women realise they can wear whatever they want, not what their husband wants. And that it's okay to get a divorce and ignore religion if it doesn't suit them. This takes education, cultural influence (passive, not actively indoctrinating them, because bzzzzt, that would be a fail again) and above all.. patience, this is a development that would take generations and generations.

Countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran culturally live in an age before our Enlightenment era. Yes, that's how back they are in cultural development. Despite all the technology. You can't force them to join us in the 21st century, they will just resent any outside influence like that. So deal with them as well as you can, force them to live by our laws in our countries when they get here and tolerate their antics if they don't break any laws. Simple as that.

Alternatively, we can all just agree that different people are allowed to have different values and that one great way to do that without having to fight about it so much is to have separate countries.

[Slant]

I've already said that I'm not favor of a ban. I'm not sure how that's not getting through.

I have no idea why you think culture, religion, and politics are separate, discrete things. These blend together. Religion and culture are upstream of politics.

The point is not if they exclude each other, the point is if burqas qualify as religious garments, which gives them a set of protection from the constitution that a mere political symbol wouldn't get. So, religion trumps politics in this case and you pointing out that it's political is... well, irrelevant really. It's a nice thing to discuss, but has no bearing on the debate at hand.

[Spectral]

First Amendment Rights are not absolute. They can be denied or limited especially when the safety or yourself or others could be at risk.

They also don't exist in Germany. The First Amendment is literally an American law. Germany has relatively liberal speech laws, but not as extreme on the matter as the United States.

[Slant]

First Amendment Rights are not absolute. They can be denied or limited especially when the safety or yourself or others could be at risk.

Are you talking about US amendments or trying to talk about the German constitution?

- - - Updated - - -

Alternatively, we can all just agree that different people are allowed to have different values and that one great way to do that without having to fight about it so much is to have separate countries.

Yes, if that worked, we'd have stopped fighting... well, before the Egyptians really.

[lonely zergling]

The basic laws are useless anyway in germany. We also have a article about equality before the law (men and woman shall have equal rights) and you see how well that works for us men.