Majority of Danes want to ban burqa: survey

[Eazy]

And I don't support any of those laws for public property. Like I said, this is an attempt to stifle freedom of expression.

So i can parade naked on the streets and yell ocassionaly - just because it's my own freedom of expression? Ridiculous.

There are a few thing that should all people obey - that's the law. Religion shouldn't be above the law. There's also a difference between burqa and cap+scarf.

[Deleted]

The issue is NOT people are covering themselfs.

Covering bodyparts is NOT action against women rights, if they choose to wear it(esp. in country like DK, they can choose not to wear it, if they wish so).

The population in DK is just xenophobics. They are afraid of people they can't relate to. Litteraly.

It comes from DK is isolated. Germany took a good deal of immigrants, same with Sweden. Seen from a cultral, economical and welfare standpoint(in fact in every infrastrucal standpoint), both of these countries are doing better than DK.

Basicly, politicians failed all the preperation work, suddenly they are left overwhelmed and they want a solution, that are against thier own foundation the country is build on.

[Deleted]

The population in DK is just xenophobics. They are afraid of people they can't relate to. Litteraly.

Are we going to call the population of every country passing such laws xenophobic now? Because I am fairly convinced that more countries will follow suit.

[Deleted]

Are we going to call the population of every country passing such laws xenophobic now?

Seems like you can't call a racist a racist without someone censoring you nowadays.

[Deleted]

Are we going to call the population of every country passing such laws xenophobic now? Because I am fairly convinced that more countries will follow suit.


Why would they ban (for example) a small cross necklace?

No.

The founder of Turkey(Ataturk), did forbid not only burqa, but even hijab(which doesnt cover the whole face)on institution such as universities. You could not work for the goverment or study, if you had burqa/hijab on. He also did ban the Fez(the ottoman hat), who was tradiontally used by imams.

It changed recently(like for 5 years ago because EU membership demands so).

So, nobody is calling the nation xenophobics, "just because". But there is evidence:

Seen from historical events, danes are just too afraid. They have strong countries doing all the "dirty" work for them and even with the slightest thing, they freak out.

Also, the media is a machine here. They can make a story out of 1 woman with burqa, instead of telling us the numbers(such as 1/10K woman who are wearing it). Also, there are 100K immigrants(in total)here, that is less than 100 woman, you can spot in the whole country.

Fake news been here for a very, very long time.

[Deleted]

But seen from historical events, danes are just too afraid. They have strong countries doing all the "dirty" work for them, and even the slightest thing, they freak out.

The thing is: You brought up Sweden and Germany, but I am not convinced that if you asked the population in those countries, that you wouldn't get a majority supporting such a ban as well. The same is true for some other European countries - it's just that the governments aren't pushing for it in the same way.

[Deleted]

The thing is: You brought up Sweden and Germany, but I am not convinced that if you asked the population in those countries, that you wouldn't get a majority supporting such a ban as well. The same is true for some other European countries - it's just that the governments aren't pushing for it in the same way.

If we talk about Germany vs. DK:
Yes, DK is xenophobic. They have so much more less immigrants(per ethnic dane), they remove themselfs constantly from responabilites, and they have so many issues with the few they have(you can't even compare how much less work politicians had to do, but they failed).

The result is the current situation.

Germany vs. DK:
Germany is stronger, both in society and economicly, because they had good politics and less shady media.

Conclussion:
It doesnt matter if Sweden or Germany would vote for something like this. What matters is how DK is doing right now.

Hats off for Germany and Sweden.

[Machismo]

So i can parade naked on the streets and yell ocassionaly - just because it's my own freedom of expression? Ridiculous.

There are a few thing that should all people obey - that's the law. Religion shouldn't be above the law. There's also a difference between burqa and cap+scarf.

I fully support you in your desire for full frontal nudity. The difference between them lies in your personal paranoia and fears. Once again, that shouldn't justify taking someone else's freedom.

The existence of a law is never a justification for it. Not. Ever.

- - - Updated - - -

Are we going to call the population of every country passing such laws xenophobic now? Because I am fairly convinced that more countries will follow suit.


Why would they ban (for example) a small cross necklace?

Yes, yes you can call them xenophobic, or at least Islamophobic.

[Eazy]

I fully support you in your desire for full frontal nudity. The difference between them lies in your personal paranoia and fears. Once again, that shouldn't justify taking someone else's freedom.

The existence of a law is never a justification for it. Not. Ever.

Parading naked on the streets could have bad influence on the children. That's not personal paranoia or fear, but its easier to detect terrorists if they have their faces revealed.

The population in DK is just xenophobics.

DK xenophobic, kek. Check out Eastern Europe countries.

[HolgerDK]

The really really ironic thing about his stupid burqa-ban is that it is already illegal by danish law to excert social control over others and punishable by up to 4 years in prison. It is paragraph 260, piece 3 of the danish penal code:

"Med bøde eller fængsel indtil 2 år straffes for ulovlig tvang den, som

1) ved vold eller ved trussel om vold, om betydelig skade på gods, om frihedsberøvelse eller om at fremsætte usand sigtelse for strafbart eller ærerørigt forhold eller at åbenbare privatlivet tilhørende forhold tvinger nogen til at gøre, tåle eller undlade noget,

2) ved trussel om at anmelde eller åbenbare et strafbart forhold eller om at fremsætte sande ærerørige beskyldninger tvinger nogen til at gøre, tåle eller undlade noget, for så vidt fremtvingelsen ikke kan anses tilbørlig begrundet ved det forhold, som truslen angår." -

"Penalties or imprisonment for up to 2 years shall be punished for unlawful coercion of the person who

1) by violence or threat of violence, significant damage to goods, detention or impropriety of punishable or crippled relations or the fact that apparent privacy causes someone to do, tolerate or omit anything,

2) in the event of threatening to report or reveal a criminal offense or to make true honorable accusations, compel someone to do, withstand or omit anything in so far as the constraint can not be regarded as reasonably justified by the threat to which the threat relates."

"Stk. 3 Tvinges nogen til at bære en beklædningsgenstand, der skjuler vedkommendes ansigt, kan straffen stige til fængsel indtil 4 år."
"PCS. 3 If someone is forced to wear a garment that conceals his face, the sentence may rise to imprisonment for 4 years."

Besides this, the danish constitution literally makes it impossible for lawmakers to prohibit certain pieces of clothing. So they have to make the burqa-ban against masking your face everywhere in the public space for any reason......

[Machismo]

Parading naked on the streets could have bad influence on the children. That's not personal paranoia or fear, but its easier to detect terrorists if they have their faces revealed.



DK xenophobic, kek. Check out Eastern Europe countries.

Many Eastern European countries are xenophobic, it's not exactly a surprise. Being a bigoted asshat can also be a negative influence on children.

I'm going to go ahead and side with freedom on this one, thanks.

[Emode]

Further oppress the oppressed, to combat oppression. Im not fan of the islamification of Europe but this is one, and the 'burquini' one, I just dont get.

[Deleted]

Why do you care? Let people wear whatever they want and prefer! This is so annoying...

[Deleted]

Parading naked on the streets could have bad influence on the children. That's not personal paranoia or fear, but its easier to detect terrorists if they have their faces revealed.



DK xenophobic, kek. Check out Eastern Europe countries.

Comparing DK with Eastern Europe. KEK.

Not to mention, that danes are also xenophobic for the whole eastern european border(in fact they are trying to reduce people from EEU, as they work for less money and "take our jobs" - this is the EXACT mindset we talk about).

They are not even good friends with Swedes(those two countries holds the world record for wars in between. They been in war offically 17 times). To put in perspective, its like US/Canada; not like they have big differences(if any but political opinion).

Dem old viking genes, are easy to pep up and manipulate.

[Deianeira]

Parading naked on the streets could have bad influence on the children. That's not personal paranoia or fear, but its easier to detect terrorists if they have their faces revealed.



DK xenophobic, kek. Check out Eastern Europe countries.

errh how do you quantify this? How can you detect if someone is a terrorist only by seeing their face?

[Planetdune]

All religious symbols should be banned on clothing in public. That includes christian crosses as well naturally. I don't mind a cross or symbol on a church or equivalent. Just, individually, symbols of this kind are reserved for private moments.

[Deleted]

All religious symbols should be banned on clothing in public. That includes christian crosses as well naturally. I don't mind a cross or symbol on a church or equivalent. Just, individually, symbols of this kind are reserved for private moments.

What exactly is the negative effect of a cross necklace, Yamaka or similar on someone or others around them? What sensible reason is there that would justify banning them in public entirely?

[Mehrunes]

Eh, mixed feelings on this. If it's to remove a religious exception from already existing anti-mask laws/is a part of proposed general anti-mask laws, fine. If it's work-place related and covers all religious clothing as was the case from Netherlands (at least I think it was from Netherlands) from a few months ago? Also fine. But other reasons are replacing one clothing repression with another.

[Planetdune]

What exactly is the negative effect of a cross necklace, Yamaka or similar on someone or others around them? What sensible reason is there that would justify banning them in public entirely?

Because you cannot allow one religious symbol and not the other. So it is easier to just ban it all. Now if you wear a cross or other symbol below your clothing, not visible that would be okay, just nothing visible in public.

[Deleted]

Because you cannot allow one religious symbol and not the other. So it is easier to just ban it all. Now if you wear a cross or other symbol below your clothing, not visible that would be okay, just nothing visible in public.

I mean, actually you can. If you ban it on the grounds of covering your face - which is valid, even if that might not be the main reason behind it.
And no, banning them all is not easier or better. Especially since a law like that would never hold if you specifically only target religious symbols - since a small necklace, for example, has no effect on the public order either way.