The Student Room Group

West Midlands Police Considers Allowing The Burka

Scroll to see replies

Reply 100
Original post by Jee1
So what? Who are you to dictate what women should wear?

Freedom
Sproinggg!
There goes another spring on my Acme Irony-o-Meter™
Original post by QE2
Come come! Are you seriously claiming that, in general, Muslims are more accepting of homosexuality than atheists? Because we both know that's a very stinky pile of ********.


Not in the slightest.
Reply 102
Original post by ivybridge
I am not in favour of absolute freedom at all. How does defending the right to wear what you want providing it doesn't cause rational offence or harm, suddenly mean I'm pro-everything?
Let me give you a hand with those goalposts, they look heavy.

PS, how does the natural human form cause "rational offence or harm"?
If you are going to cite some people's irrational aversion to seeing people "au naturel", then you are going to have difficulty explaining why it is wrong for some people to have an aversion to questionable ideological symbolism.

(JFTR, I would oppose any legislation on the niqab, burqa, etc, other that where it applies to all other face covering/masks, etc)
Original post by ivybridge
Not in the slightest.

So you support the group that want to put you death and oppose those who have your back and are prepared to defend your right to exercise your sexuality in freedom and safety?

Makes sense.
Reply 104
Original post by epage
by this logic, we should blame christians for the KKK
No, because the KKK was a white supremacist, political organisation formed with the aim of influencing the course of reconstruction of southern states after the civil war, in favour of the powerful plantation owners. It had no religious aims (other than being anti-Catholic) and certainly did not advocate the establishment of a Christian theocracy modelled on a literalist reading of the Bible.

You know, I get really tired of people trotting out the "Ooh, but the KKK!" argument by people who have no knowledge of the KKK other than some B&W photos of men in hoods standing by a burning cross.
Reply 105
Original post by ivybridge
No. Not entirely. It's about the fact it's terrorism. Not Islamic. the IRA and many other organisations caused much higher rates of devastation in the world than any Islamic group to date. But nobody ever whinges about the religion, skin colour, or origin of those groups and they pleasantly forget the statistics.
Whoah! The IRA caused more devastation than ISIS? Really?
The RAF more devatation than Al Qaeda?
Shining Path more devastation than Taliban?

I'm not entirely sure about that.

And IIRC, people roundly criticised the ideological foundations of all those groups.
Reply 106
Original post by ivybridge
[video]https://www.facebook.com/ThisIsZinc/videos/526501877550483/[/video]

Just one that presents the stats.
You are asked for a source for a quantative claim, and you link to some blokes Facebook page?
:rofl:
Reply 107
Original post by ivybridge
Why should they do it, mate? You're saying the actions of one person makes them all to blame? I'm sorry, no. That's not how it works.
If a member of a golf club killed a load of people, and claimed that he did it because the rules of the golf club authorised it, it would seem only natural for the other members of the golf club to publicly state that the golf club condemned the killings? In fact, it would seem pretty odd if they didn't.

NOTE: we need to differentiate between terms. I think it is entirely reasonable in these situations to expect condemnation of actions, but it is not reasonable to expect an apology.
However, I am not aware of anyone, apart from people rejecting the need to apologise to apologise, who raises the issue of an apology.
Reply 108
Original post by Josb
Can you talk without using insults?
No. It is the last line of defence for the failing SJW apologist.
Reply 109
Original post by ivybridge
the leading Imam of the local Muslim community in Orlando made a speech and offered support to the whole LGBT community.
I'm guessing that it isn't the same Imam speaking in Orlando who explicitly stated that the punishment for homosexuality is death?
[video="youtube;Vev-OzHQy94"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vev-OzHQy94[/video]
Original post by ivybridge
No. Not entirely. It's about the fact it's terrorism. Not Islamic. the IRA and many other organisations caused much higher rates of devastation in the world than any Islamic group to date. But nobody ever whinges about the religion, skin colour, or origin of those groups and they pleasantly forget the statistics.





You don't know the statistics.

Circa 3,600 people were killed over thirty years in the Troubles (not all by the IRA by any means).

Just under 3,000 were killed by Muslim terrorism in one attack on one day on 9/11.

More than 1,200 have been killed by ISIS outside Iraq and Syria.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/25/world/map-isis-attacks-around-the-world.html

Of course many more thousands have died within those two unfortunate countries...
Reply 111
Original post by biglad2k16
Are you trying to say that Islam is somehow more accepting of gays than Christianity?
It's a mixture of cultural relativism and the "soft racism of low expectations".
It goes something like...
"They aren't really more accepting, but they are Brown Foreigners with a proud and ancient culture, so it's different, because they don't really know it's wrong, bless 'em. And defending them will really get up the noses of the middle-class white folks (which, ironically, we all are!)."
Reply 112
Original post by ivybridge
Not in the slightest.
So what was the point of the anecdote?
What an utterly, utterly STUPID idea. If they did this, they would truely have lost the plot. Also why are they so keen for BME officers to be at 30% when they are 15% of the population. I am so so upset that they would even THINK about allowing this- how on earth are you supposed to hold an officer accountable for their actions if you have no way of identifying them? Imagine an officer beats up a member of the public but you can't identify them because they are wearing a burka. I mean it's moronic beyond belief....
Original post by ivybridge
[video]https://www.facebook.com/ThisIsZinc/videos/526501877550483/[/video]

Just one that presents the stats.


I have already replied to you with the true picture, which you can yourself verify from reputable sources if you are interested in the truth.

The enclosed is a joke. A total joke. If you seriously believe cr@p like this, no wonder you are a self hating gay apologist for Islamism. :redface:
Original post by ivybridge
Self-hating gay? Lmfao, literally **** yourself you utter ****.


What's your stance on gay marriage?
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 116
Original post by QE2
Phwoarr! Look at those hands! Mmmm...


Wrist cleavage.

:sexface:
Original post by Iridocyclitis
What's your stance on gay marriage?


Pro.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Whoa. Just ask yourselves this. When you are arrested, do you really need to see the face of the person arresting you? It's just not essential.


Yes.

identification is an essential aspect of the relationship between the police and the community they serve.

Only on rare occasions are police allowed to cover their faces.

There are other issues but you make lite of something some of use find quite important.
It is a bit of a cliched analogy, nowadays, but like all cliches, based on truth.

This steady push push push of Islamism, extending the boundaries a little further all the time, with the politically correct desperate to concede more and more ground terrified of being Islamophobic, but above all desperate to stop the terrorism. Because that is at the root of it, is it not? Unless we give them all that they want they might kill us.

If someone had raised this idea even five years ago it would have been met with gales of laughter. Now it evinces no surprise at all, in fact we all know this will come to pass. If not now, soon.

The analogy I mentioned at the start? That of the frog in boiling water on a stove. It gets used to the water as it gets warmer and warmer and never jumps. Until it is too late.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending