Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

B882 - Face Coverings Prohibition Bill 2015 watch

Announcements
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    It's the truth.
    I appreciate that not all arranged marriages end up bad but this may win you the award for most naive comment of the month.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I actually have no issue with public nudity generally.
    You haven't seen Joe, 67yo, standing nude in the tube whilst you're seated in front of him.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Ha. Well in that case I'd point out that I actually support firms choosing who they sell to be that the gay hotel people or London Underground having a 'must wear clothing' rule.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    How did I guess it was UKIP from the title...well, it is a kinda racist bill.
    Since when exactly did you become so liberal?!

    In any case, this is a fairly obvious nay from me. It is clearly seeking to deny a certain minority group the freedom to express and practice their religious beliefs which is out of order.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    I think the statistics would offer a different view, plus I'm sure you know there's no smoke without fire. Modern Christians tend not to slit throats, blow themselves up in public places or wage wars ‘for their god’ and shout his name whenever they manage to kill the enemy (which includes yourself).

    Rome wasn't built in a day and if we can make a step in the right direction, should we really be discouraged if we can't solve the issue in its entirety? We'd do very little if that were the case and I'm personally very much interested in addressing them.

    No, it's not that they're culturally other. It's the fact that their culture is completely against our values and has no place in Europe, just like our culture isn't welcome in places where they come from. I think it's quite fair.
    Yes, I consider Islam as our main societal enemy, as Communism was until 1990. We should therefore prevent them from importing their most barbaric practices in the civilised world.

    I can't believe the pusillanimity of the left against this backward belief, whilst they are so keen to denounce, and willing to ban, any other form of oppression.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Aye.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    The bill will be tidied up for a second reading but the bill does ban religious clothing that covers the face; this was intentional when the bill was written. In the same way balaclavas pose a security risk, there have been documented cases of people and suspected terrorists wearing burqas as an alternative to balaclavas when committing armed robbery. The bill does not purposely target burqas but all facial coverings in public; facial coverings are a safety risk that should not be tolerated when the current threat level is severe.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    I would also add the exception "under extreme weather conditions".



    To all people who disagree with this bill, you should therefore have no problem with public nudity and propose a bill allowing it in the places listed in this bill.

    It's the freedom to wear what you want after all.
    Under what "extreme weather conditions" would anyone use face coverings, might I ask? This is not a desert or Siberia, so I really do not see the need to cover one's face due to the weather.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Since when exactly did you become so liberal?!

    In any case, this is a fairly obvious nay from me. It is clearly seeking to deny a certain minority group the freedom to express and practice their religious beliefs which is out of order.
    Not wanting to arbitrarily deny somebody their rights based on their religion, or any other characteristic, because of a few people who share some of their beliefs is uncharacteristically liberal?

    (Original post by Josb)
    Yes, I consider Islam as our main societal enemy, as Communism was until 1990. We should therefore prevent them from importing their most barbaric practices in the civilised world.

    I can't believe the pusillanimity of the left against this backward belief, whilst they are so keen to denounce, and willing to ban, any other form of oppression.
    May I remind you that the KKK exists, that the BNP exists, the EDL, Neo-naziism, the "barbaric" practices you oppose are already in the "civilised" world, I don't see you discriminating against groups that hold similar beliefs to them. Should UKIP be banned becuase some of their members engage in barbaric practices? How about ban the wearing of the colour white because of the KKK?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Not wanting to arbitrarily deny somebody their rights based on their religion, or any other characteristic, because of a few people who share some of their beliefs is uncharacteristically liberal?



    May I remind you that the KKK exists, that the BNP exists, the EDL, Neo-naziism, the "barbaric" practices you oppose are already in the "civilised" world, I don't see you discriminating against groups that hold similar beliefs to them. Should UKIP be banned becuase some of their members engage in barbaric practices? How about ban the wearing of the colour white because of the KKK?
    Compared to most people with views as right-wing as yours I'd say it is unfortunately
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Compared to most people with views as right-wing as yours I'd say it is unfortunately
    right does not imply racist, not authoritarian, look at some of the most racist and authoritarian leaders in history,
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    right does not imply racist, not authoritarian, look at some of the most racist and authoritarian leaders in history,
    No, but in my experience it does correlate, at least in modern western society. Still, I'm glad to have a prominent right-wing voice in Parliament defending basic liberties.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    No, but in my experience it does correlate, at least in modern western society. Still, I'm glad to have a prominent right-wing voice in Parliament defending basic liberties.
    I'm hardly alone, and one could easily argue that the trend should be the other way up, going from top left to bottom right
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I'm hardly alone, and one could easily argue that the trend should be the other way up, going from top left to bottom right
    In some ways it would perhaps make more sense, but obviously isn't the case - the top-left corner is virtually deserted. I would argue it's because most people on the left see themselves as effectively liberals, but at the more radical end at least see corporations and capitalism as negatively effecting liberty by supporting a system where you have to follow the orders of a wealthy and privileged minority to earn a decent living - hence liberal lefties.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Not wanting to arbitrarily deny somebody their rights based on their religion, or any other characteristic, because of a few people who share some of their beliefs is uncharacteristically liberal?

    May I remind you that the KKK exists, that the BNP exists, the EDL, Neo-naziism, the "barbaric" practices you oppose are already in the "civilised" world, I don't see you discriminating against groups that hold similar beliefs to them. Should UKIP be banned becuase some of their members engage in barbaric practices? How about ban the wearing of the colour white because of the KKK?
    We are not arbitrarily denying someone's rights based on their religion. Take the burqa and the niqab as an example. Nowhere in the Quran, or any Hadith, or any other Islamic text, does it say that Muslim women need to wear a burqa or a niqab. Dalil Boubakeur, the grand mufti of the Paris Mosque, the largest and most influential in France, said that the niqab was not prescribed in Islam. Abdel Muti al-Bayyumi, a member of the council of clerics at Al-Azhar Mosque in Cairo, said that the niqab has no basis in Sharia.

    On the other hand, this bill may ban the use of KKK masks, so that is a positive, is it not?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    May I remind you that the KKK exists, that the BNP exists, the EDL, Neo-naziism, the "barbaric" practices you oppose are already in the "civilised" world, I don't see you discriminating against groups that hold similar beliefs to them. Should UKIP be banned becuase some of their members engage in barbaric practices? How about ban the wearing of the colour white because of the KKK?
    The KKK is American. I don't get the comparison with the white colour, but I know that the KKK costume would be banned in the UK, whilst it is almost the same thing as the burqa.
    However, by your logic, Klansmen should be allowed to wear it here. They are just expressing their religious right after all.

    There are indeed some barbarians in the civilised world, but we don't need to import other ones.
    I haven't heard of the 'barbaric practices' of Ukipers.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    How did I guess it was UKIP from the title...well, it is a kinda racist bill.
    How is this bill racist? This bill applies to everyone, regardless of their race or ethnicity, so we are not singling anybody out.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thehistorybore)
    An exceptionally poor effort in attempting to hide the true meaning of the Bill.
    We have no intention of hiding any meaning to which this bill may pertain (not that we have anything to hide).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:


    "Barbarians, nazi scum!"




    "They are just expressing their religious right."
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    2.2.e

    Time to quote the worst episode of The West Wing: "'Islamic extremists are to Islam as ______ is to Christianity.' What is blank?"
    I'm pretty sure breaking into a shop and stealing something doesn't count as 'art, leisure or entertainment' :lol:
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 21, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.