Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    how is this a security risk?
    Im also talking about the Burka, not only the "burkini". Anyone can hide under a Burka, including terrorists.

    While a "Burkini" might not represent an equal secuirty risk to a Burka, its certainly a security risk for my eyes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MeYou2Night)
    Buddhism isn't a religion for starters.

    Hinduism has big problems to. Major violence against Muslims in India for example ironically. Which is wrong obviously.
    Buddhism acts in the same way as Hinduism and has the same fundamentals and principles as Hinduism. Technically a religion or not, it certainly acts as a religion. I knew you would talk about the violence against Muslims. If you look at the history, the reason there has been tension between Hindus and Muslims is because of the Mughal Empire, where Muslim emperors forced Hindus to convert to Islam and killed all those who disobeyed. They also took all the Hindu's belongings to make sure that no Hindu was more wealthy than a Muslim etc... The violence after the empire was basically for vengeance. Buddhists in Burma actually killed MANY Muslims in 2014 because Muslims there were killing all the buddhists. My point is, these religions never started or even contemplated violence. They are peaceful. But when they are being killed on a mass scale, then violence against the oppressive religion(in this case Islam) is the only way to defend themselves and say "You cant just push us around like that". Have Hindus and Buddhists tried to conquer other lands and force their religion on the inhabitants of these lands? Nope.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    I don't see why propose banning it? It just seems silly and counter productive. (Do you support the ban on it?)

    I mean I'm all for a burka/niqab ban, as not being able to see someone's face can be troublesome. But banning a hijab for example or burkini in this case just seems pointless.
    No, I think that banning an outfit that nobody uses is senseless.

    As I said, Salafi Muslims would disapprove bathing next to men, even with a burqa, so this clothing will only have a limited popularity anyway.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Name:  image.png
Views: 119
Size:  357.4 KB

    (Original post by Galaxie501)
    Im also talking about the Burka, not only the "burkini". Anyone can hide under a Burka, including terrorists.

    While a "Burkini" might not represent an equal secuirty risk to a Burka, its certainly a security risk for my eyes.
    How is it a risk? Please tell me

    Although I've always been a little suspicious about scuba divers, so I don't blame you.

    (Original post by the bear)
    #welcometoourplanetcaptainkirk
    I'm not gonna argue that it doesn't look a little funny :lol:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    No, I think that banning an outfit that nobody uses is senseless.

    As I said, Salafi Muslims would disapprove bathing next to men, even with a burqa, so this clothing will only have a limited popularity anyway.
    It's something hijabi's would wear, my sister was interested in getting one. It just seems like the only swimwear that would appeal to a woman who wears the hijab. So it's not just limited to the types of Muslims who expect women to wear the burqa and stay away from men.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ribbit1234)
    And I'm telling you it's not that deep, Muslims are a small minority, we do not plan to take over and the U.K. is not going to become an Islamic country. Underaged pregnancies, drinking/drug problems on the rise, unemployment, failed education etc is more of a threat to the civilisation u r talk about than Muslims
    You may be moderate,many aren't . The above would be dealt with by Sharia in their world...already happens in places.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by childofthesun)
    The irony is strong. Let's restrict what Muslim women can wear in public to encourage their families to let them dress as they please
    :facepalm:
    Yes, it absolutely is irony. It's known as the paradox of tolerance. To maintain liberalism, you must be intolerant to intolerance, otherwise intolerance will destroy the tolerant, and tolerance with them. In the end it's all about choosing which intolerance you'd prefer not to have in your society. Clearly you have a greater dislike for the intolerance of highly intolerant ideologies such as Islam. Myself, I have a greater intolerance for the subjugation of women.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    It's something hijabi's would wear, my sister was interested in getting one. It just seems like the only swimwear that would appeal to a woman who wears the hijab. So it's not just limited to the types of Muslims who expect women to wear the burqa and stay away from men.
    Out of interest, why just a burkini? Why not a rash vest/board shorts combo, wet suit, ordinary clothes or triathlon suit?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)



    How is it a risk? Please tell me

    Although I've always been a little suspicious about scuba divers, so I don't blame you.



    I'm not gonna argue that it doesn't look a little funny :lol:
    Usually no one runs around in SCUBA gear at public swimming pools and beaches - so im not sure those two compare too well.

    Anyway, the Burkini is certainly less of a risk than a Burka.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1010marina)
    Out of interest, why just a burkini? Why not a rash vest/board shorts combo, wet suit, ordinary clothes or triathlon suit?
    Those are good options too, but what's wrong with the burkini? (Apart from the name)

    (Original post by Galaxie501)
    Usually no one runs around in SCUBA gear at public swimming pools and beaches - so im not sure those two compare too well.

    Anyway, the Burkini is certainly less of a risk than a Burka.
    The burkini isn't a risk at all mate :lol:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Yes, it absolutely is irony. It's known as the paradox of tolerance. To maintain liberalism, you must be intolerant to intolerance, otherwise intolerance will destroy the tolerant, and tolerance with them. In the end it's all about choosing which intolerance you'd prefer not to have in your society. Clearly you have a greater dislike for the intolerance of highly intolerant ideologies such as Islam. Myself, I have a greater intolerance for the subjugation of women.
    This all sounds terribly complicated, but it's not.

    What it means is that people are only tolerant of some things, e.g. food choices, and not of important things like morals.

    Liberalism is not morally tolerant. In fact the word 'tolerance' is now used almost entirely when calling for the persecution of some ideological group.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ribbit1234)
    It won't work so the French president can go f himself. They banned the burka too, but subhanallah, praise be to God, it didn't stop Muslim women from wearing it. Bless the French Muslim sisters in France x
    It has "worked", in that they can face penalties for doing so for contravening the law. People break laws all the time, doesn't mean that laws are useless..
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    Those are good options too, but what's wrong with the burkini? (Apart from the name)The burkini isn't a risk at all mate :lol:
    The very creation of a specifically Muslim swim garment implies that existing clothing didn't meet the needs of Muslim swimmers -I'm wondering if this is because they wanted specifically Muslim clothing (in the same way that long sleeved clothing or stuff like ponchos could do the same job as a burka yet it is preferred) or if it was just because something was disliked about traditional swimwear and a swim cap or diving cap, etc.Beyond bickering about whether it's an infringement on rights or not (because clearly nobody is going to change their mind) I'm interested in why a specifically religious item of clothing is used, if not just to throw your religion into the face of anyone that can see you. Is it a choice? Does the clothing have to be specifically Islamic, not just meet the requirements of Islamic dress code? Did anybody ever tell you that swimming without a burkini was a sexual, morally depraved act? I don't understand the thinking behind wearing one at all for sport/leisure tbh because in my mind it is not sexual.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    It has "worked", in that they can face penalties for doing so for contravening the law. People break laws all the time, doesn't mean that laws are useless..
    Nope, there was a documentary about it when the ban happened and the women said the still wear it and they don't care about the penalties. Rich French Muslim people have also came forward and said to contact them if anyone faces charges for wearing it and they'll sort it out.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Samosa)
    I thought the west was a place where a woman could wear what she wants? Without men dictating what she can and cannot wear, how is this any different.
    Too many people on this thread are labouring under the illusion that freedom of expression, (which includes what people wear), is limitless. It isn't. All freedoms must have limits so that a country doesn't descend into anarchy. We're not free to walk around naked and I'm sure there are many other example of these restrictions on a freedom.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ribbit1234)
    Nope, there was a documentary about it when the ban happened and the women said the still wear it and they don't care about the penalties. Rich French Muslim people have also came forward and said to contact them if anyone faces charges for wearing it and they'll sort it out.
    Doesn't change what I said. Not caring about the penalties doesn't mean they won't get them and won't stop them having that on their record. The law itself has been introduced therefore by that measure it has "worked".
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ribbit1234)
    I don't hate the west and also don't want them to bend for us. We respect the laws of the west, but it's blatantly obvious that the French president is racist against Muslims and is constantly targeting them and discriminating against them. A bit like how white police officers target and discriminate black Americans. You're comparing me to Isis ?? Lolollll, bigot. I wouldn't even wear the burka or bikini but it's just pure racism and discrimination. You wouldn't understand cuz ur not a minority so wouldn't ever be judged or stereotyped in the way we are.
    You cannot be racist against muslims.Racism is discrimination based on ones race.Muslim is not a race.Therefore its not racism.Please stop misusing the word.Perhaps the french president is simply trying to prevent more people becoming actual victims.You know the real victims that actually died.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Too many people on this thread are labouring under the illusion that freedom of expression, (which includes what people wear), is limitless. It isn't. All freedoms must have limits so that a country doesn't descend into anarchy. We're not free to walk around naked and I'm sure there are many other example of these restrictions on a freedom.
    Planta, you're a smart guy. You understand what I mean when I say the burkini is harmless and there's no need to ban it. A burka being banned is understandable obviously. I just feel people supporting this are just being a little unreasonable. A turban isn't a western thing, but you wouldn't stop Sikhs wearing it, as it's harmless. Nudity isn't harmless either, but people walking around everywhere naked would just be odd :lol:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    The mayor of Cannes has banned the wearing of burkinis - full-body swimsuits - on the beaches of the French Riviera resort famous for its annual film festival, officials said on Thursday.
    Mayor David Lisnard signed off on the ruling that "access to beaches and for swimming is banned to anyone who does not have (bathing apparel) which respects good customs and secularism," which is a founding principle of the French republic.
    "Beachwear which ostentatiously diplays religious affiliation, when France and places of worship are currently the target of terrorist attacks, is liable to create risks of disrupting public order (crowds, scuffles etc) which it is necessary to prevent," it says.
    Thierry Migoule, head of municipal services for the town, sought to clarify the ruling's intent.
    "We are not talking about banning the wearing of religious symbols on the beach ... but ostentatious clothing which refers to an allegiance to terrorist movements which are at war with us," he said.

    Burkinis banned on Cannes Riviera beaches by French mayor - The Telegraph
    https://apple.news/AVJQTqAaaRaKTNe5_BrQzIQ

    Thoughts?? I think this is quite frankly ridiculous.
    What about Bikinis? So it's ok to have the 'freedom' to show your tits (as they hang out, are left nothing to the imagination) and thin g stings showing the arse, but no freedom for a woman to cover herself?

    That's perversion. France doesn't know the meaning if the the only choice is the former....(no choice but only)

    No better than the Taliban, Al Queda, ISIL FORCING burkas, here the French forcing muslims (others too no doubt) to wear what they say rather then choosing...

    :rolleyes:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Ridiculous.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
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: August 18, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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.