Would You Support A Burqa Ban In USofA?

[haymarket]

and your threatening my Halloween masks to wont stand for that

Common sense would indicate we can make allowances for Halloween.

 

[blarg]

Common sense would indicate we can make allowances for Halloween.

so 1 day of the year and whenever its cold out no ban

whats the point of this other then discrimination?

 

[Manc Skipper]

What was the silly old first amendment about, anyway?

 

[AGENT J]

To be clear here, this is a Burqa:

Not to be confused with a Hijab:

"Would you support a Burqa Ban in USA?"

absolutely not
American citizens have rights and religious freedoms, I don;t lan on ****ting on my fellow americans rights anytime soon. Banning them would be down right insanity and a hugely dangerous precedence set.

Would I support possible restriction like we do many items of clothing in certain circumstances? absolutely but I would never be on board with a out right ban, its unconstitutional.

 

[TurtleDude]

The federal government has no proper power to dictate how people dress-save for those who are employees of the United States government and its agencies. Now I can see a state having some legitimate power to prevent clothing that completely prevents identification of the wearer in public.

 

[TurtleDude]

What was the silly old first amendment about, anyway?

The first prevents the government from punishing a person for what they believe It does not completely prevent government from punishing people for how they act -even if the actions are based on the religion. Every heard of Peyote?

 

[TheGoverness]

The federal government has no proper power to dictate how people dress-save for those who are employees of the United States government and its agencies. Now I can see a state having some legitimate power to prevent clothing that completely prevents identification of the wearer in public.

Even then, a state banning a particular piece of clothing is stupid.

IIRC, Oklahoma tried to ban hoodies once. Dumb as **** idea.

 

[Van Basten]

YUP.

Stick to Hijabs.

 

[beerftw]

To be clear here, this is a Burqa:

Not to be confused with a Hijab:

Only if burkinis are banned as well, a burkini is like bacon free bacon.

 

[notquiteright]

So we can all go naked then? If it's a "free" society that shouldn't regulate clothing?

You engage in absurdum arguments. You sound like the anti-same sex marriage ranters who proclaim opening up the definition of marriage past 'traditional' will have men marrying goats or women their vibrator... :roll:

Trying to claim allowing any sort of MODEST dress past what some think is acceptable is equal to complete nudity in public is about as silly.

Where was this outrage over Amish women wearing so much clothing as part of their religious practice? Why was there no demand to walk around nude then?

Too silly for serious thought... eace

 

[CLAX1911]

no Absolutely not. making laws against religious expression is a constitutional violation.

I think burqas are backward nonsense but we can't sell out our values.

To be clear here, this is a Burqa:

Not to be confused with a Hijab:

 

[Redress]

The first prevents the government from punishing a person for what they believe It does not completely prevent government from punishing people for how they act -even if the actions are based on the religion. Every heard of Peyote?

However, if you ban, say, face coverings, you cannot do it just for a religious clothing item. That would be a violation of the first. So burqa ban would fail in that way. You could, maybe, try to get a law passed banning all face coverings, but good luck with that. I am pretty sure states would run into the same issue.

To equate it to your peyote reference, peyote is illegal despite its religious use because it is harmful. The ban is for all use, not just religious ceremonies. Banning burqas but not ther face coverings in the name of security would be like banning peyote only for religious ceremonies.

Does that make sense? I am on major flu mods and may not be real coherent...

 

[SocialD]

I think the Burka should be banned while driving, or in any venue where security is an issue ( government buildings, schools, banks etc.. ). security, whether its a policeman or a camera, should be able to see a persons face.
The Hijab is generally fine.

 

[TurtleDude]

However, if you ban, say, face coverings, you cannot do it just for a religious clothing item. That would be a violation of the first. So burqa ban would fail in that way. You could, maybe, try to get a law passed banning all face coverings, but good luck with that. I am pretty sure states would run into the same issue.

To equate it to your peyote reference, peyote is illegal despite its religious use because it is harmful. The ban is for all use, not just religious ceremonies. Banning burqas but not ther face coverings in the name of security would be like banning peyote only for religious ceremonies.

Does that make sense? I am on major flu mods and may not be real coherent...

you shouldn't be flying with Mods when Sick. all we need are sick mods on this forum!!

actually your point makes some sense.

Feel better

 

[Gaius46]

no Absolutely not. making laws against religious expression is a constitutional violation.

I think burqas are backward nonsense but we can't sell out our values.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[haymarket]

so 1 day of the year and whenever its cold out no ban

whats the point of this other then discrimination?

Did you read my earlier post about freedom and identification in any open society?

 

[blarg]

Did you read my earlier post about freedom and identification in any open society?

which we wont always demand and which the criminals will ignore

yes i read them

 

[haymarket]

which we wont always demand and which the criminals will ignore

yes i read them

With that sort of attitude - why pass any laws at all?

 

[blarg]

With that sort of attitude - why pass any laws at all?

other laws might be helpful and constantly enforced

 

[RabidAlpaca]

This is not who we are. When the founders talked about freedom of religion they did not mean this.

As soon as we're done limiting the muslims rights, let's take another look at christian rights. I'm sick of seeing their crosses and religious paraphernalia. Either muslims have religious rights too or nobody does. You don't get to declare christians as something special.

 

[Hawkeye10]

As soon as we're done limiting the muslims rights, let's take another look at christian rights. I'm sick of seeing their crosses and religious paraphernalia. Either muslims have religious rights too or nobody does. You don't get to declare christians as something special.

Do what you want, except always remember this...I always have the right to try to get you(F) to look me eye to eye.

CASE. CLOSED.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Do what you want, except always remember this...I always have the right to try to get you(F) to look my eye to eye.

CASE. CLOSED.

No you don't. Please show me in the constitution where that "right" is enshrined. I can show you where the part about religious freedom is if you can't find it.

 

[Hawkeye10]

No you don't. Please show me in the constitution where that "right" is enshrined. I can show you where the part about religious freedom is if you can't find it.

Show me where the constitution tells me that I have the right to take a piss?

 

[Pozessed]

Show me where the constitution tells me that I have the right to take a piss?

I'd consider the practice of peeing to be a very basic pursuit of happiness.

 

[haymarket]

other laws might be helpful and constantly enforced

That is true of all law.