FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Burkini ban

Burkini ban

Jump to: Newest in thread

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

What are your thoughts on the burkini ban in France?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ad_seanMan over a year ago

London

I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

Any woman has the right to wear as little or as much as she wants, the state should have no say in it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Don't really understand it to be honest

What was the reason for not letting them stay covered on the beach?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's misogynistic, islamophobic and shameful. Armed French police ordering a modestly attired woman to publicly remove her clothes is a disgrace. If I was in France on holiday I'd wear a burkini in support

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *r TriomanMan over a year ago

Chippenham Malmesbury area

I've not kept up with the news for the last few days. The last that I heard was that the French courts overturned the ban but some towns said that they'd defy the court's ruling.

Personally, I think that they should be allowed - as I understand it, they aren't only worn by followers of Islam. Banning these won't stop extremists in France but it may even make matters worse by alienating French Muslim citizens.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace."

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Enforcement by gunpoint is brutal, and in this case unnecessary, but it doesn't change the fact they were simply doing their jobs, in ensuring that the people of the land, adhere to the laws of the land, which exist to maintain the order a civilised society requires to exist.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Don't really understand it to be honest

What was the reason for not letting them stay covered on the beach?"

One of the 'official' explanations I saw on the news was that it would cause further racial tension. The concern was that Non Muslim people would be angry at people wearing burkinis etc

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Don't really understand it to be honest

What was the reason for not letting them stay covered on the beach?

One of the 'official' explanations I saw on the news was that it would cause further racial tension. The concern was that Non Muslim people would be angry at people wearing burkinis etc "

Well I've heard it all now

Like who gives a shit what the woman next to you on the beach is wearing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"It's misogynistic, islamophobic and shameful. Armed French police ordering a modestly attired woman to publicly remove her clothes is a disgrace. If I was in France on holiday I'd wear a burkini in support

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Don't really understand it to be honest

What was the reason for not letting them stay covered on the beach?"

Its against their laws on secularism, basically you can't display religious imaginary etc.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iss_tressWoman over a year ago

London

Funny old world where you can wear a bikini the size of postage stamp and a Hollywood wax to carry it off in public should you wish, but punished for being modestly attired.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Funny old world where you can wear a bikini the size of postage stamp and a Hollywood wax to carry it off in public should you wish, but punished for being modestly attired."

It's a lot harder to hide your identity under a postage stamp.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal."

I have to agree with that

If we went to a Muslim country we would have to abide by their laws

Though I don't agree with telling people what to wear on a beach I do agree if you go to a country and use their beaches you should abide by their laws

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Tell me this, other than Muslims, is there ANY other demographic in the Western World, or indeed anywhere in the world, who believe they have a right to wear masks/conceal their faces in public?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ad_seanMan over a year ago

London

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal."

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

I am half tempted to go over and Wear one and see if I am fined and forced to remove it but a small part of me thinks that I am the wrong colour to be seen as a danger.

Interestingly one if the women pictured surrounded by 3 armed police and forced to remove her garments was not actually wearing a burkini.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Though I don't agree with telling people what to wear on a beach I do agree if you go to a country and use their beaches you should abide by their laws"

I know you're a mother.

If a middle man on a beach, wearing nothing but a pouch was sat within the vicinity of a young child, would you be comfortable with it?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Ever get the feeling some things are being done to provoke?- it's like some kind of stageplay.

For most of the things I have read/seen about possible threats of terror or actual terrorists attacks..the authorities have already been investigating the suspects..yet,these same people can carry out attacks.

I really cant see anything constructive about this action on this woman..and it makes no sense in it's entirety, the onlookers I bet have no clue whats going on and did not care anyway.

We've seen several 'iconic' photos come to view lately, people fighting against injustice etc..

this is one...and she is not fighting.She is terrified and mostly likely ashamed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman over a year ago

evesham

"Don't really understand it to be honest

What was the reason for not letting them stay covered on the beach?

Its against their laws on secularism, basically you can't display religious imaginary etc."

So would a nun be forced to remove her clothing too?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iss_tressWoman over a year ago

London

"Funny old world where you can wear a bikini the size of postage stamp and a Hollywood wax to carry it off in public should you wish, but punished for being modestly attired.

It's a lot harder to hide your identity under a postage stamp."

The question was what were my thoughts: I gave them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ust RachelTV/TS over a year ago

Horsham

My only concern about the burka being worn, is that it can be used by a terrorist as a means of escape. It happened in Birmingham, a terrorist evaded police by wearing one.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example. "

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Funny old world where you can wear a bikini the size of postage stamp and a Hollywood wax to carry it off in public should you wish, but punished for being modestly attired.

It's a lot harder to hide your identity under a postage stamp.

The question was what were my thoughts: I gave them."

Thankyou.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Though I don't agree with telling people what to wear on a beach I do agree if you go to a country and use their beaches you should abide by their laws

I know you're a mother.

If a middle man on a beach, wearing nothing but a pouch was sat within the vicinity of a young child, would you be comfortable with it?"

You can take kids on nudist beaches

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

It depends for me, if it is against some law ( god knows why though ) then the woman has to accept the consequences...although they could have just told her to get off the beach rather than make her strip.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I thought that the highest court in France had said the ban was unlawful? I really hope that this is the case?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Though I don't agree with telling people what to wear on a beach I do agree if you go to a country and use their beaches you should abide by their laws

I know you're a mother.

If a middle man on a beach, wearing nothing but a pouch was sat within the vicinity of a young child, would you be comfortable with it?

You can take kids on nudist beaches "

That's a choice you yourself make, not the person sitting next to you.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I thought that the highest court in France had said the ban was unlawful? I really hope that this is the case?

Yes they have, I've just been reading up on it, they have over ruled the ban apparently

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *dwalu2Couple over a year ago

Bristol

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

Any woman has the right to wear as little or as much as she wants, the state should have no say in it. "

Yes, that's the long and short of it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Funny old world where you can wear a bikini the size of postage stamp and a Hollywood wax to carry it off in public should you wish, but punished for being modestly attired."

Modesty is not the issue, the French many years ago made the decision that their country, their country, would be secular and that means you can't disply religious imagery in public. It has nothing whatsoever to do with being misogynistic or being Islamophobic a man cannot wear crucifix in public either.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal."

The legality of the ban has been called into question hence the courts overturning it. What happened to 'Liberté, égalité, fraternité' - or does that only count if you're white, male and Christian??

The burkini is no different to a full wetsuit, and banning it is just repressing women further...the French should be ashamed of themselves instead of applauding the bullying tactics of their police and local politicians

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *agan_PairCouple over a year ago

portchester

Except this never happend, it's a lovely head line for the red tops but from the woman's own mouth all she was asked to do was re arrange her head scarf in to a head band. And the ban is for all items of clothing that show strong religious affiliation. She was never asked to strip off or take off her burkini. As for making a big deal of the armed police part , currently all police who are on duty by the beaches are armed with a pistol. So the fact they were armed was coincidental not a deliberate move. The side arms were never drawn or at any point used to threaten anyone.

But hey let's not let facts get in the way of an Internet rant.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Though I don't agree with telling people what to wear on a beach I do agree if you go to a country and use their beaches you should abide by their laws

I know you're a mother.

If a middle man on a beach, wearing nothing but a pouch was sat within the vicinity of a young child, would you be comfortable with it?

You can take kids on nudist beaches

That's a choice you yourself make, not the person sitting next to you."

I know that

I just didn't understand the point of asking if Id be comfortable with a guy in a pouch sitting next to a kid when kids can go on nudist beaches and see naked people

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Funny old world where you can wear a bikini the size of postage stamp and a Hollywood wax to carry it off in public should you wish, but punished for being modestly attired.

The argument will continue no doubt, not just on this thread but the entire world, but you just summarised it perfectly.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Though I don't agree with telling people what to wear on a beach I do agree if you go to a country and use their beaches you should abide by their laws

I know you're a mother.

If a middle man on a beach, wearing nothing but a pouch was sat within the vicinity of a young child, would you be comfortable with it?

You can take kids on nudist beaches

That's a choice you yourself make, not the person sitting next to you.

I know that

I just didn't understand the point of asking if Id be comfortable with a guy in a pouch sitting next to a kid when kids can go on nudist beaches and see naked people "

But if I WASN'T on a beach where it was specifically allowed, then yes I would have a problem with it, just as I would have an issue with ethnic minorities wearing attire that disregards the laws I am expected to adhere to, but not them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Don't really understand it to be honest

What was the reason for not letting them stay covered on the beach?

One of the 'official' explanations I saw on the news was that it would cause further racial tension. The concern was that Non Muslim people would be angry at people wearing burkinis etc

Well I've heard it all now

Like who gives a shit what the woman next to you on the beach is wearing "
probably the man sitting next to her

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 28/08/16 15:33:04]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It is right and the rest of europe should introduce it, they should also submit to christianity's rules.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *estivalMan over a year ago

borehamwood

Agree it is a bit heavy handed but there are plenty of beaches where its not against the law.was widley known in the area that it was forbidden on that beach though and also she just happend to have a photographer nearby.me thinks she was doing it to cause a scene.there are certain countrys where u have to be coverd and if you go to them and break the law ya will be arrested

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"[Removed by poster at 28/08/16 15:33:04]"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

in a world where cctv is used in a vast amount of security solutions I think that burkas shouldn't be allowed just as you can't walk into a bank with a motorbike helmet on. Call me racist call me what you want but I'm not . I'm maybe a little culturalist but that has nothing to do with people's religion . Personally I've too much respect for science to believe in any God . If I had my way there would be no religion, fuck knows it creates some shit in this world.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *orkshire biMan over a year ago

elland

Take a look what's gone on in France. Do u really blame them? If we went to the ladys countries we have to abide by there dress codes and laws.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It is right and the rest of europe should introduce it, they should also submit to christianity's rules."

Yep.

Whilst I am utterly, utterly against religion holding any kind of political sway in the world, if you grant liberties to one, then you grant liberties to all - that's called 'democracy', which is the system we all agreed to live under, because we believed it best to serve the greater good of all.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *abioMan over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians."

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

when one does, then we can have that conversation....

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians"

Can't tell if they're women concealed under all that fabric though can we?

Try again Fabio.

"so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another..."

See above - I'm opposed to all deistic religions.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

If it makes civilians less stressed over being blown up then it can only be a good thing. Sadly its what happens when lunatics use the garment to avoid detection. Just like motorcycle helmets are banned from banks

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If it makes civilians less stressed over being blown up then it can only be a good thing. Sadly its what happens when lunatics use the garment to avoid detection. Just like motorcycle helmets are banned from banks

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *an_WoodMan over a year ago

Stafford

Unnecessary as it is not a law that is applied consistently across faiths. I do have sympathy for the view expressed that it is unfrench use of the beach that offends but the law is not the right way to tackle that.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

when one does, then we can have that conversation....

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another..."

Maybe you should see the British nurse who was told she could not wear a crucifix at work . A good person who's been looking after people for 30 odd years told she can't wear it in her own Christian based country . You tell me what's fair it's the same over many subjects and I'm afraid we are to pc for our own good .

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Poor women. They can't win. They are forced to cover up by an oppressive male dominated religion and then ordered to remove the sign of their oppression by the law. Personally I prefer to sunbathe naked that's why I'm off to Chams to enjoy the sundeck.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

when one does, then we can have that conversation....

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another..."

In France No, the law aplies to all religions, nothing whatsoever to do with racism.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ngel n tedCouple over a year ago

maidstone

People should be allowed to wear what they like at the beach, personally i fucking hate the beach and get plenty of odd looks when i'm there, fully clothed and refusing to sit down. I'd happily wear a burkini in solidarity.

Ted

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

Can't tell if they're women concealed under all that fabric though can we?

Try again Fabio.

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another...

See above - I'm opposed to all deistic religions."

Just because you're opposed to them doesn't negate their existence.

When you start acting in such a way towards religious inequality, then you only create further racial divide which leads to more instances of extremism.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Ok I might sound really stupid but what's a Burkini???

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

Can't tell if they're women concealed under all that fabric though can we?

Try again Fabio.

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another...

See above - I'm opposed to all deistic religions.

Just because you're opposed to them doesn't negate their existence.

When you start acting in such a way towards religious inequality, then you only create further racial divide which leads to more instances of extremism. "

The fact something exists isn't enough to justify it's value.

I would have no issue with religion, if it hadn't created more divides and hostilities in the world than any other concept human kind has ever creates, stymy the progress of science and humanity, AND become an utterly wretched form of control and manipulation amongst humankind.

Humanity has ill need of it, regardless of which ethnicity practices it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arksidesubCouple over a year ago

not far from you..

I haven't seen or heard very much about it but I believe that Muslim or any other religions should be abolished in every country.

Christians/Muslim's whoever you are its all nonesence ribble rubbish in my opinion.it's the only thing that really gets on me!

Maybe it's the lack of understanding I dunno,but what I do know is Religion breeds hate don't try to tell me differently I know!..

Stuff all religion/religious people.

Wear what you want cover up wear less who cares their is far too many judgemental folk in sheep's clothing entering churches/mosques ect.

Phew rant over.sorry

OP if I've slightly twisted this post but the religious nuts I haven't time for clearly!..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too? A burkini is a long sleeved,long legged swimsuit with an attached skirt.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?"

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *dwalu2Couple over a year ago

Bristol

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

Can't tell if they're women concealed under all that fabric though can we?

Try again Fabio.

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another...

See above - I'm opposed to all deistic religions.

Just because you're opposed to them doesn't negate their existence.

When you start acting in such a way towards religious inequality, then you only create further racial divide which leads to more instances of extremism.

The fact something exists isn't enough to justify it's value.

Humanity has ill need of it, regardless of which ethnicity practices it."

Be that as it may, no religion was ever destroyed by 'abolishing' it. All that does is strengthens the religion. So if you seek to remove religion, for whatever reason, you need to approach the subject with more thought.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

Can't tell if they're women concealed under all that fabric though can we?

Try again Fabio.

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another...

See above - I'm opposed to all deistic religions.

Just because you're opposed to them doesn't negate their existence.

When you start acting in such a way towards religious inequality, then you only create further racial divide which leads to more instances of extremism.

The fact something exists isn't enough to justify it's value.

Humanity has ill need of it, regardless of which ethnicity practices it.

Despite my personal rejection of religion, my democratic values mean I wouldn't try to remove peoples right to practice it even if I could - I just wouldn't allow them to practice it at the expense of others.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ugby 123Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

O o O oo

"It depends for me, if it is against some law ( god knows why though ) then the woman has to accept the consequences...although they could have just told her to get off the beach rather than make her strip."

Of course she could have been doing it to be provocative as she didn't seem to be with anyone, which seems odd to me

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *allipygousMan over a year ago

Leicester

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too? A burkini is a long sleeved,long legged swimsuit with an attached skirt. "

Yep, a rather silly law. Would be a different matter if that woman was wearing a yashmak, niqab or burka.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated."

The only difference between a burkini and a wet suit is the skirt. If I as an atheist didn't want to show my fat body off to the world I would wear a swimsuit with a skirt,which are also available. All it's doing is stopping women from having fun on a beach. A question: Are Sikhs allowed to wear turbans in France?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uzy444Woman over a year ago

in the suffolk countryside

"Funny old world where you can wear a bikini the size of postage stamp and a Hollywood wax to carry it off in public should you wish, but punished for being modestly attired.

It's a lot harder to hide your identity under a postage stamp."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icecouple561Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

East Sussex

"What are your thoughts on the burkini ban in France? "

I think it's allowed a lot of people to express horribly insular opinions.

I've mixed feelings on the rationale behind it and "that picture" was designed to inflame I feel.

I firmly believe that the state, religion or law shouldn't dictate what a woman can or can't wear but they do and I wouldn't knowingly sunbathe topless in a country where it wasn't allowed or wear a burkini in a country where it wasn't allowed.

Nigella Lawson wore one a few years ago, I wonder if she were to do so now if she would be asked to remove it, the acid test of any law for me is does it apply to everyone.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Tell me this, other than Muslims, is there ANY other demographic in the Western World, or indeed anywhere in the world, who believe they have a right to wear masks/conceal their faces in public?"

Yes, they are called chavs and constantly cover their faces with scarves / hoodies to avoid being recognised on CCTV

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

Can't tell if they're women concealed under all that fabric though can we?

Try again Fabio.

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another...

See above - I'm opposed to all deistic religions.

Just because you're opposed to them doesn't negate their existence.

When you start acting in such a way towards religious inequality, then you only create further racial divide which leads to more instances of extremism.

The fact something exists isn't enough to justify it's value.

Humanity has ill need of it, regardless of which ethnicity practices it."

Just because you don't see it's value doesn't mean it is lacking.

I'm not a religious person, I'm actually a fan of Dawkins and Hitchens. But I still see that religion is better off when not used as an umbrella term. Ideologies are interpreted differently from person to person, and it's individuals that decide whether these ideologies are destructive in nature.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

Good thought, if they can then that blows a hole in their law and then it would be discriminatory against the burkini.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too? A burkini is a long sleeved,long legged swimsuit with an attached skirt.

Yep, a rather silly law. Would be a different matter if that woman was wearing a yashmak, niqab or burka."

Banning a long swimsuit on a beach is not going to stop evil,deranged people from murdering innocents in theatres and shopping centres. They are just stopping women from being able to do what I enjoy doing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ophieslutTV/TS over a year ago

Central

Isn't it just a mostly futile attempt to express control when the state and many people are in fear but somewhat useless to stop atrocities? Women are the soft targets for their anger, an already oppressed group.

Seen to be doing something' is a lot of the drive in the theatre of the state. But it becomes a farce.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

Good thought, if they can then that blows a hole in their law and then it would be discriminatory against the burkini."

Maybe they have banned it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too? A burkini is a long sleeved,long legged swimsuit with an attached skirt. "

....thank you!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Isn't it just a mostly futile attempt to express control when the state and many people are in fear but somewhat useless to stop atrocities? Women are the soft targets for their anger, an already oppressed group.

Seen to be doing something' is a lot of the drive in the theatre of the state. But it becomes a farce."

They could do a Trump and ban all Muslims. Just to be on the safe side.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

The only difference between a burkini and a wet suit is the skirt. If I as an atheist didn't want to show my fat body off to the world I would wear a swimsuit with a skirt,which are also available."

Again, not religiously affiliated.

"All it's doing is stopping women from having fun on a beach. A question: Are Sikhs allowed to wear turbans in France? "

Sikhs arn't allowed to cut their hair, so they tie it up in a turban. Personally this doesn't make sense to me, but as I've yet to hear of any terrorist attacks committed by Sikhs, and the turban doesn't conceal their identities, I'm fine with them.

I'd also imagine these womens religion has stopped them doing a lot more than having fun on a beach.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddlybear2015Man over a year ago

BEDFORD

"What are your thoughts on the burkini ban in France? "

Its knee jerk nonsense,a ban on public religous display yet, I'm guessing, priests will be wearing dog collars and nuns won't be persecuted in the strrets.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

The only difference between a burkini and a wet suit is the skirt. If I as an atheist didn't want to show my fat body off to the world I would wear a swimsuit with a skirt,which are also available.

Again, not religiously affiliated.

All it's doing is stopping women from having fun on a beach. A question: Are Sikhs allowed to wear turbans in France?

I'd also imagine these womens religion has stopped them doing a lot more than having fun on a beach.

So it's ok that we can add no swimming in the sea to that?

It isn't only religious people who want to cover their bodies. If the burkini was called something else and atheists wore them would the French government ban them? It's banned purely because Muslim women wear them. They aren't a religious symbol.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Are those well known religious extremists, nuns, allowed on French beaches?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icecouple561Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

East Sussex

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

The only difference between a burkini and a wet suit is the skirt. If I as an atheist didn't want to show my fat body off to the world I would wear a swimsuit with a skirt,which are also available.

Again, not religiously affiliated.

All it's doing is stopping women from having fun on a beach. A question: Are Sikhs allowed to wear turbans in France?

I'd also imagine these womens religion has stopped them doing a lot more than having fun on a beach.

There have been terrorist attacks carried out by Sikh militants.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

The only difference between a burkini and a wet suit is the skirt. If I as an atheist didn't want to show my fat body off to the world I would wear a swimsuit with a skirt,which are also available.

Again, not religiously affiliated.

All it's doing is stopping women from having fun on a beach. A question: Are Sikhs allowed to wear turbans in France?

I'd also imagine these womens religion has stopped them doing a lot more than having fun on a beach.

So it's ok that we can add no swimming in the sea to that?"

Swimming in the sea is normal and natural, the polar opposite of religion.

"It isn't only religious people who want to cover their bodies. If the burkini was called something else and atheists wore them would the French government ban them? It's banned purely because Muslim women wear them."

Baseless, meaningless speculation, which contributes nothing positive to this debate.

"They aren't a religious symbol."

Oh that's fine, just go tell the women wearing them that they can take them off then because Allah doesn't require it, I'm sure the Muslim males would have no issue with that...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So would my children be banned from wearing the all in one uv protective sun suits with hats covering the back of their neck on these beaches? Because all the burkinis I've seen have looked exactly like adult versions of these. What about wetsuits with hoods? Are surfers/scuba divers banned too?

Smacks to me of people in power trying to make issues where there were none to distract from the fact that they are not doing the job they are actually paid to do correctly.

Mrs x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Are women banned from wearing long skirts or dresses on these beaches too?

Neither of these are religiously affiliated.

The only difference between a burkini and a wet suit is the skirt. If I as an atheist didn't want to show my fat body off to the world I would wear a swimsuit with a skirt,which are also available.

Again, not religiously affiliated.

All it's doing is stopping women from having fun on a beach. A question: Are Sikhs allowed to wear turbans in France?

I'd also imagine these womens religion has stopped them doing a lot more than having fun on a beach.

So it's ok that we can add no swimming in the sea to that?

Swimming in the sea is normal and natural, the polar opposite of religion.

Baseless, meaningless speculation, which contributes nothing positive to this debate.

They aren't a religious symbol.

Oh that's fine, just go tell the women wearing them that they can take them off then because Allah doesn't require it, I'm sure the Muslim males would have no issue with that..."

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"So would my children be banned from wearing the all in one uv protective sun suits with hats covering the back of their neck on these beaches? "

Provide a valid document showing you have a practical reason for your kids wearing them, and I doubt any court in France would have an issue with it.

"So not a fan of those pesky human rights then? "

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *alandNitaCouple over a year ago

Scunthorpe

"So would my children be banned from wearing the all in one uv protective sun suits with hats covering the back of their neck on these beaches? Because all the burkinis I've seen have looked exactly like adult versions of these. What about wetsuits with hoods? Are surfers/scuba divers banned too?

Smacks to me of people in power trying to make issues where there were none to distract from the fact that they are not doing the job they are actually paid to do correctly.

Mrs x"

NIta

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not."

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Burkini sales have risen apparently.

That's fine - just don't wear them publically in a country were they're illegal.

Good people have a duty to break bad laws. Rosa Parks refusing to move from a white only bus in America for example.

Rosa Parks, and the black community in America at large, have yet to commit a vile multitude of mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians.

So if that is the arguement... how many women wearing burkini's have committed mass terrorist atrocities against innocent civilians

when one does, then we can have that conversation....

so then if this happens, what about christian crosses, and jewish yamaka's.... or is it one rule for one religion.. and one rule for another...

nmc codes:Staff should not wear jewellery (note plain wedding bands are acceptable); fingernails

should be short and free of nail varnish (false nails are unacceptable) and hair should

be worn neatly in a style that does not require frequent re-adjustment (Pratt et al.,

2007). Organisations should also be clear regarding local policy on the wearing of

other items, such as false eyelashes by clinical staff and those working in clinical

envrionments. It is the responsibility of individual organisations to determine a local

definition of what constitutes ‘jewellery’ and what is acceptable, taking into account

religious, cultural and infection control needs.

so it was nothing about it being a crucifix,nothing about PC either..it is health and safety!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"
then you too would be told to remove or be shot don't like the rules don't go simples

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"The laws of a country and it's people come before religion...they were simply doing their jobs, in ensuring that the people of the land, adhere to the laws of the land, which exist to maintain the order a civilised society requires to exist."

Actually, the Laws in question are local ordinances, NOT national statutes. Also, they DO NOT specifically mention the burkini, but rather 'beachwear which ostentatiously displays religious affiliation.'

The justification, as given by Thierry Migoule, the Head of the Municipal Services in Cannes, is that the laws are targeting "ostentatious clothing which refers to an allegiance to terrorist movements which are at war with us.”

One is led to think of 'Reds Under The Bed' during the McCarthy Era in the USA...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

One is led to think of 'Reds Under The Bed' during the McCarthy Era in the USA..."

All of which rank lower than human rights anyway...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uriousc88Woman over a year ago

Reading

Except that particular case was nothing to do with political correctness. She couldn't wear it on health and safety and infection control grounds, because it could catch on or in something or a patient could grab it and cause injury. That doesn't make such a good headline though, eh.

Banning the Burkini was a knee jerk reaction by right wing councils in France, where the political far right is on the increase, designed to play on people's fear by taking a visible, clear and identifiable target and 'doing something about it'. It is designed to give people a focus, and make it look like something is being done.

It serves no other purpose.

Many women don't see covering themselves as a sign of submission, they choose to wear the headscarf themselves as a sign of their devotion to their God and to their faith. It's not always something forced upon them by the men in their life. Others enjoy the freedom that dressing modesty gives them. By covering themselves, they no longer find themselves subject to the casual sexual harassment that many women, of all creeds and colours, find themselves subjected to on a daily basis.

As for saying that banning that Burkini is for security reasons, the Burkini does not cover a woman's face and, personally, I have never seen one voluminous enough to conceal anything under. So tell me how it poses any form of security threat?

My body, nor anyone else's body, should not be a battleground for the challenged facing wider society. If I want to wear a long sleeved, full leg swim suit, then I should be able to. Equally, if I want to go out in a thong bikini with my big fat, wobbly arse hanging out, no one else has a right to tell me I can't do that. My choice in clothing is not subject to the whims or sensibilities of anyone else.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher"

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"The laws of a country and it's people come before religion."

Except that the Ban on the Burkini was never a NATIONAL law; it was a LOCAL ordinance.

The ban has been suspended by order of France's highest civil court. Any local authorities attempting to maintain the ban are now opening themselves up to prosecution.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights."

Humans rights are law.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Except that the Ban on the Burkini was never a NATIONAL law; it was a LOCAL ordinance.

The ban has been suspended by order of France's highest civil court. Any local authorities attempting to maintain the ban are now opening themselves up to prosecution."

Again, international law ranks higher than national law anyway.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

One is led to think of 'Reds Under The Bed' during the McCarthy Era in the USA...

All of which rank lower than human rights anyway... "

That was rather my point...Monsieur Migoule's statement can be accurately summarised as: 'if you are a woman wearing a Burkini, you are proclaiming allegiance to ISIS.'

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law. "

No, the LAW is the law, the bedrock of principles upon which of all society is build, with the intention of hopefully creating a system of equal opportunity under we can all live under peacefully. If one person, or group of people believe for some reason that their needs are somehow scared and inviolable (despite having NOTHING to back this up), at the expense of others, then no, that's not claiming your human rights, that's claiming preferential treatment.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

tch, 'sacred'

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 28/08/16 16:59:09]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

it could be great club wear... you don't know who you are playing with..... or was that wrong?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entaur_UKMan over a year ago

Cannock

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land. "

Why are human rights activists not up in arms about laws stating what women can or can't wear in public in Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia and Dubai then? If Western women go to these countries they must respect the law and cover up or dress modestly on a beach, and nothing ever gets said by the PC human rights brigade. It smacks of double standards and hypocrisy. It's very simple, if Islamic countries expect westerners to abide by the law in their countries then Muslims should respect and abide by the law when they come to a western country such as France.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"it could be great club wear... you don't know who you are playing with..... or was that wrong?"

Very, you're not allowed to make fun of religious peoples choice to wear socially isolating clothing, it infringes on their human rights.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It serves no other purpose.

as I said above and before my last comment:

this IS george orwells 1984!-

People are 'happy' to be living in an armed policed state,because they fear an enemy(this enemy constantly changes).

Nobody answered me earlier though, when I asked why a good few terrorists have already been on that 'watch list'?-and how they ended up evading the investigators to carry out mass killings..

and we are now defending a regime, where you can be told what to wear by a couple of guys armed with guns on a not very overcrowded looking beach. Even if it was a 'staged' photo..can nobody see the ridiculousness of that itself..

2016?-nope its 1984..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"No, the LAW is the law, the bedrock of principles upon which of all society is build, with the intention of hopefully creating a system of equal opportunity under we can all live under peacefully"

First, the “burkini ban” was brought in by only a few communes in a few isolated departments. IT WAS NOT a national law, nor did it possess national authority.

Second, according to a ruling passed by France's highest court, the ban was IN VIOLATION of French law.

In their ruling, the judges stated that the ban "dealt a serious and clearly illegal blow to fundamental liberties such as the freedom of movement, freedom of conscience and personal liberty.”

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land.

so your saying tit for tat...bit childish isnt it..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land.

That's a logic that only makes sense if you want western countries to uphold only the lowest common denominator of human rights.

In simple terms, the answer to your question is that we hold ourselves to higher standards.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *renchbambi xWoman over a year ago

Need to know basis

"No, the LAW is the law, the bedrock of principles upon which of all society is build, with the intention of hopefully creating a system of equal opportunity under we can all live under peacefully

First, the “burkini ban” was brought in by only a few communes in a few isolated departments. IT WAS NOT a national law, nor did it possess national authority.

Second, according to a ruling passed by France's highest court, the ban was IN VIOLATION of French law.

In their ruling, the judges stated that the ban "dealt a serious and clearly illegal blow to fundamental liberties such as the freedom of movement, freedom of conscience and personal liberty.” "

Finally an intelligent comment

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law."

You can claim it to be higher all you like - if it doesn't work then it will be subject to criticism. 'Human Rights' is a sickeningly flawed, mishandled concept that all too easily provides an escape route for those who would, and have infringed upon the rights of others, and is in major, desperate need of amendment.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher.

You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group. Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *thwalescplCouple over a year ago

brecon

What gets me is the woman photographed on a French beach wasn't actually set up for a day at the beach, if you look at the professionally shot, with a big lens, from a distance photos.

She had no sunglasses, no book, or magazine to read, no bag, and, until the police hove into view, she wasn't even lying down chilling in the sun, according to witnesses, she was sat up, and looking around.

So, what's my point?

It was a set up, designed to give a professional photographer the pics he needed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

Oh, and of course, if we're gonna go down that route, the people of France have a 'Human Right' to feel safe and secure in THEIR OWN COUNTRY, and if being able to see the faces of those passing them in the street, or on the beach (understandably) grants them a greater feeling of security, then those needs should be honoured.

" Predictable, belligerent, myopic twat argument from no one in particular 'the burkini doesn't cover the face'"

No, but it is derived from the Burkha which does - grant them the right to wear it in public (already against the law as it's a religious article regardless of what it does or doesn't show), and it won't be long before they add a face covering to it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"why are human rights activists not up in arms about laws stating what women can or can't wear in public in Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia and Dubai then? If Western women go to these countries they must respect the law and cover up or dress modestly on a beach, and nothing ever gets said by the PC human rights brigade. It smacks of double standards and hypocrisy. It's very simple, if Islamic countries expect westerners to abide by the law in their countries then Muslims should respect and abide by the law when they come to a western country such as France. "

I think you'll find that Human Rights Activists ARE 'up in arms' concerning the activities of the various forms of the Islamic Religious Police, and have been for some time.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

My understanding is it was a hijab and not a burkini...she was asked to leave the beach or remove her head scarf and leggings.....it was not about threat it was about the fairness of nuturality.

The beach signs were clear - no religious affiliation to be be worn on that beach.

There are beach signs for no dogs, no swimming, no nudity, no smoking, no alcohol - it is a communal area where they attempt equality and no offence.

Just as Arab countries ask for certain attire entering a mosque or respect with the consumption of foods or alcohol to be adhered to in public areas.

As mentioned earlier the woman in France was asked to wear her cross inside her garments at work.

If those beach guidelines are not acceptable to you attend a beach or pool or private swimming area where it is. I cannot go around kissing on a public beach in Dubai, is it my human right to kiss on a beach?

We have home guidelines, work guidelines, social guidelines.....I do not walk into a restaurant naked just because I might believe in body freedom. I would choose a venue where it was accepted. France has its guidelines just as UK, Australia or UAE do....

Did this impinge on her human right I don't think so.....yes some rules/guidelines need to be challenged ......if this is to be challenged than can we make it world wide that we can wear anything anywhere in the world and everyone will accept it be it work, home, services, hospitals, restaurant and even a school environment?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Two random thoughts:-

1) I wonder if the women were wearing wetsuits, not Burkinis, if they would be asked to remove them?

Presumably, its what the thing represents, not the thing itself thats the issue.

2) In certain countries, there are rule about what can be worn in public. France should be considered as no different from any other country which dictates through law (national or local ordinance) what can or cannot be worn in public.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

If Lacroix had designed them and made them fashionable no one would have had a problem with them. They would have been another design of swim wear. Which is what they are and I'd feel more comfortable in an all in one with a skirt than an ordinary swim suit.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

is this even better than what i was saying about 1984?-

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/704003/burkini-ban-beach-France-muslim-women-police-mayor-Nice

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Oh, and of course, if we're gonna go down that route, the people of France have a 'Human Right' to feel safe and secure in THEIR OWN COUNTRY."

Except that the ban on the Burkini WASN'T introduced at the behest of 'the people of France,' but by a handful of local mayors. Until such time as the ban becomes national, your argument has no force.

Also, if you're going to talk about 'the people of France,' was the woman on that beach not also a French citizen?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher."

And as I've pointed out, multiple times, just because a group arguing from authority claims it to be higher, doesn't make it so, especially when it falls apart under the mildest of scrutiny, as I've repeatedly shown throughout this thread.

"You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group."

If that ethnic or religious group has repeatedly been linked with many, many viciously evil acts across the world, then it should be subject to sanctions and deeply scrutinised. It has no basis for claiming a victim mentality, when it itself has created so many victims. I'm aware that not all Muslims are terrorists, but a terrifying number of terrorists are Muslims.

" Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances. "

More conjecture and speculation I see.

Hitler was a religious psychopath and Saddam Hussein was a tyrannical cunt who justified his evil deeds through his religion (though I don't doubt he'd have been a monster anyway, religion just gave him a nice wrapper).

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entaur_UKMan over a year ago

Cannock

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land.

That's a logic that only makes sense if you want western countries to uphold only the lowest common denominator of human rights.

In simple terms, the answer to your question is that we hold ourselves to higher standards."

It's not a question of any kind of standards, it's just a question of obeying the law of the land of which ever country you happen to find yourself in. What you think are acceptable 'standards' is frankly irrelevant to the discussion. Your standards may differ vastly to what someone else's may be.

I go back to the point again, when will human rights activists show the same level of anger/offence about western women being told what to wear by the law on a beach in Dubai?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Nice to see another thread proving Godwins Law.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety. "

Hmmm, removing human rights to preserve safety... sounds familiar...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"Ever get the feeling some things are being done to provoke?- it's like some kind of stageplay.

I really cant see anything constructive about this action on this woman..and it makes no sense in it's entirety, the onlookers I bet have no clue whats going on and did not care anyway.

We've seen several 'iconic' photos come to view lately, people fighting against injustice etc..

this is one...and she is not fighting.She is terrified and mostly likely ashamed."

I think it's propaganda.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land.

That's a logic that only makes sense if you want western countries to uphold only the lowest common denominator of human rights.

In simple terms, the answer to your question is that we hold ourselves to higher standards.

I go back to the point again, when will human rights activists show the same level of anger/offence about western women being told what to wear by the law on a beach in Dubai? "

I don't know, go ask the smelly tree huggers.

What part of the law of the land being subject to human rights isn't clear at this point?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety.

Hmmm, removing human rights to preserve safety... sounds familiar... "

Not removing human rights - just being a little more discerning in who actually deserves them, and which ones

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land.

That's a logic that only makes sense if you want western countries to uphold only the lowest common denominator of human rights.

In simple terms, the answer to your question is that we hold ourselves to higher standards.

I go back to the point again, when will human rights activists show the same level of anger/offence about western women being told what to wear by the law on a beach in Dubai? "

You're allowed to wear bikinis in Dubai on the beach.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

This has nothing at all to do with a 'victim mentality.'

The fact is that these bans were introduced *ad hoc* by local mayors, and in violation - according to France's State Council - of French law.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If that ethnic or religious group has repeatedly been linked with many, many viciously evil acts across the world, then it should be subject to sanctions and deeply scrutinised. It has no basis for claiming a victim mentality, when it itself has created so many victims. I'm aware that not all Muslims are terrorists, but a terrifying number of terrorists are Muslims.

This has nothing at all to do with a 'victim mentality.'

The fact is that these bans were introduced *ad hoc* by local mayors, and in violation - according to France's State Council - of French law."

Did they reference which part of the law it supposedly violates?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher.

You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group.

Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances.

More conjecture and speculation I see.

Honestly, I really don't know what inspired your username. You may or may not have a high IQ or good education, but you suffer from the number 1 inhibitor of good analysis, which is adherence to an ideology. You should really read Philip Tetlocks scientific study on expert political judgement, it would honestly be life changing for you and would explain everywhere you go wrong, in scientific terms. Your points above are laughable, you need to be really well educated to be that stupid.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

This has nothing at all to do with a 'victim mentality.'

The fact is that these bans were introduced *ad hoc* by local mayors, and in violation - according to France's State Council - of French law.

Did they reference which part of the law it supposedly violates?"

And I'd like that part quoted directly please, not speculated upon.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mojeeCouple over a year ago

Dunfermline

I don't trust anyone when I can't see their face.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety.

Hmmm, removing human rights to preserve safety... sounds familiar...

Not removing human rights - just being a little more discerning in who actually deserves them, and which ones

This is comedy gold. We're going to select which humans get human rights!! Seriously, reconsider your username!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety.

Hmmm, removing human rights to preserve safety... sounds familiar...

Not removing human rights - just being a little more discerning in who actually deserves them, and which ones

Oh, so you are appointing yourself supreme arbiter on who deserves 'human rights'?

Basically, you're saying that anyone who professes adherence to Islam forfeits their human rights...

I'm reminded of the Test Act, the Irish Penal Laws and the Papist Acts, all of which denied civil liberties to Catholics in Britain and Ireland solely on grounds of religion...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher.

You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group.

Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances.

More conjecture and speculation I see.

Oh the fucking IRONY of that statement...

"You should really read Philip Tetlocks scientific study on expert political judgement, it would honestly be life changing for you and would explain everywhere you go wrong, in scientific terms. Your points above are laughable, you need to be really well educated to be that stupid. "

Here's a better idea - supposedly you've read this book, so how about making a few points from it, or have you done so already, because they really weren't that difficult to counter?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I don't trust anyone when I can't see their face. "

I don't trust you then...you're wearing a mask and hiding your face in your pics...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"My understanding is it was a hijab and not a burkini...she was asked to leave the beach or remove her head scarf and leggings.....it was not about threat it was about the fairness of nuturality.

The beach signs were clear - no religious affiliation to be be worn on that beach.

There are beach signs for no dogs, no swimming, no nudity, no smoking, no alcohol - it is a communal area where they attempt equality and no offence.

Just as Arab countries ask for certain attire entering a mosque or respect with the consumption of foods or alcohol to be adhered to in public areas.

As mentioned earlier the woman in France was asked to wear her cross inside her garments at work.

X "

I'm gonna quote this post, because it was a damn good one that got totally overlooked.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nice to see another thread proving Godwins Law.

Lol, I was waiting on that one too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

This kind of thing further plays into the hands of groups like IS and Boko Haram when will people learn that terror attacks are not about bringing a country to its knees they are about causing a devide in society if they can make muslims feel like outcasts by turning the population against them it makes their job of radicalising people a whole lot easier and the sad fact is people buy into this islamobphobic bullshit every day terrorist are bot muslims theyre killers masquerading as religious martyrs

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nice to see another thread proving Godwins Law.

Lol, I was waiting on that one too."

Without looking it up I'll assume it refers to Nazi-ism.

And it was the ones defending the Burkini who brought it up...so predictable...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

This has nothing at all to do with a 'victim mentality.'

The fact is that these bans were introduced *ad hoc* by local mayors, and in violation - according to France's State Council - of French law."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher.

You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group.

Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances.

More conjecture and speculation I see.

Oh the fucking IRONY of that statement...

You should really read Philip Tetlocks scientific study on expert political judgement, it would honestly be life changing for you and would explain everywhere you go wrong, in scientific terms. Your points above are laughable, you need to be really well educated to be that stupid.

Here's a better idea - supposedly you've read this book, so how about making a few points from it, or have you done so already, because they really weren't that difficult to counter?"

It's not a book, it's a scientific study, as I say it would change your life. 9/11 conspiracy theorists and creationists also believe that they easily countered the arguments they encountered.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety.

Hmmm, removing human rights to preserve safety... sounds familiar...

Not removing human rights - just being a little more discerning in who actually deserves them, and which ones

This is comedy gold. We're going to select which humans get human rights!! Seriously, reconsider your username! "

Not quite as golden as bending over backwards to protect murderers and rapists from justice, but still, I wouldn't be surprised by your simplistic sense of humour.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

It serves no other purpose.

The burkini doesn't cover the face. I really don't see how it is a religious symbol. It's a swimsuit that covers the body.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nice to see another thread proving Godwins Law.

Lol, I was waiting on that one too.

Without looking it up I'll assume it refers to Nazi-ism.

And it was the ones defending the Burkini who brought it up...so predictable..."

Actually, it's that as the length of a internet argument grows inevitabily someone will mention Hitler or the Nazi party. And that falls on you.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!"

Where should they fuck off too?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher.

You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group.

Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances.

More conjecture and speculation I see.

Oh the fucking IRONY of that statement...

Here's a better idea - supposedly you've read this book, so how about making a few points from it, or have you done so already, because they really weren't that difficult to counter?

It's not a book, it's a scientific study, as I say it would change your life. 9/11 conspiracy theorists and creationists also believe that they easily countered the arguments they encountered. "

Ok then, just out of curiosity, this 'scientific study' - did it actually propose any kind of solutions to the issues arising from Islam, or was it just more pointless cerebral wanking?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!

Where should they fuck off too?"

A country where Burkinis aren't illegal may be a good destination.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nice to see another thread proving Godwins Law.

Lol, I was waiting on that one too.

Without looking it up I'll assume it refers to Nazi-ism.

And it was the ones defending the Burkini who brought it up...so predictable...

Actually, it's that as the length of a internet argument grows inevitabily someone will mention Hitler or the Nazi party. And that falls on you. "

Actually I mentioned Hitler as the 'Jew' issue had already been raised.

Unless I jumped to conclusions and they were actually talking about Ramses, but I doubt stories in the Old Testament would be most people go to in this kind of debate.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety.

Hmmm, removing human rights to preserve safety... sounds familiar...

Not removing human rights - just being a little more discerning in who actually deserves them, and which ones

That comment makes no sense. Do you understand what human rights are?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!

Where should they fuck off too?

A country where Burkinis aren't illegal may be a good destination."

So they can stay in France then?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mojeeCouple over a year ago

Dunfermline

"I don't trust anyone when I can't see their face.

I don't trust you then...you're wearing a mask and hiding your face in your pics..."

In real life I mean. Obviously putting our faces on a sex site could have implications for work and family life etc.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!

Where should they fuck off too?

A country where Burkinis aren't illegal may be a good destination.

So they can stay in France then?"

Ah, you're familiar with French law, wonderful, perhaps you can tell me which part of it the ban violates then, with direct quotes please?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher.

You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group.

Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances.

More conjecture and speculation I see.

Oh the fucking IRONY of that statement...

Here's a better idea - supposedly you've read this book, so how about making a few points from it, or have you done so already, because they really weren't that difficult to counter?

It's not a book, it's a scientific study, as I say it would change your life. 9/11 conspiracy theorists and creationists also believe that they easily countered the arguments they encountered.

Ok then, just out of curiosity, this 'scientific study' - did it actually propose any kind of solutions to the issues arising from Islam, or was it just more pointless cerebral wanking?"

You've mentioned on other threads that you think you're intelligent. Intelligence alone does not produce good analysis. For example, there was a hedge fund called Long Term Capital Management that was packed full of Nobel prize winners and it set the record for largest bankruptcy.

This study explains why there is such a gap and in my humble opinion, you are a perfect example of that gap. I never met an intelligent person who wasn't interested in challenging their preconceptions anyway so really I'm not sure what harm it could do you.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think its important to consider the security level and recent activitys in France before passing judgement.

We live on a very volatile world and the actions to make these women remove this clothing could well be for there own safety.

Hmmm, removing human rights to preserve safety... sounds familiar...

Not removing human rights - just being a little more discerning in who actually deserves them, and which ones

That comment makes no sense. Do you understand what human rights are? "

He does but the facts are conflicting with ideology, the latter is winning

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

So not a fan of those pesky human rights then?

Where they violate and infringe upon the human rights of others, such as in the case of the Burkha/ini then no, I'm not.

Well that explains why you ramble on about the law of the land and ignore the fact that human rights rank higher

Without laws, humans HAVE no rights.

Humans rights are law.

Whether or not you personally like international law is irrelevant to the facts that it exists and it ranks higher than national law.

It's not my claim, it's a fact that it ranks higher.

You know what else is a flawed concept, national governments being free to make whatever laws they like whether it discriminates against a religious or ethnic group.

Bad things happen to Jews and Kurds in those circumstances.

More conjecture and speculation I see.

Oh the fucking IRONY of that statement...

Here's a better idea - supposedly you've read this book, so how about making a few points from it, or have you done so already, because they really weren't that difficult to counter?

It's not a book, it's a scientific study, as I say it would change your life. 9/11 conspiracy theorists and creationists also believe that they easily countered the arguments they encountered.

Ok then, just out of curiosity, this 'scientific study' - did it actually propose any kind of solutions to the issues arising from Islam, or was it just more pointless cerebral wanking?

Right, then kindly explain to me, in a nutshell, what was the upshot of the study?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Human rights come before the law of the land.

Spot on.

But that would be too much like common sense.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!

Where should they fuck off too?

A country where Burkinis aren't illegal may be a good destination.

So they can stay in France then?

Ah, you're familiar with French law, wonderful, perhaps you can tell me which part of it the ban violates then, with direct quotes please?"

As the highest law in France has said the ban on Burkinis is unlawful I'm really not sure of the point you are asking?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!

Where should they fuck off too?

A country where Burkinis aren't illegal may be a good destination.

So they can stay in France then?

Ah, you're familiar with French law, wonderful, perhaps you can tell me which part of it the ban violates then, with direct quotes please?

As the highest law in France has said the ban on Burkinis is unlawful I'm really not sure of the point you are asking?"

I just wanted to read it for myself, rather than simply accept a supposed argument from authority.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"My understanding is it was a hijab and not a burkini...she was asked to leave the beach or remove her head scarf and leggings.....it was not about threat it was about the fairness of nuturality.

The beach signs were clear - no religious affiliation to be be worn on that beach.

There are beach signs for no dogs, no swimming, no nudity, no smoking, no alcohol - it is a communal area where they attempt equality and no offence.

Just as Arab countries ask for certain attire entering a mosque or respect with the consumption of foods or alcohol to be adhered to in public areas.

As mentioned earlier the woman in France was asked to wear her cross inside her garments at work.

X "

Brilliant post x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Right, then kindly explain to me, in a nutshell, what was the upshot of the study?"

That it proves that IQ or education play only a hygiene role in being able to properly understand, and hence predict political events.

It also proves that the more ideological a person is (left or right), the worse their analysis gets.

So when you are absolutely sure you are correct, but you find your views very well aligned to a single ideology - that should serve as a big red flag to the scientifically minded. Of course you could always double down and join the conspiracy theorists and creationists in the unscientific world. They will think they are right until their dying day and there's comfort in that.

It's actually a very famous study, often misquoted as saying that experts are no better than dart throwing chimps.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tickyfingers60Couple over a year ago

rochdale

it has little to do with telling women what they can and cannot wear and more to do with symbolism. I'm sure a lot of people would have a problem if certain groups like the KKK walked about in their clothing !?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It serves no other purpose.

The burkini doesn't cover the face. I really don't see how it is a religious symbol. It's a swimsuit that covers the body. "

Because only Muslim women wear it.

Do Rastafarians have to cut off their dreads or cover up with a head scarf?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isdirtygirlCouple over a year ago

somewhere out there

This does make me smile. Thousands of Christians in Africa, the Middle East and Asia are persecuted and die in Muslim countries yearly. This largely due to the intolerance of Muslims. Nobody over here gives a flying Fuck about that. If we feel so strongly about intolerance hows about we do something about that intolerance. Intolerance where people either submit to Islam or die. Then once we sort that out we can tackle the low level intolerance of women in burkinis over here.

Personally I don't care what a woman wears on a beach as long as her face is visible and she can't pack an explosive belt or other weapons. I do however get pissed off when we bend over backwards to guarantee Muslims all sorts of freedoms when Muslim countries still govern according to the middle ages - and give little or no freedoms to anyone not Muslim and male.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It has been lifted. Ninjas like to swim too you know!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isdirtygirlCouple over a year ago

somewhere out there

"Except this never happend, it's a lovely head line for the red tops but from the woman's own mouth all she was asked to do was re arrange her head scarf in to a head band. And the ban is for all items of clothing that show strong religious affiliation. She was never asked to strip off or take off her burkini. As for making a big deal of the armed police part , currently all police who are on duty by the beaches are armed with a pistol. So the fact they were armed was coincidental not a deliberate move. The side arms were never drawn or at any point used to threaten anyone.

But hey let's not let facts get in the way of an Internet rant."

And people will conveniently ignore your posting as it doesn't fit with the PC narrative.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

This was debated on TV this morning.

The most interesting response was in reply to a viewer who had commented that when a Westerner visits a Muslim country, they are expected to cover up on the beach, so why should the French not expect a Muslim to abide by their dress code.

The response? Because Muslim countries do not promote themselves as liberal. France does.

Quite right.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 28/08/16 18:14:47]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

f you give into terror it has won;

The day a woman cannot wear what she wishes without being given a label or branded of being a symbolic terrorist is the day that all terrorism has won.

If a woman wears a short skirt on a night out is she "asking for it"? Is she a slut?

If a woman wears a burkini ; does she support terrorism?

Seriously; think about it; we have fought (as a race) for freedom of expression; what we wear, how we look; who we can marry; and this medieval logic of "ban this/that" serves no one but the terrorists;

Rather than concentrate on what divides us; try to see what unites us. These women are at liberty to wear what they wish; as are you; deny freedom and you become the terrorist you despise

eek spelling mistake

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

But hey let's not let facts get in the way of an Internet rant.

And people will conveniently ignore your posting as it doesn't fit with the PC narrative.

With the thread heading towards capacity, I'll quote it again, just to make sure.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"f you give into terror it has won;

The day a woman cannot wear what she wishes without being given a label or branded of being a symbolic terrorist is the day that all terrorism has won.

If a woman wears a short skirt on a night out is she "asking for it"? Is she a slut?

If a woman wears a burkini ; does she support terrorism?

Rather than concentrate on what divides us; try to see what unites us. These women are at liberty to wear what they wish; as are you; deny freedom and you become the terrorist you despise

eek spelling mistake

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 28/08/16 18:20:30]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Aaaand scene!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Thousands of Christians in Africa, the Middle East and Asia are persecuted and die in Muslim countries yearly. This largely due to the intolerance of Muslims. Nobody over here gives a flying Fuck about that."

'Noone gives a flying fuck? What utter Bullshit.

People protest every again against the injustices suffered by Christians, women, LGBT and other minorities in Africa, Asia and the Middle East...it's just that the Redtop papers know that reporting on them won't sell copies...

However, getting you pissed off by giving you the impression that we 'bend over backwards to appease [insert fundamentalist here]' will make them rich...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think men, dressed in black from head to toe, and pointing machine guns at women, while ordering them to undress is a disgrace.

The laws of a country and it's people come before religion.

Too right if they dont like it just fxxk off!!!

Where should they fuck off too?

A country where Burkinis aren't illegal may be a good destination.

So they can stay in France then?

Ah, you're familiar with French law, wonderful, perhaps you can tell me which part of it the ban violates then, with direct quotes please?

As the highest law in France has said the ban on Burkinis is unlawful I'm really not sure of the point you are asking?

I just wanted to read it for myself, rather than simply accept a supposed argument from authority."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/burkini-ban-french-france-court-suspends-rule-law-forbidding-swimwear-worn-muslim-women-seriously-a7211396.html

One of countless new articles about it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)