FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


The Burka Debate





ohlee
of cousre we ll believe in freedom of riligion in so far it accord with our laaw.

the debate is like the ACLU vs Intergrate or go home, literary to home.

how to find a place the every one can live with.........

AS australians we have had 25 years not stop media bombardment and these images are brought up over the bourka debate'

Australia has no history of only showing your eyes. our most famous bush ranger wore a butlet proof head shield, we co go to images of terrorists in Islam and socking wearing armed roberies

Full face motor cycle heaments with dark tint band, in fac yout car can onl get tinting to certain level, we see special forces, riot squads and even ninjas the im age ingrained in our mind - munich

i sse people good people humanirain people not able to find the worlds. i say explain to them, show pictures, so they understsnt that is not rascim. all we as is to show your mouth.

Then we will let you go isto banks, pharmacy, plans have drivers licence. and we can wake sumdy full burka day
ratanegra
On one side we have the freedom of speech and religion, from which one can conclude that people should do whatever they want with their bodies and appearances. And on the other side, we've got those who defend the rights and equality of all human beings. Choosing won't solve the problem, since there will always be other person who chose the other side. However, in the middle, we've got France's situation. They argue that by covering their faces, people could be anonymous for the authorities and CCTV cameras, which would end up being a serious security issue.

There is an argument that reverberates through the teachings on the philosophy of rights, and that is that the rights of a human being must end when they interfere with the rights of another human being. You can express your religion however you want as long as it does not harm anybody else or put anyone else in danger. Outside of this, whichever of the sides above we choose is meaningless.
grofet
It's just an islamphobia

naked naturism ---> allowed
Long jacket + health face masker ---> allowed
Cosplay costume + face mask ---> allowed
Halloween costume + face mask ---> allowed
Abaya + bourka ---> not allowed

C'mon man give me your break!

Many normal people know that the naturism is should be not allowed.
truespeed
grofet wrote:


C'mon man give me your break!

Many normal people know that the naturism is should be not allowed.



why not? What is wrong with it? There are tribes in the Amazon jungle that still walk around naked,should we tell them to cover up? On one hand you defend the right to cover up,on another you want to take away the rights of those who want to be without clothing.
Josso
grofet wrote:
It's just an islamphobia

naked naturism ---> allowed
Long jacket + health face masker ---> allowed
Cosplay costume + face mask ---> allowed
Halloween costume + face mask ---> allowed
Abaya + bourka ---> not allowed

C'mon man give me your break!

Many normal people know that the naturism is should be not allowed.


Speaking from a UK perspective, no naked naturism is not allowed under some section public order law. I *believe* since the latest London riots ANY TYPE of face shielding you can be asked to remove but only in a 'state of emergency' or riot type situation. Don't quote me on any of this but I'm pretty sure it was put in to place after that, or maybe it was always like that. I think people have a right to cover up their faces unless being used for crime - a bit like how you can carry a screwdriver on the street if you are fixing something but not for no reason, or you can have a baseball bat in your car as long as you have a baseball.
truthspeker
Josso wrote:
grofet wrote:
It's just an islamphobia

naked naturism ---> allowed
Long jacket + health face masker ---> allowed
Cosplay costume + face mask ---> allowed
Halloween costume + face mask ---> allowed
Abaya + bourka ---> not allowed

C'mon man give me your break!

Many normal people know that the naturism is should be not allowed.


Speaking from a UK perspective, no naked naturism is not allowed under some section public order law. I *believe* since the latest London riots ANY TYPE of face shielding you can be asked to remove but only in a 'state of emergency' or riot type situation. Don't quote me on any of this but I'm pretty sure it was put in to place after that, or maybe it was always like that. I think people have a right to cover up their faces unless being used for crime - a bit like how you can carry a screwdriver on the street if you are fixing something but not for no reason, or you can have a baseball bat in your car as long as you have a baseball.


Anything which hide or change the Natural Identity to be banned. Anything which is forced because of faith or belief to be thrown in to dustbin.
Related topics
Debate Forum?
Talking about China
Plasma or LCD debate
Is the human race truly the final product of evolution?
A debate of religion, science, and more
Twain's frog jumps to center of debate
Looking for Political Junkies to Debate
Debate, discussion and argument worth your time?
A debate forum
Please help me with this Geography debate
Debate
Debate Help: Why Going to Prison isn't the Best Bet.
Do we NEED Politics and Debate forum?
Is Sarcozy right about the Burka?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.