U.K Race Riot - Should They?

Is this wrong? ^^^

Should they be allowed to come to England and then wear there full veils like this? ^^^

Many people have debated over whether they should be allowed or not. It has gotton so bad, here in the u.k - veils forcefully being pulled off of muslim women and the muslim individuals badly beaten up by thugs.

Please post your thoughts on this topic and what you think. But please don't post anything that is offensive. Thanks

Read the whole story here >>>>>> The Debate...

What are your views De Niro's Sister?

hmmm... well.

As it says in the story on the link. It talks about the teacher that works at a school with her veil on. I don't think that i'd be too jolly about having a teacher like this, however if she maybe took the veil off i'd be much happier. I think that it's there religion and there life, so therefore they can wear it. But there should be some rules, as to where they should wear it for e.g. Not in schools, maybe even public - buses etc. But they should be allowed to wear it at some places as they need to respect there own religion. How about you?

So if I follow you correctly you think they shouldn't wear the veil in public?

Their religion states they need to wear it at all times though, so for the UK to respect other religions they should allow them to wear it no matter what, whether its school, work, buses etc.. those are my views.

Your very correct. They should wear it all the time, but wouldn't being in their own country be a little more right and easier. I respect there rights, all the way but with people beating them up, and politics involving the whole of the U.K, wouldn't it be better to just have some rules OR be in the comfort of their own country?

I don't see how what country they are in should have to do with it. I think your country respects the rights of Jewish People, Christians etc.. so they should be no different.

But they aren't breaking any laws by wearing what they want in public, its the people beating them up who are breaking the law and should be sent to jail.

Obviously with everything that is going on in the world involving the Muslim Religion I don't think what a person wears really involves the UK government, especially restricting a person's religion. If anything they should be protecting the rights of their Muslim citizens and sending the people who break the law by assaulting them to jail.

Also, do you think by discriminating against these citizens who have done nothing wrong, MIGHT cause them to turn to terroristic actions or maybe join militant groups against the UK government?

Wow.

You are correct people, however especially the british, are going to think different. There will be lot's of people like you wanting to speak out to the nation about there argument. I'm half and half, i respect them though.

EDIT - Well, it's not really muslims that do this, well maybe it is. But is the one individual that desides to terrorise not all MUSLIMS. Do you get what i mean? They are all individuals and they all think differently and take different actions just like any other person in this world.

So in other words what you are trying to say is that I wouldn't really understand how the British are going to think because I don't live in the UK and these things aren't going on around me or happening to people I know?

No i don't mean that lol! I mean that people have different views. I totally don't really care what there views are as everyone's going to say something maybe unexpected, expected too.

This makes me realize another point.

DMC is rightwing. In my country, and it can be generalized to the whole of Europe, most rightwing people are against religious symbols. No, that's not totally true, they are especially against women wearing muslim symbols.
In Belgium there were cases of fired teachers and expelled students because they wore a shawl around their head (religious Musliml symbol). And there were law prepositions, asking for an entire 'no' to those kind of religious symbols.

But DMC, a rightwing American is not against them. This is a fine example of how culture and country matter for your political views, IMO.

Ok, but you are saying even though they haven't done anything wrong that the government should step in and tell them they have to disrespect themselves and their religion.

So does that mean that you want your government to step in for the protection of everyone? Do you think these women who refuse to not take off their veils should be deported back to their country of origin?

This is really hard to decide on. What would you say to that question Enzo?

It seems to me that under basically any other circumstances you would want everyone to live their life as they choose. So what you are saying now is that your country is going through an event that has never happened before and you want them to step in and act in a way that is more beneficial for the established citizens more so than these "foreigners" who are coming in, who you yourself said would be better going back to their own country right?

Is this to me?

All I was saying that the things I mentioned, are, in fact, happening, and that a considerable amount of people, and political partys want to forbid religious symbols at work or in school.
I myself am against forbidding that, but it happening, and maybe legal in the (near) future.

Oh, ok. I think that it would also be cool if they could only wear them in their houses, during the half-time of Monday Night Football. Good, that's one religion down and surpressed. Next week, we'll find ways to get the Jews out of Yankee Stadium.

Now onto our next order of business, ladies and gentlemen; How do we kill Superman?

No that wasn't intended for you, it was for De Niro's Sister lol

I know these polls are private but I would be curious if the person who voted for them not to wear their veils would kindly explain why?

Maybe the UK has a totally different take on this than the U.S. I don't know. I don't see where there should be a problem. I'll admit to not knowing much at all about this religion, but I can respect it like any other legitimate religion.


We have students at my school who are/were celebrating "Ramadan"(I think that's the holiday) (sp) The girls have had their veils (most have not the full veils however, but their heads are covered) and nobody questions it; All these students, both male/female are fasting and excused from PE (physical exercise and lack of nourishment = health concerns)and become teacher assistants, work in the computer lab or other things designated by the admnistration, for this period.

I'm surprised that there are actually riots over this issue.

TIS

Why shouldn't they be allowed to wear it in public, in schools or even buses?

If the government of ANY nation were allowed to make rules on these religious matters, they would be one step away from Nazism.

If their religious beliefs require them to wear a berka, then that religious belief should not affect their getting a job as a teacher. That's discrimination as far as I'm concerned.

Just imagine if a government was allowed to tell a Muslim that they are not allowed to wear a berka ( I think I'm saying it correctly) in public. The next thing would be that they would forbid hasidic Jews from walking around in public, and before you know it they'd be telling Christian people that they are not allowed to wear a cross around their neck when in public!

So in my opinion when it comes to religious beliefs and what a religion requires a follower to wear, there is NO difference if your a Hasidic Jew, a Christian or a Muslim.

To quote our late friend Plawrence, allowing the government to intercede and make rules about religion is like taking a walk on "The Slippery Slope."



Don Cardi

What are the reasons for them not to? Like, what argument is the Government using? I've been living in a hole of ignorance for a month now; I know nothing of the "news" in general.

Please, convince me (anybody), without referring to Terrorism, why not allowing these Muslim women to wear veils is a good idea.

Umm, yes.

Lipstick sales for Muslim women will drop to depression-era levels if they are allowed to wear their face garb.

The idea is that a lot of European countries want a very strict separation between Church and State, religion in private and in public/work.
In short: no religious symbols at work/school.
In reality: Muslims women can't wear their Burka's. Reason: a lot of anti immigrant (and especially Muslim) feelings.

And most companies, entreprises want to maintain neutral at all time. They think that if there are Muslim employees wearing a burka, that members of other religions will be offended or whatsoever.

Another argument of those in favour of forbidding, is that these burka women don't even want to wear them; that their husbands oblige them to; and that by forbidding burka's/head shawls, they are helping Muslim women.

I thought Plaw was against public religion, against Bush's talk about God, against the obliged 'flag greet' (sorry, don't know the exact name) containing the word God?

Weak arguement, very weak arguement. Just because someone may be offended by the wearing of something that symbolizes anopther person's religious beliefs. or the wearing of something that is required to be worn by that religion, does not make that a valid reason for banning the wearing of a religious symbol or clothing.

That person is not forcing someone else to wear their religion's symbol or required garb. They are wearing it on themselves, which to me, does not impose on or offend someone else.

And as far as the woman not wanting to wear the burka (thank you for the correct spelling btw), that may be true on some cases, but it is not neccesarily true in All cases.

Seperation of church and state does not mean that a person should not be allowed to wear something that is required by their religion. It was meant to cease the federal government from making decisions and laws that dictate religious practices and establishments, to prohibit the government from forcing the people to practice and believe in a specific religion of the government's choosing. It was meant to provide the right to people to practice and believe in any religion that they desire.

If you feel this way about banning the wearing of a Burka in public, then should they also ban the wearing of a Yarmukah or star of David by a Jew, a cross or a charm of a saint by a Christian?


Don Cardi

You're welcome about the spelling.
I have to say it regularly just is true in Europe that immigrant Muslim women are forced into wearing clothing they don't want. But of course not in all cases, like you say.


Yep, that's what a considerable part of Belgian (European) right wing people and parties want, prohibiting the wearing of religious symbols in public.

Again, to leave out all misunderstandings, these are not my views, I was just giving the arguments of those people.

I rather not get into how and when Plaw applied his beliefs because it is not my place to do such a thing. I was only attempting to use the phrase itself, a phrase to me that was symbolic of Plaw's opinions when it came to these kinds of debates. I was not trying to inject what Plaw would have felt about this issue itself. I was only trying to borrow the term "Slippery Slope" because whenever I hear it or read it, I always think of Plaw. And in this instance that phrase popped right into my head. I'm sorry if you misinterpreted WHY I quoted the phrase which was so commonly used by Plaw.



Don Cardi

I see.

Yeah, I didn't interprete it that way, but now I understand.
And you're right about the phrase itself, this is indeed a situation that will go down the Slippery Slope.

There was a muslim teacher teaching at a childrens school and she refused to take her veil off,i think she is saying should the children be able to see there faces etc,

I think yes they should be able to see the teachers face it must be quite scarey for a child to see your teacher like that...But who cares what i think

That was what i was getting at. It would be a little scary, but only really when your younger, as children can be so vulnerable to things like that.

I doubt it would frighten a young child. As a matter of fact, the only way to wipe out intolerance is if children are exposed to differing lifestyles and opinions from an early age. Why would it frighten them?? Perhaps because an adult in their life planted the pre-conceived notion that those people are bad into their small brains??

Freedom of religion is just that. It means that people are free to practice their religion of choice, or no religion at all, without the fear of discrimination. There are many Hasidic Jews where I live, and they are dressed quite differently from the rest of the community. Should we ask them to shave their beards and curls, and remove their hats because they look different or "scary"?

Tolerance is the answer, not asking someone to violate their beliefs to make someone else more comfortable.

No we are not saying that they should stop believing. I'm just saying that a women with only her eyes showing is kinda different to someone that's all.

If we let these people come to the UK then we have to let them celebrate their religions and beliefs the way they want to!

But wearing it IS a part of their religion. Asking them to take off the veil is violating their beliefs.

I understand.

The Devils advocate in me says: If we allowthese people to come to our country, then they should adapt our habits.

Oh no! Can't have that!

I say we tar and feather 'em. That'll teach them to have their own beliefs. 'S far 's I'm concerned, Christianity is the only way to go.

And while we're at it, we should get rid of Hannakah and Kwanzaa as well.

Now you're sounding like an American capitalist!



Don Cardi

Sometimes I feel like talking dirty.

I can see where your going your right.

Certainly I support a certain degree of assimilation, which is why I disagree with the US's relatively recent trend of bilingual forms and such, and why I supported legislation that would have forced all such things to be in English. While we are a multicultural nation, it doesn't mean that people shouldn't have to adapt as our forefathers did when they came here. Cultural identity can be preserved, but I think it is wrong when there are entire sections of states (Florida, for example) where no one speaks any English, and if you don't speak Spanish, you're toast. Of course, since Florida originally belonged to Spain, its kind of a weak argument, but nonetheless I think that there should be some cultural assimilation by non-native citizens (or immigrants) to adapt to the American way of life, beginning with English.

However, I disagree with limiting the religious expression. While I wholeheartedly hate the radical Islam that spreads terror, the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people who have come to the West to worship in freedom, and the UK should respect that right.

In a related story, a British Airways employee was suspended for wearing a crucifix necklace, challenging the ruling since employees of other faiths (Sikhs and Muslims) are allowed to wear their religious articles, yet are not reprimanded.

I believe the US should have another vote on turning the national language into German. It only failed by one vote and German is a cooler language anyways. This way, almost everyone would be forced to learn a non native language... equality for all

Plus, we could reenact the "riechstad" fire right here in America!

No, JJ, I'm sure you mean REIKSTADE, RIKSTID, RIKESTAD, NIKE-STAD, KSWISSSTAD and in Chinese ROOSERRAND

No.

I MEANT ROSSIGNOL!

IF YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT THEN YOU'RE AN IDIOT!

http://www.rossignol.com/

like that?

NO!

STOP BEING SUCH A SHEEP TO THE GOVERNMENT!

LIKE THIS:

Holy shit JJ, you have opened my eyes!

Now you know, but you must go spread the gospel of TREUTHE before the vast right-wing conspiracy comes to blow up your existence!

This is much ado about little. Eventually after a generation or two the Muslims will put away their behive get ups, the sikhs will get rid of their turbans and people will start intermarrying.

In the US the Hispanics will assimilate as well, and we will all be speaking some form of Spanglish.

BTW can we get a seperate thread for JJ...call it "Rupert's Basement" let it post whatever it wants, but that way the rest of us won't have to be subjected to it.

What's your problem? Personal attacks again? Surprise.

I can't help but think of Howard Dean when I read these posts of yours.



Regards,
Double-J

What THIS then?

If you don't like personal attacks, perhaps stop relying on them yourself.

In case you hadn't realized, the conversation between MadJohnny and myself, including the quote which you're using, is complete sarcasm...in fact, its the basis for the conspiracy thread.

So, I'm not relying on personal attacks...I'm simply responding to them.

Quite a lot of posts since i since visited here! But there hasn't been much about the riot.

What riot? If there has been rioting over this, the newspapers here have not given it much press. Is there actual rioting going on over there because of this? Please fill us in?



Don Cardi

Theres been small riots in a part of UK,nothing major,think its all over now..

we seen what happened in paris and other city's in france....would be terrible if it happened in the uk