| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Michael Gray" |
| Date: |
17 Nov 2006 06:30:23 PM |
| Object: |
News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
Dutch government backs burqa ban
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6159046.stm
"The Dutch cabinet has backed a proposal by the country's immigration
minister to ban Muslim women from wearing the burqa in public places.
The burqa, a full body covering that also obscures the face, would be
banned by law in the street, and in trains, schools, buses and the law
courts.
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
The decision comes days ahead of elections which the ruling
centre-right coalition is expected to win.
Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk, who is known for her tough
policies, said it was important that all people in the Netherlands
were able to see and identify each other clearly to promote
integration and tolerance.
Last year a majority of MPs in the Dutch parliament said they were in
favour of a ban.
An estimated 6% of 16 million people living in the Netherlands are
Muslims.
But there are thought to be fewer than 100 women who choose to wear
the burqa, a traditional Islamic form of dress.
Civil rights debate
The latest move came after an expert committee judged that it would
not contravene Dutch law.
Other forms of face coverings, such as crash helmets with visors that
obscure the face, would also be covered by a legal ban.
Ms Verdonk insisted the burqa was not an acceptable part of public
life in the Netherlands.
"The Cabinet finds it undesirable that face-covering clothing -
including the burqa - is worn in public places for reasons of public
order, security and protection of citizens," she said.
Critics of the proposed ban say it would violate civil rights.
The main Muslim organisation in the Netherlands, CMO, said the plan
was an "over-reaction to a very marginal problem", the Associated
Press reported.
But the minister told the BBC that social interaction would be easier
if faces were not covered.
"It is very important that we can see each other and can communicate
with each other. Because we are so tolerant we want to respect each
other."
Tension
The issue of the type of clothing worn by Muslim women has become a
hotly-debated subject in a range of European countries.
France has passed a law banning religious symbols, including Muslim
headscarves, from schools.
Some German states ban teachers in public schools from wearing
headscarves, but there is no blanket rule against burqas.
Italy has banned face-coverings, resurrecting old laws passed to
combat domestic terrorism, while citing new security fears.
The issue of Muslim women's dress also surfaced in the UK, where
former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said women should not wear the
veil.
The Dutch relationship with its Muslim community has been under
scrutiny since the murder of film-maker Theo van Gogh by Islamic
extremists in November 2004.
Earlier this year Ms Verdonk clashed with a minority party in the
governing coalition over her handling of the citizenship case of
Somali-born Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
The MP scripted a controversial film about the treatment of women in
Islamic society, directed by van Gogh before he was killed.
But she admitted lying on her 1992 application for Dutch citizenship,
and Ms Verdonk initially called for the MP to be deported."
--
.
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
17 Nov 2006 10:14:58 PM |
|
|
In article <iuksl2dfjuh7isg59j9v52cdhe26lav5a7@4ax.com>,
mikegray@newsguy.com says...
Dutch government backs burqa ban
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6159046.stm
"The Dutch cabinet has backed a proposal by the country's immigration
minister to ban Muslim women from wearing the burqa in public places.
Good. I hope the US is next in line to do it. Hopefully this should be
something that liberals and xercons can agree upon, though the xercons
are being somehow hypocritical, as usual, because they pretend they care
about religious freedom. At least us godless liberals realize that
muslims are worse theocrats than repugs.
--
"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort
to take away the power of rational decision, to
drain people of their free will--and a hell of a
lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in
their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all.
For most people, religion is nothing more than a
substitute for a malfunctioning brain." --Gene Roddenberry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 01:24:26 PM |
|
|
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1fc836b01de60d7698976a@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <iuksl2dfjuh7isg59j9v52cdhe26lav5a7@4ax.com>,
mikegray@newsguy.com says...
Dutch government backs burqa ban
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6159046.stm
"The Dutch cabinet has backed a proposal by the country's immigration
minister to ban Muslim women from wearing the burqa in public places.
Good. I hope the US is next in line to do it. Hopefully this should be
something that liberals and xercons can agree upon, though the xercons
are being somehow hypocritical, as usual, because they pretend they care
about religious freedom. At least us godless liberals realize that
muslims are worse theocrats than repugs.
Unbelievable.
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 10:04:25 PM |
|
|
In article <C9GdnSY4Q5P-w8LYnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@giganews.com>,
stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu says...
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1fc836b01de60d7698976a@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <iuksl2dfjuh7isg59j9v52cdhe26lav5a7@4ax.com>,
mikegray@newsguy.com says...
Dutch government backs burqa ban
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6159046.stm
"The Dutch cabinet has backed a proposal by the country's immigration
minister to ban Muslim women from wearing the burqa in public places.
Good. I hope the US is next in line to do it. Hopefully this should be
something that liberals and xercons can agree upon, though the xercons
are being somehow hypocritical, as usual, because they pretend they care
about religious freedom. At least us godless liberals realize that
muslims are worse theocrats than repugs.
Unbelievable.
That's how I describe god myths and repug promises, yes.
--
"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort
to take away the power of rational decision, to
drain people of their free will--and a hell of a
lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in
their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all.
For most people, religion is nothing more than a
substitute for a malfunctioning brain." --Gene Roddenberry
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 12:09:05 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
Dutch government backs burqa ban
Absolutely. The burqa amounts to a disguise, and is a sign not only of
submission to a religion, but a negation of one self. It is disgusting.
Olrik
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 01:25:34 PM |
|
|
"Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1163830145.366735.186540@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Michael Gray wrote:
Dutch government backs burqa ban
Absolutely. The burqa amounts to a disguise, and is a sign not only of
submission to a religion, but a negation of one self. It is disgusting.
.....and this is sufficient reason for the government to ban it how?
Someone's clothing choices are none of the government's damn business.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 02:55:52 PM |
|
|
Mark Stahl wrote:
"Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1163830145.366735.186540@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Michael Gray wrote:
Dutch government backs burqa ban
Absolutely. The burqa amounts to a disguise, and is a sign not only of
submission to a religion, but a negation of one self. It is disgusting.
....and this is sufficient reason for the government to ban it how?
Someone's clothing choices are none of the government's damn business.
Granted, a ban is probably not the best solution, but there're security
matters to consider, too. And if the people supports the ban, then the
governement has a legitimate backing.
Besides, I do not consider a mask as "clothing".
Olrik
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 12:51:25 AM |
|
|
On 17 Nov 2006 22:09:05 -0800, "Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1163830145.366735.186540@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Dutch government backs burqa ban
Absolutely. The burqa amounts to a disguise, and is a sign not only of
submission to a religion, but a negation of one self. It is disgusting.
Olrik
Are cosmetics a form of disguise?
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 01:45:03 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On 17 Nov 2006 22:09:05 -0800, "Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1163830145.366735.186540@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Dutch government backs burqa ban
Absolutely. The burqa amounts to a disguise, and is a sign not only of
submission to a religion, but a negation of one self. It is disgusting.
Olrik
Are cosmetics a form of disguise?
Kind of. Just like your hairpiece.
Olrik
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 03:13:59 AM |
|
|
On 17 Nov 2006 23:45:03 -0800, "Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1163835903.617148.321700@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 17 Nov 2006 22:09:05 -0800, "Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1163830145.366735.186540@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Dutch government backs burqa ban
Absolutely. The burqa amounts to a disguise, and is a sign not only of
submission to a religion, but a negation of one self. It is disgusting.
Olrik
Are cosmetics a form of disguise?
Kind of. Just like your hairpiece.
Can you see the join from where you are?
The bloke I bought it from claimed that it was undetectable!
I forget his name. Hang on, I remember now.
It was a William Shatner or something.
Big fat old codger with a corset.
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 02:44:59 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On 17 Nov 2006 23:45:03 -0800, "Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1163835903.617148.321700@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 17 Nov 2006 22:09:05 -0800, "Olrik" <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1163830145.366735.186540@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Dutch government backs burqa ban
Absolutely. The burqa amounts to a disguise, and is a sign not only of
submission to a religion, but a negation of one self. It is disgusting.
Olrik
Are cosmetics a form of disguise?
Kind of. Just like your hairpiece.
Can you see the join from where you are?
Only if I squint really realy hard.
The bloke I bought it from claimed that it was undetectable!
I forget his name. Hang on, I remember now.
It was a William Shatner or something.
Big fat old codger with a corset.
Hey! He's the greatest Hoolywood star my city (Montreal)
inflicte^H^H^H^H^H bestowed to an unsuspecting, trusting world!
Olrik
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
17 Nov 2006 08:30:51 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Michael Gray
(mikegray@newsguy.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
Yeah, just like oversize "baggy" clothing in metropolitan USA. *****.
People should have the right to dress any way they please. Sorry, I hate
dress codes.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 12:49:39 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 02:30:51 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <Xns987EBC5305ABFvicman@66.75.164.120>
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Michael Gray
(mikegray@newsguy.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
Yeah, just like oversize "baggy" clothing in metropolitan USA. *****.
People should have the right to dress any way they please. Sorry, I hate
dress codes.
Yep, I agree.
I am going to get a full burkha if I am able.
Seriously.
I think it would be educational to walk down the street, noting the
reaction.
--
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 07:03:40 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 02:30:51 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
Yeah, just like oversize "baggy" clothing in metropolitan USA. *****.
People should have the right to dress any way they please. Sorry, I hate
dress codes.
Just wait until they take over your country. See what you say then.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 08:19:46 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Jos Flachs
(xwcruise@ksc15.th.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 02:30:51 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com>
wrote:
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
Yeah, just like oversize "baggy" clothing in metropolitan USA.
*****. People should have the right to dress any way they please.
Sorry, I hate dress codes.
Just wait until they take over your country. See what you say then.
OK.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
17 Nov 2006 09:36:23 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
Yeah, just like oversize "baggy" clothing in metropolitan USA. *****.
People should have the right to dress any way they please. Sorry, I hate
dress codes.
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 01:11:24 PM |
|
|
"L. Raymond" <badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:dj0fy7lp9188.aip2blzzu22e.dlg@40tude.net...
Uncle Vic wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
Yeah, just like oversize "baggy" clothing in metropolitan USA. *****.
People should have the right to dress any way they please. Sorry, I hate
dress codes.
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
....which should also not happen. Dress codes=bad.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Larry" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 12:18:22 AM |
|
|
L. Raymond wrote:
Uncle Vic wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
The cabinet said burqas disturb public order, citizens and safety.
Yeah, just like oversize "baggy" clothing in metropolitan USA. *****.
People should have the right to dress any way they please. Sorry, I hate
dress codes.
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
Larry
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 01:20:25 AM |
|
|
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's that
it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in the US,
it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your face
covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other non-medically
necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11. I'm sure other
nations have similar laws.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 01:23:50 PM |
|
|
"L. Raymond" <badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1qhpu1skwb7fx.19wgzlxslejto.dlg@40tude.net...
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's that
it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in the US,
it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your face
covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other non-medically
necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11.
Can you please cite these laws? Thank you.
I'm sure other
nations have similar laws.
Let's hope not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 10:42:24 PM |
|
|
Mark Stahl wrote:
"L. Raymond" <badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1qhpu1skwb7fx.19wgzlxslejto.dlg@40tude.net...
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's that
it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in the US,
it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your face
covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other non-medically
necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11.
Can you please cite these laws? Thank you.
No. And you're welcome.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "leo" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 12:54:28 PM |
|
|
L. Raymond ha escrito:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's that
it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in the US,
it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your face
covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other non-medically
necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11. I'm sure other
nations have similar laws.
--
L. Raymond
In London they had put a few thousand (?) cameras to record the faces
of the crowd coming and going, on public premises. The four boys that
put bombs on the tube trains and a bus, were identified a posteriori,
and they found were lone guys, not people related to al Qaeda. If it
is a common occurrence that if many persons go freely wearing burqas or
other ways of disguising, the cameras would be useless. You would not
be able to search for any ***** whatever. I am in favor of the police
to arrest this people such covered to put them out of the streets and
other public places.
On the other hand, I am really affraid that ordinary people in Europe
would be slowly becoming more hostil to Islamics wearing burkhas or or
other similar clothes. This would generate hate among the different
populations. And hate is the mother lode of murder.
leopoldo
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 10:41:40 PM |
|
|
leo wrote:
On the other hand, I am really affraid that ordinary people in Europe
would be slowly becoming more hostil to Islamics wearing burkhas or or
other similar clothes. This would generate hate among the different
populations. And hate is the mother lode of murder.
Unfortunately, that hate is already there, which is one of the reasons
the Dutch are reacting with this law.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lucifer" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 02:22:46 PM |
|
|
L. Raymond wrote:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's that
it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in the US,
it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your face
covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other non-medically
necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11. I'm sure other
nations have similar laws.
Italians, as far as I am aware, have a law banning masks that cover
most of the face...
--
Lucifer the Unsubtle, EAC Librarian of Dark Tomes of Excessive Evil and
General Purpose Igor
The Anti-Theist
Convicted by Earthquack
"Don't worry, I won't bite.......hard"
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 10:58:05 PM |
|
|
Lucifer wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a man
or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in the
Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in the
name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's that
it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in the US,
it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your face
covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other non-medically
necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11. I'm sure other
nations have similar laws.
Italians, as far as I am aware, have a law banning masks that cover
most of the face...
People in various US cities have been been approached by the police
for wearing ski masks just for fun, rubber Halloween type masks,
bandanas covering the face like old west outlaws and similar things.
They don't get arrested unless they put up an argument when told to
remove them. At least, I've never heard of anyone being arrested just
for covering the face. I believe these are mainly city ordinances, but
I'd hardly be surprised if some turned out to be state laws in some
places.
So far as I've seen in the US Code, there aren't any nationwide laws
dealing with this, although within the Transportation section there are
probably requirements about showing the whole face to board planes and
trains.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 11:38:41 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet L. Raymond
(badaddress@mylinuxisp.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
People in various US cities have been been approached by the police
for wearing ski masks just for fun, rubber Halloween type masks,
bandanas covering the face like old west outlaws and similar things.
They don't get arrested unless they put up an argument when told to
remove them. At least, I've never heard of anyone being arrested just
for covering the face. I believe these are mainly city ordinances, but
I'd hardly be surprised if some turned out to be state laws in some
places.
So far as I've seen in the US Code, there aren't any nationwide laws
dealing with this, although within the Transportation section there are
probably requirements about showing the whole face to board planes and
trains.
I enjoy changing my appearance every now and then. One of the guards at
the studio where I work laughed at me when he noticed I'd forgotten to
shave. I grew a beard just for him. Then a year or so later, I shaved
it off while growing my hair long and wearing it in a pony tail. I grew
a big handlebar moustache just after I got into motorcycles in '03, then
I grew a goatee, which I still wear today. Recently I started shaving my
head. That was a killer, nobody knew who the hell I was, especially the
poor guards at the employee entrance who had to deal with my '01 post -
9-11 picture on my studio ID card...
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 02:38:48 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Lucifer
(wyrdology@hotmail.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
L. Raymond wrote:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely
cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's
a man or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially
in the Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public
murder in the name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over
the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's
that it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in
the US, it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your
face covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other
non-medically necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11.
I'm sure other nations have similar laws.
Italians, as far as I am aware, have a law banning masks that cover
most of the face...
Jamaica has a law that bans the wearing of camoflauge. It's also against
the law to be gay there.
People are stupid all over the globe.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
|
|
|
| User: "Larry" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 08:01:16 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Lucifer
(wyrdology@hotmail.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
L. Raymond wrote:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely
cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's
a man or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially
in the Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public
murder in the name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over
the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's
that it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in
the US, it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your
face covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other
non-medically necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11.
I'm sure other nations have similar laws.
Italians, as far as I am aware, have a law banning masks that cover
most of the face...
Jamaica has a law that bans the wearing of camoflauge. It's also against
the law to be gay there.
People are stupid all over the globe.
Next we will have laws banning fake mustaches, sunglasses,
and hair coloring.
Larry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
20 Nov 2006 02:28:30 PM |
|
|
"Larry" <lseib@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> wrote in message
news:1163901676.282409.67850@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Lucifer
(wyrdology@hotmail.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
L. Raymond wrote:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely
cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's
a man or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially
in the Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public
murder in the name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over
the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's
that it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in
the US, it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your
face covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other
non-medically necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11.
I'm sure other nations have similar laws.
Italians, as far as I am aware, have a law banning masks that cover
most of the face...
Jamaica has a law that bans the wearing of camoflauge. It's also against
the law to be gay there.
People are stupid all over the globe.
Next we will have laws banning fake mustaches, sunglasses,
and hair coloring.
Well, *****, then I'm screwed ;)
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Larry" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 08:01:28 PM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Lucifer
(wyrdology@hotmail.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
L. Raymond wrote:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely
cover the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's
a man or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially
in the Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public
murder in the name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over
the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's
that it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in
the US, it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your
face covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other
non-medically necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11.
I'm sure other nations have similar laws.
Italians, as far as I am aware, have a law banning masks that cover
most of the face...
Jamaica has a law that bans the wearing of camoflauge. It's also against
the law to be gay there.
People are stupid all over the globe.
Next we will have laws banning fake mustaches, sunglasses,
and hair coloring.
Larry
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: News: Dutch government backs burqa ban |
18 Nov 2006 02:16:54 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet L. Raymond
(badaddress@mylinuxisp.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
Larry wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Baggy pants are not a proper comparison. Burqas completely cover
the
body, masking the person to the extent you can't even tell if it's a
man or a woman. That is a safety hazard these days, especially in
the Netherlands where there's already been a brazen public murder in
the name of Islam.
This is just like banning the wearing of black panty hose over
the
head and a baggy sheet over the body in metropolitan USA.
The terrorists have won, we no longer have any freedom, not even
what we chose to wear.
That's nonsense. The problem the Dutch have is not that the burqa
identifies the wearer as a terrorist or a Moslem or whatever, it's
that it hides the identity of the person under it. In many places in
the US, it's against the law to go about your daily affairs with your
face covered, whether by a mask, handkerchief or any other
non-medically necessary item. This was the case well before 9/11.
I'm sure other nations have similar laws.
There are gas stations and convenience stores that have told me to remove
my motorcycle helmet before they will sell me anything. I leave my
purchases on the counter and walk out. And I keep a mental list of them.
I do not have to buy things in those places. I am not a thief, even if
some people may think I look like one.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
