[Scarlett.]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

The Left wing president of Austria has said ominously "and it is not only Muslim women, all women can wear a headscarf, and if this real and rampant Islamaphobia continues, there will come a day where we must ask all women to wear a headscarf - all - out of solidarity to those who do it for religous reasons".

Isn't this left wing PC propaganda exactly why so many have concerns about both Islam and PC. This left wing Western idiot is suggesting that all women should in time be 'forced' in one way or another to wear a headscarf to appease Muslims.

As a woman I for one will NEVER 'comply' with such garbage. Thoughts please!

You'd force Muslim women to comply with your garbage though wouldn't you?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I agree with that Smudgie,I do however have an issue with this one simply because it has been used in terrorist actions before,all well and good in private but not on our streets,they are dangerous enough.

I agree. The wearing of the face coverings is an entirely different subject. They are oppressive, pose a security risk, are a health hazard and look awful.

I would also imagine Western babies and young children would be pretty frightened if someone wearing one got too close. Scary looking things.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Chewy

You'd force Muslim women to comply with your garbage though wouldn't you?

If I chose to live in Saudi I would abide by their rules - It's called respect. Hence I wouldn't ever choose to live there.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

A very misleading thread, if you can't post the whole article then do not cherry pick the parts that suit your agenda since it's not representative of what's been said and leads to a flawed discussion.

I have already explained why I couldn't copy the link across, but it is now there for all to see. As many do I quoted the bit I was objecting to and gave my opinion, so what exactly is your issue with that.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I agree with that Smudgie,I do however have an issue with this one simply because it has been used in terrorist actions before,all well and good in private but not on our streets,they are dangerous enough.

I would not feel comfortable with my doctor wearing that to work, or teachers in school.
I think you need to be able to read someone's face when you have an important conversation.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have already explained why I couldn't copy the link across, but it is now there for all to see. As many do I quoted the bit I was objecting to and gave my opinion, so what exactly is your issue with that.

I've already said...

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I've already said...

Which did not take all the facts into account.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

"if this real and rampant Islamaphobia continues, there will come a day where we must ask all women to wear a headscarf – all – out of solidarity to those who do it for religious reasons."

Ask. ASK. Not force. He is talking about ASKING women to VOLUNTARILY wear a headscarf out of solidarity with women who do so for religious reasons, if there comes a day when they are to be "banned". He is not talking about forcing anyone to do anything. Because he also specifically says;

"It is every woman’s right to always dress how she wants, that is my opinion on the matter,” he told an audience of school pupils."


A valiant effort to twist something into fearful propaganda though Brillo. Shame that DR ruined it for you by actually linking to the source material you cherry picked out of context comments from.

Tthis is what i meant.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

The only 'mad' ones I see on here are the ones driven to insult people with a different opinion,now THAT is losing a debate.

Obviously i meant mad as in cross/angry. It doesnt even read well with the other definition of mad, so I'm not sure what it is about Brillo that made you think I meant it in that way.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Obviously i meant mad as in cross/angry. It doesnt even read well with the other definition of mad, so I'm not sure what it is about Brillo that made you think I meant it in that way.

I think it had more to do with you.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I think it had more to do with you.

No I doubt it, she already kicked up a fuss about people insulting each other. I dont think shes hypocrite enough to insult me in the same post.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Obviously i meant mad as in cross/angry. It doesnt even read well with the other definition of mad, so I'm not sure what it is about Brillo that made you think I meant it in that way.

You claim not to read it that way for obvious reasons. You are attempting to be funny and insulting in the same breath. Once again you proved her right.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You claim not to read it that way for obvious reasons. You are attempting to be funny and insulting in the same breath. Once again you proved her right.

Originally Posted by Withano

Obviously i meant mad as in cross/angry. It doesnt even read well with the other definition of mad

Stop baiting
Besides, you've already implied to me what youre suggesting I've implied to you.. so stop being a hypocrite whilst you're at it

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I think it had more to do with you.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Stop baiting

Like you were. Are there different rules for you then?

It doesn't matter what little bits you conveniently quote people can read.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Which did not take all the facts into account.

It doesn't change the fact that, if you actually wanted to represent the actual story, then you could have typed out a sentence or two more from the article that balanced out your bias and gave us something solid to discuss.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

It doesn't change the fact that, if you actually wanted to represent the actual story, then you could have typed out a sentence or two more from the article that balanced out your bias and gave us something solid to discuss.

Nope, I thought people would look it up as it is a subject many are interested in, on both sides of the argument. People want to see the full article - that is to be expected.

I also hoped someone would copy it across and they did quite early on in the thread, so many had access to it on which they could base their response.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Like you were. Are there different rules for you then?

It doesn't matter what little bits you conveniently quote people can read.

You seem mad, maybe take a breather.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

You seem mad, maybe take a breather.

Ditto.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by smudgie

I would not feel comfortable with my doctor wearing that to work, or teachers in school.
I think you need to be able to read someone's face when you have an important conversation.

Exactly Smudgie

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

If I chose to live in Saudi I would abide by their rules - It's called respect. Hence I wouldn't ever choose to live there.

Fortunately we don't have such rules of dress here. The only western uniform restrictions is, no women walking around topless or anyone walk around naked and its frowned upon if you walk to your local shop in your dressing gown and slippers. Other than that, we are free to wear what we want.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Withano

Obviously i meant mad as in cross/angry. It doesnt even read well with the other definition of mad, so I'm not sure what it is about Brillo that made you think I meant it in that way.

Nothing wrong with people being passionate about things that matter to them,no need to try shooting them down with so called smart arse remarks,I have not seen any madness in Brillo whatsoever ,the people that are mad as in angry are the ones doing the insulting,funny that,now I am mad

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Fortunately we don't have such rules of dress here. The only western uniform restrictions is, no women walking around topless or anyone walk around naked and its frowned upon if you walk to your local shop in your dressing gown and slippers. Other than that, we are free to wear what we want.

Is it okay for someone to walk around in a hooded robe with KKK plastered all over it or teeshirts with very offensive racist comments/gay comments. I don't know the precise rules on this but I would imagine not. The burkha/niqab are equally as offensive to women's rights to equality.

[jennyjuniper]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

The Left wing president of Austria has said ominously "and it is not only Muslim women, all women can wear a headscarf, and if this real and rampant Islamaphobia continues, there will come a day where we must ask all women to wear a headscarf - all - out of solidarity to those who do it for religous reasons".

Isn't this left wing PC propaganda exactly why so many have concerns about both Islam and PC. This left wing Western idiot is suggesting that all women should in time be 'forced' in one way or another to wear a headscarf to appease Muslims.

As a woman I for one will NEVER 'comply' with such garbage. Thoughts please!

Me neither. This idiot is asking to increase islamaphobia by even suggesting that women should be forced to wear a headgear that is only the result of muslim mens insecurity.He makes a good muslim puppet though doesn't he.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Is it okay for someone to walk around in a hooded robe with KKK plastered all over it or teeshirts with very offensive racist comments/gay comments. I don't know the precise rules on this but I would imagine not. The burkha/niqab are equally as offensive to women's rights to equality.

Inciting hatred is a crime. Wearing a head dress of any kind is not a hate crime and is thus incomparable.

I'd imagine limiting a woman's choice of clothing by banning head dresses is also offensive to women's rights as it's dictating what they can or cannot wear. Banning an item of clothing that doesn't incite hatred is a pointless endeavour, I think restricting it like you would a hoodie or a mask in certain places is fine but a ban is flawed.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Inciting hatred is a crime. Wearing a head dress of any kind is not a hate crime and is thus incomparable.

I'd imagine limiting a woman's choice of clothing by banning head dresses is also offensive to women's rights as it's dictating what they can or cannot wear. Banning an item of clothing that doesn't incite hatred is a pointless endeavour, I think restricting it like you would a hoodie or a mask in certain places is fine but a ban is flawed.

The wearing of burkhas etc is tantamount to wearing a tee shirt stating women are second-class citizens and unequal to their male counterparts - the property of men - is that not hatred? Just because the law hasn't quite recognised that yet doesn't mean it isn't and doesn't mean it won't.