The Burkini Ban

[Valmy]

his followers are.  I'm not concerned about Trump, I am about the people following and immitating him.

Not necessarily. His two yugest fans on this board are not religious at all.

[viper37]

Surprised there's no Languish ruling on this.

My take: this is nothing but a racist, anti-Muslim decree masquerading as Pro-Female, Pro Secularism.

Honestly, on the beaches of France, for decades, anything goes. You want to wear a piece of cloth that barely covers your clit, fine. No problem. But wait.....you want to cover your whole body....Outrageous.

you shouldn't use the beach to make a political statement, just like you'll get fined for having sex on a public beach.

Why should we allow the ennemy to spread its propaganda here?  Secularism is the dam that protects democracy and it's under attack from within as well as without.

Where do you draw the line then. If  a guy wears a Speedo with a Star of David on it, should that be banned. if a woman with a disfigurement wants to cover her body, should she be told not to.

Again, just like Barrister, you bring physical disabilities in the mix with religion.  It has no links whatsoever.  You can abandon a religion, you can change religion, you can't remove your physical disability.

It's not about making a point at a beach. I'm sure that wasn't the intention.

You should read a little more about extremism and how it's spread.

[Malthus]

Religion is private, that's it.  It has no place in a courtroom, it has no place in the army, it has no place in the city counsel, it has no place on the beach.  Worship who you want.  Believe what you want.  Attend the religious service you want when you want.  Fast or feast as you want.  But respect the rights of others to not share your beliefs.

It must really chap your ass that the guy currently in charge of the army wears a Turban. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harjit_Sajjan

[viper37]

his followers are.  I'm not concerned about Trump, I am about the people following and immitating him.

Not necessarily. His two yugest fans on this board are not religious at all.

In a country where there's 10% atheists/agnostics, they're all on board with Trump?
In a party dominated by religion, the supporters of Trump would be the less religious ones?
In various vox pop, when you hear people justifying their position on various issues by what God's wants or what the Bible says, that would be a simple coincidence that they happen to support Trump?
I have doubts.

[grumbler]

Surprised there's no Languish ruling on this.

My take: this is nothing but a racist, anti-Muslim decree masquerading as Pro-Female, Pro Secularism.

Honestly, on the beaches of France, for decades, anything goes. You want to wear a piece of cloth that barely covers your clit, fine. No problem. But wait.....you want to cover your whole body....Outrageous.

you shouldn't use the beach to make a political statement, just like you'll get fined for having sex on a public beach.

Why should we allow the ennemy to spread its propaganda here?  Secularism is the dam that protects democracy and it's under attack from within as well as without.

Where do you draw the line then. If  a guy wears a Speedo with a Star of David on it, should that be banned. if a woman with a disfigurement wants to cover her body, should she be told not to.

Again, just like Barrister, you bring physical disabilities in the mix with religion.  It has no links whatsoever.  You can abandon a religion, you can change religion, you can't remove your physical disability.

It's not about making a point at a beach. I'm sure that wasn't the intention.

You should read a little more about extremism and how it's spread.

I wonder if you know how irrational you sound with all of these non sequiturs.  I suppose that, if you had an actual argument to make and some logic or evidence to support that argument, you would make it and support it.  As it is, your arguments sound like bumper-sticker slogans and logic and evidence are completely absent.

[viper37]

Religion is private, that's it.  It has no place in a courtroom, it has no place in the army, it has no place in the city counsel, it has no place on the beach.  Worship who you want.  Believe what you want.  Attend the religious service you want when you want.  Fast or feast as you want.  But respect the rights of others to not share your beliefs.

It must really chap your ass that the guy currently in charge of the army wears a Turban. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harjit_Sajjan

I find it silly.  Religion and politics should never mix.  But I understand it's not Canada's way.

[viper37]

Surprised there's no Languish ruling on this.

My take: this is nothing but a racist, anti-Muslim decree masquerading as Pro-Female, Pro Secularism.

Honestly, on the beaches of France, for decades, anything goes. You want to wear a piece of cloth that barely covers your clit, fine. No problem. But wait.....you want to cover your whole body....Outrageous.

you shouldn't use the beach to make a political statement, just like you'll get fined for having sex on a public beach.

Why should we allow the ennemy to spread its propaganda here?  Secularism is the dam that protects democracy and it's under attack from within as well as without.

Where do you draw the line then. If  a guy wears a Speedo with a Star of David on it, should that be banned. if a woman with a disfigurement wants to cover her body, should she be told not to.

Again, just like Barrister, you bring physical disabilities in the mix with religion.  It has no links whatsoever.  You can abandon a religion, you can change religion, you can't remove your physical disability.

It's not about making a point at a beach. I'm sure that wasn't the intention.

You should read a little more about extremism and how it's spread.

I wonder if you know how irrational you sound with all of these non sequiturs.  I suppose that, if you had an actual argument to make and some logic or evidence to support that argument, you would make it and support it.  As it is, your arguments sound like bumper-sticker slogans and logic and evidence are completely absent.

Ma!  Look!  It's a troll!

You know you're not forced to answer a thread when you have nothing to say.  There's no reward for increasing a post count here

[grumbler]

In a country where there's 10% atheists/agnostics, they're all on board with Trump?
In a party dominated by religion, the supporters of Trump would be the less religious ones?
In various vox pop, when you hear people justifying their position on various issues by what God's wants or what the Bible says, that would be a simple coincidence that they happen to support Trump?
I have doubts.

You hadn't written this when I was writing my post, but thanks for following my post with an excellent example of exactly what i was talking about. 

[Martinus]

his followers are.  I'm not concerned about Trump, I am about the people following and immitating him.

Not necessarily. His two yugest fans on this board are not religious at all.

Hey, I'm religious!

[Martinus]

And sorry viper, while I sympathise with the side you are representing (although Nawaz's more nuanced view is closer to my heart) your argument does sound like a non-sequitur.

[Valmy]

Hey, I'm religious!

You're so vain you probably think every post is about you!

But now that I think about it Legbiter probably sacrifices a beta male to Odin every once in a while.

[garbon]

Surprised there's no Languish ruling on this.

My take: this is nothing but a racist, anti-Muslim decree masquerading as Pro-Female, Pro Secularism.

Honestly, on the beaches of France, for decades, anything goes. You want to wear a piece of cloth that barely covers your clit, fine. No problem. But wait.....you want to cover your whole body....Outrageous.

you shouldn't use the beach to make a political statement, just like you'll get fined for having sex on a public beach.

Why should we allow the ennemy to spread its propaganda here?  Secularism is the dam that protects democracy and it's under attack from within as well as without.

The personal is political.

[garbon]

Surprised there's no Languish ruling on this.

My take: this is nothing but a racist, anti-Muslim decree masquerading as Pro-Female, Pro Secularism.

Honestly, on the beaches of France, for decades, anything goes. You want to wear a piece of cloth that barely covers your clit, fine. No problem. But wait.....you want to cover your whole body....Outrageous.

We have been discussing it in the Prison Food thread...because of course we have.

Because I'm great at changing the topic of conversation.

[Barrister]

Surprised there's no Languish ruling on this.

My take: this is nothing but a racist, anti-Muslim decree masquerading as Pro-Female, Pro Secularism.

Honestly, on the beaches of France, for decades, anything goes. You want to wear a piece of cloth that barely covers your clit, fine. No problem. But wait.....you want to cover your whole body....Outrageous.

you shouldn't use the beach to make a political statement, just like you'll get fined for having sex on a public beach.

Why should we allow the ennemy to spread its propaganda here?  Secularism is the dam that protects democracy and it's under attack from within as well as without.

Where do you draw the line then. If  a guy wears a Speedo with a Star of David on it, should that be banned. if a woman with a disfigurement wants to cover her body, should she be told not to.

Again, just like Barrister, you bring physical disabilities in the mix with religion.  It has no links whatsoever.  You can abandon a religion, you can change religion, you can't remove your physical disability.

WTF - I haven't even posted in this thread.

I just find it funny that somehow baring your skin is a cultural imperative in the west, when it really wasn't that long ago when this wsa how you dressed for a day at the beach:

[Valmy]

I just find it funny that somehow baring your skin is a cultural imperative in the west, when it really wasn't that long ago when this wsa how you dressed for a day at the beach:

Hey! We had to keep our pasty skin safe in the ante-sunscreen period.