Dutch to ban wearing of Muslim burqa in public

Take a look at this.


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/17112006/325/dutch-ban-wearing-muslim-burqa-public.html


Bet we havn't got any politicians with the balls to do anything like that here.

 

This will just lead to more girls saying 'hey I'm also going to wear a burqa as a protest'," Naima Azough,



Then Ms Azough and her friends should face the full extent of the Law!!Flagrant law breaking under the banner of a "protest" is just not acceptable!

 

Then if anyone says boo to them, claim compensation.

 

A few days ago the lapsed-Nazi Pope told Muslims that they should not covet their faces in public in Italy. To be fair to him, this has already been illegal in Italy since the days of the Red Brigades, but until now, not for Muslims. The next veil we need to ban is the veil of intimidation the Catholic Church has used in the past to silence the victims and families of Christopaedophilia.

 

It used to be an offence in this country to go around in public with the face covered or otherwise disguised. It was brought in because of the spate of highway robberies and was known as the notorious 'Black Act'.

Unfortunately it led to some pretty severe miscarriages of justice such as miners going home with dirty faces ending up being hanged for their trouble. :|

The problem with this Dutch law is that by targetting the burka it is targetting a particular religious group which will be illegal under the damned Human Rights Act.

Far better would be to bring in a law similar to the 'Black Act' but with adequate built in protections for reasonable excuses.

Motorcycle helmets/hoodies anyone?


PS - What the hell is Christopaedophilia? :? I am unaware of any officially sanctioned sexual contact with children by the Christian churches. Even though Mary was about fourteen when she had Jesus.

 

Are you labouring under a misconception there? :lol:

 

Probably an immaculate misconception!

 

arf, arf, arf

bout bloody time....... however it wont happen as it is obviously "a breach of human rights" (yeah right)

disolussioned of Bristol

 

It's like saying.................you can't wear that cross around your neck if you're a Catholic. Think it's outragous to be honest.

 

The cross does not hide your features.
The Niqab is not a requirement of the Muslim faith. Motorcyclists (male or female) have to remove their helmets in many public buildings as do hoodie wearers. Time for the rules to be brought up to date.
And while were at it, why shouldn't sikhs wear crash helmets? After all there are plenty of females with long hair and they are not excused.

 

Still think it is a disrespect to a culture, not a thing to do before elections really.

 

Sikhs wearing crash helmets? They do if they are aircrew.

 

Just the thing to do before elections when you consider that Muslims make up just 6% of the Dutch population. As for respect its about time that the Muslim religion stated to respect other religions. As far as Islam is concerned there is one religion, all followers of others are referred to as Infidels.

 

Exactly Higs. The crash helmet is a safety idea and I'm certain that one could be easily designed for the Sikh religion. Lets face it most of us know that the Sikh turban is not actually put on like a bandage but is worn like a hat. We had a Sikh greenie on course when i was at daedalus, wore a blue one in 8s and a white one on divisions. Must say it always looked extremely smart

 

What's hard about making a fibreglass turban, motorbikes, for the use of?

 

Can't see why helmet manufacturers couldn't come up with something like that.

 

It's a new word I've just invented. What does it mean? Christians who sexually abuse children by pointing out that in the Bible Jesus does not specifically condemn the centurion for having a catemite when he brings him to Jesus for healing. I got told off for saying this on AARSE - however a when I recently asked a Christian colleague to explain to me why my former Church condemns consensual gay acts between adults more strongly that non-consensual sex between Priests and boys - this was his explanation!!! As he's a spare-time clergyman himself it must be true! 8O

Incidentally Shakey, you didn't spot my spelling mistake... I put covet instead of cover - this was a boo boo on my part actually - and it turns what Benedict said into something utterly different! :lol: I shall eat a whole bar of carbolic soap in pennance! :cry: :wink:

 

Nice one Always. If its not the G place It`s religon and gays. Methinks you have a few problems, so non Christians don`t abuse children?, and as for your Gays, what about Soddom and Gomorrah?. All religons teach a Moral code to live by, be thankful there are only ten commandments.

 

Hey Higs, leave off Soddom & Gomorrah. Those places got done for having a great time in general. Don't remind the big fellow upstairs or we could all be in the sh!t when we visit Bangkok, Come to think of it the back wall of The two Red shoes in Elgin could have been a good place for him to hit.

 

The Two Red Shoes? Nah mate, the Devil would be there first to cast his net, as for Soddom and Gomorrah, depends purely whose side you were on.