Both are acceptable.
Modern life in Saudi Arabia.
- Thread starter aristotle
- Start date
No matter what you call it, when they unloaded the shoplifting rates skyrocketed.
And then there is this:
'CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP'
POW BANG POW POW BANG BANG
'CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP'
* Amish drive by shooting *
GO FOR IT RAGGERS!
'CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP'
POW BANG POW POW BANG BANG
'CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP CLIP CLOP'
* Amish drive by shooting *
GO FOR IT RAGGERS!
Dang! This is going to take some time.
We ALL have faith that you can do it! We await your offering!
OH, that is LAME! Try something more like the "War Wagon". That had horses so it would be "legal" for the "Plain Amish".
Many religious sects, here in the US, have been required to change and adapt their rites, rituals or customs when in conflict with law. Islam doesn't get a free pass with compliance.
Go back and study the arguments for banning the burqa nationwide in France. One component of the French argument was to liberate the Muslim women from need to have their faces covered in public as their men demand. The French legislature was, in effect, granting a degree of women's liberation which otherwise might not be available.
The banning of face coverings is fully constitutional. No refunds required.
Go back and study the arguments for banning the burqa nationwide in France. One component of the French argument was to liberate the Muslim women from need to have their faces covered in public as their men demand. The French legislature was, in effect, granting a degree of women's liberation which otherwise might not be available.
The banning of face coverings is fully constitutional. No refunds required.
I agree that many religions have altered to conform to US laws and customs. What took place in France has NO bearing on what happens here. We are NOT France. (Thank God)
Our laws have never been designed to honor the tenets of any religion. You apply neutral laws in a neutral fashion. If someone wants to give testimony in court or make a legal claim, while wearing a burqa, they'll have to choose which one they want to do. Otherwise, it's large brown paper bags all around.
Yes, your honor. The defendant chased me up a tree on multiple occasions.
If only our laws could be that neutral. ( I like the cartoon). Alas, that is NOT possible, as we both know.
Nobody here is suggesting otherwise. There are some, however, that have suggested Muslims should not be able to practice their religion in this country at all.
I'm quite well versed in the matter, thanks.
It was a minor component, one that was made by primarily by western women who don't agree with the custom, in order to rationalize the law. Muslim women, on the other hand, counter that by saying having their faces covered affords them more protection than going uncovered, and they choose to do it not because their men demand it, but because they want to be faithful to their faith.
The US must keep an eye on the cultural upheaval happening in Europe as it eventually makes its way across the pond. France felt compelled to act. Someday, probably after the next significant terrorist attack on the US, more legislation will be drafted in the name of national security which further restricts the intersection of religious liberty and public safety.
Why would anyone wish to conceal their face in public without good cause? It makes no sense. Try walking into a shopping mall with your face covered like a ninja.
Just as I don't like to use other countries "gun control" examples, I don't want to use France for this. On top of that, France does not have a very good track record in these regards, neither does Europe in general. We need to forge our own path. Europe is not a good example for anything.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Nonsense ... our culture - if it is anything - is pluralistic and generally highly tolerant of many types of cultural diversity ...
It may well be a problem for Ricky Redneck and his wife (who may also be his first cousin ... or worse ...) and their spawn ... but generally it will not be a problem for the better educated among us.
ROTFLMAO ... legitimate ?
Who determines that ?
No - the desire to wear some sort of covering, be it a burqa or hijab - or any type of religious apparel - goes back someone's religious faith ...
It's the desire to prohibit the wearing of such things that has a connection to assimilation ...
That connection is really tenuous at best, since it appears functionally to be an effort - on the part of some at least - to deny others their ability to practice the tenets their faith as they understand them to be ...
When those efforts are targeted to a particular religion or religions, by a member of another religion, the case could be made that it is evidence of religious bigotry ...
That would be really funny ... if it were a self-righteous Bible thumper making the argument ...
Your apparent position, as stated above - if taken to its logical conclusion - would advocate the prohibition the wearing of a kippah or yarmulke for devout, religious Jews, the prohibition of wearing a turban by Sikhs ... or even the prohibition of the wearing of clergy shirts with clerical collars or other vestments by Christians ...
Of course, if one were to then discriminate among religions after having made the above statement, to try and justify a prohibition for some but not others, it would be be utterly hypocritical ...
The United States is a diverse nation, with a secular government and laws (much to the chagrin of some I'm sure) ... with a culture of religious pluralism. Learn tolerance.
Generally speaking, we, as a nation, have no desire for a religious Taliban here ... even if it's an indigenous one ...
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Oh Lordy ... first it was emulation of NYC - the land of Prohibition of the Big Gulp - and now it's France ...
What's next ?
Will our resident Greek philosopher nominate crepes and ratatouille as our new National Food ?
Baguettes as our official bread ?
Hmmm ... you really want the government inserting itself into religious practice ... in order to effect "women's liberation" ?
I'm thinking that perhaps the decision to start a journey down that road wasn't real well-thought out ... and is perhaps somewhat ill-considered ...
Of course, the French prohibition also ends up being a reduction of freedom and liberty ... for those who wish to wear such things on their own determinism ...
Last edited:
Clearly, religious convictions is neither legitimate nor a good cause. Boy, there's a slippery slope. I don't want to be at the bottom of that one.
Looking at that latest cartoon tells me that women everywhere want to blame men for all their problems.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Almost sounds like that was voiced in the spirit of "hoping" for something to occur ... to derive something one perceives as a desirable outcome ...
Apparently no one wants to conceal their face without "good cause" ...
If you asserting that is not the case, then it begs the question:
What constitutes "good cause" ?
A lack of self-awareness could be said to be evidenced by the inability to discern that one's own education, cultural upbringing, and biases play into determining what constitutes the definition of "sense" for one ... as opposed to how those same things play into determining the definition of "sense" for others ...
Last edited: