BS: Is it safe to drive...

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 12:46 PM

for those who missed this one.

Sal

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:56 PM

Unfortunately it doesn't matter what country you're in. Making the right "noises" to the right people is what gets you elected.

"If elected I will protect you from the Bogeyman!"

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 12:48 PM

I'd love to, Carol:-) but I'm afraid I don't have the money or serious inclination to try:-(

There are loads that I would love to have a go at as well - PRS payments for one. Having to pay our local taxes in advance for another. Maybe when my lottery numbers come up:-)

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:27 AM

I don't think you will ever get the courts or the legislators to agree with your definitions in this case, Dave, although I imagine you could have some fun trying.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:09 AM

Exctly, Carol. If other religions are protected in their practices, you can't single out just Muslims

If you accept that peer pressure/fasion is a strong a motive as religion then you cannot single out anyone. I genuinely believe that these kids see the fad as their 'religion'. What we are doing is saying that one set of beliefs (Islam) is more important than another and therefore discriminating.

There is one thing of course. Both are a 'fad'. The hoody will be gone in a couple of years. Now that even the Taliban accept that it is not required the burka will be not too long after.

Chief Chaos - Sorry if I implied that the security people were going after the easy target - They are not. It is the British government in particular that I am refering to. They are the one who make 'the right noises' just to get votes.

Cheers

Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 06:01 PM

I work for a security company (I won't name) in a mall. If it were up to us we would ban the hoodies. It isn't out of meanness or "conservatism" but because the youths wearing the hoodies scare the bejesus out of the folks that actually spend the money at the mall. Hoodies (not the sports style), with the hood up over a ballcap, distort the body shape making the person look bigger, taller and more aggressive. As mentioned before some of the prints on them are deliberately "scary" or bear markings that espouse "gang" activity (guns, knives, brass knuckles, etc.)

Although Burkas (or their equivalent) were used to smuggle weapons and other materials in the first gulf war by Kuwaiti women and although we have recently seen a spate of female suicide bombers in Iraq, the Burka itself doesn't seem to bother the shoppers in our area. The DC area is highly mixed culturally so it isn't rare or threatening.

Luckily for us the mall is private property. It doesn't matter your religion or fashion sense. If the general populace is threatened or intimidated by your behavior or appearance we can ask you to leave/force you to leave.

Usually as long as a person isn't breaking any laws we'll leave them alone.

As far as going after the easy target, the boys wearing the hoodies are much more likely to decide to fight. We don't allow bandanas (known as "colors")to be worn in the mall at all because of previous gang problems.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: meself
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 03:30 PM

Trouble is, in instances like this we seem to have 'conflicting rights'. Some kind of official compromise or 'reasonable accomodation' may be in order - or maybe it's already in place ... That's often how it plays out in Canada - and the 'equality' is in the dissatisfaction all parties derive from the results.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 03:20 PM

You konw, it bothers me far more when I am talking with a person who keeps their dark, dark shades on. There oughta be a law. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 02:55 PM

It doesn't matter whether or not you agree that they should be protected in order for my point to be valid, because what we are talking about here is equality before the law. If other religions are protected in their practices, you can't single out just Muslims to abridge their right to practice their religion. If you do that, you are practicing discrimination.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 02:52 PM

BTW - I do think it is as safe to drive in a close fitting hood, balaclava, burka or rugby ear prtector as it is in a crash helmet - As has been pointed out they turn with your head. It is unsafe to drive or cycle wearing a hoodie, parka, kagoule, anorak or any derivation that you can turn your head into and it stays where it is!

Just to set the record strait and get back to the thread:-)

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 02:40 PM

Thanks, Sal. To be honest though it isn't the burka I have a problem with, it's the authorities that go after the 'easy' targets like the hoodies while treading very carefuly whan it comes to issues that may loose them votes!

Carol, you have some very good points but you assume that I believe it is OK to protct religious practices and not fasions. I don't wish to offend anyone but personaly I don't differentiate between the two. Religion - someone telling someone else what to do for no good reason. Fasion - Ditto. Fasion - Multi-million pound industry. Religion - Ditto. Both rely on peer pressure to retain their following. Both have their fanatics. As far as I am concerned someone saying they are wearing x, y or z because it is fasionable has an equal, if not better, reason to do so than those who hide behind the burka of religious doggarel.

I think we will just never agree on this point so rather than flog it to death I am happy to say that, in the main, society seems to agree with you. I hope the time will come when we are free of all such nonsense, be it fasion, peer pressure or dogma but until then I will follow, if not agree, with the law as it stands.

Just one question you have left unanswered. It is not theoretical as I have actualy seen it, what would you do in the situation where a teenage girl is wearing a hooded top for religious reasons? Let her into the mall but bar her Christian friend? Who is to determine which one is the Moslem? In fact, in the case of some of the younger teens, who is to determine which one is the girl?

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 11:12 AM

If you let one group within the community cover their faces, for whatever reason, why should you ban another from doing the same thing?

Because wearing a burka is a religious practice and wearing a hoodie is not. Religious practices are protected, fashion statements are not.

The community in this case is not defined geographically, but religiously. So the correct correlation would be between burkas and nuns' habits rather than burkas and hoodies. If you allow people of some religions the freedom to practice according to their traditions, you have to give the people of all other religions the freedom to practice according to their traditions. Anything else is discrimination and is not applying the law equally. That is certainly how the courts would see it.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 10:00 AM

Dave: You talk sense and I'm enjoying reading your responses.

" do not suggest that just because no-one will speak out it is because they do not care." I believe many people feel unhappy about burkha wearing women (to name a minority of incomers) but are much too afraid to speak out because of being called racist.

Sal

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 08 - 03:27 AM

Hi Carol - Point taken about religious practice etc. but that doesn't invalidate the point I am trying to make. If you let one group within the community cover their faces, for whatever reason, why should you ban another from doing the same thing? If a young couple were to enter the Trafford Centre (huge shopping mall near us), she wearing a burks and he wearing an adidas hooded top with the hood up, she would be admitted and he would be refused entry. Where is the sense or fairness in that?

Worse still, if I, for some reason, decided to wear a burka (there would be a strange sight!) to enter the same place the security guard would be wrong to ask me if I was a) Moslem and b) a woman because they are not allowed to refuse entry on the grounds of sex or religion. If the next day I wore my 'Cure' hoodie (Very scary picture of Robert Smith) he would then refuse me entry on the grounds that I was was not a Moslem woman - Surely just as bad as refusing me entry because I was!

To make matters more confusing, what if a Moslem woman decided to update the burka she was wearing yesterday with a pair or trendy jeans and my Cure hoody? Her religious requirements are fulfiled in that her body and head are fully covered. What does the guard do now?

No, sorry, but there must be one law applicable to all. Either we do have have the right to wear what we want or we don't. Either people can be barred from entering premises on the grounds of what they are wearing or they can't. Anything else can only be discriminatory against some sector of the community.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: meself
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 11:24 PM

Glad they don't know about some my driving habits ...

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 09:44 PM

There was, a while back, a bit of fuss about nuns wearing full habits and driving. Vision was definitely impaired.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:23 PM

Oops. I need to correct my last post.


That the burka is not part of any current religious law and my firm belief that we cannot have one law for one part of the community and a different one for the other.

Whether or not it is a part of religious law is irrelevant. It is a part of religious practice and that's the only consideration that matters. If it is a part of religious practice, like the wearing of crosses around the neck, or the wearing of the Star of David around the neck, or the wearing of a nun's habit, that is all that matters.

Furthermore, I think you misunderstand how Islam is structured. It isn't necessary for the leading Imam in the UK to require the wearing of the burka in order for individual adherents to legitimately wear them for religious reasons. Islam just isn't that monolithic.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:21 PM

That the burka is not part of any current religious law and my firm belief that we cannot have one law for one part of the community and a different one for the other.

Regardless of whether or not it is a part of religious law is irrelevant. It is a part of religious practice and that's the only consideration that matters. If it is a part of religious practice, like the wearing of crosses around the neck, or the wearing of the Star of David around the neck, or the wearing of a nun's habit, that is all that matters.

Furthermore, I think you misunderstand how Islam is structured. It isn't necessary for the leading Imam in the UK to require the wearing of the burka in order for individual adherents to legitimately wear them for religious reasons. Islam just isn't that monolithic.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:16 PM

Dave, I wasn't suggesting that you had made that point. That point was made in the opening post to this thread. I did remember somewhat incorrectly in that the robbery was in a jewelry store and not a bank. Still, I think my point stands.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:09 PM

Oh, sorry - one more point they welcome the money of burka-clad women

Where do you live, meself? The burka clad women around here have very little money. They tend to be immigrants who have escaped the ravages of the middle eastern wars. The burka clad women spending money freely in the jewelers of the west end are a far cry from the ones I see here scrimping to get a family meal together while their husbands are recovering from a double shift of abuse driving a taxi or a bus.

Very similar in fact to the lads and girls out on the streets, wearing their hoodies and annoying the shopkeepers because they have no money, no self esteem and even less hope.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 05:40 PM

Carol, you should know me better by now:-) Where on earth did I suggest that Muslim women should not be allowed to wear burkas because other people might use burkas to rob banks

The only thing that I have brought to this party is the truth - That the burka is not part of any current religious law and my firm belief that we cannot have one law for one part of the community and a different one for the other.

Good news about the ganja btw - I now wish to be known as Dave Winston Marley Polshaw...;-)

Meself - The issue I have is that teenage boysand girls of all colours and creeds can be banned from huge swathes of our 'free' country for their sense of fasion, I can be refused service in my local pub for not removing my hat and you can be stopped and arrested for, if you would care to do so, wearing nothing whatsoever. Yet the freedom for anyone to wear whatever they like is being upheld for what, as already has been pointed out, a very small minority of our society. Does that seem fair to you?

As to Do you know this is the reason. Yes I do. I have close friends in both the retail and licensed trade as well as the police who will tell you, in closed company, that they wish they could ask people in burkas to remove their veils so their faces are recorded on CCTV. No other reason, just that, just like everyone else's image is recorded. But they are afraid of the consequences. Sorry but, for obvious reasons, I will not tell you their names. I will ask you to trust me and if you cannot I will respect that view but please do not suggest that just because no-one will speak out it is because they do not care.

Thanks.

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 05:18 PM

A woman may wear it to be consistent with her personal understanding of the requirements of her religion, or with her sense of modesty, or with the practice within her sub-culture, or I suppose for any number of other reasons." Guest/meself

That was going to be my point, meself, in relation to Amish women wearing their 'coverings', thanks. Any half-grown woman on up is encouraged and expected to wear a 'covering' whenever the person is out of the house. (When I was a child, kids were not expected to wear them - I never wore one at school- but that has changed, especially in larger congregations. I have even seen a babe in arms with her own little covering. Somewhat bizarre, actually.)

An Amish woman finding herself away from home without a covering would feel as naked and ineffectual as I would feel having inadvertently left my eyeglasses at home. If Amish women were ordered by the state to cease wearing them, I have no doubt but that generation of women would simply stay home.

I have no problem understanding that burka wearers may well feel the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 04:11 PM

Yes, that's true. Wine is not really required in order to reach a religious state in the Catholic Church, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 04:06 PM

"They can't reach an appropriate religious state without ganja. It's like taking the wine out of the Catholic Church." Taken from the link above.

Well, not quite!

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 04:02 PM

On the subject of Rastafarians and ganja...

Religion Ruled Valid Defense in Drug Case

Rastafarians can use their religious belief that marijuana is a sacrament as a defense against drug possession charges, a Federal appeals court ruled today.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the misdemeanor marijuana possession convictions of three Montana residents, saying the trial judge improperly barred evidence of their religious views.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 03:51 PM

Oops! Looks like they're going to have to outlaw elderly women and nuns now...

Bank robber dressed as elderly woman

Police are hunting a man dressed as a nun


We have to apply the law equally, don't we?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 03:03 PM

Would that be a good defense for a ganja smoking Rastafarian in an Alabama court, Carol?

I don't know if any Rastafarians have tried to test the law against marijuana use on religious grounds, Dave. I think it would be very interesting if they did. But it does apply to the use of psychedelic mushrooms and cacti in the case of Native American religions, the members of which are allowed the use of such substances on religious grounds.

My point about Musims being people, is that their motivations for wearing religious garb, including the burka, are no less religiously motivated than those of any other religious group in which the women are covered up, whether such coverings are required or not. No one has suggested that nuns not be allowed to wear their habits, even though it often is not required for them to do so.

By the way, the suggestion that Muslim women should not be allowed to wear burkas because other people might use burkas to rob banks is specious. There are all kinds of ways people can disguise themselves if they want to commit crimes that don't involve burkas, and which are not illegal.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: meself
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 02:53 PM

"They are not applying it to these because they believe it contravenes the above rules."

Do you know this is the reason, or are you assuming it is? Is it possible for instance, that they welcome the money of burka-clad women, and do not suspect them of shoplifting, petty vandalism, and generally being a pain in the ass?

"As I pointed out, it does not."

I would think they might be having concerns about the implications of "unless it is on the grounds of religious, racial or sexual discrimination". Otherwise, isn't the problem then that management of the establishments in question are not cognizant of the law regarding their establishments?

"Please see this report and then ask why shop managers may or may not wish to ban the burka."

Yes, I'm aware of that report - but the question remains, DO shop managers wish to ban the burka?

"The 'hoody' or hooded top is worn as part of a sub-culture and due to presure from peers. How is this different to the wearing of a burka?"

I have no particular opinion concerning hoodies or the people that wear them. Perhaps they should be allowed to wear them wherever and whenever they like. There is a long history of a somewhat antagonistic relationship between honest shopkeepers and idle teenage boys, and the respect that should accorded the "rights" of each party has been a prickly issue as long as I can remember. However, my point was simply that there may be any number of reasons that women wear burkas, not that their reasons were any better or any worse than the reasons some people wearing hoodies.

I'm still wondering: is there any hue and cry from shopkeepers for authority to refuse entry to the burka-clad? If not, then I don't understand the issue ...

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 01:42 PM

People often pratice their religions in individual ways.

Would that be a good defense for a ganja smoking Rastafarian in an Alabama court, Carol?

Of sourse Moslems are just people. So are young men who want to wear 'hoodies'. I have nothing at all against religious freedoms or personal preferences as long as the law is applied evenly to all.

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 01:30 PM

BTW - In the example of the burka wearing robber you will find that the 5 men with their faces covered would have been refused entry to most establishments but the one woman would not. Can anyone tell me how this is fair, either in law or in principle?

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 01:27 PM

People often pratice their religions in individual ways. Muslims are people just like everyone else. Some Amish women here in the US wear head coverings like the ones in this picture, that cover most of the head and neck, while others wear a head covering that looks like this, with a much smaller part of the head covered. Some nuns wear habits like these, which really aren't all that terribly different from a burka, while others dress in regular (albeit modest) street clothes like most other people.

Here in the US, if we wanted to try to ban the wearing of burkas, there would probably be a outcry from all religious sects in which women cover their bodies and heads.

Muslims really are people, just like everyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 12:58 PM

Has it been established in law that shopping centres have the right to refuse entry to "youths wearing hooded tops"

Yes. It is up to the management of ANY establishment to apply any rules they wish allowing entry unless it is on the grounds of religious, racial or sexual discrimination.

but not to burka-clad women?

They are not applying it to these because they believe it contravenes the above rules. As I pointed out, it does not.

And is there any indication that the managers of shopping centre want to refuse entry to burka-clad women? If so, why? If not, why not?

Please see this report and then ask why shop managers may or may not wish to ban the burka.

As to A woman may wear it to be consistent with her personal understanding of the requirements of her religion, or with her sense of modesty, or with the practice within her sub-culture, or I suppose for any number of other reasons.

The 'hoody' or hooded top is worn as part of a sub-culture and due to presure from peers. How is this different to the wearing of a burka?

Cheers

Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 11:43 AM

"So, the burka is not part of religious or racial law. The wearing of one in the west can therefore only be a political or even, on occasion, a fasion statement."

Just because the burka is not mandatory according to some "religious or racial law", it does not necessarily follow that it is only worn to make a political or fashion statement. A woman may wear it to be consistent with her personal understanding of the requirements of her religion, or with her sense of modesty, or with the practice within her sub-culture, or I suppose for any number of other reasons.

Has it been established in law that shopping centres have the right to refuse entry to "youths wearing hooded tops" but not to burka-clad women? And is there any indication that the managers of shopping centre want to refuse entry to burka-clad women? If so, why? If not, why not?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 06:15 AM

Does everyone here realise that the burka is NOT mandatory under any current Islamic law? It used to be under Taliban law but even that has now been relaxed. From MiddleEastWeb.org - Middle east Encyclopedia.

The Burqa (or Burka) (Arabic) is a long garment covering the entire body worn by extremely religious Muslim women. In Afghanistan, the Burqa was mandatory under the Taliban. Several countries including Holland have considered or passed laws banning the wearing of these garments in schools and other public places, as they are often symbols of extremism when worn in the West.

The Afghan version of this garment is called the chadri. It is the most severe version, and covers the entire face except for a small region around the eyes, which is covered by a concealing net or grille. Pakistani and Indian burqas are more daring, and may expose the eyes and even the face. The chadri is often a light blue color.

While wearing of the chadri or burka is no longer compulsory under Afghan law, outside Kabul the old laws are still enforced by the Taliban, and women wear the chadri for safety.

So, the burka is not part of religious or racial law. The wearing of one in the west can therefore only be a political or even, on occasion, a fasion statement. Asking someone to show their face in these circumstances is no worse than the shopping centres who refuse entry to youths wearing hooded tops.

I agree that people should be able to wear what they want but I also think that people should be treated evenly. When freedom of expression gives rights to one set of people (moslem women) and removes them from another (youths of all races) then something needs to be done. Either let everyone cover their faces or stop being discriminatory.

Cheers

Dave (who was once asked to remove his Tilley hat in a pub)

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 20 Apr 08 - 04:32 AM

Oh I see, so life's too short now, to use words?

Sal

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: meself
Date: 18 Apr 08 - 01:11 PM

A White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. As opposed to a Black, Brown, Yellow, Red or Wode-coloured Anglo-Saxon Protestant. (BASP, BrASP, YASP, RASP, BlASP respectively).

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 18 Apr 08 - 12:21 PM

What's a WASP?

Sal

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 18 Apr 08 - 01:38 AM

"Does the Mudcat have any Muslims who post to it?"


Not that I'm aware of, but it has plenty of 'WASPs' who shouldn't.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 05:44 PM

Does the Mudcat have any Muslims who post to it?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 05:42 PM

Careful you guys, this thread will get shut down if you start using it to snipe at each other.

I only asked if it's dangerous to drive with your head wrapped in cloth with only eyes looking through a letter box opening. Ok so other things as well, like hiding weapons under baggy clothing.

I remember a letter coming home from school with one of my kids saying they weren't allowed to ride bikes with their hood up on their jackets cos when they turn their heads the hood doesn't move. Try it, it is so. So if you are driving a car, how can you reverse or even look properly when coming out of a junction?

Why have no muslim Cats defended themselves in this thread, btw?

Leadfingers: Tell you something odd, since I posted this thread and mentioned High Wycombe a couple of times, someone from that very Mosque has looked at my myspace page! I have a hit map on it. Creepy or what!

Sal

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 03:17 PM

More ill-informed twaddle from across the pond about the "evil" British Empire. Complete and utter crap.

No it isn't. But I can understand why you wouldn't want anyone to know about Britain's track record in this regard... it's pretty shameful. However, pretty much everyone in the world knows about it, except possibly a few deniers in the UK like yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: meself
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 03:17 PM

" in fact the 'apple' is never named as the forbidden fruit."

Nor did I say it was so named - but EVERYBODY KNOWS it was an apple ...

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Leadfingers
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 02:57 PM

Sal - I had family living in High Wycombe when the Desborough Road Mosque tried to get the road closed on Fridays because the noise of the traffic interfered with their observance of the day !

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 02:26 PM

I know I shouldn't be a pedant but somehow I just can't resist. I have read Genesis (and listened to the album) and in fact the 'apple' is never named as the forbidden fruit.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 01:18 PM

"considering Britain's track record of imposing its will, culture, and political ideology on others, as well as its exploitation of people in other parts of the world, they're not really in a position to get all righteously indignant if those who sought refuge in their country want to bring some of their culture and customs with them." - CarolC

More ill-informed twaddle from across the pond about the "evil" British Empire. Complete and utter crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: meself
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 10:23 AM

No - but there seem to be a few who live in High Dudgeon ...

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 17 Apr 08 - 08:31 AM

So is there anyone here who lives in High Wycombe?

Sal

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Apr 08 - 09:52 PM

Are they really imposing their value system on you saulgoldie, or do you merely object to the presence of people with a different value system than yours? I think you live in the US, so I would be very interested to know in which part of the country Muslims have attempted to impose their value system on anyone. I lived for a little while in Dearborn Michigan, which has one of the highest percentages, if not the highest percentage, of Muslims of any part of the country, and I never experienced any Muslims trying to impose their value system on me.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: GUEST,saulgoldie
Date: 16 Apr 08 - 09:41 PM

I frankly had not thought of the driving/safety issue. The issue for me is that people know each other by their faces. I don't want to deny anyone the right to be anti-social, which separating onesself from the community in that way certainly is. But it is important in many situations to be able to identify people by their whole faces, and the burka prevents that. And of course, it endangers the community if someone is driving while wearing one. Sheesh, that's a no-brainer!

And anyway, no one forced them to come here. They CHOSE to come here, and they should not having trouble adopting at least some of our customs. It would not even occur to me to go to another country and try to impose my value system on them. As the thread started, "When in Rome..."

Subject: RE: BS: Is it safe to drive...
From: artbrooks
Date: 16 Apr 08 - 09:25 PM

I must correct myself. The garment worn by women in Saudi (and Iraq and other places) is the abaya, not the burka. The basic difference is that burkas often have an open slit in the front, while the face of an abaya's head covering is entirely covered with black mesh. My ex-sister-in-law called it a burka.