Austrian Burqa Ban Passed into Law | Page 2

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Teppodama, May 18, 2017.

?

Would you support a burqa ban in your own country?

Poll closed May 26, 2017.
  1. Yes

    74.4%
  2. No

    25.6%
  1. FacePunch Yellow Card

    FacePunch
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2017
    Messages:
    2,550
    Likes Received:
    4,699
    Location:
    Traffic court
  2. El Che Semedo Belt

    El Che
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    10,726
    Likes Received:
    12,650
    I'm kind of split. I voted no but with the caveat they should/could be banned from places like banks where no one should have their face covered. If someone has their face covered there it could/should be taken as a possible threat.
     
    #22
    7437, scoopj and Slippery Kantus like this.
  3. Concrete Whale Double Yellow Card

    Concrete Whale
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2016
    Messages:
    7,349
    Likes Received:
    8,197
    The problem is the people wearing it, not the burqa itself. Making them mix in with us shall only make things worse.
     
    #23
    steelcity77 likes this.
  4. Concrete Whale Double Yellow Card

    Concrete Whale
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2016
    Messages:
    7,349
    Likes Received:
    8,197
    What negative consequences for our countries would a ban on Muslims have?
     
    #24
    mon and RhinoRush like this.
  5. Concrete Whale Double Yellow Card

    Concrete Whale
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2016
    Messages:
    7,349
    Likes Received:
    8,197
    Textbook example of gaslighting:

    Muslims are dangerous! Fear them! Hate them!

    *brings in stricter security for non Muslims and allows Muslims to conceal themselves and get by with reduced searches*
     
    #25
    RhinoRush likes this.
  6. sabretruth Silver Belt

    sabretruth
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    14,870
    Likes Received:
    2,519
    Instead of barbecued shrimps, barbecued sausages.
     
    #26
  7. Lead /Led/

    Lead
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    28,340
    Likes Received:
    9,647
    Location:
    Around Pittsburgh
    You're question reflects the exact point that this is short sighted (meaning you are only applying this to a group where you like the policy). Doing this means we should vet people immediately off of a religious belief. That can be applied to a different group in the future. Not to mention that policy would have to expand beyond immigration policy because once a person comes into the state, do we then follow to see if they start practicing Islam? The state shouldn't try to control the flow of religion. That's one of the most basic foundations of the US.

    Short sighted and authoritarianism. No thanks
     
    #27
    freakyfarley and 7437 like this.
  8. snakedafunky Black Belt

    snakedafunky
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    5,230
    Likes Received:
    5,614
    I voted no. I would only ban it if it's against some "anti disguise laws".
     
    #28
  9. Mainez Brown Belt

    Mainez
    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    3,242
    Likes Received:
    708
    Location:
    Whittier, CA
    Gov shouldn't tell me what I can't wear
     
    #29
    grimballer, Kafir-kun and Lead like this.
  10. Gigas Banned

    Gigas
    Joined:
    May 6, 2017
    Messages:
    293
    Likes Received:
    315
    Calling islam a "religion" is short sighted and foolish, no thanks.

    There would be no negative or consequence to banning muslims. Any one with such believes should be kept out, their action in western europe prove that.
     
    #30
  11. Concrete Whale Double Yellow Card

    Concrete Whale
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2016
    Messages:
    7,349
    Likes Received:
    8,197
    What negative consequences for our countries would a ban on brown people have?
     
    #31
  12. Broken arrow Purple Belt

    Broken arrow
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,688
    Likes Received:
    1,874
    Throw another shrimp on the barbie
     
    #32
    freakyfarley and Kafir-kun like this.
  13. Lead /Led/

    Lead
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    28,340
    Likes Received:
    9,647
    Location:
    Around Pittsburgh
    First sentence... ?

    Second part, doesn't address my point that you are now allowing government to try to monitor people's beliefs. You are willing to sacrifice rights just because you are so excited to go after a specific group. The argument we are having here is making policy based on underlying principles and fundamental rights vs "I'm for any law that hurts this group I don't like". I'm guessing part of your argument is Islam isn't a religion but if we are starting from that point; I'll concede this isn't worth arguing over between us.
     
    #33
    freakyfarley, 7437 and Kafir-kun like this.
  14. Lead /Led/

    Lead
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    28,340
    Likes Received:
    9,647
    Location:
    Around Pittsburgh
    Were we talking about muslims or did you just now expand it to all brown people? Let's see how silly your policies can get. Religion testing first. Now let's just have a color scale at the airport. Better not tan too hard.
     
    #34
    A_bomb47, 7437 and Kafir-kun like this.
  15. Devout Pessimist Tragic Vision

    Devout Pessimist
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Messages:
    27,230
    Likes Received:
    17,457
    Location:
    The Nexus
    I'm not sure if an outright ban is an intelligent approach, but I do believe a strict vetting process and strong limitations on non-Europeans being allowed into North America would be a reasonable approach. Allowing whites to become minorities in their own countries is not something I want to see. Europe and North America should be majority white countries.
     
    #35
    Lead likes this.
  16. Gigas Banned

    Gigas
    Joined:
    May 6, 2017
    Messages:
    293
    Likes Received:
    315
    Argument is Islam is incompatible with basic human rights. All those that adhere to it need to be kept out.

    Don't let in people that think rape/subjugation of women and fucking kids is normal.
     
    #36
  17. Lead /Led/

    Lead
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    28,340
    Likes Received:
    9,647
    Location:
    Around Pittsburgh
    I agree with that post up to the intention of the end. We should have strict vetting where there is danger. Simple as that. If a certain group or area has more radicalism currently in it, those people need to be vetted very well before we consider letting them in. Im pretty sure we do that already though
     
    #37
  18. Devout Pessimist Tragic Vision

    Devout Pessimist
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Messages:
    27,230
    Likes Received:
    17,457
    Location:
    The Nexus
    You do not agree that Europe and North America should maintain a white majority?
     
    #38
  19. Gigas Banned

    Gigas
    Joined:
    May 6, 2017
    Messages:
    293
    Likes Received:
    315
    Cant vet what some one truly believes and will act on given an opportunity. they can always lie. only real solution is keeping them out.
     
    #39
  20. Kafir-kun Gold Belt

    Kafir-kun
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    20,609
    Likes Received:
    11,301
    Location:
    Democratic Islamic Republic of Kekistan
    If there's a compelling reason then why not? Masks are banned to varying degrees in different parts of the West. At the very least they're often banned in places like banks where they present a potential security issue. IMO the burqa should just be treated legally as a mask so that wherever a Halloween mask is banned so to is the burqa.
     
    #40
    7437 likes this.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "fd5733925866a04e50edd70f38dfaa35"
monitoring_string = "603ac9fff68f23709f2a42bf5e29272b"