European Court rules Employers CAN ban staff from wearing Islamic headscarves and religious symbols

[Bald1]

The way it's worded - they CAN, not they shall, is fair, imo. As long as it applies to all religions anyways.

“The supposed ‘neutrality’ is really discrimination, making the false claim that employers who allow staff to wear the headscarf are in some way not neutral.”

If the "discrimination" is applied evenly to all religions, which seems to be the case, then how is it discrimination? If crosses are allowed, but not yarmulkes, or hijabs, then yes, that's unfair, and should be a no no. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Bald1]

I for one am in doubt whether @WhitebeltXL is an actual racist. Can you point out examples of his racism in this thread or elsewhere?

He's not. The issue stems from his unfavorable view of Islam. In which case, I am racist as well.

 

[ShinkanPo]

Yeah... maybe he's got you mixed up with Blackened, the many other crypto-white nationalists that think they're successfully walking the line, or any of the long stream of holocaust deniers we've had.

The War Room is now complete we have Crypto-White Nationalist, and I think you are one of IntheNameoff's Crypto Muslims.. and I am the Fake Filipino!!!!!!


Hehehee

 

[WhitebeltXL]

Headscarves are symbols of oppression now? are you a third wave feminist?

Not the Hijab IMO, but the Burqa and Niqab are most definitely a slap in the face to western values.

 

[Ruprecht]

The War Room is now complete we have Crypto-White Nationalist, and I think you are one of IntheNameoff's Crypto Muslims.. and I am the Fake Filipino!!!!!!


Hehehee

Ah... fake pinoy. I always forget what you're meant to be. Although that wasn't the description you gave me last time!

 

[Rod1]

Not the Hijab IMO, but the Burqa and Niqab are most definitely a slap in the face to western values.

I agree.

 

[The Diplomat]

Headscarves are symbols of oppression now? are you a third wave feminist?

I'd say so, considering the headscarf, or hijab, is supposed to convey "purity", "modesty," and women have to wear it in the presence of adult males outside of their own home. In some nations it's illegal for a woman to walk around showing her hair, all in the name of protection... I'd say that's rather oppressive, don't you think?

I don't know, the idea that a woman simply showing her hair will lead to rape and/or unwanted attention seems archaic. Got raped? Well she was showing her hair and ankles, maybe even an elbow, so it was her fault...this is the mindset of many Muslims.

There are multiple cases of women being murdered by their own family members, simply for not wearing a hijab. I'd say it's oppressive as fuck, to be honest.

 

[Rod1]

I'd say so, considering the headscarf, or hijab, is supposed to convey "purity", "modesty," and women have to wear it in the presence of adult males outside of their own home. In some nations it's illegal for a woman to walk around showing her hair, all in the name of protection... I'd say that's rather oppressive, don't you think?

I don't know, the idea that a woman simply showing her hair will lead to rape and/or unwanted attention seems archaic. Got raped? Well she was showing her hair and ankles, maybe even an elbow, so it was her fault...this is the mindset of many Muslims.

There are multiple cases of women being murdered by their own family members, simply for not wearing a hijab. I'd say it's oppressive as fuck, to be honest.

According to that logic then sleeves and pants are also oppressive because there are countries where women cant show their legs or elbows.

 

[The Diplomat]

According to that logic then sleeves and pants are also oppressive because there are countries where women cant show their legs or elbows.

Well, yeah that is pretty oppressive. Will they be stoned to death for doing so, though?

It's essentially saying men are incapable of looking at a woman's hair, legs, arms/etc. without raping them. You don't find this barbaric and out dated thinking?

I was mostly responding to the "headscarves are symbols of oppression?" which given the actual context, they are. It's not just a fashion choice, it's mandatory.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

A comprehensive ban on religious symbols would be illegal in the US. Title VII prohibits discrimination based on religion.

In this case, there was no formal written policy regarding religious symbols until after a client complained about this woman's head scarf. Pretty easy to infer this bias was specifically anti-Muslim.

 

[Bald1]

A comprehensive ban on religious symbols would be illegal in the US. Title VII prohibits discrimination based on religion.

In this case, there was no formal written policy regarding religious symbols until after a client complained about this woman's head scarf. Pretty easy to infer this bias was specifically anti-Muslim.

If it's anti-Muslim, then why is it applied evenly across the board to all religions?

 

[NSX-R]

Good luck banning Sikhs from wearing their turbans.

 

[Rod1]

Well, yeah that is pretty oppressive. Will they be stoned to death for doing so, though?

It's essentially saying men are incapable of looking at a woman's hair, legs, arms/etc. without raping them. You don't find this barbaric and out dated thinking?

I was mostly responding to the "headscarves are symbols of oppression?" which given the actual context, they are. It's not just a fashion choice, it's mandatory.

So you think we should ban pants and sleeves now? anything that its used as oppression cant be used as fashion or part of your culture anymore?

Should the Russians force their babushkas to stop using headscarves?

What about indigenous people in Mexico?

That oppression.

Old rite catholics?

Russian Orthodox?

 

[Bald1]

So you think we should ban pants and sleeves now? anything that its used as oppression cant be used as fashion or part of your culture anymore?

Should the Russians force their babushkas to stop using headscarves?

If ever there was a group of women in need of full face coverings, it's old eastern euro ladies.

 

[WhitebeltXL]

Good luck banning Sikhs from wearing their turbans.

This is a good point when thinking about these blanket bans, now obviously it's at the employers discretion but you'd have to be a cunt to ask a Sikh to remove their turban if it's not interfering at all with their roles. (Just like you'd have to be a cunt to ask a lady to remove her Hijab if it has no bearing on their role)

I think this will most be important when employers have employees wearing full face coverings which could obviously be detrimental to their ability to work in a way that a Turban would never be.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I'd say so, considering the headscarf, or hijab, is supposed to convey "purity", "modesty," and women have to wear it in the presence of adult males outside of their own home. In some nations it's illegal for a woman to walk around showing her hair, all in the name of protection... I'd say that's rather oppressive, don't you think?

I don't know, the idea that a woman simply showing her hair will lead to rape and/or unwanted attention seems archaic. Got raped? Well she was showing her hair and ankles, maybe even an elbow, so it was her fault...this is the mindset of many Muslims.

There are multiple cases of women being murdered by their own family members, simply for not wearing a hijab. I'd say it's oppressive as fuck, to be honest.

Is it oppressive that women's breasts are considered sexually explicit in a way that men's breasts aren't? That is a double standard isn't?

 

[The Diplomat]

So you think we should ban pants and sleeves now? anything that its used as oppression cant be used as fashion or part of your culture anymore?

Should the Russians force their babushkas to stop using headscarves?

What about indigenous people in Mexico?

That oppression.

Old rite catholics?

Russian Orthodox?

Is it mandatory, and punishable by death, stoning, prison time, etc. ?

 

[Rod1]

Is it mandatory, and punishable by death, stoning, prison time, etc. ?

Is the hijab mandatory in Europe now?

 

[The Diplomat]

Is the hijab mandatory in Europe now?

It is within the Islamic faith and many Muslim nations.

I'm guessing you don't find it oppressive though. *shrugs*

 

[The Diplomat]

Is it oppressive that women's breasts are considered sexually explicit in a way that men's breasts aren't? That is a double standard isn't?

I'd say thats more of a biological trait than a governmental and/or religious oppression. I don't have a problem with nudity, though. Some places, they'll be stoned to death or beheaded for showing those, though.