Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(147,334 posts)
36. For me, individual expression is something I
Wed Jun 26, 2019, 04:33 PM
Jun 2019

want to protect. I have no doubt that some Muslim women feel oppressed by what they wear, but there are others who do not. I'm not able to discern which are which. So that's a difficult thing. Still, I don't think banning that clothing outright is the right approach, especially when those who impose such a ban are not Muslims.

It's a delicate balance. And that's just one issue. If I object to fundamentalists imposing their standards in public life, I also have to oppose imposition of other standards on fundamentalists.

So I oppose all imposition of "moral" standards in general. So, if a woman is required to dress a certain way, against her wishes, then I oppose that. By the same token, though, I would not prohibit a woman from choosing that type of clothing, independently. Both are wrong.

That's always the dillemma, isn't it?

This may have no bearing on the situation, however, guillaumeb Jun 2019 #1
You're absolutely right. It has no bearing on the situation. trotsky Jun 2019 #6
And what about analysis based on facts? guillaumeb Jun 2019 #10
There are facts and there is speculation based on prejudice. trotsky Jun 2019 #13
We agree that anti-religious prejudice is behind the burkini ban. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #19
Nope. trotsky Jun 2019 #22
You have not demonstrated that it is the nonreligious who are objecting MineralMan Jun 2019 #14
The ban itself, and the political support for it, guillaumeb Jun 2019 #28
You have not demonstrated that at all. MineralMan Jun 2019 #29
And this further attempt at avoidance guillaumeb Jun 2019 #30
It demonstrates that I disagree with you. MineralMan Jun 2019 #31
You don't mind if I bookmark your post here for future use do you? AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #61
Bookmarks are free here. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #63
A dossier, I hope? AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #64
Are dossiers also free? guillaumeb Jun 2019 #66
Facts. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #16
You're probably pretty familiar with French history. Act_of_Reparation Jun 2019 #24
The phrase "I was plenty provoked, thank you." springs to mind. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #56
Well, good for them for asserting their rights. MineralMan Jun 2019 #2
Agreed. eom guillaumeb Jun 2019 #5
Yeah, strange that someone would be more outraged at this... trotsky Jun 2019 #7
I just think the entire thing is utter nonsense. MineralMan Jun 2019 #8
It is all nonsense. trotsky Jun 2019 #9
What you mean is: guillaumeb Jun 2019 #11
He did not say that at all. MineralMan Jun 2019 #12
Yes, the open hostility to theists and theism. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #17
Oh, my! MineralMan Jun 2019 #18
You just don't understand Major Nikon Jun 2019 #25
Oh, I understand perfectly well. MineralMan Jun 2019 #26
That is a complete and utter falsehood. trotsky Jun 2019 #15
Please do not presume to tell others what they mean. MineralMan Jun 2019 #27
You are forgetting that Boston Atheists were once mean to a Trump supporter Major Nikon Jun 2019 #20
... trotsky Jun 2019 #23
France is not the US Major Nikon Jun 2019 #21
That is true, of course. MineralMan Jun 2019 #32
Religionists typically have the expectation their "rights" trump everything else Major Nikon Jun 2019 #33
For me, individual expression is something I MineralMan Jun 2019 #36
It's easy to consider such things in a vacuum Major Nikon Jun 2019 #37
We impose many things here. MineralMan Jun 2019 #39
I have a simpler way of looking at it Major Nikon Jun 2019 #40
I agree with that. MineralMan Jun 2019 #41
Wrong venue Cartoonist Jun 2019 #3
The correct venue. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #4
Clearly some are more concerned with religious intolerance than gender intolerance Major Nikon Jun 2019 #34
Religious sect Z forces women to cover their bodies. Country X won't let them. trotsky Jun 2019 #35
Isn't it wonderful when you can use tolerance to further intolerance? Major Nikon Jun 2019 #38
'But I know a couple people who say they *want* to!' AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #86
The burkini ban in some public pools is wrong edhopper Jun 2019 #42
If freedom in France is restricted to European attitudes and behaviors, guillaumeb Jun 2019 #45
And the second part of my question edhopper Jun 2019 #48
You will not get a response to that. trotsky Jun 2019 #49
Your attempt at analysis fails on many levels. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #52
No framing is necessary. trotsky Jun 2019 #53
I agree that your framing fails, guillaumeb Jun 2019 #54
Yes, people CAN read what you actually say. trotsky Jun 2019 #55
Are all women who wear the hijab subjugated? guillaumeb Jun 2019 #51
And women vote edhopper Jun 2019 #57
Some vote in that way because they believe it. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #59
So if subjugated people edhopper Jun 2019 #70
And now you are certain that they are brainwashed as well. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #72
Maybe you can point me to a matriarchal or matrilineal society that employs face coverings. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #58
My answer indicates that these Muslim theocracies are patriarchal. eom guillaumeb Jun 2019 #60
But does not address why some choose to keep wearing them when not embedded in that AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #62
The word "choose" is key here. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #65
You seem to be dodging my question. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #67
Your question is not to the point. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #68
It is the point. You claim they need to be free to choose. Are they? AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #69
You are diverting from the topic, possibly in an atempt to minimize this example guillaumeb Jun 2019 #71
It's a simple question, that could be more easily answered than your gyrations in dodging it. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #74
Are you? guillaumeb Jun 2019 #75
Yes, it's called social enforcement. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #78
Also, point of order, your own argumentation has drifted from the French situation. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #73
Which is why they closed the pool? guillaumeb Jun 2019 #76
Yeah, I suspect the government is going 'this is a bridge too far'. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #79
What liberties must one lose in the name of security? guillaumeb Jun 2019 #81
Walk into a bank with a ski mask on, in any country, and you tell me. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #83
A bank is not a pool. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #84
There are contextually appropriate circumstances. I view a pool and a bank as a public accomodation AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #85
While I agree, in part, with your response, guillaumeb Jun 2019 #87
So it's never religion with you edhopper Jun 2019 #89
Religion is a part of all theists. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #90
What attitudes does that include edhopper Jun 2019 #50
Is there a free society? guillaumeb Jun 2019 #77
Well... some of us are subject to the consequences of those rules, to a degree. AtheistCrusader Jun 2019 #80
Nice. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #82
Even if it includes edhopper Jun 2019 #88
Now the city has closed the pools. Eugene Jun 2019 #43
"See what you made us do, you filthy Muslim women?" MineralMan Jun 2019 #44
Very well said. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #47
Thank you for the update. eom guillaumeb Jun 2019 #46
My family went to a public pool in France. PassingFair Jul 2019 #91
Burkinis are intended to be, and designed to be, swimwear. guillaumeb Jul 2019 #92
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Muslim women defy ban to ...»Reply #36