StarGateWars Forums

I just think in your own country you can have your own laws.

Legendary Apophis wrote:Muppetery is a common known thing, theorists manipulate people into following them trying to prove they followed this path by themselves. Is it my case? No, I have witnessed what I'm talking about more or less in real life, it's not like if I lived in a seperate "sphere" without a clue of what's going on and drinking propaganda like if it was good wine.

I'm sorry but we cannot accept sub-cultures overriding our own country rules.

i understand what your saying, and i'm not trying to say that a foreign culture (any foreign culture) can or should have the right to override the indigenous cultures laws, so in short i agree with you...

having said that, can we claim to be an open society if we tell X culture they cannot practice certain customs?

just wow apophis. wow. this thread is bias i will not participate further.

well argued KMA and R8

ciao

solmyr wrote:just wow apophis. wow. this thread is bias i will not participate further.

well argued KMA and R8

ciao

mate, there's no need to leave because not all of us share the same opinions. we are adults having a sensible discussion, nothing more, so dont take it personally...

stay and chat

However KMA we (well ok then the UK) only became so open & free because of our ability to identify each other and to identify if a person was a threat to us or not.

By covering heads it makes it impossible to identify people & to see their facial expressions that would betray any thoughts of ill-intent.

If they want to cover their bodies then fine, but the item of clothing can end at the neck. They then suit both cultures needs by preventing the sexulisation of womens bodies & allowing for identification.

(all from a uk viewpoint that is of course)

Kit-Fox wrote:However KMA we (well ok then the UK) only became so open & free because of our ability to identify each other and to identify if a person was a threat to us or not.

By covering heads it makes it impossible to identify people & to see their facial expressions that would betray any thoughts of ill-intent.

If they want to cover their bodies then fine, but the item of clothing can end at the neck. They then suit both cultures needs by preventing the sexulisation of womens bodies & allowing for identification.

(all from a uk viewpoint that is of course)

I agree I think if you want to go out in the open in most counties you need to have your face uncovered you could be a most wanted criminal no one would know.

Byrnes wrote:

Kit-Fox wrote:However KMA we (well ok then the UK) only became so open & free because of our ability to identify each other and to identify if a person was a threat to us or not.

By covering heads it makes it impossible to identify people & to see their facial expressions that would betray any thoughts of ill-intent.

If they want to cover their bodies then fine, but the item of clothing can end at the neck. They then suit both cultures needs by preventing the sexulisation of womens bodies & allowing for identification.

(all from a uk viewpoint that is of course)

I agree I think if you want to go out in the open in most counties you need to have your face uncovered you could be a most wanted criminal no one would know.

what are we talking about here because i'm starting to get confused

are we saying Burqas should be illegal because of who might be hiding (remember, innocent till proven guilty?) underneath?

or are we saying that Burqas should be illegal because of basic sexism?

if its the latter, then i say leave it upto the woman who ware them to decide!
if its the first, then sorry no!!! that's a VERY dangerous and slippery slope leading to a mile high drop, and i'm afraid of heights!

We're not saying that they should be illegal but that they should be modified to fit into the culture of the country that these people have decided to come to.

Stopping the garment at the neck would satisfy both needs & allow for better integration into the the country. Their bodies will still be covered and that seems to be the primary reason for the garment in the first place.

(again this is a very uk centric point of view, but most of the western world views the covering of your face/head in much the same way as the uk does)

EDIT: I'd just like to point out (in case anyone is thinking of making a point out of it) that I would expect to have to adapt my cutoms and traditions if I moved to another country to live there as well. So its not like I'm asking them to do something I wouldnt be prepared to do myself. Its not about forgetting where you come from or forcing certain things on anyone, its about fitting/integrating into the country you have chosen to live in the best you can.

New images, first one particularly directed towards United Kingdom people. Controversial both at its best also!
Some of you happen to be hostile to the EU organisation, but what do you think about that kind of "new order"? :

[spoiler][/spoiler]

Second is directed towards Netherlands, same kind.

[spoiler][/spoiler]

(reason for the second image
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ppeal.html )

Alot of talks in this forum about NWO and countryless banker neo-nazi eugenist felons...let's not forget it's not the only issue. There are other kind of extremisms around.

There goes the obvious limits of multiculturalism and communautarism and the need to assimilate newcomers to our culture bases, for preservation of freedom that those people want to see to "go to hell" (believe me, it's *far* from being first time I see this kind of slogan/speech=> NOT isolated kind of speech there). I just illustrated the limits of not enforcing the adaptation to country's laws and cultures already highlighted by the problem of veiled women.

Because shocking news, we don't have only far-leftist/anarchists and neo-nazis/fascists extremists in EU!

There are just as many nuances and divisions to the religion of Islam as there are to the religion of Christianity. It annoys me when people use the words 'Islam' and 'Muslin' as though they describe a single entity. They don't. The provocative images which have been posted in this thread, of Muslim protesters and the like, are of a minority. Just as the Westboro Baptist Church, who picket the funerals of dead soldiers with 'God Hates Fags' and 'God Wants America to Burn', represent a minority of Christians.

Traditional cultures of North America, Africa, Australia and the Pacific Islands considered female toplessness normal.

When christians arrived they incarsarated them behind turtle necks, blouses and the like... And strangley enough the white women found that covering up "normal".

So it`s really all just a POV. To each theirown I say. Don`t think your pov is supperior to someone elses and be judgmental and force them to change, for tomorrow someone might turn the tables on you.

Mordack wrote:There are just as many nuances and divisions to the religion of Islam as there are to the religion of Christianity. It annoys me when people use the words 'Islam' and 'Muslin' as though they describe a single entity. They don't. The provocative images which have been posted in this thread, of Muslim protesters and the like, are of a minority. Just as the Westboro Baptist Church, who picket the funerals of dead soldiers with 'God Hates Fags' and 'God Wants America to Burn', represent a minority of Christians.

The problem you see is those minorities are much more voiced than the majority.
Several reasons. Most hostile towards primitive radicals receive threats and such things. Rest is hesitating between two cultures. And the rest either doesn't care, or is tempted to support the radicals.

That's what I wondered in another forum...why the hell don't all "moderate" muslim wake all at once and take a real hard stance against those extremists and tell them they aren't welcome here. Sure it's quite dangerous to do that, but that would be one of solutions to get rid of that filthy extremist side.

Brdavs wrote:Traditional cultures of North America, Africa, Australia and the Pacific Islands considered female toplessness normal.

When christians arrived they incarsarated them behind turtle necks, blouses and the like... And strangley enough the white women found that covering up "normal".

So it`s really all just a POV. To each theirown I say. Don`t think your pov is supperior to someone elses and be judgmental and force them to change, for tomorrow someone might turn the tables on you.

When you go in a country you generally try to not disturb habits of said country, especially if you go living there.
Ideally, christian evangelists should have asked those tribes, due to them being at home.
That said, people from other cultures have also to adapt to our European culture. As afterall, they come to us and we already have an already existing culture. It just means hundred(s) of years habits from christian comers is taken by those people, and therefore is an issue.