France enforces ban

[freeatlast]

At least two women have been detained in France while wearing Islamic veils across their faces, after a law banning the garment in public came into force....
http://zionica.com/2011/04/11/women-in-face-veils-detained-as-france-enforces-ban/


The same needs to be done in the US. This can easily be a security issue.

 

[preachinjesus]

Baptists have always stood for freedom of religion. One could only hope that Baptists in France will stand for it in this instance too. The ban on coverings is terrible policy and directed at oppressing a minority of individuals. To claim the label of security is both disingenuous and belies a more ominous trend against people of faith.

 

[matt wade]

Will you also support a ban on ski masks? How about fishing scarves that people wear?

 

[mandym]

Baptists have always stood for freedom of religion. One could only hope that Baptists in France will stand for it in this instance too. The ban on coverings is terrible policy and directed at oppressing a minority of individuals. To claim the label of security is both disingenuous and belies a more ominous trend against people of faith.

Quite an unfounded accusation against their motives. Not very Christian to be sure.

 

[StefanM]

Quite an unfounded accusation against their motives. Not very Christian to be sure.

You commit the same offense by claiming that his motives are unchristian. Pot meet kettle.

 

[mandym]

You commit the same offense by claiming that his motives are unchristian. Pot meet kettle.

Maybe you should reread what I posted because this makes no sense.

 

[freeatlast]

Will you also support a ban on ski masks? How about fishing scarves that people wear?

Some states already have a ban on shi masks in public. Virginia comes to mind and i think Ohio is another. They are permitted on the slopes and places like that but not permitted in public buildings and even driving or walking around. In some Southern states laws were brought about because of The Ku Klux Klan, others because of safety issues and robbers using them so yes i support those laws.

 

[StefanM]

Maybe you should reread what I posted because this makes no sense.

You are saying that he has no basis for his claim. You claim that it was unchristian. However, you have not substantiated your assertion, and to claim that it is unchristian is making a moral claim against him similar to what you are claiming that he did.

 

[mandym]

You are saying that he has no basis for his claim. You claim that it was unchristian. However, you have not substantiated your assertion, and to claim that it is unchristian is making a moral claim against him similar to what you are claiming that he did.

Again that is not what I said. You have put words in my mouth and you need to read with careful concern what I said.

 

[freeatlast]

Baptists have always stood for freedom of religion. One could only hope that Baptists in France will stand for it in this instance too. The ban on coverings is terrible policy and directed at oppressing a minority of individuals. To claim the label of security is both disingenuous and belies a more ominous trend against people of faith.

While I also support freedom of religion, and baptists traditionally do support it, also true is that they do not turn off their brains to support every claim to religious freedom. Just because someone claims a practice as their religious beliefs does not make it their right even under our religious freedom laws.
There are those who seek to sacrifice animals under their religious laws and that is against the law in this country. There are those who would sacrifice children and circumcise girls also banned in this country. Also some believe in marrying multiple wives, also banned. Some in the Muslim religion believe it is all right even commanded to beat their wives. Would you stand for that? So the claim that something should be allowed because of freedom of religion is simply a mindless thought.

In the case of these coverings there is not a clear teaching in the Koran. In reading the passage about this many Muslims do not agree as to its meaning. It does speak of a head covering and being modest and how the covering should come down and cover the chest, but it does not specify blanking out everything except the eyes.

In the case of the Muslim covering every inch of her body with only the eyes showing one problem is that some of the women are forced to wear the coverings by their husbands in some instances and that alone should warrant a law. However another problem is in today's world with the terrorist problem it is an open door for trouble. So I totally support any law banning these things.

 

[MamaCW]

I'm kind of torn on this area because I see both sides of this story.
The government is trying to protect the people, and/or at least be able to see the faces of people because of the past suicide bombers (which have included women). I agree that all possible precautions should be taken, but where (if any) would the line be drawn. I can also see how these women may feel that their religious beliefs, being the moral coverings, are being attacked because of the evil doings of others.

Its unfortunate, but I guess its a part of this sinful world. Many laws are put into action because someone has abused certain freedoms.

 

[StefanM]

Again that is not what I said. You have put words in my mouth and you need to read with careful concern what I said.

You are free to clarify.

 

[InTheLight]

Will you also support a ban on ski masks? How about fishing scarves that people wear?

Exceptions to ban on public face covering

* Motorcycle helmets
* Face-masks for health reasons
* Face-covering for sporting or professional activities
* Sunglasses, hats etc which do not completely hide the face
* Masks used in "traditional activities", such as carnivals or religious processions

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13031397

 

[InTheLight]

I'm kind of torn on this area because I see both sides of this story.

Same here.

The government is trying to protect the people, and/or at least be able to see the faces of people because of the past suicide bombers (which have included women). I agree that all possible precautions should be taken, but where (if any) would the line be drawn. I can also see how these women may feel that their religious beliefs, being the moral coverings, are being attacked because of the evil doings of others.

The French claim that women wearing veils are being demeaned and made to be thought of as inferior citizens. People forcing women to wear veils can face a prison term of up to 2 years.