Talk:United Kingdom debate over veils
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Other Views
I have done some editing to this piece, although less than I think it really needs. The main change is that I have put the views of the Prime Minister and the Mayor of London at the top, rather than below the views of the British National Party and the Socialist Workers Party as they were. The Express poll showed 98 per cent thought a ban on veils would be a good thing (according to the Express), not that 98 per cent supported Straw's contention. To say they supported women "losing the right" to wear veils raises all sorts of issues - better to just use the language used by the Express in citing the newspaper's report imho. Personally I think this section is too long. I appreciate a lot of work that has gone into it and have not cut anything (except the reference to one anoymous woman reportedly shouting something at a meeting). Hobson 01:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bravo
I just wanted to say that this is one of the best summaries of a debate I've seen on Wikipedia - an excellent list of prominent speakers on the issue. While its NPOV, it's shocking the amount of Islamophobic bull which has been printed in the name of free speach in the last few weeks. It makes me ashamed to be British. Snooo 23:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- "Sociology graduate from University of Birmingham; maintain a weblog in my spare time." Well what a surprise that is! A sociology grad weeps for the poor oppressed minorities. But, you know, there are plenty of other reasons why you should be ashamed to be British. Aren't you simply jumping on the bandwagon? It amazes me how little foresight these "art house cinema" socialist graduates actually have. We are dealing with an immense problem at the moment, with a minority who think Britain's men are drunks, the women slappers, and to be brutally honest and very politically incorrect, there is a catasrophe waiting to happen. Those who want sharia law over here must be shunned, beaten, whatever. Although, a lot of people just can't see it, the niqab issue is largely connected to this desire to bring about sharia law in Britain; and I for one am not about to let this happen. I certainly don't require some second generation Muslim brit to instruct me on moral behaviour, when he himself comes from a backwards medieval society in which the year is only circa 1400 (I.e., Iran). CaptainSurrey 23:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- " I certainly don't require some second generation Muslim brit to instruct me on moral behaviour"... "he himself comes from a backwards medieval society in which the year is only circa 1400". If hes 2nd gen.. hes a Brit.. What part is causing you trouble? --Irishpunktom\talk 10:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know. What I do know is, I'm sick and tired of leftists launching vicious attacks on any one who actually tries to engage in honest, straight debate about a subject. I don't hate Persians, Arabs or any other ethnicity adopting the Islamic religion. What I hate is people who lie about things, hide information from people. The world isn't about 10,000 years old, and it certainly wasn't made by God or Allah; I don't know this for sure, but I believe it. But then my belief is based on some evidence put forth by scientists. There is plenty of evidence that the earth is a lot older than 10,000 years. There's plenty of evidence that all the miracles that have ever happened have been those affecting only minor ailments which probably were cured by something else. And we all have heard of dopamine and the affect the anticipation of reward can have on the mind. (Just thinking you will get something good will give you something similar to an adrenalin rush.)
- " I certainly don't require some second generation Muslim brit to instruct me on moral behaviour"... "he himself comes from a backwards medieval society in which the year is only circa 1400". If hes 2nd gen.. hes a Brit.. What part is causing you trouble? --Irishpunktom\talk 10:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- There's plenty of evidence that a Niqab (worn in some countries where a stricter school of Islam prevails, e.g. Saudi Arabia) upon a woman can be intimidating, scary, and can create a power imbalance between the two people engaged in talk. The veiled woman can see the person to whom she is speaking, but that person can't see the veiled woman fully, and so the veiled woman has an advantage. The advantage is due to the fact that over here in Britain, women are no longer seen as sexually dangerous beings, and therefore we don't make them cover up. But then in a society where men are increasingly being shown as equal to women or even weak up against the woman, the veiled Muslim woman would then actually be an equal woman with bizarre clothing to make her sort of mysterious and powerful.--CaptainSurrey 05:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
-
What is wrong with being afraid of Islam? Islamic terrorists caused 9/11, Islamic terrorists caused the London Bombings in 2005, Islamic terrorists caused the death of many of our troops and even more innocent Iraqis. Sure, Islam was considered a peaceful religion. Accept Allah or die. Islam is an idea, an idea that is pushing people to kill themselves along with many others. Why shouldn't we be afraid of Islam? --69.67.235.68 03:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Expressveil.gif
Image:Expressveil.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 21:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)