Since the issue with the burka is men and a patriarchal culture forcing or strongly influencing women to dress in certain ways. Shouldn't conservative Christians and Jewish men who do the same and have the same type of culture when it comes to dress be in the same boat?

Why aren't France and those who agree with banning burkas calling for banning the head scarves of conservative Christians and Jews whos roots are form the same type of patriarchal male dominant culture?


Also aside its a funny society that has minimum clothing laws, dont go out naked its indecent. And maximum closing laws, take off that burka. Odd world.

tooth: youre voting for Trump, right?

The face is an instrument of expression and interaction. Women who cover all of their face are essentially unable to live normally in the world, and interact with anyone but their relatives and the people who control them.

What religion has anything comparable to the burqa? Or even the niqab?? It's a vile creation. It's sickening to be in crowds of hundreds of people where the women are covered up like possessions, and are taught to value the same, lest the sight of their nose or even their eyes in the case of burqa turn on some man and turn him from his contemplation of Allah.

You're really asking this question? Perhaps you don't know the difference between the burqa, the niqab and the hijab. Most of the anti-Islam-criticism people here are deeply ignorant. The hijab isn't banned. Only the total covering of the face is, which has the effect of turning women into cattle, unable to be distinguished or visually communicated with.

Comparing that to dressing modestly - which still allows full recognition, communication and emotional expression - is absurd in the extreme. Islam apologists are wtf to me sometimes.

I'm not American.

So its fine for a male patriarchal culture to force or strongly influences some dress but not full covering for women. ok...

You should take out all the we stuff here and use you or something else then.

dont dodge the obvious intent of the question. if you could youd vote for Trump.

Something else. The cry that women are cattle and nothing more then slaves in Islam. Which i agree with in some cases.

Well shouldn't we let those cattle and slaves into America? Let the oppressed in? You would think any of those women who could get here would be welcomed. But their not, for reasons.

But I just did before this post. That you don't realize it is part of the beauty of it.

I'm entirely convinced you have me confused with somebody else.

Our main interaction is me calling your bluff about the come-to-philly and black-friends bets, that mightv'e been the straw on the camel's back that led to your Politics exile.

Srsly even for wil this is ball-tingling levels of ignorance.

Except this didn't really happen, mostly. So there's that.

And the part that did happen, I hinted at the context earlier. Yes, Muhammad might've killed you, personally, you, Toothsayer, but does that really make him that bad of a guy?

Yes, ty, 1000 times ty.

I don't have you confused with anyone else, and I'm pretty sure if you actually did come and meet my black friends they would defend me vigorously. The conversation wouldn't go well for your argument.

It's a moot point, as I'd have zero interest in meeting you. You seem like a total waste of time.

Which liberal democracy forces or strongly influences ANY type of dress? What sort of dress is forced in, say, America?

Since when is the criteria of letting people in the US solely based on being "oppressed"?

When did he suggest that be the sole factor in letting people in?

He's been one of Trump's most vigorous, eloquent, and denial-ridden defenders in this thread and elsewhere for at least 6 months. Classic examples:

He no doubt thinks Trump's flip-flop on deportations is evidence of tactical brilliance and a top-notch new campaign staff, but everybody just can't see it yet like he does.

Just checking, because on the last page he was insisting he's not right-wing.

Stop lying

There's a great bit in the Vice article about Milo Yabbadabbadopolis' speech in London where all the pasty loser white supremacists in England are wearing MAGA hats now.

fixed that for ya.

Anyone with American values (freedom, democracy, women's rights, individualism, self determination) would be passionately against Islam, as it is the antithesis of those values, as much as Nazism and communism was/is.

You sir, are un-American, if you spend your time defending Islam from legitimate and fact-based criticism.

Let's see...

- Strongly pro-women (unlike most of the pretty awful people in this thread who apologize for the most oppressive religion in the history of the world, which currently destroys the lives and freedom of hundreds of millions of women).
- Pro public health care - which is one reason why I support Trump - he's the only one who genuinely wants that and can get it done.
- Pro seeing people as individuals, unlike the bigots on here who always think and talk in terms of race.
- Pro subsidized education
- Pro education, evidence and science
- Anti-religion
- Anti gun

So no, most certainly not right wing. I mean, what right wing positions do I have?

The only thing that could be considered right wing about me is that I think Western Civilization has been the shining beacon of light in the world. We ended the widespread practice of slavery, gave self determination when we didn't have to, promoted freedom, emancipated women, advanced science and philosophy and human rights on a scale never seen. No one apart from the West has done those things, and the world is far better for it.

If that view is considered right wing, then that's just a sign of how detached from reality and morally bankrupt the left is.

Personally I think both sides of American politics are crazy. The Democrats are as bad as the evangelical Christians. If you're strongly for one side or the other you're not a very rational person, imo.

He said "let the oppressed in?" As if that was enough of a reason to. He phrased it that way, not me.