46d
@Rajk999 saidThen it violates the Swiss Constitution:
Yes it is discriminatory. It is result of the problems caused by Arab immigrants in many parts of the world. If you are blind to that then you need to open your eyes.
2 Nobody shall suffer discrimination, particularly on grounds of origin, race, sex, age, language, social position, lifestyle, religious, philosophical or political convictions, or because of a corporal or mental disability.
Chapter 1, Article 8, Section 2
https://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/europe/CH/Switzerland%20Constitution%202002.pdf
46d
@no1marauder saidBoy Im so glad you brought that up. Smart countries and their people have come to realise that the constitution must work for the decent, law-abiding citizens, not against them.
Then it violates the Swiss Constitution:
2 Nobody shall suffer discrimination, particularly on grounds of origin, race, sex, age, language, social position, lifestyle, religious, philosophical or political convictions, or because of a corporal or mental disability.
Chapter 1, Article 8, Section 2
https://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/europe/CH/Switzerland%20Constitution%202002.pdf
Heres the thing. ... terrorists commit the most heinous acts of cruelty, rape and murder, all in the name of their religion. They violate all rules and laws of decency and violate the Geneva Convention regarding conflict between nations. But they are the first to complain about war crimes and religious persecution, when others dont follow the very same laws they constantly break. What hypocrites.
The constitution is designed to protect the innocent from abuse. Islamic extremists and even their moderate counterparts are not innocent. Over 30 countries have banned the burqa, hijab and other Islamic wear. Some countries are destroying their mosques. All of this is unconstitutional.... but who cares. Islam needs to be stopped, and violently too, if necessary.
@divegeester saidI voted to ban face coverings in public. It's nothing to do with religion. I am entitled to know with whom I dealing in public. Just as numerous other public officials are entitled to know with whom they are dealing. I'll give just a few examples. Numerous public services and benefits are bound to specific individuals: dole payments and pension payments, bus passes and rail discount cards, taxi driver IDs, medicines (especially registered opiates) collected at pharmacies, medical services, driving licenses, library cards, literally hundreds of other public services are bound to specific individuals and public officials are entitled to know that the person standing before them is who she says she is. When I withdraw money from my bank, for example, I present my bank card and my ID; the teller checks both to make sure I'm the man in the photo and entitled to withdraw money from the account. And I like it that way. Otherwise, anyone could steal my wife's bank card, walk into another branch of the bank wearing a burkha, claim she's my wife, and clean out the account.
After a closely fought referendum the Swiss have voted to ban the burqa from January 2025.
I was under the impression (he says with tongue firmly in cheek) that Switzerland was a liberal society.
@moonbus, which way do you vote and what’s going on out there?
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/swiss-burqa-ban-take-effect-2025-2024-11-06/
Suppose a robbery is committed on the street--someone threatens me at knifepoint and demands my wallet. I have not only a right, but a legal entitlement to compel witnesses to the crime to assist law enforcement officers investigating the incident; and that means, I am entitled to know and be able identify witnesses on the scene. I have a legal entitlement to compel them to testify in court to what they saw and heard (assuming it comes to court), and the judge and jury are entitled to know that the person on the witness stand is one and the same as the person who witnessed the crime; the judge and jury and prosecutor are entitled to look into the witness's face to see for themselves whether she is truthing or lying or dodging. All these examples presuppose identifiability, and the face is the place.
This has nothing to do with religion. I would be equally opposed to Jews or atheists walking about in public with face masks on. I have no objection to orthodox Jews wearing skull caps or Christians wearing crucifixes, as these do not hinder identifiability.
Obviously, there are going to be a few exceptions: motorcyclists wearing helmets, for example. But a motorcyclist who wears his helmet into a bank will trigger security alarms, and rightly so.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
46d
@vivify saidBecause a cross or Yarmulka isn't covering your whole face and body and walking around like it's Halloween.
If they can ban burka's, why not crosses or Yarmulkas?
It's a victory if you hate Islam but a loss for freedom of religion.
Regarding the Swiss being liberal, last year they elected a right-wing government.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
46d
@divegeester saidHere's a picture....delightful, ain't it?
Someone please correct me here, a burqa/burka however it’s spelt, is a long garment covering the entire body? Can be worn with or without a face covering?
46d
@divegeester saidSounds right.
Someone please correct me here, a burqa/burka however it’s spelt, is a long garment covering the entire body? Can be worn with or without a face covering?
Burqa covers the body.
Niqab covers the face.
46d
1 edit
@moonbus saidMakes perfect sense.
I voted to ban face coverings in public. It's nothing to do with religion. I am entitled to know with whom I dealing in public. Just as numerous other public officials are entitled to know with whom they are dealing. I'll give just a few examples. Numerous public services and benefits are bound to specific individuals: dole payments and pension payments, bus passes and rail d ...[text shortened]... . But a motorcyclist who wears his helmet into a bank will trigger security alarms, and rightly so.
46d
@divegeester saidIm in agreement. But I am anti-Islamic for other reason so there is the added benefit of getting Muslims to understand that they have to fit into the country and its culture, and not the other way around. Failure to do that will lead to a rise in Islamic fundamentalism, as many around the world have experienced.
Thanks.
In that case I’m fine with the burqa but not with the niqab.
To No1’s point earlier, the former is like a nun’s outfit.
To moonbus’ point, face covering is a security risk.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
46d
@divegeester saidThere have been cases of men wearing burquas and robbing people to hide their identity, also a few women in the US have tried to sue the DMV or police departments because they've refused to show their face for ID photos/mug shots.
To moonbus’ point, face covering is a security risk.