Way to go, France

[droski]

If I choose to move to a Middle Eastern country, I would not expect them to accept my Christianity with open arms. So, I would never move there.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

france is not a christian country.

 

[n_huffhines]

so you're fine with a gov't stripping the rights of its citizens? Good to know

Though I personally want to live in the most free society possible, I recognize that France is a sovereign state that can make this kind of decision if they so choose. If I lived there I would fight it.

This isn't any different than banning pot or light bulbs?

 

[Cartervol]

If I choose to move to a Middle Eastern country, I would not expect them to accept my Christianity with open arms. So, I would never move there.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

No problem there because they wouldn't accept it anyway, as it is stated in the back of their book.

 

[vol_in_ar]

I wonder if that discover coincides with the shift in policy re: our departure from Afghanistan.

I doubt it, since one of Obama's platforms for election was troop withdrawl

 

[SDV]

If law is based on safety reasons and protects our citizens then yes. I am all for freedom of religion, but I don't see how uncovering a face is a violation of that.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[droski]

This isn't any different than banning pot or light bulbs?

not many religions with pot or light bulbs as important parts.

 

[utvolpj]

Though I personally want to live in the most free society possible, I recognize that France is a sovereign state that can make this kind of decision if they so choose. If I lived there I would fight it.

This isn't any different than banning pot or light bulbs?

it's a little different since it's in place to limit the freedom of one religion.

Should I assume you are totally against any involvement by the US in any sovereign country as well?

 

[droski]

If law is based on safety reasons and protects our citizens then yes. I am all for freedom of religion, but I don't see how uncovering a face is a violation of that.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

so you'd be ok if the US banned people from wearing crosses? assuming it saved a couple of lives?

 

[utvolpj]

If law is based on safety reasons and protects our citizens then yes. I am all for freedom of religion, but I don't see how uncovering a face is a violation of that.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

if their text tells them to cover their face then it would be a violation right?

and I seriously doubt many believe it is for safety and protection of citizens

so you'd be ok if the US banned people from wearing crosses? assuming it saved a couple of lives?

could get caught in something and strangle them. Safety first

 

[n_huffhines]

not many religions with pot or light bulbs as important parts.

Personal liberty is personal liberty.

 

[SDV]

so you'd be ok if the US banned people from wearing crosses? assuming it saved a couple of lives?

If people wore ones big enough to conceal their faces yes. Lol.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[droski]

Personal liberty is personal liberty.

you mean like having the liberty to wear whatever you want?

 

[n_huffhines]

it's a little different since it's in place to limit the freedom of one religion.

Should I assume you are totally against any involvement by the US in any sovereign country as well?

Yes, and how in the hell did you extrapolate that? :blink:

 

[n_huffhines]

you mean like having the liberty to wear whatever you want?

Like that, yes.

 

[therealUT]

I doubt it, since one of Obama's platforms for election was troop withdrawl

Yes, but this past fall, Obama made it clear that we will be in Afghanistan longer than his original withdrawal window.

 

[utvolpj]

Yes, and how in the hell did you extrapolate that? :blink:

because you said a sovereign nation such as France had the right to do what they want. No problem with it just making sure it's the same everywhere

 

[therealUT]

If people wore ones big enough to conceal their faces yes. Lol.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

You do know that women can see out of the Burqa, right?

Your argument would be akin to banning sunglasses, simply because they go over one's eyes.

 

[SDV]

You do know that women can see out of the Burqa, right?

Your argument would be akin to banning sunglasses, simply because they go over one's eyes.

So similar. One covers entire head and face, the other covers eyes only. Thanks for enlightening me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[tvolsfan]

Are you going to argue that, in hindsight (seeing what America has done over the past 200 years), that was a bad thing?

I think it was a terrible thing and I have my reasons; yet, you seem to be very pro-US, a stance that would be utterly impossible had those immigrants assimilated to Native American culture.

Immigrants assimilating would be beneficial to them, not just us.

 

[tvolsfan]

If you have a problem with France not allowing you to wear your burqa, guess what? Don't move there. I applaud them.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

What if you're already there? Sucks to have to move out. Well, I guess it's France, so it's probably a good thing to leave, but still...

 

[therealUT]

So similar. One covers entire head and face, the other covers eyes only. Thanks for enlightening me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

You were trying to mask this as a safety precaution. I pointed out that your argument was ridiculous; however, if you want to me to continue, I will.

Maybe we should ban the combination of a cap, sunglasses, and a scarf. I imagine that would put an end to the majority of accidents.

 

[tvolsfan]

I'll admit I'm pretty surprised a country like France would do this. Religion doesn't play a lot of importance there, and you would think they are past the racism stuff.

 

[therealUT]

Immigrants assimilating would be beneficial to them, not just us.

Forcing them to assimilate, even if it was for "their benefit", is still not acceptable.

Immigrants, as long as they are not conquering, assimilate over the course of two generations.

 

[SDV]

I dont think you grasped the meaning of my use of safety. I was not referring to accidents, as in people couldn't see. Lol. I meant that people can conceal their identities.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[tvolsfan]

Forcing them to assimilate, even if it was for "their benefit", is still not acceptable.

Immigrants, as long as they are not conquering, assimilate over the course of two generations.

It's not just for their benefit, it's for everybody's benefit. For example, I'm not talking about holding a gun to their head and making them learn English. I just don't see a problem at all with making English the national language.