[MD] What is the intellectual argument about Islamic veil wearing?

[ian glendinning]

Wow, a great deal of "tit for tat" binary argument - I can see why
Case started up a separate thread.

Mark (or someone ?) said the key point earlier ... most of this
subject is "social".

Ian
PS: Arlo, why do you still argue intellectually with Platt, when his
arguments are entirely social ? You must have a cunning plan I cannot
see :-)

On 11/18/06, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> [Platt]
> Yes, the Dutch and English are really, really stoopid.
>
> [Arlo]
> Not stupid. Motivated by fear, fear used by politicians to secure power. Our
> politicans should appeal to intellect, and when the masses are swayed by
> emotion (fear or otherwise), they should temper that storm. Instead, the not
> only pander to it, they manipulate it.
>
> For example, would it now be illegal for a disfigured person, uncomfortable with
> her/his appearance, to wear a veil-covering in public? Or is it only illegal if
> its a "Muslim veil". And if its the religion that creates the illegality, why
> not say what you really want, for Muslim itself to be banned. You certainly
> seem to have no problem with stoopid Christian social customs.
>
> But once again, leave it to the right-wing to chip away at individual freedoms
> in the name of fear, the State and protecting us from the Boogeyman, while all
> the way claiming to be the Party of Freedom. Because as always, its blatantly
> evident that the only "freedom" you champion is the freedom "to be like you".
>
> You accuse me of being "anti-freedom" because I favor taxation to provide public
> libraries, but then turn around and support laws that prohibit free activity
> based solely on fear. Sad.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>