• starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    As an American, I don’t have a whole lot to be proud of, but I’ll be damned if I don’t think every country deserves First Amendment rights

  • crapwittyname@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    A law banning one religion’s symbology is always going to be a bad time for everyone. As seen with other burqa bans, this will just cause division, which is exactly what the originators of the bill are looking for. Shame that level heads didn’t prevail. Again.

    It’s weird for me to be defending the right to wear a burqa. I think extreme religious practices like this are silly and need to be modernised, and I particularly think that teaching women and girls to “cover their beauty” is disgraceful. But this is not the way to fix it. This just makes it worse, aggravating divisions and entrenching views. Fuck your burqa ban.

    • CAVOK@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Very much agree with this. The end result might actually be that women and girls won’t be allowed to go out at all, which isn’t great.

      • crapwittyname@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        More than likely in some cases.
        And I don’t see any potential positive end results for anyone except bigots.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Reminder that the problem with Islam isn’t that they force women to cover themselves, it’s that apostasy is punished so severely that secular women would rather put up with the burqas. If a woman genuinely believes in Islam, she should have the right to practice her religion.

  • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    So no more face masks during a respiratory pandemic? 🤦

    Edit: Apparently people didn’t read the article. The proposed law was modified to forbid all sorts of face covering and the terms are so vague that is absolutely includes N95 masks and similar.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Because it isn’t a ban on burqas (which alone would also be problematic on grounds of religious freedom), but a general ban on all face covering in public. And this should be obviously a problem both for health reasons (respiratory masks) and video surveillance with face recognition.

        • CactusEcho@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          24 hours ago

          yes there are. Exceptions:

          • Health, professional, artistic, entertainment or advertising reasons;

          • Places of worship and diplomatic and consular premises, as well as aircraft;

          • Weather conditions, security reasons or other situations provided for by law.

        • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          I have not checked the details in the actual law, so maybe.

    • CAVOK@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      It might not be, or it might, but I somehow don’t believe that the far-right who proposed this had the well-being of women and girls in mind.

      • xcel@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Ok ? Does this matter? It still seems like a good idea. How are you supposed to identify someone if they commit a crime? If it was a mask it would be illegal

        • crapwittyname@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          The wellbeing of women and girls matters, yes.

          In fact, their wellbeing (along with everyone else’s) is exactly why you would be trying to stop crime in the first place.

          How are you supposed to identify someone if they commit a crime?

          They’re wearing a fucking burka FFS, it’s a pretty good way to identify a person. It’s about as easy as it gets. Also, have you ever tried to run from the cops in one of those things? It’s a fool who chooses that as their getaway clothing.

          • xcel@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            If everyone wears a burqa, how are you meant to tell one person apart from another

            • crapwittyname@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              Everyone doesn’t wear a burqa though. The vast majority of people don’t. So, if a crime is committed by someone wearing one, it will be much easier for the police to find them than it would be by recognising the details of their faces.

  • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    So, under ‘international law’, is it now legal to invade Portugal and stop them oppressing their women? Or does that only apply if they have proven oil reserves?