France starts ban on full-face veil

[true_indian]

Your English is poor, the last part of your statement doesn't make any sense, ,may be your over-enthusiasm has fizzled the part of the brain that controls your linguistic. Nobody is about to take charge of anything, it' all about the right to wear whatever one pleases which happens to be a so-called 'western value'. It's strange that the indian government is not passing similar law against the Muslims in India to show its support to the French government.

Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it lacks sense. I just made it easy for you, read it again. If you don't understand it even then may be you should revisit your English lessons again.

For the rest of your post, I have already answered it in my previous posts.

PS: English for you

Charge(Noun) - a formal police statement saying that someone is accused of a crime. Or a formal accusation.

 

[true_indian]

your comments are funnny. Islam has never been abn exotic religion and it never will be. It requires to surrender onself to Allah's will. It gives you firm guide lines. It prohibits most "Fun" things considered enjoyment these days. It's somewhat difficult to stay on the right track with all the "Fun" going around everywhere.

Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, who equate it either do it out of ignorance, media misguide or for specific purpose lmowingly. Hitler killed millions of jews how come christianity never got associated with terrorism? why they say Nazis killed jews, why don't they say christains killed jews.

And No we do not live under the rock, we clearly understand what is going on in this world.

Read my all posts, my argument is not religion based, its pure logic.

Yes, but that's not how it is perceived in the western world. And perception is everything. Unless you put counter theories out there and prove them by actions, its not gonna change. Its only Muslims who think Islam is a peaceful religion, why is that?

 

[Thorough Pro]

Buddy again, India is not France. What can't you understand? India had Islam in it for more than millennium. We are more than adjusted to it. We were oppressed but since it has become part of us. France is still relatively new to all this. They would evolve in time. If they don't want to take India's route, more power to them. I won't stand in Judgment.

PS: Even with all that experience India still got partitioned because someone thought they couldn't co-live together in harmony. May be France is avoiding that. I would say wise decision.

Either you are not understanding my argument or not trying to. for you informatin, Isalm is not new to france either, many mulim countries had been colonies of france in the past and a very large number of muslims (highest in europe) live and have been living in france for many many years. Even the burqa is not new in france, it is as old as the muslims living thhere which in turn is as old as the oldest muslim colony riled by france.

Hence their so called fear of muslims or burqa is nothing bur nonesence. French give two arguments against burqa.
1. it creates differenciation on the basis of religion. My answer so does the specific dress including the head scarf worn by nuns. and neither is a new thing they both existed in france for hundreds of years, why ban now?

2. It is a symbol of opression. My answer wrong again, infact the law banning it a state sponsored opression, it denies ones basic right to wear a piece of dress. It denies freedom of choice, freedom of expression, freedom of religion.

 

[T-Rex]

Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it lacks sense. I just made it easy for you, read it again. If you don't understand it even then may be you should revisit your English lessons again.

For the rest of your post, I have already answered it in my previous posts.

Why don't you just show how somebody is about to take charge? I'm sure you're not going to do that because that will expose your 'excellent' command over English.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Yes, but that's not how it is perceived in the western world. And perception is everything. Unless you put counter theories out there and prove them by actions, its not gonna change. Its only Muslims who think Islam is a peaceful religion, why is that?

No one can explain the logic how one perceives a given thing. Just like mass murder of jews is not considered terrorism of christains, the same irrational, inconsistent logic makes them think Isalm is not a religion of peace.

This is not even the crux of discussion.

 

[true_indian]

Why don't you just show how somebody is about to take charge? I'm sure you're not going to do that because that will expose your 'excellent' command over English.

I already did.

Again.

Charge (Noun): a formal police statement saying that someone is accused of a crime Or a formal accusation.

Now go brush up your English.

 

[Thorough Pro]

So they are waging a war against Islam. Is that what you are saying? Even if so, you are hardly in a position to judge them, don't you think? Even if they claim themselves as champions of freedom of expression you decide if it to be true based on their actions. They are okay with this action and are ready to take the charge for it.

We are not discussing a war among any religion. the whole discussin is that by passing the law, French have done exactly opposite of what they are saying.

Tey say Burqa is a symbol of opression, yet the method they use (forceful ban by way of passing a law) they themselvs are denying the women their basic right to choose theor dress. How can they claim that by not giving women freedom to choose their dress they are giging freedom. Nothning can be more contradictory rhan this.

 

[T-Rex]

I already did.

Again.

Charge (Noun): a formal police statement saying that someone is accused of a crime Or a formal accusation.

Now go brush up your English.

Listen, it won't be 'take charge' it should be 'bring charge', do you know the difference? Take some lessons in English, I'm pretty sure you'll improve fast.

 

[true_indian]

We are not discussing a war among any religion. the whole discussin is that by passing the law, French have done exactly opposite of what they are saying.

Tey say Burqa is a symbol of opression, yet the method they use (forceful ban by way of passing a law) they themselvs are denying the women their basic right to choose theor dress. How can they claim that by not giving women freedom to choose their dress they are giging freedom. Nothning can be more contradictory rhan this.

Alright I am sorry, I was under wrong impression that they are doing it to integrate Muslims into society. But their reasoning is illogical. I apologize for so much rumbling.

 

[true_indian]

Listen, it won't be 'take charge' it should be 'bring charge', do you know the difference? Take some lessons in English, I'm pretty sure you'll improve fast.

They are okay with this action and are ready to take the charge for it

Read again. I said they are taking this action fully knowing accusation/charge associated with it. And they are ready to take it. All of this was implicit in my statement. May be you should take some comprehension lessons as well.

 

[T-Rex]

Read again. I said they are taking this action fully knowing accusation/charge associated with it. And they are ready to take it. All of this was implicit in my statement. May be you should take some comprehension lessons as well.

Then it should be 'face charge' not 'take charge'!

 

[true_indian]

Then it should be 'face charge' not 'take charge'!

Awesome. You are right. Thanks for correcting me. In my defense, I write my posts pretty fast.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Alright I am sorry, I was under wrong impression that they are doing it to integrate Muslims into society. But their reasoning is illogical. I apologize for so much rumbling.

No problem, you are most welcome.

 

[fallstuff]

We are not discussing a war among any religion. the whole discussin is that by passing the law, French have done exactly opposite of what they are saying.

Tey say Burqa is a symbol of opression, yet the method they use (forceful ban by way of passing a law) they themselvs are denying the women their basic right to choose theor dress. How can they claim that by not giving women freedom to choose their dress they are giging freedom. Nothning can be more contradictory rhan this.

There is the spirit of the Law and the letter of the Law. The spirit of the Law this has been an effed up effort to garner vote. It has very little to do with reality. Another fine example of the effed up spirit of the Law is in Oklahoma. In Oklahoma GOP led houses pre-emptively banned Sharia Law in the State of Oklahoma,

The letter of the Law must be respected by everybody, however worthless it maybe.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Pathetic Islamphobia .....

Well its stated , if you can't do anything about something unjust the last resort of defiance is an objection of will and morally not agreeing with injustice

Its shameful out leaders are sitting around while this is happening in France -