The foolishness of Western liberals using 'tolerance' as an excuse for cowardice in the face of the most intolerant of ideologies is beyond belief.

Bring on the new Enlightenment.

Mr Morgan says:

//IMHO, if a woman or man wishes to walk naked down the street for whatever reason, then that should be permitted by law so long as they're not actually harming anyone.//

Interestingly narrow definition of 'harm'... limited to physical ?

curious .. curious indeed.

PROTAGORAS.. u are on the money.. but now in enlightened Victoria the 'Equal Opportunity' commission can send a few of their stormtroopers/thought police out to rip off those discriminating Burka's :) How dare those Muzzies discriminate against the hearing disabled.

Helen...this is your Que! gooo Helen.

For a list of burqa bandits (partial, no doubt):
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2006/11/niqabs-and-burqas-as-security-threats
Can we expect an increasing diversity of burqa banditry here in Australia?
Something to look forward to!
Remember, if evil doubts start to arise,
repeat the mantra:
Diversity is good,
Diversity is good,
Diversity is good,
Diversity is good.
If doubts persist, repeat the above
until you return to that blissful trance-like state.

"IMHO, if a woman or man wishes to walk naked down the street for whatever reason, then that should be permitted by law so long as they're not actually harming anyone."

CJ - This is becoming silly because what would the ladies, wearing the burqa (and particularly their men) say about being subjected to nakedness on the streets? Nothing?

But perhaps you could take the 'do no harm' free-for-all bit further and allow citizens to walk down the street naked, engaging in a bit of harmless masturbation? How about that? Burqas, uncovered meat and DIY sex in the city - hilarious!

Yay - let's do it! A limitless array of freedoms for everyone except the significantly large deaf community and those with delicate sensibilities who can go jump - whingers!

STOP PRESS: Attention all bikies, Klan members and bank robbers: There is no longer a requirement to remove your harmless helmets, pillow cases or balaclavas when entering banks - good stuff chaps!

I'm quite fascinated by the specious arguments advanced by the burqa banners, in order for them to avoid saying why they really want to dictate what women can and cannot wear in public.

In particular, I find the argument that a few women wearing burqas is making life difficult for deaf people quite risible. How often is communication with deaf people actually impeded by the wearing of burqas? I imagine that the frequency is very close to zero.

I have a beard, which can make lip reading difficult. Should we ban beards, particularly given that many Muslim men grow them?

As for the discomfiting aspects of reduced eye contact, perhaps we should ban sunglasses as well?

The push to ban the burqa emanates from Islamophobic bigotry, but is dressed up in disingenuous politically correct terminology that conscripts feminism, security and even disabled people to its odious cause.

As for this, with respect to the fatuous example provided by one bigot of the illegality of public nudity:

<< Interestingly narrow definition of 'harm'... limited to physical ? >>

Perhaps Boazy can specify what harm of any kind is caused by seeing someone naked (and its corollary, what harm is caused by wearing the sartorial equivalent of a tent)?

'So if a woman wishes, as part of her religion, to walk naked then it is OK?'

Strangely enough many probably think this is part of the Greens religion. Many from PETA and environmentalist love nudity and violence.