Emily's listers/Greens/full head covers all totalatarian ideolgies.

I've managed to read Cory Bernardi's article in
the Sydney Morning Herald, as well as that of
Waleed Aly. And the best comments that made
the most sense to me that I found came
from a reader. I want to quote a part of what they
said:

"... if we as citizens are rightly expected to show
tolerance, where is the reciprocal tolerance on
display with those practicing such extreme
interpretations of Islam that they are offended by the
mere act of someone being able to look at their face,
surely the most natural way to engage with another
human being."

"How does discouraging people from engaging in such
communication make us a more tolerant society?
Why can't we expect some sort of give and take on both
sides, such as is provided by the wearing of a hijab?"

"People have the right to do a lot of things, but when
accepting that right means that the existing social compact
and societal norms are compromised then I think it is
legitimate to question whether we are getting the
balance right."

"I am not anti-Muslim, ignorant, untravelled, et cetera.
I just think we are being asked to consider this from
one perspective, the one where religious tolerance is king.
But there are plenty of examples where religious freedoms
are not acceptable and not practised in Western Societies.
For mine, both the niqab and the burqa run counter-productive
to a harmonious and inclusive society."

This debate has shown that the "real" motivation of the opponents of the burqa is not security, it's out and out bigotry against something they see as un-Australian. This is borne out by the phrasing and language used.

Earlier on I asked for anyone to supply instances of where any person in the entire history of Australia has been charged with any terrorist offence whilst wearing a burqa. Of course not one person here was able to answer in the affirmative. Why? Because the burqa is NOT any security threat whatsoever in Australia. So the bigots here lose that one.

I'll now ask another question: Can anyone here provide a link that proves that any person in Australia, throughout the history of Australia, has committed any violent crime whatsoever whilst trying to conceal their identity behind a burqa? The answer I bet will likely be in the negative, or at the most just a handful of examples in the entire history of Australia.

I can see what'll happen now: All the bigots here will immediately start typing their "search phrases" into google, looking for any tiny bit of evidence that links the burqa in Australia to even the tiniest, most insignificant crimes (in order to justify their ALREADY HELD without evidence bigoted opinions). Come on bigots, try your hardest to answer the question I asked.

Hi Pual,

Gosh, quite clever freally. Just a heads-up - the government hasn't banned the birka, or the nikab either. And nobody has demanded the right, as Prime Minister, to wear Speedos in Parliament. I think he'd be thrown out by his own party members (no pun intended).

But if you had paid any attention to the original rationale for confining people wearing balaklavas, or full-face motor-cycle helmets, or nikabs or burqas, or presumably dust-masks and health-masks and hoodies as well, to a sound-proof area, was that the chair of the Senate has to be able to see quickly somebody who is interjecting from the gallery, so that they can be identified and cautioned, without taking up too much time of the Senate.

Hence anybody wearing face-covering clothing or equipment to be asked to sit behind a sound-proof glass screen from which they can't interject while their face is covered.

Fair enough.

Joe

MAY MAY...

You challenge seeking evidence of anyone ever being charged with any offence while wearing a Burka is a little skewed I reckon. You will note that personally I've no problem with what's worn by either gender, but attire that completely prevents an adequate ID can and does represent a security risk ? The reasons are obvious.

While it's quite true, any individual who enters premises while attired in a Burqa would necessarily draw attention to themselves, purely because of the peculiar uniqueness of that attire. Nevertheless a specific ID would prove impossible in a court of law, and I'm sure you know that my friend !

The Beatles, I love 'em ! Ringo STARR aka Richard STARKY included ! To the point, me in company with my girlfriend, resolutely stood outside the Sheraton Hotel at the 'Cross', gazing up at the third floor balcony, vainly hoping to catch a glimpse of our beloved Beatles ! I could never understand why they never stayed at the Chevron Hotel directly opposite, a superior hotel in every way ?

Loudmouth, can you name even one person who has been ejected from the Parliament House viewing areas, for shouting abuse/interjecting whilst wearing a burqa --- at any time throughout the entire history of the Australian Parliament?