[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

The battle over enforcing the burkha on Western streets makes it a political symbol. It is the same like waving a flag with an obscene symbol, or a swastika. Is a flag with a swastika just a rag of textile with some ink on it? Is it the same like a flag for a football club? Hardly, it is a political statement for Nazism, and a calculated, intended provocation. Is the burkha a dress like any other? Hardly, it is a statement for Sharia and it's ideal of what women should be like, and it is a wanted, claculat5ed, intended provocation to weaken Western resistence - by constant small callibre firing.

The swastika comparison is a good one, because it raises an interesting comparison. Here in the United States there was the famous case of Skokie, Illinois vs the American Nazi Party, in which the nazis wanted to hold a rally in a largely Jewish community, many of whose members were holocaust survivors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...lage_of_Skokie

An telling quote from Federal Judge Bernard M. Decker:
"It is better to allow those who preach racial hatred to expend their venom in rhetoric rather than to be panicked into embarking on the dangerous course of permitting the government to decide what its citizens may say and hear...The ability of American society to tolerate the advocacy ot even hateful doctrines...is perhaps the best protection we have against the establishment of any Nazi-type regime in this country."

Please note that the above is only in reference to the "Swastika" comments.

I end this thread for me with saying this: I despise people who under the label of "free relgion" and "free speech" accept and tolerate the enslavement and almost racial discrimination of women...etc.

I completely agree on this point. Religious freedom in a free country does not include the right to enslave or abuse others in the name of religion any more than it includes the right to ritual sacrafice, human or animal.

The question raised of whether the clothing issue is religious or cultural is an interesting one. The efforts of France to fight Islamic incursion is questionable, but I don't claim, as some do, to have the answer. I don't think such a law could fly here in the United States.

And some people here cannot. Their clever tricks to minimize such opinions, or any opinion on Islam they do not like, are just this: tricks at some times, rethoric surrogates at other times.

So anyone who disagrees with you is dishonest? Anyone who questions whether total ousting of Islam is the answer is actually a closet supporter of Islam?

I'm just looking for answers, and I don't think you have them.