Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ban The Burka Not Fancy Dress Parties
Weekend Libertarian ^ | 15 June, 2011 | B.P. Terpstra

Posted on 06/15/2011 4:51:16 PM PDT by AustralianConservative

The establishment media faked crocodile tears when one Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform. Apparently, only Hollywood actors can dress up as fascists for fun. Islamist-inspired fascism is another matter: a peaceful religious expression.

Here in the real world, of course, appeasement policies are eroding our security – not fancy dress parties. Plus, there’s no free-market without security.Therefore, I say: Give us the right to ban burkas and (where reasonable) veils.

There are clear cases of burka-wearing women smuggling in bombs to slaughter ladies, gentleman, and children. There are clear cases of cross-dressing men using burkas as escape costumes. A London bombing here – 43 people killed over there. This is utter madness.

Example one:

In Pakistan’s first known female suicide attack, a woman wearing a bomb under her burqa struck near a UN food distribution point in Khar on December 25 killing 43 people. The Salarzai tribe was again the target.

Example two:

The fiancee of one of the failed July 21 suicide bombers was today jailed for three years for helping him to escape by dressing as a Muslim woman in a burka.

Example three:

Teachers in several local schools have told The Sunday Telegraph [UK] that they feel “under pressure” from local Muslim extremists, who have mounted campaigns through both parents and pupils – and, in one case, through another teacher - to enforce the compulsory wearing of the veil for Muslim girls. “It was totally orchestrated,” said one teacher. “The atmosphere became extremely unpleasant for a while, with constant verbal aggression from both the children and some parents against the head over this issue.”

Over the years, Islamist-first politicians have sided with fundamentalists. My advice: They need to redirect their anti-fancy dress party energy towards a more productive, more pro-security agenda.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Politics; Religion; Society; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: bans; burka; europe; security
1 posted on 06/15/2011 4:51:23 PM PDT by AustralianConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AustralianConservative

It’s easier to stick their tongues out and mouth bad words while hidden under a veil.

2 posted on 06/15/2011 4:55:32 PM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All


3 posted on 06/15/2011 4:59:43 PM PDT by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AustralianConservative

I’m surprised a libertarian site is for the ban. I got into a heated online argument with someone at another Libertarian blog over my support for a ban.

4 posted on 06/15/2011 5:22:31 PM PDT by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AustralianConservative; humblegunner

(Excerpt)

5 posted on 06/15/2011 6:00:35 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn
There is a fundamental philosophical issue for Libertarians, namely, do they want a weak state one where private organizations can do what they wish, or do they want a strong state that stands for individual freedom. There is a polar difference between these two. While libertarians worship individual freedom, including freedom of association, with a weak state organizatons can arise which do not believe in freedom of expression for its members, and even membership can be regarded as compulsory.

If a woman decides she thinks burkas are cool and wants to wear one in a situation that poses no security risk to others, one libertarian view would be, well that is her choice, that is fine and we have nothing to say. On the other hand, wearing a burka is prescribed by a certain sect of a certain religion, and women are not entirely free in their choice to adhere to that religion or to abstain from wearing the burka.

Does the libertarian allow private organizations to arise whose power to compel behavior rivals or exceeds that of the state that they despise? My view is no, because that endangers the rights of all of us. E.g. I would defend the right to form and enforce private common law contracts, but think the notion of private Sharia law contracts is an aberation of our view of the freedom of contract.

6 posted on 06/15/2011 6:40:48 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

Thank you for the explanation. I can see how some Libertarians view the state as a larger danger though, being that “it” has more power by definition.

7 posted on 06/16/2011 7:46:10 AM PDT by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

RE: Burkas. I’ve noticed a big gap between the so-called libertarian left and the libertarian right.

There are similar issues, of course.Murray Rothbard for example was a famous pro-death penalty libertarian.

8 posted on 06/16/2011 5:27:05 PM PDT by AustralianConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AustralianConservative

Why excerpt?

9 posted on 06/16/2011 5:37:44 PM PDT by FourPeas ("Maladjusted and wigging out is no way to go through life, son." -hg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson