Jump to content
Thailand Forum
Scott

SURVEY: Should clothing with religious symbolism be outlawed?

SURVEY: Should items of clothing with religious symbolism be outlawed?  

115 members have voted

  1. 1. Should items of clothing with religious symbolism be outlawed?

    • Yes, all clothing with religious symbolism should be outlawed in public.
      34
    • No, they should be permitted in public.
      50
    • There should be restrictions on wearing clothing with religious symbolism in the work place.
      25


Recommended Posts

hawker9000    3,963
1 minute ago, farcanell said:

Atheism is a disbelief, or lack of belief in a religion... and there is no "code of conduct" involved. One simply follows ones moral compass.

 

ergo, there is nothing tangible about it that can be banned.... in fact, quite the opposite, as history has seen non believers persecuted, and forced to accept (or outwardly admit) to a religious belief

 

the same goes for communism or other forms of socio politically induced/enforced cultures, as these are not religions or beliefs

Atheism involves a "belief" in something no mortal can possibly know, and involves "expression" just as much as any organized religion does.  Most organized religions "deny" other  organized religions; atheism merely denies them all and substitutes denial of the other beliefs as ITS "belief".  Neither the faithful NOR the non-believers can do anything but "believe" in what they're expressing (unless you know somebody who's back from the dead with a firsthand account).   "Ergo", there IS something tangible about atheism, certainly no less "tangible" than religious belief.   Neither sides "knows" what its talking about; both sides simply believe what they're saying.

 

So.  Ban someone else's religion?  OK.  Let's ban yours, too.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
farcanell    1,573
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

Atheism involves a "belief" in something no mortal can possibly know, and involves "expression" just as much as any organized religion does.  Most organized religions "deny" other  organized religions; atheism merely denies them all and substitutes denial of the other beliefs as ITS "belief".  Neither the faithful NOR the non-believers can do anything but "believe" in what they're expressing (unless you know somebody who's back from the dead with a firsthand account).   "Ergo", there IS something tangible about atheism, certainly no less "tangible" than religious belief.   Neither sides "knows" what its talking about; both sides simply believe what they're saying.

 

So.  Ban someone else's religion?  OK.  Let's ban yours, too.

 

 

 

How?

 

how can you ban, or stop someone from not believing in a god?

 

Make them believe in a god?

 

atheism is the "belief" ( as you suggest) that there is nothing to believe in... ie... an absence of belief... banning this, means they have to therefore believe in something... which is what the poster (@6) said should be banned.

 

i do not see atheism as a religion... there is nothing being worshipped, which is what a religion does (worships)... by being an atheist, I simply choose not to believe in god(s) or any religion

 

post 6 suggests an alternative though... tax religions... that would work for me, too.

 

worshipping religions makes money for that faith... tax it.

 

atheism doesn't make money... so that's all good with me, if you insist that not believing in a god (nonbelif), is actually a belief

Edited by farcanell
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jesimps    3,018

I would say yes, providing it doesn't include face covering and that it doesn't offend the main religion of the country. All visitors, asylum seekers MUST comply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
elgordo38    9,505

I did not vote as there is such a large differential. On one side is the whole Muslim attire granted mostly on the females which designates them as Muslim then there are Hindu's etc. that wear large turbans and others that do not come to mind. To go to the point of banning these would be well an excercise in futility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Deerhunter    2,256

Complicated issue.  For example the Sikh turban denotes his religion and also the Items every Sikh man must carry at all times including a knife.  But generally Sikhs are very polite and innocuous. The full hijab is a symbol of female oppression. PS.  I am a man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMA_FARANG    3,587
Posted (edited)

wTo ban clothing with religious symbols on them means telling  Catholic priests not to wear crosses on their robes, as well as Catholic Nuns not to wear a Nuns habit

Once you start down the slippery slope of stopping people from wearing the clothes they wish you also can't stop anyone from wearing any clothes no matter how insulting their clothes are  to another group.

For that reason we can't start going there, we must stay away from that area or we can ban anything another person doesn't like.

I don't want to live in that kind of country.

 

Edited by IMA_FARANG
correct typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neurath    954

85 years ago there was a country forcing people to wear identifying signs of their religion - even if they did not wish to do so. How terrible we thought. Now we're discussing passing laws that will force people to remove identifying signs of their religion. It might be thought that in the first case, there was no desire that this particular religious community integrate whereas in the second there is demand that the religious community or communities integrate completely. Not really though is it? What a mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grouse    4,085
Posted (edited)

 

God being Maxwell of course!

Edited by Grouse
Problem posting image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Si Thea01    1,980
Posted (edited)

I do not believe "Religious" garb should be banned but the wearers of the Niqab and Burka should be required, by law, to remove the face covering any where that it is necessary for the wearer to be identified.  That is banks, courts, police checks, police stations, airports etc., or anywhere any other type of face covering is banned.  Those bans are in place for a reason, that is for the specific purpose of identifying the wearer, nothing more, nothing less.  Other than that, wear what you like, who really gives a toss. :wai:


 

Edited by Si Thea01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 19 September 2017 18:46
Sponsors
×