ban the burka

[gordon_s1942]

One thing no one has mentioned when the French were proposing the ban on full body cover (not face) when at the beach is those who wear a wet suit or as people are encouraged here (particularly children) to 'Slip, Slop, Slap' to minimise the risk of Sun cancers.

I am not in favour of any sort of face covering such as worn by Muslim women unless your out in the desert in the middle of a raging dust storm which is where the style originated.
Up until 50 some years ago Catholic Nuns wore the full habit covering from head to toe with only the face exposed and that didnt cause any dramas neither should the Burka, so long as the face is uncovered.

[peteramjet]

...that didnt cause any dramas neither should the Burka, so long as the face is uncovered.

You can't wear a burka and have your face 'uncovered' - a burka is a full body covering, that is the issue.

[gordon_s1942]

You can't wear a burka and have your face 'uncovered' - a burka is a full body covering, that is the issue.

Whatever the NON FACE COVERED version is called is acceptable.

[Onefella]

Whatever the NON FACE COVERED version is called is acceptable.

That would be the Hijab.

[peteramjet]

Whatever the NON FACE COVERED version is called is acceptable.

A hijab - but no one has suggested that be banned, just the full-face covering burka. They are two seperate things

[trash]

I was casually stumbling through the Summary Offences Amendment act (as you do) which is currently in the NSW legislative council
Actually reading the law can be good for shits and giggles from time to time and I stumbled upon this little gem.
Summary Offences Amendment (Full-face Coverings Prohibition) Bill 2017, Debate currently adjourned, 15/03/2018. Private Member's Public Bill.
Private member, this has got Fred Nile's paw prints all over it, so it's my guess I'll give the crazy religious right a tick for this one.

quoted from the amendment....

[Division 2C] Wearing full-face coverings in public places

(1) A person must not, without reasonable excuse, wear a face covering while in a public place. Maximum penalty: 5 penalty units.

(2) A face covering is any article of clothing or other thing (such as a helmet) that hides a person’s face in a way that conceals the identity of the person.

(3) Without limitation, it is a reasonable excuse for the purposes of this section if the wearing of the face covering is reasonably necessary in all the circumstances for any of the following purposes:
(a) the lawful pursuit of the person’s occupation,
(b) participation in a lawful entertainment, recreation or sport,
(c) such other purposes as may be prescribed by the regulations.

(4) However, a religious or cultural belief does not constitute a reasonable excuse for the wearing of a face covering.

(5) For the purposes of this section, a face covering can hide a person’s face in a way that conceals the identity of the person even though part of the person’s face can still be seen.

(6) The onus of proof of reasonable excuse in proceedings for an offence under subsection (1) lies on the defendant.

(7) A person who compels another person, by means of a threat that the other person could not reasonably be expected to resist, to commit an offence under subsection (1) is guilty of an offence. Maximum penalty: 10 penalty units.

(8) In this section:
- public place does not include a church.
- threat means:
(a) a threat of physical force, or
(b) intimidatory or coercive conduct, or other threat, that does not involve a threat of physical force.



Au visage France !

[hinekadon]

dont bring the into the country

[lsemmens]

I'd go so far as to repeal section 8 part 1 - into a church.