• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

It's their CULTURE, you INSENSITIVE creature!

Not to mention it's a violation of both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the citizenship laws of virtually every western country in the world.

One of the fundamental principles of citizenship is that you cannot prevent a citizen from living in their own country.

I have no idea how the citizenship laws are structured in the UK but if these people have gotten citizenship, god forbid, then they should be thrown in jail.
 
I have no idea how the citizenship laws are structured in the UK but if these people have gotten citizenship, god forbid, then they should be thrown in jail.

They are British. They do not get anything. It is their country.

If you have no idea about something it is usually a good idea to keep your mouth shut.
 
Every single one of them?

Yes, all the people who are British are British. They did not get anything, they are not illegal immigrants, it is their country. So what do you do about it?

According to you if it is their country, then they should be allowed to do what they want to do and anyone else should xxxxx off.
 
Not to mention it's a violation of both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the citizenship laws of virtually every western country in the world.

One of the fundamental principles of citizenship is that you cannot prevent a citizen from living in their own country.
Does this mean there are no citizens in North Korea?
 
Neither do you - a burkha is the enveloping outer covering, the bit that covers the face is a hijab.
No, the hijab only covers the head and hair, but not the face.

A burkha is an entire ensemble - the loose outer covering (niljab), plus the hijab, plus the face veil (niqab).

So a woman in a burkha is not showing her face.
 
Last edited:
I think he means the hijab -- the scraf which doesn't hide the face. I agree that is something completely different than a burka, morally as well.
.
I was watching 9 Muslim girls at the Mall a day or so ago.
8 wore the hijab, one didn't.
Other than hiding the hair, it does draw attention to the face, most of them were quite attractive. :)
 
I was referring to the practice of Christians doing this in Africa, as well as Muslims. That is the statement/claim/assertion that piqued my interest.

DR
.
It's even here in the Western Hemisphere. As noted, the sole cure is to educate the men in the culture.
As to its origins, I can't conceive of anyone with a vile enough mind to desire to do that to any woman.
Whatever the purpose, it's the epitome of barbarism.
 
Far from it. It is the women who perpetuate the custom as much as, if not more than men.
.
Women! :)
I can see the desire to perpetuate the horror one has experienced on everyone, just because!
"That bitch isn't going to get away without being cut the way I was!"
Rites of passage are so Stone Age today, it is only thru education that these and other practices both real; circumcision, getting laid, and imaginary; confirmation,... can be eliminated.
 
.
Women! :)
I can see the desire to perpetuate the horror one has experienced on everyone, just because!
"That bitch isn't going to get away without being cut the way I was!"
Rites of passage are so Stone Age today, it is only thru education that these and other practices both real; circumcision, getting laid, and imaginary; confirmation,... can be eliminated.

Yes, the women perpetuate the custom, just as in many cultures the men perpetuate the rites of passage of the boys.
 
The only rite I passed or was even subjected to was confirmation.
The other crap, was just never on my horizon.
Unless one counts getting a deer on opening day.
My home room teacher in senior class high school tore me a new one for doing that.
Not killing a deer, but missing class. :)
 
It's a shame your thread title yet again is nothing to do with the link you gave.

You should not insult the Britons like that either. It's childish.

Perhaps you missed the part where there have been no convictions under that law. That has everything to do with that link - unless you have an alternate reason that there have been NO CONVICTIONS. And, another reason I am as I am and write as I do when functional criminals get away with things like this. Completely (as evident from the NO CONVICTIONS part of the article).


I should note that unless they have some tendencies I have completely missed I begin to admire and value the Independant. They are two for two on reporting squarely and indicting the right people (the bad guys both times). Where both times the law worked unfairly or did not work at all.
 
What might be done? How about throwing those who mutilate their daughters and maim them for life in jail for a long time?

I like orbital sanders for an educational tool in these circumstances ("See how that feels? If you don't want to feel it again, let's don't catch you trying to mutilate anybody again.") . I believe education should be appropriate to the subject being taught - and certainly "hands on" -as the current models of good educational technique are big on that.:):)
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom