Swiss voters approve facial covering ban

[The Alma Mater]

So, now everybody will freeze their ears off in Swiss Alps while skiing because ski masks are banned?

It is not law yet. They will.probably use a system like "forbidden in public buildings"; and it will take them several years to implement.

[Kowani]

swiss ski towns 'bout to get fuckin merc'd 'cause some people wanted to shit on muslims

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

I think it is a very good decision because closing the face poses security risks.

You must feel really threatened by bearded guys wearing sunglasses?

You cannot keep the niqab and burqa together with sunglasses.

This is an infringement of freedom of expression. Let minorities wear their traditional clothing if they want to. Banning it doesn't solve anything.

Accordingly, it is not a problem for you to walk around naked. Nudity and niqab and burqa are the same to disturb the peace and security of society

[Vassenor]

I think it is a very good decision because closing the face poses security risks.

Ban full-face motorcycle helmets. -nod-

[Vassenor]

You must feel really threatened by bearded guys wearing sunglasses?

You cannot keep the niqab and burqa together with sunglasses.

This is an infringement of freedom of expression. Let minorities wear their traditional clothing if they want to. Banning it doesn't solve anything.

Accordingly, it is not a problem for you to walk around naked. Nudity and niqab and burqa are the same to disturb the peace and security of society

Apparently being reminded that other people have a religion that is not your religion is a threat to public security and safety now.

[Kilobugya]

Well, in all honesty I can understand viewing the islamic face-covering veil as a symbol and instrument of submission of women, and opposing it for that. But you just can't force people to be free, defend women rights by limiting what women can do. And at worse, it'll just mean they'll have to stay home instead. And fuel resentment and bigotry on both sides, the racists feeling strengthen in their conviction that "islam and arabs are evil" and the islamist in their conviction that "the west" is out there to oppress them.

[Picairn]

Accordingly, it is not a problem for you to walk around naked. Nudity and niqab and burqa are the same to disturb the peace and security of society

Since when did naked bodies become a threat to society?

[The United Confederacy of Texas]

Honestly, I'm not surprised this happened, same thing occurred when Swiss voters decided to ban any further construction of minarets. That said, it's still bullshit and an infringement on both freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

[Kilobugya]

Accordingly, it is not a problem for you to walk around naked

Well, actually from a philosophical/theoretical point of view, I would support it. But it would create too much uproar, for something not important at all, so really not worth investing time/energy in it.

[Ainland]

I'm seeing a lot of reactionary comments and cries of racism and targeting Muslims out of hate. Having read into it, it looks like the concerns are actually based on oppressing women. It's a very difficult topic, but I can see the argument that says: Yes, there should be religious freedom and tolerance. But religion cannot be an excuse for the oppression of women (or gay people, or disabled people, or any other such characteristic).

It looks like, at least for some people, this is not about suppressing religious freedom, but just saying that religion can't be used to subverse certain groups into being treated as lesser in general society.

[Vassenor]

I'm seeing a lot of reactionary comments and cries of racism and targeting Muslims out of hate. Having read into it, it looks like the concerns are actually based on oppressing women. It's a very difficult topic, but I can see the argument that says: Yes, there should be religious freedom and tolerance. But religion cannot be an excuse for the oppression of women (or gay people, or disabled people, or any other such characteristic).

It looks like, at least for some people, this is not about suppressing religious freedom, but just saying that religion can't be used to subverse certain groups into being treated as lesser in general society.

Remember, dictating what women can and cannot wear is freeing them from oppression.

[Ainland]

I'm seeing a lot of reactionary comments and cries of racism and targeting Muslims out of hate. Having read into it, it looks like the concerns are actually based on oppressing women. It's a very difficult topic, but I can see the argument that says: Yes, there should be religious freedom and tolerance. But religion cannot be an excuse for the oppression of women (or gay people, or disabled people, or any other such characteristic).

It looks like, at least for some people, this is not about suppressing religious freedom, but just saying that religion can't be used to subverse certain groups into being treated as lesser in general society.

Remember, dictating what women can and cannot wear is freeing them from oppression.

Exactly, and it seems like that is what is the concern for many people. That women are subversed, with the use of religion, into covering their faces as if they are lesser in society. And I think many Swiss people are saying that, whilst they support freedom of religion, such oppression is not acceptable in their society, whether religiously motivated or otherwise. So I can see that argument, and I would hope a similar view would be taken if the 'religious freedom' argument is used in relation to any other protected characteristic, such as homosexuality, race, disability.

[Vassenor]

Remember, dictating what women can and cannot wear is freeing them from oppression.

Exactly, and it seems like that is what is the concern for many people. That women are subversed, with the use of religion, into covering their faces as if they are lesser in society. And I think many Swiss people are saying that, whilst they support freedom of religion, such oppression is not acceptable in their society, whether religiously motivated or otherwise. So I can see that argument, and I would hope a similar view would be taken if the 'religious freedom' argument is used in relation to any other protected characteristic, such as homosexuality, race, disability.

So social pressure to dress a certain way is oppression, but laws requiring you to dress a certain way is freedom.

[New haven america]

How will protesters express their dissatisfaction toward the government without being identified, arrested, and charged with subversion now?

Does that actually happen in Switzerland ?

No.

There's not really much to do in Switzerland other than roll around in Nazi Gold money and Saudi Oil money and travel around to other countries while complaining how everywhere isn't exactly like Switzerland.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

A fine slice of nationalistic xenophobia topped with a healthy serving of civil rights violation. Wonderful.

Look, my opinions on religious customs are on the record, and they're not exactly moderate. And even I think this is a terrible move.

[New haven america]

Well, in all honesty I can understand viewing the islamic face-covering veil as a symbol and instrument of submission of women, and opposing it for that. But you just can't force people to be free, defend women rights by limiting what women can do. And at worse, it'll just mean they'll have to stay home instead. And fuel resentment and bigotry on both sides, the racists feeling strengthen in their conviction that "islam and arabs are evil" and the islamist in their conviction that "the west" is out there to oppress them.

Ah yes, Switzerland, the country globally renowned for its socially progressive views and laws.

Like the time it took them until 1971 to give women the right to vote, and that didn't even apply to the entire country until the 90's.

[Ainland]

Exactly, and it seems like that is what is the concern for many people. That women are subversed, with the use of religion, into covering their faces as if they are lesser in society. And I think many Swiss people are saying that, whilst they support freedom of religion, such oppression is not acceptable in their society, whether religiously motivated or otherwise. So I can see that argument, and I would hope a similar view would be taken if the 'religious freedom' argument is used in relation to any other protected characteristic, such as homosexuality, race, disability.

So social pressure to dress a certain way is oppression, but laws requiring you to dress a certain way is freedom.

I fully acknowledge, like I said, that it's a very difficult area. But, like I already said, I think the concern comes when 'religious freedom' is used to actually oppress certain groups based on characteristics (gender, in this case). So I can see how they're looking at it. This is similar to how some countries have banned gay conversion therapy. There is a similar 'religious freedom' argument, based on people 'freely choosing' to engage with it based on their religion.

So my point is, I don't think these cases are really just about suppressing religious freedom, or hate for certain religions or religious people, but rather drawing a line when 'religious freedom' is used to oppress certain types of people in general society.

[Kilobugya]

So social pressure to dress a certain way is oppression, but laws requiring you to dress a certain way is freedom.

Well, when something (like social pressure) does create an oppression, sometimes a law to ban it can, in the end, create more freedom than it suppresses. That's often the case in labor law or in consumer protection law, to shield workers/consumers from accepting, due to pressure or ignorance, things from employers/corporations that end up hurting them.

But in this case, I fear it'll just lead to more oppression (such as not being allowed to leave the house at all), and as I said above, more resentment and hostility, further dividing society.

And there also is a strong hypocrisy behind it, because many people supporting such bans don't care much about women rights in general, they only see that as a way to strike against their perceived enemy, "the evil Muslim".

[Great Brytain and Ireland]

There’s nothing wrong with the Swiss people cementing their customs into law, especially given the recent history of Islamic involvement in terrorism and murder within Europe. From what I’ve read (the Reuters article), the only problems I can see with this is the fact no one wears burqas, but a rare few people do wear niqab (which I understand is outlawed under this new law); this may play a role in further dividing a seemingly integrated society but we shall see.

Reiterating my thoughts simply, I am not against the ban but it’s possible it may cause some local issues from time to time until the idea of wearing niqab or burqa become distant memories.

[Vassenor]

There’s nothing wrong with the Swiss people cementing their customs into law, especially given the recent history of Islamic involvement in terrorism and murder within Europe. From what I’ve read (the Reuters article), the only problems I can see with this is the fact no one wears burqas, but a rare few people do wear niqab (which I understand is outlawed under this new law); this may play a role in further dividing a seemingly integrated society but we shall see.

Reiterating my thoughts simply, I am not against the ban but it’s possible it may cause some local issues from time to time until the idea of wearing niqab or burqa become distant memories.

So how does banning facial coverings prevent terrorism?

[New haven america]

There’s nothing wrong with the Swiss people cementing their customs into law, especially given the recent history of Islamic involvement in terrorism and murder within Europe. From what I’ve read (the Reuters article), the only problems I can see with this is the fact no one wears burqas, but a rare few people do wear niqab (which I understand is outlawed under this new law); this may play a role in further dividing a seemingly integrated society but we shall see.

Reiterating my thoughts simply, I am not against the ban but it’s possible it may cause some local issues from time to time until the idea of wearing niqab or burqa become distant memories.

Because as we know, Switzerland is a hotbed of Islamic terrorist activity.

Place is damn near unlivable with all the car bombs going off.

[Vassenor]

So social pressure to dress a certain way is oppression, but laws requiring you to dress a certain way is freedom.

Well, when something (like social pressure) does create an oppression, sometimes a law to ban it can, in the end, create more freedom than it suppresses. That's often the case in labor law or in consumer protection law, to shield workers/consumers from accepting, due to pressure or ignorance, things from employers/corporations that end up hurting them.

But in this case, I fear it'll just lead to more oppression (such as not being allowed to leave the house at all), and as I said above, more resentment and hostility, further dividing society.

And there also is a strong hypocrisy behind it, because many people supporting such bans don't care much about women rights in general, they only see that as a way to strike against their perceived enemy, "the evil Muslim".

Pretty much. This isn't about women's rights and freedom. This is about not being reminded that some people aren't Catholics.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Women feeling social pressure to wear face coverings, is a legitimate concern where they all do it. Because they would stand out and (some of those places at least) face harassment or even violence, for taking it off.

Where burqa wearers are a small minority though, there's no case for them being socially pressured or oppressed except by their fathers or husbands. I'm pretty sure Swiss men don't want widespread inquiry into whether they're oppressing any of the women they live with, and/or are seen in public with!

[Ainland]

Well, when something (like social pressure) does create an oppression, sometimes a law to ban it can, in the end, create more freedom than it suppresses. That's often the case in labor law or in consumer protection law, to shield workers/consumers from accepting, due to pressure or ignorance, things from employers/corporations that end up hurting them.

But in this case, I fear it'll just lead to more oppression (such as not being allowed to leave the house at all), and as I said above, more resentment and hostility, further dividing society.

And there also is a strong hypocrisy behind it, because many people supporting such bans don't care much about women rights in general, they only see that as a way to strike against their perceived enemy, "the evil Muslim".

Pretty much. This isn't about women's rights and freedom. This is about not being reminded that some people aren't Catholics.

The fact that some people have bad motivations for something, is a terrible reason to oppose it. That's like me saying some people support Labour because they are antisemitic, and using that as an argument to say that all support for Labour is bad. Clearly ridiculous. If people have a sensible reason for supporting something, it's wholly irrelevant that some others may support the same for bad reasons. We'd get into a right mess if we followed that logic.

[Great Brytain and Ireland]

There’s nothing wrong with the Swiss people cementing their customs into law, especially given the recent history of Islamic involvement in terrorism and murder within Europe. From what I’ve read (the Reuters article), the only problems I can see with this is the fact no one wears burqas, but a rare few people do wear niqab (which I understand is outlawed under this new law); this may play a role in further dividing a seemingly integrated society but we shall see.

Reiterating my thoughts simply, I am not against the ban but it’s possible it may cause some local issues from time to time until the idea of wearing niqab or burqa become distant memories.

So how does banning facial coverings prevent terrorism?

It weakens the cultural influence of Islam and reinforces indigenous culture. By weakening Islam and its separate cultural practices, Switzerland is better assimilating future generations of Muslims in Switzerland. Islam has been the primary cause of terrorism in Europe as far as I am aware.

There’s nothing wrong with the Swiss people cementing their customs into law, especially given the recent history of Islamic involvement in terrorism and murder within Europe. From what I’ve read (the Reuters article), the only problems I can see with this is the fact no one wears burqas, but a rare few people do wear niqab (which I understand is outlawed under this new law); this may play a role in further dividing a seemingly integrated society but we shall see.

Reiterating my thoughts simply, I am not against the ban but it’s possible it may cause some local issues from time to time until the idea of wearing niqab or burqa become distant memories.

Because as we know, Switzerland is a hotbed of Islamic terrorist activity.

Place is damn near unlivable with all the car bombs going off.

I didn’t say it was. From what I read, the burqa is rarely if ever worn, but a niqab is worn but that isn’t necessarily widespread. It’s simply reinforcing Swiss culture in Switzerland from a foreign religion.