Outraged French ban Muslim 'burkinis' on multiple beaches

[RgrF]

Quoting fauch:

I meant the liberal European policies and attitude that allowed Muslims, that to put it mildly are NOT interested in integrating into the host cultures, to flood into their countries at alarming rates and now have become a critical mass.

Check our own history. To this include enclaves of early immigrants who were either unwelcome or unable to become citizens of their newly adopted nation, for some it took generations, others are still working at it.

Places like New Braunfels, Texas or almost anyplace you can put a pin in, in Wisconsin or areas adjacent were their landing zones and today their descendants are telling others to get the hell out. Were they New Yawkers it'd be called hutzpah but they're not so it's called IGNORANCE.

We Southern Californians are still attempting to adapt to the Spanish/Mexican culture we once wrested from them. They're winning and we'll soon be the oppressed minority. Good reason for the barnaclbill types to move here and have another whining point, if they could afford to actually live here.

On the other hand, staying at mom's fully paid off place, Cape Cod adjacent has its advantages - just not so much in November - March.

[RgrF]

rjmacs wrote:
[quote=RgrF]
Integration seems to be the hang-up.

Americans pat themselves on the back about how they were inclusive and integrated and that would be praiseworthy, had it actually happened. It didn't and the myth that it did is one of the problems we deal with today.

America was never a homogeneous or welcoming place, it was simply and plainly a place that needed to import more people who looked like each other and were needy enough to go through the privations (they were severe beyond anything we can imagine) and then on arrival displace the people who lived here before them.

Without getting into North American heritage, imagine how horrible it must have been for a mother and father to bundle themselves and their children into steerage on a ship to escape the horror that was then their life. Think about what must have been in their minds "we can stay and starve like your aunts, uncles and cousins" or we can roll the dice and get on board and have about a 18% chance of even surviving to tell the tale.

Europe and most of the rest of the world were actually less a threat and thus did many disadvantaged (read poor) folks head West (East if you were disadvantaged, Asian and wanted to build railroads)

Wow. That was the most slavery-free accounting of the peopling of America that I've heard in a LONG time.
There's a difference between coming here in shackles and coming here in either desperation or hope, who put the burr under your saddle this morning?

[Ted King]

A good article on this:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/201...rance.html

Muhammad pointed out that burkinis themselves are a sign that many French Muslims are relatively liberal; in conservative Muslim countries, it would be unfathomable for women to join men at the beach, let alone in the water. “This is a good news in a way because it means Muslim women who didn’t used to enjoy that day at the beach or at the pool are now taking part, they are socializing,” he told the Times.

The French argument against burkinis doesn’t translate neatly into American culture. Where the U.S. largely views religion in terms of positive rights—you have the right to practice your faith—French laïcité is a negative right, guaranteeing freedom from the religious claims of others. As reporter Mimi Kirk writes at CityLab, “in France the state is shielded from religion, while in the United States religion is shielded from the state.” But Nicolas Cadène, the spokesman for the government’s Observatory on Laïcité, suggested to the Times that the principle is being exploited “for partisan ends and to stigmatize people.” French politicians’ condemnations of the burkini have openly stoked Islamophobia. Cannes mayor David Lisnar deemed burkinis a “symbol of Islamic extremism,” and Prime Minister Manuel Valls, coming out in support of the bans on Wednesday, called the burkini part and parcel of “the enslavement of women.”

[rjmacs]

RgrF wrote:
There's a difference between coming here in shackles and coming here in either desperation or hope, who put the burr under your saddle this morning?

Someone who doesn't want the shackles to be left out of any story of this sort. Pesky bastards.

[max]

max wrote:
They do not see it freedom of religion the way we do.
It is much more more than that. They did not subdue the religious institutions to let them go without any state controls.
The state owns most of the religious buildings and controls them in other ways, as well.
The basic difference is that the French system promotes essentially freedom from religion and as such displaying religious symbolism is often limited by law. Burqas and burkinis are not outside of those definitions....

I am glad that you have learned something new Ted, again.

Ted King wrote:
A good article on this:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/201...rance.html

The French argument against burkinis doesn’t translate neatly into American culture. ... As reporter Mimi Kirk writes at CityLab, “in France the state is shielded from religion, while in the United States religion is shielded from the state.”

The difference is that I did not have to look it up and I did not post xenophobic, myopic PC inanities, before you did...

[Ombligo]

This thread tends to remind me of a scene in Fiddler on the Roof....

Avram: (gestures at Perchik and Mordcha) He's right, and he's right? They can't both be right.
Tevye: You know... you are also right.