jayseven Posted July 30, 2008 Posted July 30, 2008 Or girl. It's stupid. In shopping centres you can't wear a hood up or a hat. Yet they can wear a sack where you can only see their eyes. The can even cover their head on a passport photo. I'm not allowed to have my fringe below my eyebrows yet they can cover their head? It's a fucking joke. It's not even part of their religion anyway, nto that it should matter. Citations needed! RE: passport photos and "not even part of their religion anyway" - as it is, really.
MoogleViper Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Citations needed! RE: passport photos and "not even part of their religion anyway" - as it is, really. Do you think that's acceptable? 'cos I don't.
jayseven Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 You made it sound like their whole face was covered :P Yeah, that's acceptable. Why not? You can see exactly what they look like!
MoogleViper Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Because none of these are acceptable. And you can see what they look like much more than what she looks like.
jayseven Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 I'd disagree. If she's going to be wearing her shawl at the airport, which is more likely to happen than those three pictures, then what's the big deal? Seriously, it's not like she's wearing a gas mask or anything. if you just imagine that she has long, black hair then there's no difference is there?
MoogleViper Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 I'd disagree. If she's going to be wearing her shawl at the airport, which is more likely to happen than those three pictures, then what's the big deal? Seriously, it's not like she's wearing a gas mask or anything. if you just imagine that she has long, black hair then there's no difference is there? But then you could say that the old lady is going to wear her hair like that at the airport, or the baby will have the dummy. It's a joke. They shouldn't be allowed to wear it in the airport anyway.
jayseven Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 You can't say that with as much certainty as you can about her outfit though. The baby's passport will last 5 years so they'll stop using the dummy. Hair isn't stable and not only grows but moves about thanks to sheer momentum alone! Why shouldn't they be allowed to wear it in the airport?
MoogleViper Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 You can't say that with as much certainty as you can about her outfit though. The baby's passport will last 5 years so they'll stop using the dummy. Hair isn't stable and not only grows but moves about thanks to sheer momentum alone! Why shouldn't they be allowed to wear it in the airport? Because you can't see who they are. You can't wear a hat or sunglasses when they are IDing you so why should you be able to wear that?
Slaggis Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Because you can't see who they are. You can't wear a hat or sunglasses when they are IDing you so why should you be able to wear that? Because that would be covering your face. What she is wearing is covering her hair, her entire face is in open view.
MoogleViper Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Because that would be covering your face. What she is wearing is covering her hair, her entire face is in open view. But a hoody wouldn't cover your face. And you can't wear that.
jayseven Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 dude, this is getting silly. How can you not see who they are? Their face is right there! *points* They're a hell of a lot more likely to look exactly like their picture! It's like they're wearing a frame around their face. All taht's covered is, what, ears and hair? They still have the eyes, nose and mouth, and they're surely considered the essential parts to IDing a person, hence no sunglasses. But a hoodie would produce a different image to that of your passport :P You don't have to wear a hoodie - they have to wear that.
Jonnas Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Unnecessary accessories are forbidden in IDs, and of course we can understand that. That woman is wearing a obligatory piece of clothing. It's not an unnecessary accessory she'll only use sometimes. She's going to wear it at all times. And you can still see her face.
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 I was reading until this point. Same. Your post is flawed due to that unneutral, irrelevant comment. :/
MoogleViper Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 dude, this is getting silly. How can you not see who they are? Their face is right there! *points* They're a hell of a lot more likely to look exactly like their picture! It's like they're wearing a frame around their face. All taht's covered is, what, ears and hair? They still have the eyes, nose and mouth, and they're surely considered the essential parts to IDing a person, hence no sunglasses. But a hoodie would produce a different image to that of your passport :P You don't have to wear a hoodie - they have to wear that. Unnecessary accessories are forbidden in IDs, and of course we can understand that. That woman is wearing a obligatory piece of clothing. It's not an unnecessary accessory she'll only use sometimes. She's going to wear it at all times. And you can still see her face. She doesn't have to wear it. It's not obligatory. Religion should not grant anybody any special treatment. You can't see her face shape in that photo. There are plenty of muslim women that don't wear that. What if I said my belief was to wear a bandana? I wouldn't be allowed. But why should her beliefs be worth more than mine? We aren't a muslim country. People shouldn't get special treatment just because of some beliefs. They carry no actual meaning other than to the person themselves. So they shouldn't be granted any special treatment because of it.
jayseven Posted July 31, 2008 Posted July 31, 2008 Religious imperatives and moral laws of course found the basis of justice systems in all countries, and with our laws are arguably based on more christian ideals there also comes the idea of accepting other ways of life, and respecting other boundaries. The only debate over this I could persuade myself to give would be that it could be considered a rather sexist and pristine way of treating half the sex, but as I read between your lines you speak as if you can't trust people wearing hijabs (hadith?). I do understand your comparison to other forms of clothing/dress and how they're treated differently, but the essense of a religious law can't be loverlooked. it's much less a choice than wearing a hoodie or a hat is. I still disagree with you that you can't see the shape of their face. The hijab isn't worn loosely like a hood - and it isn't a fashion, it's a way of life. As Wiki tells me, 'hijab' is more than simply the veil, it is "One of the tenets of Islam ... a requirement for modesty in both men and women." Sure you can argue that wearing the scarf/thing is only an interpretation, but it's an interpretation taken from doctrines and scripture held as law. So yeah - it's a liberty afforded to muslims, but! If you wanted to wear a headscarf for your passport photo, you can - so it's not unfair treatment is it?
Recommended Posts