Nobody here is telling women what not to wear though. “You are doing the same like thlse forcing a hijab?” jose1324 isn’t killing people for wearing them
By saying “fuck that this gesture is possible” the conclusion is that it shouldn’t, which means that women wouldn’t wear hijab in the first place. But as they choose to do so, that means infringing on their choice.
And it should be very telling that in places like Iran women face repression if they want to not wear hijab, and the western countries working towards the opposite sentiment of repression for wearing hijab.
No, nothing about what Jose said implies that they wouldn’t want women to be allowed to wear a hijab. This gesture is possible because Islam forces women to keep their head covered when they’re around men. If they were allowed to uncover their head around men, then this gesture would hold no weight.
in places like Iran women face repression if they want to not wear hijab, and the western countries working towards the opposite sentiment of repression for wearing hijab.
Stop making these stupid comparisons. Iran imprisons women if they choose not to wear hijabs. Western countries offer women the option not to.
Earlier this month a women in Germany was banned from court service for refusing to take of her hijab. The EU court ruled that banning women from wearing scarfes in the work place is legal, if it is embedded in a “neutrality policy”
If secular doesn’t mean to separate state and religion but to suppress freedom of religion then absolutely yes. Because a theocratic state is doing just the same.
Also it is always ironic when states claim to be “secular” while having christian holidays as public holidays because “culture”.
Nobody here is telling women what not to wear though. “You are doing the same like thlse forcing a hijab?” jose1324 isn’t killing people for wearing them
By saying “fuck that this gesture is possible” the conclusion is that it shouldn’t, which means that women wouldn’t wear hijab in the first place. But as they choose to do so, that means infringing on their choice.
And it should be very telling that in places like Iran women face repression if they want to not wear hijab, and the western countries working towards the opposite sentiment of repression for wearing hijab.
No, nothing about what Jose said implies that they wouldn’t want women to be allowed to wear a hijab. This gesture is possible because Islam forces women to keep their head covered when they’re around men. If they were allowed to uncover their head around men, then this gesture would hold no weight.
Stop making these stupid comparisons. Iran imprisons women if they choose not to wear hijabs. Western countries offer women the option not to.
There is bans of hijabs in many places. A few years back France infamously banned wearing them to the beaches and arrested women for refusing it.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/burkini-ban-why-is-france-arresting-muslim-women-for-wearing-fullbody-swimwear-and-why-are-people-so-angry-a7207971.html
Earlier this month a women in Germany was banned from court service for refusing to take of her hijab. The EU court ruled that banning women from wearing scarfes in the work place is legal, if it is embedded in a “neutrality policy”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/24/muslim-women-struggle-with-germanys-hijab-ban-in-workplaces
It is not on the same level like in Iran, but as i said they are moving towards it, step by step.
Secular state is as bad as theocratic state, gotcha, hope you’ll get your gold medal this summer.
If secular doesn’t mean to separate state and religion but to suppress freedom of religion then absolutely yes. Because a theocratic state is doing just the same.
Also it is always ironic when states claim to be “secular” while having christian holidays as public holidays because “culture”.