7 ms·

Well, that same system also voted on banning Muslim face coverings ("Experts estimate that at most a few dozen Muslim women wear full-face coverings in the coun

by marcod 6y ago

Well, that same system also voted on banning Muslim face coverings ("Experts estimate that at most a few dozen Muslim women wear full-face coverings in the country of 8.5 million people."), while a pandemic is going on and face coverings for protection are recommended. https://apnews.com/article/health-legislation-coronavirus-pandemic-carnivals-switzerland-131b4130766ad37fa5faa27d096c8b09 https://apnews.com/article/health-legislation-coronavirus-pa...

wombatmobile 6y ago
You seem to be expressing an opinion about banning Muslim face coverings. I am not responding to your expression of opinion - just clarifying how the Swiss electoral system is structured. That vote was a referendum, which is another component of the Swiss system, separate and complimentary to the Executive Council. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland
- marcod 6y ago
  My bad, I thought the anti electronic ID vote was also a referendum. Populist ideas, can easily thrive in a direct democracy.
  - cies 6y ago
    It was. And the face covering ban was spinned to be against the customs of a minority. It is still allowed indoors. Every country has some clothing requirements. Some mandate headscarfs (for women only), some mandate the face remains visible. No laws were needed for this in Swiss because no people were covering up. But now this has changed, so laws come. I dont find any problem with it, and hope that the "custom" of genital mutilation done to children is next to be forbidden. You can still do it, at 18, but yr parents should not be able to decide for you. Not against jews/muslims, just in favor of childrens rights. Scandinavia is front running on this one.
    - marcod 6y ago
      "But now this has changed, so laws come." A few dozen women in a country of 8.5 million do not need a law, especially one that doesn't really do anything for the victims, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26380029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26380029
      - marcod 6y ago
        Also, look at that image https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/1aad669348cc4c74aef0e41c1ffca821/1000.jpeg https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/1aad669348cc4c...
ulucs 6y ago
Burqua isn't islamic to begin with anyway.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  Yep it's definitely a cultural thing. I think it really is mostly to suppress women and not as a way one shows their religion which one does by living and not by clothing.
  - DoreenMichele 6y ago
    Historically, the veil was considered a huge step forward for women's rights/freedoms as it allowed them to leave the house more than three times in their life. Before that, they left the house to marry and move from their father's home to their husband's and when they died....and maybe I am misremembering that number of "three times" or maybe I just can't remember the third instance. (I'm a woman. I've had a college class in Women's History. FWIW.)
    - ulucs 6y ago
      Point is, islam was a progressive religion. But many countries took it in as a regressive one since they were also taking in customs from the culture which islam was supposed to progress. Which totally misses the point. You shouldn't have been importing burqua if women were already were allowed to go outside without it.
      - DoreenMichele 6y ago
        The reality is that progress tends to be a case of two steps forward and one step back. It's also reality that this is true in part because people come up with these theoretical ideals of equality or something and they sometimes don't work in practical reality. Additionally, one way to spread religion is to be tolerant of the existing culture of the people you are hoping to spread the religion to. This is Christianity is associated with a lot of holidays that have seemingly inane and random traditions, such as Easter and Easter Bunnies and hiding Easter eggs. What on earth do bunnies and hiding eggs have to do with each other, much less the risen Christ? Not much, but it's some pagan set of traditions that got tolerated by the Christian church and that's how you have bunnies and hidden eggs all wrapped up with the risen Christ. https://www.history.com/topics/holidays/history-of-easter https://www.history.com/topics/holidays/history-of-easter
bitcharmer 6y ago
What's wrong with banning a backwards custom that limits women's rights?
- XorNot 6y ago
  Because the presumption is that the women in question are being forced to do this and don't want to. But your solution is to implement a law which punishes the victim, rather then doing anything about their presumed victimizer. If the women who didn't want to wear the covering didn't want to wear it, what is stopping them from simply not doing it to start with? The answer of course is husband's, brothers, family etc. and probably that they'd be recognized in their community. But this is someone's religion - a fair bit more important to them then the laws of the state in a lot of cases. So you haven't answered how you're going to protect those women from being targeted and forced to simply never leave the house, if they are being targeted by people who are forcing them to do something they don't want to. Your law offers no solution to this - and again - implements itself by targeting the apparent victims it proposes to protect with punishment. Setting aside that the government can stay the hell out of what I choose to wear, this is just a monumentally stupid approach to anything.
  - stjohnswarts 6y ago
    The laws of religion should not override those of the state. To do so would lead to a theocracy and that has been shown to be almost universally bad on any large scale.
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      The laws of the state shouldn't go out of their way to get in the way of the laws of religion, doing so for no real reason other than spite. To do so creates conflict where there should be none, which is against the very purpose of a state.
  - supergirl 6y ago
    I imagine the women are not physically forced (or maybe only some are) but instead are “educated” from childhood that this is the way. How would you solve it then?
jeofken 6y ago
Is it not more of an expression of how the general public of (native) Europeans want to keep their country for their people and culture

by marcod 6y ago

wombatmobile 6y ago

You seem to be expressing an opinion about banning Muslim face coverings. I am not responding to your expression of opinion - just clarifying how the Swiss electoral system is structured. That vote was a referendum, which is another component of the Swiss system, separate and complimentary to the Executive Council. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland

marcod 6y ago
My bad, I thought the anti electronic ID vote was also a referendum. Populist ideas, can easily thrive in a direct democracy.
- cies 6y ago
  It was. And the face covering ban was spinned to be against the customs of a minority. It is still allowed indoors. Every country has some clothing requirements. Some mandate headscarfs (for women only), some mandate the face remains visible. No laws were needed for this in Swiss because no people were covering up. But now this has changed, so laws come. I dont find any problem with it, and hope that the "custom" of genital mutilation done to children is next to be forbidden. You can still do it, at 18, but yr parents should not be able to decide for you. Not against jews/muslims, just in favor of childrens rights. Scandinavia is front running on this one.
  - marcod 6y ago
    "But now this has changed, so laws come." A few dozen women in a country of 8.5 million do not need a law, especially one that doesn't really do anything for the victims, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26380029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26380029
    - marcod 6y ago
      Also, look at that image https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/1aad669348cc4c74aef0e41c1ffca821/1000.jpeg https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/1aad669348cc4c...

ulucs 6y ago

Burqua isn't islamic to begin with anyway.

stjohnswarts 6y ago
Yep it's definitely a cultural thing. I think it really is mostly to suppress women and not as a way one shows their religion which one does by living and not by clothing.
- DoreenMichele 6y ago
  Historically, the veil was considered a huge step forward for women's rights/freedoms as it allowed them to leave the house more than three times in their life. Before that, they left the house to marry and move from their father's home to their husband's and when they died....and maybe I am misremembering that number of "three times" or maybe I just can't remember the third instance. (I'm a woman. I've had a college class in Women's History. FWIW.)
  - ulucs 6y ago
    Point is, islam was a progressive religion. But many countries took it in as a regressive one since they were also taking in customs from the culture which islam was supposed to progress. Which totally misses the point. You shouldn't have been importing burqua if women were already were allowed to go outside without it.
    - DoreenMichele 6y ago
      The reality is that progress tends to be a case of two steps forward and one step back. It's also reality that this is true in part because people come up with these theoretical ideals of equality or something and they sometimes don't work in practical reality. Additionally, one way to spread religion is to be tolerant of the existing culture of the people you are hoping to spread the religion to. This is Christianity is associated with a lot of holidays that have seemingly inane and random traditions, such as Easter and Easter Bunnies and hiding Easter eggs. What on earth do bunnies and hiding eggs have to do with each other, much less the risen Christ? Not much, but it's some pagan set of traditions that got tolerated by the Christian church and that's how you have bunnies and hidden eggs all wrapped up with the risen Christ. https://www.history.com/topics/holidays/history-of-easter https://www.history.com/topics/holidays/history-of-easter

bitcharmer 6y ago

What's wrong with banning a backwards custom that limits women's rights?

XorNot 6y ago
Because the presumption is that the women in question are being forced to do this and don't want to. But your solution is to implement a law which punishes the victim, rather then doing anything about their presumed victimizer. If the women who didn't want to wear the covering didn't want to wear it, what is stopping them from simply not doing it to start with? The answer of course is husband's, brothers, family etc. and probably that they'd be recognized in their community. But this is someone's religion - a fair bit more important to them then the laws of the state in a lot of cases. So you haven't answered how you're going to protect those women from being targeted and forced to simply never leave the house, if they are being targeted by people who are forcing them to do something they don't want to. Your law offers no solution to this - and again - implements itself by targeting the apparent victims it proposes to protect with punishment. Setting aside that the government can stay the hell out of what I choose to wear, this is just a monumentally stupid approach to anything.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  The laws of religion should not override those of the state. To do so would lead to a theocracy and that has been shown to be almost universally bad on any large scale.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    The laws of the state shouldn't go out of their way to get in the way of the laws of religion, doing so for no real reason other than spite. To do so creates conflict where there should be none, which is against the very purpose of a state.
- supergirl 6y ago
  I imagine the women are not physically forced (or maybe only some are) but instead are “educated” from childhood that this is the way. How would you solve it then?

jeofken 6y ago

Is it not more of an expression of how the general public of (native) Europeans want to keep their country for their people and culture