View Single Post
Old 27th November 2018, 06:13 AM   #40
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by arayder View Post
Maybe I am mincing words, but the right to practice one's religion is not what I would call a "mandate", but rather an inalienable right.

My point is that Menard professes to hold individual freedom sacred and yet fails to defend the right of Muslim women to practice their religion as they see fit.

The hypocrisy seems to be lost on Bobby. I recall the time Bobby he the "story" that upon a courthouse official demanding that he remove the silly little fez he used to wear he claimed to have brilliantly successfully argued that the fez was a practice of his religion.

It seems to me that Menard thinks he has a right of make up a religious practice on the spur the moment yet Muslim women can't practice their religion.
You're still labouring under the falsehood that wearing a face covering is a religious mandate. And that's not the only misapprehension you have. Perhaps the most obvious is that the right to practice one's religion is an inalienable right. This is patently absurd and I can't imagine why you said it. That right only extends as far as the law restricts. A person who murders a homosexual, sells their daughter into slavery or beats up their neighbours for objecting to the odour of a sacrificial bull will find that protesting religious exemption won't help them much (although in Canada it's probably worth a try).

Originally Posted by arayder View Post
Are you saying that the Quran does not instruct Muslim women to dress in a modest way?
No. I know what the Koran instructions on account of having read it. Most women dress in modest ways but only a tiny minority cover their head and face.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top