Blog powered by Typepad

« None so blind as them wot don't wanna see! | Main | Shades of Simon and Ehrlich »

Thursday, 01 April 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"Returning to the burka, I am virulently opposed to governments telling people how to dress beyond the accepted laws of decency.  However, that should not preclude the right of individuals to set down rules govening dress codes on their own property."

Fully agree. Remove all the 'diversity' laws guarenteeing that any shopkeeper who sought to ban them would be hounded by all the quangos and racehustlers, and the problem would soon disappear.

Quangos and racehustlers put out of business. Hmmn, so the Law of Unintended Consequences isn't all bad then!

My usual dress style is ragamuffin. I do like, though, wearing topper and tails for a wedding. Anything in between just irks me.

"It is, of course, the 'foreigness' of it that offends ..."

Not really. Nuns join an order voluntarily. When they quit, they go back to wearing civies. What offends about the burqa is that women are forced to wear it.

What strikes me about the Belgium law is that it gives Moslem girls a good excuse to not wear a burqa.

I agree with the sentiment, 'DM', but not being 'to the manner born' top hat and tails makes me feel (even more) fraudulent.

Two good points, Dom, but I still feel the government should just butt out.

The comments to this entry are closed.