Bavaria plans burqa ban

522 posts in this topic

1 minute ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

Some landlords may be like that, but the stories I have heard from long-term residents and citizens of Germany with Turkish and other origins suggests something more systematic is afoot.  That may even no longer be as bad as it was (doubtful, considering AfD rise), but may be normalized so much that some Turks don't bother to look for housing outside of enclaves. 

Is that due to to the renting situation or that they do not want to move out of their area?

 

I have met Germans in Berlin (surprise) that never really left their area except to go on holiday. Lived their live sin the same stadtteil. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

Some landlords may be like that, but the stories I have heard from long-term residents and citizens of Germany with Turkish and other origins suggests something more systematic is afoot.  That may even no longer be as bad as it was (doubtful, considering AfD rise), but may be normalized so much that some Turks don't bother to look for housing outside of enclaves. 

This applied to Russlanddeutsche as well, even that they came here as refugees and were granted citizenship.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

Is that due to to the renting situation or that they do not want to move out of their area?

 

I have met Germans in Berlin (surprise) that never really left their area except to go on holiday. Lived their live sin the same stadtteil. 

 

Ghettoization becomes entrenched over time.  Some people just get used to living in that neighbourhood.  However, if they want to move out, it's harder for them, if they need to get the approval of a landlord, because there are fewer who will put them on the preferred list in an "in-demand" area.   Meaning that, the ghettoization becomes associated with "lower-demand" areas, ie, poorer areas. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, yourkeau said:

This applied to Russlanddeutsche as well, even that they came here as refugees and were granted citizenship.

 

I don't doubt that there are other affected groups.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

As a general rule, that bears the risk of severely reducing career options for some women, in practical terms.  ie, the outcome of this overall is bad.  Again, you may think, "why don't think rethink their beliefs so that they can get a better job?"  But some of them won't. So why not just let them have the damn job?

 

 

Why does it have to be "pandering"?  What cost it is to you that e.g. a receptionist covers her head?

A choice is involved here, why should a company have to make exceptions for that choice - in which case, it is pandering.

This is where this all falls down, 'rethink their beliefs'.. Why should I have to deal with someone's beliefs? That white people are superior, that Jews are shifty, that Muslims are terrorists - all beliefs, un-grounded, untrue and not based on fact. Like religion.

What is the cost if she doesn't? You are doing it again, narrow focus, it may offend someone. Like my sexy Islamic women, it may not offend you, but I bet one of my customers would take offence.  

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is all surely full of nuances but some landlords/ladies are worried about their places being neglected, trashed etc and it is difficult to kick a tenant out. 

That is also true re (youngish? ) German tenants and a reason more and more property owners also insist the tenants take out liability and household insurance.

 

We have recently rented a place near the coast for the hot months and the Greek owner was tired of trashy young season workers (Greeks and non-Greeks ) messing up the place, breaking fixtures and fittings, rubbish littering the garden etc. 

 

We are having the place renovated because it was in a disgusting state. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

Ghettoization becomes entrenched over time.  Some people just get used to living in that neighbourhood.  However, if they want to move out, it's harder for them, if they need to get the approval of a landlord, because there are fewer who will put them on the preferred list in an "in-demand" area.   Meaning that, the ghettoization becomes associated with "lower-demand" areas, ie, poorer areas. 

I also expect such area attract less affluent people which adds to their problem when wanting to move out.
Even if they can afford the new rent the extra costs mount up. Over time, as you say, it entrenches itself and the area goes down hill.

I have lived in enough area where the usual pass time was being on the street drinking to know I never want to live in such an area again. 
However in Europe, especially here in Germany, it is possible to drag yourself out of that (it is in the UK as well). That leads to another topic, social mobility and the problems kids of poorer parents have, but it is still possible (I managed). 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

A choice is involved here, why should a company have to make exceptions for that choice - in which case, it is pandering.

 

Why should this be seen in terms of "make exceptions"?  That's what I mean by the obsession with Extrawurst.  What burden does this "exception" bring, how onerous is it that one must worry about "pandering"?  If the headscarf-wearing woman is doing her job, what does it matter?

 

Quote

This is where this all falls down, 'rethink their beliefs'.. Why should I have to deal with someone's beliefs? That white people are superior, that Jews are shifty, that Muslims are terrorists - all beliefs, un-grounded, untrue and not based on fact. Like religion.

 

 

If someone treats co-workers, etc, badly based on some set of beliefs and fails to do their contracted job in some material way, then you would have grounds to complain!  However, wearing a religious garment for reasons of personal conviction does not strike me as a relevant barrier to performing the functions of most of the jobs in question.

 

Quote

What is the cost if she doesn't? You are doing it again, narrow focus, it may offend someone. Like my sexy Islamic women, it may not offend you, but I bet one of my customers would take offence.  

 

Even the court in this case agreed that customers taking offense was not itself grounds for discrimination against religious-clothing wearers.  Otherwise, customers could be used as an excuse to discriminate on all sorts of grounds!  None of that is something that is within the purview of customers to object to, and not anything that an employer is allowed to do anything about!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Its all been discussed before...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

Why should this be seen in terms of "make exceptions"?  That's what I mean by the obsession with Extrawurst.  What burden does this "exception" bring, how onerous is it that one must worry about "pandering"?  If the headscarf-wearing woman is doing her job, what does it matter?

 

 

If someone treats co-workers, etc, badly based on some set of beliefs and fails to do their contracted job in some material way, then you would have grounds to complain!  However, wearing a religious garment for reasons of personal conviction does not strike me as a relevant barrier to performing the functions of most of the jobs in question.

 

 

Even the court in this case agreed that customers taking offense was not itself grounds for discrimination against religious-clothing wearers.  Otherwise, customers could be used as an excuse to discriminate on all sorts of grounds!  None of that is something that is within the purview of customers to object to, and not anything that an employer is allowed to do anything about!

It obviously matter to someone of the case would not have gone the way it did.

As I say, you are taking the narrow view, at least one company had a problem with this and took action. 

Some people are offended by religious and political symbols. Some Muslims are offended by Islamic jokes (and sexy headscarf wearing scantily clad women). 
All your comments here could be turned around and asked of you when it comes to your defence of Islamic practices. How does not segregating kids in school or men and women in a mosque hurt anyone? It obviously hurts someone as they segregate, something you have been quite energetic in your support of it. Asking if it hurts me is the same as me asking if it hurts you. Given that you have defend segregation while saying you are not a fan of it shows this cannot be narrowed down to a personal level .

 

I am not saying anyone should be allowed to treat a co-worker differently based on their beliefs. I am saying it is ok to forbid the wearing of religious and political symbols providing it is applied to everyone, every religion and political symbol. 

One of the cases was about a worker who was fired when a customer complained about her headscarf and she would not remove it. 

Which is why I expect they said a broad ban on all was ok, any company who just zeros in on one particular religion should be prosecuted. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

Which is why I expect they said a broad ban on all was ok, any company who just zeros in on one particular religion should be prosecuted. 

 

So how many religions wear head scarves?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

It obviously matter to someone of the case would not have gone the way it did.

As I say, you are taking the narrow view, at least one company had a problem with this and took action. 

 

 

 

Obviously, it mattered to someone.  The question has been, whether the fact that it mattered to someone is grounds for allowing policies that are known to have larger-scale negative social outcomes.

 

3 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

Some people are offended by religious and political symbols. Some Muslims are offended by Islamic jokes (and sexy headscarf wearing scantily clad women).

 

 

The question has always been, partly, whether that offense should take precedence over personal autonomy in religious dress.  I admit I find your accusation that I am taking the "narrow view" rather strange, because I have always drawn attention to the large-scale, broad issues: social outcomes, personal rights, ethical questions, etc.  What is more narrow than appealing to the tendency of individuals to be offended by what other people wear, as you are?  That's the narrowest concern of all!

 

3 minutes ago, cb6dba said:

 
All your comments here could be turned around and asked of you when it comes to your defence of Islamic practices. How does not segregating kids in school or men and women in a mosque hurt anyone?

 

This doesn't make sense and has nothing to do with anything I never said.  If a mosque chooses not to segregate men and women -- Alevite Muslim congregations don't -- that does not hurt anyone, at least not in any way that the law should care.  That's right and proper.  I never argued otherwise!  Forcing the mosque to desegregate genders through outside interference in the practices of a private religious congregation is another matter.  But a mosque choosing not to segregate is its own choice -- which some take, depending on sectarian variety.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SpiderPig said:

 

Its all been discussed before...

 

It's the Eternal Subject.  So it will always be discussed, and discussed again and again.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a person can't wear a nice silver atheism bracelet to work if the boss does't want it, but they get a Christmas bank holiday because it is "cultural". Ah Rudolf, why is your red nose more valuable than my bracelet? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2013 a woman was given compensation for not being allowed to wear it - by European Court of Human Rights. Humans and rights have changed since then it seems. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, zeino said:

In 2013 a woman was given compensation for not being allowed to wear it - by European Court of Human Rights. Humans and rights have changed since then it seems. 

 

Source please. Thank you.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 ECHR database is open to everyone. With all the theological research skill to discuss Islam and all that stuff, that one should be pretty accessible . You are welcome. 

 

Nothing personal to you. I love your music for instance. I just don't believe in this source pls trend as people can make their own research, and not everything we say is based on source, is it? If we go on saying that to each other all the time, I can ask that for everything everyone says about anything and that will be source oppression. I just don't believe that, that^'s all. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, zeino said:

So a person can't wear a nice silver atheism bracelet to work if the boss does't want it, but they get a Christmas bank holiday because it is "cultural". Ah Rudolf, why is your red nose more valuable than my bracelet? 

Exactly. Although holidays are a holy cow of Arbeitsrecht, and Muslims do have a right not to show up at work during their religious holidays. They must, however, use their vacation days, but they are no more discriminated than Catholics in predominantly Lutheran states or Lutherans in Catholic states.

 

Bavaria is even more interesting: there is one religious holiday which only applies in predominantly Catholic municipalities, that's on 15th August. There are many Catholics everywhere, but there are towns where they are a minority, so there is no holiday in this town. Catholics can, however, do not show up at work anyway, but this will be deducted from vacation time.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And atheists? Can they benefit from all holidays or are there no holidays for them because atheism is no religion? Then can we wear this bracelet or is it philosophy? Or I am an atheist who likes Danish Lutheran philosophy and its idealism?  What if I just have no philosophy and don't even think it's political? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now