Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She CAN wear everything, but voluntarily, which is not the case in certain countries.
There is also a difference between forcing someone to do something and not allowing someone to do something.
Yes, of course, but I think Malala was referring to the anti-Muslim phobia that makes wearing Middle Eastern dress a little dicey in the less tolerant areas of America...
Yes, of course, but I think Malala was referring to the anti-Muslim phobia that makes wearing Middle Eastern dress a little dicey in the less tolerant areas of America...
That's quite logical as people associate burqa and such gear with radical Muslims, i.e. potential terrorists.
Not only in the US, but in Europe as well.
The New York Sheriff's Office was founded in 1626, and the Albany County Sheriff's Department in the 1660s. In the colonial period, policing was provided by elected sheriffs and local militias.
That was BEFORE the American revolution, so I'm pretty sure the framers were aware of the idea and still felt it vitally important to protect the lay person's right to bear arms.
Well, but things tend to change in the course of centuries...
The progressives were denounced in their own day by conservatives (who would be called libertarian today), religious leaders and those influenced by them (i.e., G.K. Chesterton). It is not me who lacks historical appreciation or understanding. You have chosen to label yourself a "progressive" without understanding the history of that label.
Ha! Conservatives have denounced pretty much all things not conservative since they were in a position to do so, "progressives" certainly no exception. Most simply put, conservatives almost by definition don't like change, altering the status quo. Or what sort of forward-thinking life-altering changes for the better can we credit conservatives for ushering forth?
Nothing learned here, but I don't call myself a progressive today because of whatever the term was used to describe back in your day of sterilization and all the rest.
Maybe best, all considered, to avoid labels in the first place, but all I did was point out that as properly defined TODAY, the label "progressive" fits me as well as any other.
You want to somehow twist that into suggesting I believe in sterilizing other people? Well rather than me address that sort of nonsense any further, I leave you to enjoy those loony tune right-wing sources of knowledge and enlightenment all you like!
That's quite logical as people associate burqa and such gear with radical Muslims, i.e. potential terrorists.
Not only in the US, but in Europe as well.
Logical, perhaps. Understandable for some, also perhaps, but more in the rural areas, not so much in the more urban cosmopolitan areas or cities like New York or Paris or London where all manner of dress has been everywhere in the streets long before now.
I don't know about the US, but the police is responsible for safety in every country I have lived so far.
I get the impression that in the US they often react when it is already too late. But also just like in Europe, i.e. in a preemptive protective way. When a woman gets attacked by her violent husband or a shopkeeper gets robbed, they call the police in the US as well, just like in Europe.
I don't share your view regarding the reason for the invention of a police force. And be honest, even in the US you would have no ghost of a chance against the police, actually in your country less than in any European country because the US police force is almost militarized these days.
Of course you are right. Even back in the old wild west days that I think every gun enthusiast either secretly or openly longs for return, the concept of the sheriff to provide some law and order over the whim of any Tom, Dick or Harry with a gun took hold and developed into a police force intended to "serve and protect."
Also of course, there is no arguing with those forever fearful of conspiracy, because without that conspiracy, you really don't have as much good reason to spend all that time polishing your guns...
Yes, unlike here where you can get away with calling our POTUS a foreign-born Muslim, communist, terrorist and not only get away with it but get others to cheer you on at Tea Parties!
You can also burn the American flag in this country, which some people also view as a bit too much freedom, but I for one am proud to be an American where this sort of freedom is protected by our Constitution like none other!
On the third hand (or thereabouts), the (in)famous Mohammed cartoons were printed in every mainstream Danish newspaper, something a lot of US media couldn't find the testicular fortitude to do.
Weird fact: In Denmark, you can burn the Danish flag as much as you like. But burning/desecrating a foreign flag is technically illegal - the idea being that antagonizing entire nations is a foreign policy decision and as such a Crown/government privilege. Nobody really cares, of course.
I am not aware of any lese-majeste cases being brought anywhere in Europe in the last 100 years, though. If you want to call Her Majesty a chain-smoking senile old biddy with little dress sense who should have been put out to pasture a few decades ago, have at it. Hell, you're perfectly within your rights to argue that it's time to do away with monarchy altogether, and you can't lese a majeste much more than that.
Of course you are right. Even back in the old wild west days that I think every gun enthusiast either secretly or openly longs for return, the concept of the sheriff to provide some law and order over the whim of any Tom, Dick or Harry with a gun took hold and developed into a police force intended to "serve and protect."
Isn't it pretty well documented that quite a few of the old west townships instituted bans on carrying weapons in public as soon as a modicum of law and order was instituted?
Hey, lookie here:
Tombstone Ordinance No. 9, 1881:
Quote:
"To Provide against Carrying of Deadly Weapons" (effective April 19, 1881).
Section 1. It is hereby declared unlawful to carry in the hand or upon the person or otherwise any deadly weapon within the limits of said city of Tombstone, without first obtaining a permit in writing.
Section 2: This prohibition does not extend to persons immediately leaving or entering the city, who, with good faith, and within reasonable time are proceeding to deposit, or take from the place of deposit such deadly weapon.
Section 3: All fire-arms of every description, and bowie knives and dirks, are included within the prohibition of this ordinance."
On the third hand (or thereabouts), the (in)famous Mohammed cartoons were printed in every mainstream Danish newspaper, something a lot of US media couldn't find the testicular fortitude to do.
Weird fact: In Denmark, you can burn the Danish flag as much as you like. But burning/desecrating a foreign flag is technically illegal - the idea being that antagonizing entire nations is a foreign policy decision and as such a Crown/government privilege. Nobody really cares, of course.
I am not aware of any lese-majeste cases being brought anywhere in Europe in the last 100 years, though. If you want to call Her Majesty a chain-smoking senile old biddy with little dress sense who should have been put out to pasture a few decades ago, have at it. Hell, you're perfectly within your rights to argue that it's time to do away with monarchy altogether, and you can't lese a majeste much more than that.
Isn't it pretty well documented that quite a few of the old west townships instituted bans on carrying weapons in public as soon as a modicum of law and order was instituted?
Hey, lookie here:
Tombstone Ordinance No. 9, 1881:
The old West "lawmen" were often as corrupt as the criminals (or in fact were criminals who used their office to get away with it). Those ordinances were generally used to disarm their competition. The Earps were the perfect example of that. The Tombstone ordinance was also found unconstitutional later (when someone survived long enough to challenge it in court).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I certainly disagree!
