Should Western Countries Ban Burkhas?
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
This debate centers on the growing controversy in Western nations over the use of the burkha and other full-face coverings in public spaces. In recent years, several countries—including France, Belgium, Denmark, and now Switzerland—have introduced laws banning such garments, citing concerns about public safety, gender equality, and the integration of immigrants into society. Supporters of these bans argue that they are necessary to protect secular values, ensure women’s rights, and maintain open communication in public life. Opponents, however, contend that such laws unfairly target Muslim women, restrict religious freedom, and risk further marginalizing minority communities.
We will explore both sides: Should Western countries continue or expand these bans, or are they an infringement on individual rights and cultural diversity?
Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'" Sahih Bukhari 4:52:260Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims." Sahih Bukhari 9:83:17A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Muadh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Muadh asked, "What is wrong with this (man)?" Abu Musa replied, "He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism." Mu`adh said, "I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle. Sahih Bukhari 9:89:271By Allah, Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate." Sahih Bukhari 9:83:37No doubt I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, where-ever you find them, kill them, for who-ever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection." Sahih Bukhari 9:84:64
Ahmad takes the words of Surah 33.26, "Some ye slew, and some ye made prisoners" as the foundation of his theory that, while some of the more serious offenders may have been proscribed, the bulk of the tribe was probably exiled like the others. At first sight it does seem strange that Muhammad should despatch the whole tribe while he had let the others go free, but there is concrete evidence that he had intended to execute the Banu Qaynuqa in the same way.According to Ibn Sa'd (Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 2, p. 32-33), when the tribe surrendered, Muhammad ordered his companions to tie the men's hands behind their backs to prepare them for beheading. It was only the remonstrances of Abdullah ibn Ubayy, then still too influential to be refused that made him abandon their execution and order their banishment instead.What is most significant about Ahmad's assessment of the historical genuineness of the massacre is that, in querying it, he finds himself free from the need to justify Muhammad and accordingly treats it for what it really was - an unjustifiable atrocity. He says:No one could come out of such a holocaust - 600 to 900 killed in cold blood in one day - without damage to his personality. 'All and Zubayr's holocaust legacy of massive deadness would not have left them in peace. (Ahmad, Muhammad and the Jews, p. 86).
To behold the slaughter of many men in battle is indeed one thing - to unemotionally witness the execution of a whole tribe is another entirely. Ahmad continues:The very idea of such a massacre by persons who neither before nor after the killing showed any sign of a dehumanised personality is inadmissible from a psychological point of view. (Ahmad, Muhammad and the Jews, p. 87).
Ahmad has challenged a story whose historical accuracy has hitherto never been questioned and, while the external evidences may weigh against him, he is to be commended for seeing the tragedy for what it truly was - in his own words, a "massacre" and a "holocaust".In their determination to exonerate Muhammad the Muslims have found themselves in an awkward situation. If they admit the story, they find themselves obliged to counter the suggestion that it had the nature of an atrocity. If, however, this is conceded, they strive to challenge the reliability of the narratives! Either way none dares admit that Muhammad was the leading figure, or at least a willing accomplice, in a "holocaust".Shortly before the conquest of Mecca Muhammad attacked the remaining Jewish fortress at Khaibar and, while not gaining an outright victory, nevertheless brought it into subjection. Here he was poisoned by a Jewish woman. Although she did not succeed in killing him, Muhammad complained to the day of his death of the effects of her act of revenge. Ibn Sa'd says she was put to death (Vol. 2, p. 249), but this is disputed by Bukhari who states that Muhammad refused to sanction her execution (Vol. 3, p. 475). Which of the two is true, "God only knows".By the end of his life Muhammad's relationship with the Jews had deteriorated to the point of irreconcilable hostility. We have not spoken of his relationships with the Christians, which seem to have been a bit more amicable though much less frequent, but his contacts with their armies during his latter days seems to have hardened his heart against them also. The later passages of the Qur'an breathe out denunciations of both groups in vehement language. This tradition tells its own story:It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattab that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslims. (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 3, p. 965).
This same Umar, on becoming Caliph just two years after Muhammad's death, proceeded dutifully to put this injunction into effect and by the end of his reign all the Jews in the Hijaz had duly been
- Security protocols already address identification concerns: In most Western countries, authorities can require individuals to temporarily remove face coverings for identification purposes, such as during security checks or when verifying identity for official documents. Even in conservative Muslim-majority countries like Saudi Arabia, women are required to show their faces for security checks3. This means that the presence of a burkha does not prevent law enforcement from confirming someone's identity when necessary.
- No evidence of widespread misuse: The argument that burkhas are used to conceal criminal activity is largely hypothetical and not supported by significant evidence of widespread misuse in Western societies. The vast majority of Muslim women who wear burkhas do so out of personal, cultural, or religious conviction, not for nefarious purposes.
- Bans may increase, not decrease, security risks: Blanket bans on burkhas can exacerbate social tensions and discrimination, potentially increasing feelings of alienation and marginalization among Muslim communities. This social exclusion can, in some cases, create conditions more conducive to radicalization than the presence of religious attire itself.
- Freedom of religion and expression: Western democracies are founded on principles of individual liberty, including the right to religious expression. Singling out Muslim women for restrictions undermines these core values and can be seen as discriminatory.
- CCTV images become futile as at most they can estimate body proportions only and height estimation woukd depend on heels. This means robbers even if male can show up in Burqa and do the crimes. In fact this increases Islamophobia so that is bad for the Muslims.
- Those that wear Burqa are the severe Sunnis
- Severe Sunnis doctrinally believe in extreme misogyny, killing apostates, killing Jews, waging war with Christians and much more, lgbtq+ as well have to worry big time.
Pros of facial recognition technologyImproving security systems and identifying criminals are often cited when arguing in favor of facial recognition, as well as getting rid of unnecessary labor or human interaction. However, there are also plenty of other examples.1. Finding missing people and identifying perpetratorsFacial recognition technology is used by law enforcement agencies to find missing people or identify criminals by using camera feeds to compare faces with those on watch lists.The technology has also been used to locate missing children. Sometimes it is combined with advanced aging software to predict what a child might look like based on photos taken when they disappeared. Law enforcement agencies often use facial recognition with live alerts to help track potential matches.2. Protecting businesses against theftFacial recognition is increasingly being deployed as a means of identifying known individuals before they commit crimes like theft or public affray. It's common to see CCTV in shops and places of work, and by using facial recognition software it's possible to create tools like automatic cross-referencing to match individuals to a database of known suspects.The technology has the dual purpose of helping to prevent crime before it happens, and also – some would argue – a deterrent for would-be offenders.If something is stolen from the business, the software can also be used to catalog the thieves for future reference.3. Better security measures in banks and airportsFacial recognition has also come to be used as a preventative security measure in sensitive locations such as banks and airports. Similar to identifying criminals that come into shops, the software has helped identify criminals and passengers that pose a potential risk to airlines and passengers.Border checks have also been sped up at some airports through the use of facial recognition cameras at passport-check gates.Institutions like banks use the software in the same way to prevent fraud, identifying those previously charged with crimes and alerting the bank to watch specific individuals more carefully.4. Drastically reduces human touchpointsFacial recognition requires fewer human resources than other types of security measures, such as fingerprinting. It also doesn’t require physical contact or direct human interaction. Instead, it uses artificial intelligence (AI) to make it an automatic and seamless process.It also limits touchpoints when unlocking doors and smartphones, getting cash from the ATM or performing any other task that generally requires a PIN, password or key.5. Better tools for organising photosFacial recognition can also be used to tag photos in your cloud storage through iCloud or Google Photos. Users who wish can enable facial recognition in their respective photo app’s settings, resulting in named folders for regular photo subjects. Facebook also used facial recognition to suggest people to tag within a photo.6. Better medical treatmentOne surprising use of facial recognition technology is the detection of genetic disorders.By examining subtle facial traits, facial recognition software can, in some cases, determine how specific genetic mutations caused a particular syndrome. The technology may be faster and less expensive than traditional genetic testing.7. Enhancing retail customer experiencesFacial recognition technology can also be used to personalize customer experiences in retail settings. By recognising returning customers, stores can offer personalized greetings, tailor product recommendations, and provide a more customized shopping experience.This can enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty, as shoppers feel recognised and valued by the business. Additionally, it can streamline the checkout process by allowing for facial recognition payments, reducing wait times and improving overall service efficiency.
Facial identification of suspects by humans plays a crucial role in crime solving, with advancements in facial recognition technology aiding this process. While humans are still relied upon for initial identification and in cases where technology falls short, tools like facial recognition software and databases are increasingly used to quickly identify suspects and solve crimes.Here's a breakdown of how facial identification is used in crime solving:1. Human Identification:
CCTV and Witness Identification:Police officers often rely on CCTV footage and witness descriptions to identify suspects. This can involve reviewing hours of footage or relying on witness memory and descriptions. E-fits and Photo Line-ups:When CCTV is unavailable or unclear, e-fits (computer-generated images based on witness descriptions) or photo line-ups are used to present potential suspects to witnesses or victims. Challenges:Human identification can be subjective and prone to error. Factors like stress, memory distortion, and individual biases can affect accuracy.
2. Technology-Assisted Identification:
Facial Recognition Software:Facial recognition software compares images of suspects (from CCTV, body-worn cameras, or other sources) against databases of known individuals (mugshots, watchlists, etc.). Real-time Identification:Live facial recognition (LFR) technology compares live camera feeds against a watchlist to identify individuals of interest in real-time, such as wanted persons or those with outstanding warrants. Operator Initiated Facial Recognition (OIFR):This technology allows officers to use a mobile phone to take a photo of a person and compare it against a watchlist to aid in identification. Benefits of Technology:Facial recognition technology can significantly speed up the identification process, improve accuracy, and potentially identify suspects who might otherwise be missed. Limitations of Technology:Facial recognition technology is not foolproof. Image quality, pose, lighting, and other factors can affect accuracy. There are also ongoing concerns about privacy and potential biases in algorithms.
3. Combining Human and Technological Approaches:
Complementary Roles:Human identification and facial recognition technology often work together. Officers may use facial recognition to narrow down potential suspects, and then rely on human review and investigation to confirm the identification. Example:In a case where a suspect is caught on CCTV, the image may be run through facial recognition software to find potential matches. If a match is found, police may then approach the individual to verify their identity through traditional methods, such as ID checks or interviews. Addressing Concerns:Law enforcement agencies are implementing policies and procedures to address privacy concerns and ensure the responsible use of facial recognition technology, such as limiting its use to specific situations and ensuring transparency and accountability.
In conclusion, facial identification of suspects is a combination of human observation and technological tools. While human identification remains vital, advancements in facial recognition technology are providing law enforcement with more efficient and accurate ways to identify suspects and solve crimes, while also raising important questions about privacy and responsible use.
I won imo
Con obviously wins on arguments but also obviously used AI heavily. But Pro also used nothing but copy-pasting other sources in R3 and forfeited R4. So I'm really not sure how to vote here.
So is it a Text Debate?
Sorry it was neom city, autocorrect mess sometime.
Saudi, is more liberal now then even many of western countries. They are making dajjal's headquarter names as neon city. Why complaining now?
Tell me one thing how a woman is free if she shows her face and not free if she hides? A woman is free if she can choose what they wants, whether it's showing her face or hiding her face.
Yes wonderful when women of west go to Saudi in Ramadan they are so free.
Nice first round argument.