That's actually the very definition of the word. Thank you for crystallizing it.https://twitter.com/muffyhicks/status/804026751286448129 …
-
-
Replying to @LibyaLiberty @Enjoneer01
still don't understand the problem with headcoverings if people choose to wear them.pic.twitter.com/7QDdKivbFH
6 replies 5 retweets 15 likes -
Even when ppl choose gender specific modesty codes, they are still gender specific modesty codes.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That's a feminist/gender egalitarian argument anyway. Security & social divisiveness are others.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Personally, I support ppl's right to choose socially conservative dress but not religious privilege.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
please enlighten me re: religious privilege.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Gowayj
Its when you have benefits others don't or are allowed to do things others aren't because your reason is religious.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
ah , ok, so similar to police wearing turbans? Just want to make sure I understand.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
Some time ago here. Sikh? RCMP officers wanted to wear their turbans..
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
OK. Unless there is some valid reason no police officer shld wear a turban, all police officers shld be able to, Sikh or not.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
It wld be religious privilege if a rule were made -no-one allowed to wear head covering &then exception made if religious reason
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.