Limiting people’s honestly held political and religious expression which directly aims no one else seems dubious
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @NorthCaliGrl @ArsinoeV and
Tom Coates Retweeted Tom Coates
I don’t really know how to explain this to you but (1) I’m gay and (2) I explicitly said people should speak out and say something!https://twitter.com/tomcoates/status/1004069884731375616?s=21 …
Tom Coates added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomcoates @NorthCaliGrl and
Seventeen retweets and 37 likes for a statement criticizing me - saying I should say precisely what I said. The only bit that seems insane is *banning* people from wearing clothes and following their religions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomcoates @NorthCaliGrl and
I suspect that tweet above was to support your point, not counter it. At least that’s how I read it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YasMohammedxx @ConfessionsExMu and
I don’t think it is, but just in case anyone is confused, I’ll restate my point - I don’t think it’s okay to ban anyone’s religious expression (unless it hurts someone else), and generally people should be free to worship how they wish or not at all.
10 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tomcoates @NorthCaliGrl and
I agree w you. I think your ‘unless it hurts someone else’ caveat is key when it comes to niqab. I wore it myself and I can tell you, it hurts the wearer first and foremost. Other than that, it’s as much a societal safety concern as a balaclava or anything else hiding identity.
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @YasMohammedxx @tomcoates and
I believe in one law for all. I don’t think there should be religious exclusions. If no one can walk into a bank or a school or an airport etc with their face covered...then no one can. No exceptions.
3 replies 12 retweets 30 likes -
Replying to @YasMohammedxx @ConfessionsExMu and
I understand the rationale - I would argue that placing a barrier between someone’s actually held belief and their ability to function in the world could be highly counter-productive.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tomcoates @ConfessionsExMu and
And there are different ways to express “one law for all”. Another might be that non-damaging expression of faith shouldn’t be banned from core businesses. That would apply to Christians, Jews, Muslims equally.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I’m atheist. I don’t think any religious edicts should supersede law ever. That’s why it’s one law for all.
-
-
Replying to @YasMohammedxx @ConfessionsExMu and
I am also atheist. And I feel strongly that religious reasoning should not inform law. But I also don’t think law should interfere in people’s belief systems. I wish to advocate for atheism, not force people to conform to my belief system.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
