From: fffurken <fffurken1@mail.com>
Subject: Re: Maybe Trump will help the resistence in Iran
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.200.38.208 with SMTP id 16mr35133695qtp.9.1514931717673;
Tue, 02 Jan 2018 14:21:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.31.61.149 with SMTP id k143mr4511585vka.7.1514931717461;
Tue, 02 Jan 2018 14:21:57 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!m31no5758622qtf.0!news-out.google.com!t48ni2298qtc.1!nntp.google.com!m31no5758620qtf.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.gambling.poker
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 14:21:57 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1xS2C.38907$pF5.31986@fx03.iad>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.46.28.99; posting-account=ooQ2cwkAAAD5fHesw79EWxuj2WdLyA1Z
NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.46.28.99
References: <cc2c4da7-55fe-4623-94e7-acf691f76707@googlegroups.com>
<25f5a81b-75cd-4ec1-aa2d-092a50787084@googlegroups.com> <A1e2C.71666$oY6.36333@fx26.iad>
<532f6221-6a3f-4d60-87f2-c9b85069688c@googlegroups.com> <Trh2C.70369$qV5.49061@fx37.iad>
<3eba10f0-3b4c-474f-b86f-4cdc7af9495e@googlegroups.com> <434a9803-5902-4e76-a9dc-b5da6601c5e6@googlegroups.com>
<w2k2C.61466$_G5.56531@fx25.iad> <4c581f1f-6f53-4957-a403-1c1dd8f44d41@googlegroups.com>
<0900cb20-554b-490c-8f20-5af5666eb459@googlegroups.com> <1xS2C.38907$pF5.31986@fx03.iad>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <ca9f247f-ebfc-4d2b-ae10-0f4f2eee2e49@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Maybe Trump will help the resistence in Iran
From: fffurken <fffurken1@mail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 22:21:57 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 20
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tuesday, 2 January 2018 21:08:17 UTC, Dutch  wrote:
> On 1/2/2018 9:39 AM, risky biz wrote:
> >> A headscarf is formally required by law in Iran now and that's just as wrong as France banning
headscarves. Explain why you consider the former imposition by the state authoritarian while you
have absolutely no condemnation of the latter imposition of the state as authoritarian.
> 
> Context matters. The headscarf has become a symbol of the oppression of 
> females, attaching shame to the display of feminine beauty, something 
> anathema to French values and traditions. However I don't find banning 
> the headscarf to be a particularly good way to approach the issue. 
> Education would be better.

And by the way, two additional points;

1) There has not been a ban of headscarves in (secular) France, the ban is on full face coverings

2) AFAIK, there is no requirement for females in terms of their clothing other than "modesty" in any
of the Muslim hate books