Swiss Voters Ban Face Coverings

[Kooky]

Official results of the nationwide referendum showed 51.2 percent of voters supported the ban on full facial coverings, which was proposed by the populist, anti-immigrant Swiss People’s Party (S.V.P.), compared with 48.8 percent opposing it, a much narrower margin of victory than pollsters had initially predicted.

The initiative, started long before the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, makes exceptions for facial coverings worn at religious sites and for security or health purposes, but also bans coverings like the ski masks worn by protesters. Officials have two years to write legislation to put the ban into effect.

The federal government had urged voters to reject the ban as tackling a problem that didn’t exist and arguing that it would damage tourism.

Critics of the ban cited a study showing only some 30 women in Switzerland wear the veils and most of them were born in Switzerland and had converted to Islam. The only people seen wearing the burqa, a full head-to-toe covering, are visitors from the Middle East, mostly wealthy tourists from the Persian Gulf bringing welcome revenue to the country’s hospitality industry.

NYT article

CNN article

CBS News article

The timing of this is especially interesting, as is the provisions of this law that seems to target Muslim women exclusively (since it makes exceptions for nearly every other occasion when one would want to cover one's face). I wonder if the Swiss constitution has anti-discrimination provisions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do not think that this is a proper solution. Yes, sometimes women are essentially forced into wearing a burqa, but there is no way of knowing that. And there does appear to be a religious bias behind this.

 

[Estro Felino]

Vox Populi, Vox Dei.
The voice of the people is God's voice.
Switzerland is an excellent model of direct democracy.

 

[Samael_Khan]

NYT article

CNN article

CBS News article

The timing of this is especially interesting, as is the provisions of this law that seems to target Muslim women exclusively (since it makes exceptions for nearly every other occasion when one would want to cover one's face). I wonder if the Swiss constitution has anti-discrimination provisions.

I don't know why they care about these cultural practices. How about they target the actual issues.

 

[Secret Chief]

If only they'd ban yodeling.

 

[Altfish]

Vox Populi, Vox Dei.
The voice of the people is God's voice.
Switzerland is an excellent model of direct democracy.

No, the voice of the people would vote to bring back hanging; lower taxes; support separatist policies, etc.

Remember 'The Voice of the People' is actually a vote of prople averaging an IQ less than 100, controlled by popularist politicians

 

[Mock Turtle]

If only they'd ban yodeling.

And all those awful cowbells.

 

[Debater Slayer]

If this is indeed primarily intended to target the burqa or niqab for ideological rather than safety reasons, then I think it is a problematic law that shouldn't be up for a popular vote anyway. Freedom of choosing one's clothes as long as it poses no harm or risk to anyone else's safety should be guaranteed without needing a popular vote.

The problem with the populist right is often that they use legitimate issues, such as the multiple undesirable and inhumane beliefs in specific cultures, to extrapolate that the rights or freedoms of all individuals of certain religions should be reduced or voted against.

 

[viole]

NYT article

CNN article

CBS News article

The timing of this is especially interesting, as is the provisions of this law that seems to target Muslim women exclusively (since it makes exceptions for nearly every other occasion when one would want to cover one's face). I wonder if the Swiss constitution has anti-discrimination provisions.

I am Swiss and I voted for the ban. I also voted to ban minarets a few years ago (also won).
And that was a constitutional vote. Ergo, our constitution changes all the time if the people decides so.

we also banned kosher and halal slaugthering practices. And, I believe, female genital mutilation.

we basically do not care if someone feels discriminated, if that involves issues we believe to be wrong and, as I said, the constitution changes all the time, so that is not an issue.

now, you can shoot at will.

ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

If this is indeed primarily intended to target the burqa or niqab for ideological rather than safety reasons, then I think it is a problematic law that shouldn't be up for a popular vote anyway. Freedom of choosing one's clothes as long as it poses no harm or risk to anyone else's safety should be guaranteed without needing a popular vote.

The problem with the populist right is often that they use legitimate issues, such as the multiple undesirable and inhumane beliefs in specific cultures, to extrapolate that the rights or freedoms of all individuals of certain religions should be reduced or voted against.

Very little is not up for popular vote in Switzerland. We are a direct democracy, ergo we basically vote for everything. And our political elected people in Bern can be overruled by the Volk very easily.

ciao

- viole

 

[Thief]

NYT article

CNN article

CBS News article

The timing of this is especially interesting, as is the provisions of this law that seems to target Muslim women exclusively (since it makes exceptions for nearly every other occasion when one would want to cover one's face). I wonder if the Swiss constitution has anti-discrimination provisions.

where I live....it used to be law.....NO face covering in public
aimed at your presence in places such as hotels, banks, etc....etc....

the intent was to keep honest people facially visible
and the bad guys draw attention for having their faces covered

is there a crime problem?.....as per op

 

[Koldo]

No, the voice of the people would vote to bring back hanging; lower taxes; support separatist policies, etc.

Remember 'The Voice of the People' is actually a vote of prople averaging an IQ less than 100, controlled by popularist politicians

The only alternative I know is to leave it up to judges that can freely bend the constitution whenever they wish with no consequence.

 

[viole]

where I live....it used to be law.....NO face covering in public
aimed at your presence in places such as hotels, banks, etc....etc....

the intent was to keep honest people facially visible
and the bad guys draw attention for having their faces covered

is there a crime problem?.....as per op

The motivation of the Swiss people, and of me and most of my girlfriends, that are mainly from liberal/feminist side, is that wearing a Muslim face cover is like a carrying a little prison with a woman inside.

symbols of oppression and totalitarian regimes/theology belong to be banned. Like female genital mutilation and other customs motivated by primitive superstitions.

ciao

- viole

 

[Thief]

The motivation of the Swiss people, and of me and most of my girlfriends, that are mainly from liberal/feminist side, is that Muslim face cover is like a little cage with a woman inside.

symbols of oppression and totalitarian regimes/theology belong to be banned. Like female genital mutilation and other customs motivated by primitive superstitions.

ciao

- viole

so...if the religious participant would choose......the covering
then what?

 

[viole]

No, the voice of the people would vote to bring back hanging; lower taxes; support separatist policies, etc.

Remember 'The Voice of the People' is actually a vote of prople averaging an IQ less than 100, controlled by popularist politicians

Well, it works in Switzerland. We are often asked if we want more vacations, retire younger, lower taxes, etc. And we often vote nope, if we believe that is financially not sustainable.

so, the problem is not the system, but the people it is applied to. Some need big wise parents that look after them, others don’t.

ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

so...if the religious participant would choose......the covering
then what?

Then you can cover your face.

ciao

- viole

 

[Revoltingest]

Vox Populi, Vox Dei.
The voice of the people is God's voice.
Switzerland is an excellent model of direct democracy.

I'm not a fan of democracy being the
majority voting to oppress a minority.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Very little is not up for popular vote in Switzerland. We are a direct democracy, ergo we basically vote for everything. And our political elected people in Bern can be overruled by the Volk very easily.

ciao

- viole

I didn't say otherwise; I simply think direct democracy is a suboptimal way to rule. Individual rights shouldn't be up for popular vote; that can easily enable mob rule and tyranny of the majority.

 

[Lyndon]

I am Swiss and I voted for the ban. I also voted to ban minarets a few years ago (also won).
And that was a constitutional vote. Ergo, our constitution changes all the time if the people decides so.

we also banned kosher and halal slaugthering practices. And, I believe, female genital mutilation.

we basically do not care if someone feels discriminated, if that involves issues we believe to be wrong and, as I said, the constitution changes all the time, so that is not an issue.

now, you can shoot at will.

ciao

- viole

So you're proud to vote for discrimination based on religion?

 

[viole]

I didn't say otherwise; I simply think direct democracy is a suboptimal way to rule. Individual rights shouldn't be up for popular vote; that can easily enable mob rule and tyranny of the majority.

This is true only if we assume the people we elect are wiser than us. So, according to you, voting for people like Hitler, is safer.

Do you realize how close you are to undermine democracy, in general?

ciao

- viole