Sure and everyone in all the social circles I grew up in have shunned me for giving up my faith. The government banning me from choosing to wear a cross necklace wouldn’t change that or give me any more freedom of choice.

[–] WhiteHawk@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A cross necklace is a little different than having to cover your head or your entire body, don't you think?

[–] colforge@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My point was more that more oppression is not the answer to oppression.

[–] WhiteHawk@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Removing one of the ways someone is being oppressed doesn't sound oppressive to me

[–] colforge@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Removing the freedom of choice is textbook oppression but ok.

[–] WhiteHawk@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which is exactly what Islam is doing

[–] colforge@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

I don’t deny that. But I posit that it matters not whether it’s a religion or a legislating body, telling women what they can or cannot wear is wrong and it is oppressive. If one must resort to the same tactics as the oppressors, what makes them any better?