Re: Cattala bans Minarets and Burkhas

by **Thomas** 14th July 2010, 18:11

This reminds me of Marmite - love or hate. Cheeky/Razz

Kran'et followers only number in their hundreds in Cattala, however they will not face any ban on clothing, temples and houses of prayer.

The issue with Burkhas is that they pose a threat to national security, with the rising terror threat on all European nations from Islamic extremists. The lack of identity that is caused by the burkha would allow criminals to hide from police, and can cause distrust between other citizens and Muslims. They are allowed to wear all other head garments, such as the Khimar, Chador, Al-Amira, Shayla and Hijab.
Historically, the Burkha and Niqab are symbols of the oppression of Muslim women, and sexism that stems from this. These garments were designed for the sole purpose of showing male superiority in the Arab world, which the Holy Regno does not support. Women are entitled to freedom, and the outlawed clothing does not give them this right.

The issue with minarets is that they are an eyesore amidst the historic Catholic architecture of Cattala, and the calls for the outlawing of these buildings have been popular for decades. Minarets will not be torn down - however no new ones will be constructed.
Mosques have not been outlawed - however due to the elaborate exterior design of all 14 mosques already in Cattala, it has been advised by many senior advisors on religious architecture and planning laws that mosques in the future will need to be less out-of-touch with other modern developments in the Kingdom. All Christian churches and Jewish synagogues in Cattala abide by the new guidelines, after a review of all religious buildings in the nation.
I hope this helps answer your questions and concerns. This is not racism - it is protecting the historical cities that cover Cattala, and promotes integration between Muslim and Christian communities.

by **Blakeway4** 14th July 2010, 18:15

Rhodes completely agree and support the decision of Cattala.

Lanaya will remain Neutral, but understand the decision of Cattala.

by **Liberater444** 15th July 2010, 04:55

After the clarification, the Tirnreich understands and supports the decision of the Holy Regno. However, due to the lacking of such dress in the Tirnreich, we will not follow suit and ban it.

by **Aleks** 15th July 2010, 04:56

my bad, i was thinking of gansibi, my bad :oops:

by Guest 17th July 2010, 10:58

East Rockcoast TOTALY agains Cattala's action. The foreign minister will BAN all products, citizens and will close the embassies in the both country.

While Starfishland remain neutral on this.

by **Thomas** 17th July 2010, 12:50

You're closing an embassy, banning products and closing borders because islamic outfits were banned? Has ERC closed the border with Switzerland, Belgium and France as well?

(out of roleplay, btw)

by Guest 17th July 2010, 16:28

ALL of them.
Eh I mean, all of they dont have embassies but there isnt any border closing. Cheeky/Razz

by **Blakeway4** 17th July 2010, 17:43

As ERC is doing this to our biggest ally, Rhodes will ban all the ERC products and close its embassy in ERC and the ERC one in Rhodes. Long life to the Prince! :king:

by **Thomas** 17th July 2010, 18:06

As ERC is doing this to OUR biggest ally, Cattala will ban all the ERC products and close its embassy in ERC and the ERC one in Cattala. All diplomatic links with ERC have been severed. Long live the Queen! :queen:

Thank you for your support, Rhodes.

by **Aranho** 17th July 2010, 18:54

Off-topic: Two questions
1) ERC is an Islamic country, am I right?
2) Dryan, I believe you did what you do because you live in an Islamic country, right?
If the two answers are yes, then I understand why. Cheeky/Razz

-----

The Fornaxian Government condemns the actions taken by all three: East Rockcoast, Rhodes and Cattala. Such actions are totally unneccessary and totally not acceptable. All three of you did such stuff just because of a law? Unreasonable.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Republic of Fornax

by **Thomas** 17th July 2010, 18:57

In response to the Fornax Ministry of Foreign Affairs' statement, Cattala has taken this action following discussions with our friends Rhodes.

by **Blakeway4** 17th July 2010, 19:07

976 wrote:East Rockcoast TOTALY agains Cattala's action. The foreign minister will BAN all products, citizens and will close the embassies in the both country.

While Starfishland remain neutral on this.

Well, Rhodes is doing this because of ERC's decision.

by Guest 18th July 2010, 15:03

Due for the confrontation, ERC DEMOLISHED both country embassies. All citizens from will be departed to their own country.
Keep roleplays in italics guys.

by **Thomas** 18th July 2010, 15:26

We are staying in italics, LOL

.

by **Liberater444** 18th July 2010, 19:39

Really? I'm just a little put off, that we are destroying embassies because 2 countries banned a headdress and overly out of place religious buildings.

by **Thomas** 18th July 2010, 19:49

Following discussions with the Cabinet and Her Royal and Holy Highness Queen Alexandra V, Lord Anthony Secolo of Celestine has withdrawn the ban of ERC products and will allow the Republic of East Rockcoast to re open it's embassy in Celeste.

We hope that this disagreement can be resolved immediately.

by **Peter** 18th July 2010, 20:57

While Petrova and Dardajhan Rep. has decided to remain neutral on this matter, they discourage such acts.

by **Blakeway4** 18th July 2010, 23:27

Peter wrote:While Petrova and Dardajhan Rep. has decided to remain neutral on this matter, they discourage such acts.

Which acts? Banning Burqas in minarets or destroying embassies?

by **Bruce** 19th July 2010, 02:14

Duwamish discourages such acts, but does not want to cut diplomatic ties.

by **Peter** 19th July 2010, 03:37

Julien wrote:
Peter wrote:While Petrova and Dardajhan Rep. has decided to remain neutral on this matter, they discourage such acts.

Which acts? Banning Burqas in minarets or destroying embassies?

haha both

by Sponsored content