The Yes camp spent much of the debate widening the question: if the state is to require visible faces, voters argued, it must apply to balaclavas, ski masks and protest hoods too. That broader coalition carried Yes to a two-to-one victory, though the debate was as much about coercion and integration as security.
The floor’s most-respected Yes case began with religious interpretation: “Full face veils are not a requirement of Islam”, and a ban could mean “loosening the repression of women and promoting integration”. Other supporters added facial recognition, public unease and the belief that “One public. One rule.” should govern every face covering.
The No side’s sharpest objection was practical rather than theological. Its best-rated argument asked whether we want police “policing women's wardrobes on the high street”, while another called the ban hammer “blunt and inaccurate”. The two camps often talked past each other: Yes voters saw imposed veiling and concealed identities; No voters saw the state dictating dress and police resources being diverted.
That helps explain why so many Yes arguments were conditional on a wider, neutral rule rather than a measure aimed only at Muslim women. Yet the room also contained a more exclusionary register, with one voice saying “foreign cultures ought to be barred from Britain”; it was present, but it did not carry the chamber’s most respected case.
For a self-selected online vote, the verdict was clear; the argument beneath it was not a simple security demand, but a call to make visibility, integration and equality the price of public life.
38 Opinions
Full face veils are not a requirement of Islam, there is nothing at all about then in the Quran, they are additions made by Arabic men to help them to repress women, they have no place in the 21st century. This vote would NOT ban the Hijab, which is the Islamic head covering such as a scarf, and so it is not Islamophobic, but it is about loosening the repression of women and promoting integration. Vote for the 21st century, not the 15th century.
The Quran does not explicitly mandate either the hijab or the burka. It simply instructs both men and women to dress and act with modesty. Mandating it it a feature of hardline Islamists and a misogynistic culture. The do not help integration and can be a security risk.
Burqa normalises a culture of shaming all women in public spaces. It's completely unacceptable in a modern democracy.
Eastern Europeans who lived under Communism can see that Socialism has stealthily infiltrated UK in a malign way & women who flee Islam recognise & fear militancy of the cult & its barbarous ways. Islam is intolerant & victim seeking on its way to domination. Its hatred of women who of course are asking for it even at age 9 or below justifies apparently trussing them up whatever the weather. Men? No such restrictions & well they just can’t help themselves poor lambs.
I am surprised by the people who feel they have to say" Balaclavas too" in case someone thinks they're being discriminatory. They are two different arguments. One is an abuse, one is a choice. We can and we should stop the abuse.
I don’t like telling anyone what they can wear but here in England we don’t like the full face covering. It frightens people as they feel worried as to who is hiding behind them and are these women being forced to wear them.
While I respect religious freedom, there is no Islamic law to make women cover their faces. It's a decision made by the women and possibly their fathers, husbands, to show how devout they are. Many find the full face cover intimidating, so yes, while out in public we want to see your face, get to know you as a person.
Yes, but the ban should be clear about which public settings are covered and should also ban other face coverings e.g. ski masks, balaclavas, masks, motorcycle helmets
Everyone shouting about banning lads who went to Dover and wore masks !! To stop the spread of TB from all the migrants there. So if you want to stop British people from wearing masks only right that all face coverings be banned. What a change from covid though where they tried to force you to wear face coverings!!!
This should be part of a ban on all face covering as many extremists are using balacalavas and other masking to hide their identities as they go about their violent protests as seen recently in Cleveland