Goddess

If you don't have anything to add to the discussion of Bill 62, please avoid just making comments that accuse others of hypocrisy all the time. Thank you.

I'm assuming the law would also apply to protesters.

deleted, wrong thread. Oopsy-Doodle!

Please discuss this on one of your own topics. Thank you.

Agree. But one is for women who have chosen to serve God as their profession - thus, a uniform. The other is mandated for all women. Few nuns wear the habit these days and they are not murdered or beaten for not wearing it. If nuns are required to wear burkas, I'm unaware of this requirement, you'd have to fill me in. I wonder if the Pope suddenly made it a requirement for all Catholic women to wear burkas or face coverings at all times, how that would go over? I suspect most people would be livid.

No, they're not. They may look similar, but they have entirely different purposes.

Frankly, I think he's still confused about burkas/hijabs/niqabs.

You are the one who said that nuns wearing habits is exactly the same as Muslim women wearing burkas. I'm pointing out the false aspects of your statement. ONE of which is that young women all over the world (en masse) are not being forced socially or religiously to become nuns, as young Muslim women are. TWO - is that nuns enter it voluntarily; it is a job, a career - thus a "uniform". THREE - nuns are not murdered or have acid thrown in their faces and are not stoned to death for not wearing the habit. If you want to compare nuns to Muslim women, then you would need to compare TODAY's Muslim women to nuns in medieval times. Then you would be onto something.

Where in Canada are young girls, en masse, being indoctrinated to be nuns?

It's ridonkulous. And it's an argument that's been debunked over and over again. Nuns spend their days working their chosen career path. Praying, tending to religious duties, etc. Women who are required to burka-up are not devoting their days to worship. They are trying to cook meals, raise children, work a job, drive to the grocery store. I'd like to see some men here throw a comforter over their heads for a week and try to live a normal life. Are Christian women all over the world being actively/socially coerced into becoming nuns? No. Aside from being silimlar in appearance, they are completely different in their symbolism.

False analogy. Being a nun is a voluntary career choice, while Muslim "modesty" is most often coerced. The underlying ideology, how it functions and what it confers are totally different. FFS, there are entire countries where millions of women are forced from childhood to cover their entire selves! Which country on earth is murdering nuns, throwing acid in their faces, beating and mutilating nuns for not wearing a habit?

??? This is about banning burkas. Please review the history of the burka. Thanks.

Actually in discussion here and in other forums, I am getting more comfortable with the idea. I don't think what is being asked is unreasonable. This article goes through the history of burkas/niqabs: http://www.meforum.org/2777/ban-the-burqa The history of the burka is that it has always been and continues to be, used to denigrate and marginalize women. It has always been and continues to be, used by Islamists to acheive political gains. It has always been and continues to be, affiliated with the most violent, regressive, extremist and fundamentalist forms of Islam. I think these considerations are more important than any one person's "personal freedom". Why allow Islamists to even get a toehold in Canada? This is a garment that should not be celebrated in any way, shape or form.

This is my understanding, too - that Saudi Wahhabism is making definite strides in Canada and other countries where their funding is accepted by Muslim organizations and they are then obligated to abide by the wishes of the extremists funding them. And they are having definite success in establishing their extreme brand of Islam in Canada. Yet while they are busily funding and establishing extreme Islam in Canada and actively recruiting Muslims to their brand of extremism, we have Canadians who feel that we should do nothing about it, nor allow our politicians to address it:

I meant the ones who refuse - do so for religious reasons. I guess I'm getting tired of accomodating bizarre and unhealthy religious beliefs, while they refuse to accomodate common sense ones.

I have more faith in their common sense than in the common sense of any religious fundie. That could very well be.

Hmmmm.....I'm thinking there is probably less people who wear a surgical mask in public as a security blanket, than women in burkas.

I believe she has said she doesn't agree with burkas, but I think she is more comfortable with women being dictated to by their religion than being dictated to by the government.

Using Benz' analogy of the fields, both sides of this dispute were squarely in the religious field. One side felt Sunday is the religious "day of rest", the other did not. Secularism won out. Thankfully.

I would only add that it's not considered misogyny - it IS misogyny. And if we have to legislate it away, then so be it.

I've seen more people in burkas than people walking around with surgical masks (except in China). I'm assuming such ones wouldn't have an issue with taking them off momentarily for security and ID purposes, unlike burka wearers who refuse for religious reasons. Some outpatients are required to wear a mask in public for medical reasons (which is different than religious reasons), so I'm also going to assume that any law would include some common sense. I think it would be difficult to hide a machete or home made bomb or a gun under a surgical mask......would be the reason common sense would prevail in your hypothesis.

I think it's not headscarves - it's the full face burkas and niqabs that present the issues.

Well, really the concern here is that husbands/fathers ARE using force, the women - too cowed to report it. And when they do, mostly nothing is done because no one wants to challenge the religious freedom aspect. This is why this law will be useless unless we are fully prepared to prosecute families who hold their women captive. France has issued many fines, and one report says some women are getting fined multiple times. I'm okay with this - if a family/husband wants to force women into burkas, then the consequence is you keep paying the fines.

Would you be more receptive to such a law if the government outright said "This laws is to fight oppression against women by Muslim men and mosques?" I agree the number of women this would affect would be small. Maybe a percentage of those would gain strength from such a law to go against their family/religion by reporting them. And maybe another percentage of families would think twice about forcing their women into burkas if it were prosecutable. Mostly just thinking out loud here.....