Face Covering in Public in Canada

[Smallc]

How am I surrendering my own values? Veiling one's face is NOT one of my values!

Is religious freedom one of your values? What a narrow view of the world.

I would think that a better example of cowardice is to allow yourself and others to potentially be in danger by bowing to political correctness.

No, that's definitely not a better example.

Edited August 5, 2010 by Smallc

[Mr.Canada]

I just mentioned security certificates (I believe they're gone now but they certainly existed.

This affected your life in what way? Did this stop you from doing something? If so, how and what?

Is religious freedom one of your values? What a narrow view of the world.

Wearing a veil isn't a religious thing, it's cultural. Nowhere does it say in the Koran that a women must wear a burka. It only says modest dress. That's it.

Which religion are you speaking of?

Edited August 5, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[Smallc]

Don't care how people feel? You're going to make a very good lawyer!

I'm not trying to be a lawyer. I don't care how people feel about things that they know little about, not how they feel in general. I work with children several days a week, I have to care how they feel.

How does that connect?

You honestly don't see it?

I suggested that we allow face veiling until and unless it actually was a factor in a terrorist act. Then and only then would I support a ban, in the interests of better security to help prevent such an action from happening again.

I suggest that we allow people to own guns until such a time as they are used in the commission of a crime. Then and only then would I support a ban, in the interest of better security to help prevent such actions from happening.

What does the choice of weapon have to do with anything?

Really?

Sometimes keeping you on topic is like nailing jello to the wall! You always start arguing about something different than what I said!

Sometimes arguing with you is like spending a day working at daycare.

[Smallc]

This affected your life in what way? Did this stop you from doing something? If so, how and what.

It doesn't affect me directly, but it affects the legal freedoms of Canadians in general.

Wearing a veil isn't a religious thing, it's cultural.

That's your uninformed opinion.

Nowhere does it say in the Koran that a women must wear a burka. It only says modest dress. That's it.

Religion doesn't end with the bible, I hope you know. You, as a catholic should know that.

Which religion are you speaking of?

All religions. I'm not playing your games.

Edited August 5, 2010 by Smallc

[Mr.Canada]

It doesn't affect me directly, but it affects the legal freedoms of Canadians in general.

It does! Ok which Canadians does it affect? Who? When and where exactly. I want to know how their rights as protected under the Charter were taken away. Also which rights were taken away Smallc?

That's your uninformed opinion.

It's a fact. The majority of Islamic scholars say so. So you side with the minority of Islamic scholars who enforce it as law then smallc.

Afghanistan - burqa, wear it it or death penalty

Saudi Arabia

According to Saudi Arabia's law, women's clothing should meet the following conditions:

* Women must cover their entire body, but they are allowed to expose one or both eyes in necessity.

* Women should wear abaya and niqāb thick enough to conceal what is underneath, and the abaya should be loose-fitting.

* Women should not wear brightly coloured clothes or clothes that are adorned so that they may attract men's attention

Also Yemen, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, the UAE and Pakistan. In other words mostly Arab countries in the Middle East.

They are bringing these practices to Canada. Tribal extremist Islamic views and the socialists are in full support of them. Even thought these countries hand homosexuals. I don't get it.

All religions. I'm not playing your games.

The majority of Islamic scholars say that it isn't mandatory under Islamic Law yet you don't believe it support the chatteling of women.

[ToadBrother]

Which civil liberties have you personally given up in the name of security?

I'd like to know what you could do before, protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that you cannot do now.

They're great talking points but they're just that...talking points without substance.

I haven't given up any. But a liberty deprived of a fellow citizen is a liberty that could be deprived from me. That is the nature of liberties. Once you permit liberties to be limited for one group, it puts the liberties of the whole society at risk.

And for what? The illusion of security? No one has convinced me in the least that banning niqabs and other similar clothing will make me any safer. It's security theater, a phantom, a ghost of real security that makes people feel better while delivering nothing in return.

[Argus]

Actually thats backwards. Demonizing muslims and putting security over freedom IS political correctness since 911.

No, it's not. Political Correctness remains the safe bastion of Leftist kant.

[Argus]

And that's it in a nutshell. We've been terrified into believing that only by surrendering or limiting liberties can we hope to be safe, and the government and the police, as these groups ever have since their invention, seek to do just that.

Drivel. I'm not "terrified". I'm not even personally afraid, or even worried.

I've never liked fanatics, and by a secular standard, MOST Muslims are fanatics. And a sizeable number, most actually, are from primitive countries with backwards cultures which are not at all adverse to violence in the name of religion or politics. Islam is both religious and political, and both its religious side and its political side are inimimcal to everything I believe in.

Quite aside from them blowing up everyone and anyone who questions their hysterical doctrine, I dissaprove of almost everything most of Islam currently believes is proper behaviour. I don't need some mythical arch neo con propaganda master to convince me of that. Nor do I need anyone's help to convince me that cladding women in black death shrouds for their entire lives to preserve their "modesty" is an instrinsically stupid idea only put forth by moronic lunatics who think the goat is a suspiciously modern piece of high technology.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Argus

[ToadBrother]

Drivel. I'm not "terrified". I'm not even personally afraid, or even worried.

I've never liked fanatics, and by a secular standard, MOST Muslims are fanatics. And a sizeable number, most actually, are from primitive countries with backwards cultures which are not at all adverse to violence in the name of religion or politics. Islam is both religious and political, and both its religious side and its political side are inimimcal to everything I believe in.

Quite aside from them blowing up everyone and anyone who questions their hysterical doctrine, I dissaprove of almost everything most of Islam currently believes is proper behaviour. I don't need some mythical arch neo con propaganda master to convince me of that. Nor do I need anyone's help to convince me that cladding women in black death shrouds for their entire lives to preserve their "modesty" is an instrinsically stupid idea only put forth by moronic lunatics who think the goat is a suspiciously modern piece of high technology.

Even if I tended to agree with you (and I won't argue every point), that hardly deals with the underlying issue, which is whether the secular liberal democracies where individual liberties are viewed as paramount can legitimately stay within those ideals and ban these modes of dress.

[Argus]

Even if I tended to agree with you (and I won't argue every point), that hardly deals with the underlying issue, which is whether the secular liberal democracies where individual liberties are viewed as paramount can legitimately stay within those ideals and ban these modes of dress.

Well as I said, I don't believe we should ban them. I do think we should discourage their use, however, much as we discourage all manner of other anti-social behaviour.

[ToadBrother]

Well as I said, I don't believe we should ban them. I do think we should discourage their use, however, much as we discourage all manner of other anti-social behaviour.

I agree completely. The appropriate arena for this is not the legislature or the judiciary, but in the wider society. If we can make endlessly ponderous commercials about the evils of smoking, alcohol, poor self-image, drugs, gang violence and on and on and on, surely we can produce some nice little TV spots showing the evils and idiocies of this clothing.

[Jack Weber]

I agree completely. The appropriate arena for this is not the legislature or the judiciary, but in the wider society. If we can make endlessly ponderous commercials about the evils of smoking, alcohol, poor self-image, drugs, gang violence and on and on and on, surely we can produce some nice little TV spots showing the evils and idiocies of this clothing.

That might force the very conversation and confrontation that is probably necessary when dealing with what amounts to a culture clash...

Edited August 6, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Wild Bill]

The burkha was invented in the 1970's. There is no record of a burkha being worn anywhere in the world before that time.

It appeared in some Moslem countries that culturally are particularly repressive towards women.

So it's not as if it's some long term religious symbol. As Mark Steyn wrote, it is as old and venerable as platform shoes.

[g_bambino]

The burkha was invented in the 1970's. There is no record of a burkha being worn anywhere in the world before that time.

So it's not as if it's some long term religious symbol. As Mark Steyn wrote, it is as old and venerable as platform shoes.

Maybe not the burqa specifically, but the veiling of women's faces has been taking place for millennia.

[ToadBrother]

Maybe not the burqa specifically, but the veiling of women's faces has been taking place for millennia.

From what I've read, the Muslims got it from the Persians and Byzantines, but clearly it is a very very ancient cultural motif.

[Mr.Canada]

I agree completely. The appropriate arena for this is not the legislature or the judiciary, but in the wider society. If we can make endlessly ponderous commercials about the evils of smoking, alcohol, poor self-image, drugs, gang violence and on and on and on, surely we can produce some nice little TV spots showing the evils and idiocies of this clothing.

That might force the very conversation and confrontation that is probably necessary when dealing with what amounts to a culture clash...

Sounds reasonable but it would take several generations to get rid of it. Plus we have immigration from these backward lands everyday so as some wouldn't wear it we'd have a whole new crop of problems getting of the plane the next day. This will not end the problem at all. Only make it worse.

An outright ban makes it immediately clear to everyone here already or just arrived that this isn't welcome nor tolerated by Canadians. If you want to come and live in Canada then get with the program or leave and find someplace else to live. If their place of origin was so terrible that they left it for Canada then they should be happy to leave behind these terrible social practices as well.

If they're not then we don't need these types of anti social behaviors in Canada to begin with so good riddance.

Edited August 7, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[g_bambino]

An outright ban...

That's not going to happen.

[capricorn]

An outright ban makes it immediately clear to everyone here already or just arrived that this isn't welcome nor tolerated by Canadians.

Not all Canadians want an outright ban. See this poll.

http://www.chathamdailynews.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2688717

Here's a regional breakdown in that poll.

Percentage of population who think burkas should be banned

39% B.C.

45% Alberta

43% Saskatchewan, Manitoba

53% Ontario

73% Quebec

54% Atlantic

[Mr.Canada]

Not all Canadians want an outright ban. See this poll.

http://www.chathamdailynews.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2688717

Here's a regional breakdown in that poll.

Yep and the numbers are highest in th e provinces with the biggest populations. So we'd drown out the rest. Ontario has more people then all the praries combined.

No matter what happens I'll continue to confront people who wear the niqab and tell them it isn't welcome in Canada. I've made several of them cry, mostly this happens in Brampton. I go there once in a while. I always wear my "I will never submit" (in Arabic) T-Shirt. They no doubt report it as a hate crime...lol.

Edited August 8, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[Mr.Canada]

In true Canadian style we will probably take the path of least resistance and of coarse not wanting to offend anyone we'll allow face veils but have a separate area in airports for them to be identified. Thus creating gender apartheid which is in essence a part of Sharia Law. We'll be playing right into the hands of those Muslims who'd like to see Sharia Law in Canada being official and intertwined with Canadian Law. This will make us one step closer to it. Gender apartheid is a major part of the Muslim faith. This is what will happen, I have no doubt about it.

[ToadBrother]

In true Canadian style we will probably take the path of least resistance and of coarse not wanting to offend anyone we'll allow face veils but have a separate area in airports for them to be identified. Thus creating gender apartheid which is in essence a part of Sharia Law. We'll be playing right into the hands of those Muslims who'd like to see Sharia Law in Canada being official and intertwined with Canadian Law. This will make us one step closer to it. Gender apartheid is a major part of the Muslim faith. This is what will happen, I have no doubt about it.

What part of liberty don't you understand?

[jdi]

Today on www.themarknews.com, The Mark is hosting liberal leader Michael Ignatieff in a live chat at 4:30pm EST. You can submit questions to the opposition leader as he travels cross Canada via The Mark's Facebook page, The Mark's website, or Twitter @themarknews. Submit your questions and comments ASAP!