Face veils banned for citizenship oaths

[Guest American Woman]

Here's the thing. Showing that men are also discriminated against does nothing to prove that women aren't.

It has everything to do with the fact that only women are discriminated against in Islamic nations - and your attempt to claim they are also discriminated against here. But if it's just women there while it's men and women here, you have no case. Furthermore, since it's both sexes, I fail to see how there can be discrimination. It goes against the definition. It can't be discrimination if it affects everyone.

Again, this is completely irrelevant to the topic, so we should stop discussing it here.

Not really; not as it was brought up.

[Guest American Woman]

According to BBC:

Veils and face coverings are already banned in Quebec for people receiving some government services.

Canada is considering a wider ban on veils in government offices, schools and hospitals.

[cybercoma]

It has everything to do with the fact that only women are discriminated against in Islamic nations - and your attempt to claim they are also discriminated against here. But if it's just women there while it's men and women here, you have no case. Furthermore, since it's both sexes, I fail to see how there can be discrimination. It goes against the definition. It can't be discrimination if it affects everyone.

If you can't see that society values beauty in women above and beyond all other traits, moreso than it does for men, then I don't know what else to tell you.

People do actually research this stuff, you know.

http://forumonpublicpolicy.com/vol2010no5/archivevol2010no5/spann.pdf

Abstract

Employment appearance discrimination is practically legal in the United States of America. Yet, the discrimination can involve unjust hiring or promotional practices based solely on physicality, including weight, skin, or height, versus skills, aptitudes, or qualifications. Women are more likely impacted than men based on the empirical acceptance of societal norms concerning gender inequality. Legislation continues to improve inequitable work conditions for women, as evidenced with the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act ratified on January 29, 2009. However, the act, like other gender and equality legislation for workforce development in America, is unlikely to impede employment appearance discrimination against women due to cultural assent and tolerance. This submission intends to increase awareness about the problem and to propose initiations for extended research. Until employment appearance discrimination against women declines in America, injustice may continue to increase.

Notice how it doesn't say men are not affected. It's discrimination because women are more affected, as I said.

[wyly]

There's nothing in the Koran that in any way mandates that women are oppressed in this manner

there's nothing in the bible that mandates the pope interfere/oppress women with restricting the use of contraception...

christians mostly share the same bible but that doesn't prevent numerous sects each from interpreting it differently...the mormons even rewrote it to their satisfaction...

muslims also interpret their writings differently they do not all see it the same...like christians they have a number of branches that do see eye to eye in their belief and how it should be interpreted, that kenny can make a claim that the islamic version practiced in saudi arabia is the only version therefore the correct version is both arrogant and unbelievably stupid...

[August1991]

I agree. But I can't see this going unchallenged. I also wonder if this is the beginning of banning the veil in other circumstances.

Quebec is now passing a law (loi 94) to require all bureaucrats who deal with the public to show their face. It is still pending and has not been enacted. (AW, the BBC report is wrong in several ways.)

Would I be allowed to wear a ski mask while walking in a mall during April?

Without having read this entire thread, that in a sense is the question.

What can one wear in public?

I understand that a mall is a private place and a citizenship court is part of the State apparatus. Could one appear nude in either? Without shoes? Without a shirt?

----

I simply hope that tolerance prevails in this debate. Russia's Peter the Great tried to ban beards on men. The Chinese have at various times forced men to have hair queues or not. In general, when the State tries to force arbitrary private behaviour, it fails.

Edited December 13, 2011 by August1991

[Guest American Woman]

Evidently the Muslim Canadian Congress agrees with the decision: the Muslim Canadian Congress welcomed the new regulation, urging the Canadian government to go even further and ban the burqa and niqab from all public places in Canada. link The MCC seems to be really progressive.

[Wilber]

Curiously Canadian. Citizenship is not a right unless you are born here. If I was seeking to become a citizen of another country, I don't think I would be laying down the conditions under which I could become one.

[cybercoma]

Evidently the Muslim Canadian Congress agrees with the decision: the Muslim Canadian Congress welcomed the new regulation, urging the Canadian government to go even further and ban the burqa and niqab from all public places in Canada. link The MCC seems to be really progressive.

They also heavily criticize Israel and call what's happening over there Palestinian Apartheid. You still want to throw your eggs in that basket?

[August1991]

Citizenship is not a right unless you are born here. If I was seeking to become a citizen of another country, I don't think I would be laying down the conditions under which I could become one.

But what are those conditions? Hassidic men grow long sideburns. Some Muslim men grow long finger nails. Many Christians wear a cross around their neck. People have tattoos or piercing of their body. Some Sikhs have a symbolic knife. Some lesbians wear baggy pants. Pious Hindu women cover their hair but expose their midrift.

My first instinct is to say that we should live and let live.

-----

There is an elephant in the room however.

Sikhs, Hassidic Jews, Christians and people with tattoos/piercings don't threaten us in the West. Islamists destroyed two large buildings in New York. It is very hard to separate Muslims and the attacks of September 2001 or many other recent terrorist attacks around the world (Bali, London, Madrid, even Munich) generally directed at western targets.

Edited December 13, 2011 by August1991

[Guest American Woman]

They also heavily criticize Israel and call what's happening over there Palestinian Apartheid. You still want to throw your eggs in that basket?

So I have to agree with them on everything, do I? If I did, it would be a first.

[cybercoma]

Here's the article I was looking for. There was a huge rift in the MCC. The entire executive quit and formed the CMU back in 2006.

http://www.muslimunion.ca/20060822.html

August 22, 2006: For immediate release!

This statement is the resignation of the following Board members from the Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC):

•Niaz Salimi, President;

•Rizwana Jafri, Vice President;

•El-Farouk Khaki, Secretary General;

•Arif Raza, Legal Advisor;

•Abbas Syed, Chief Financial Officer;

•Gary Dale, Director & webmaster;

•Amr Malik, Director;

•Atique Azad, Director;

•Jehad Aliweiwi, Director;

•Nadine Estrada-Karachi, Director;

•Suhail Alsameed, Director;

•Imtiaz Popat, Regional Coordinator, B.C.

It is also signed by the following people who have recently resigned from the MCC Board and who share our concerns:

•Nadia Awad;

•Hanadi Loubani.

The MCC was intended to be a voice of "Muslims not represented by other organizations, organizations that are sectarian or ethnocentric, largely authoritarian, and influenced by a fear of modernity and an aversion to joy."

Over the years the MCC has made significant strides in offering a voice to many. Recently, however, the public face of the MCC has deviated from its stated priorities.

The message that MCC has been giving out is "not addressed to Muslims, it is aimed at making Muslim haters feel secure in their thinking".

As a result, many in the Muslim community have been alienated from the MCC as a viable voice for the community. Sadly many progressive Muslims and others perceive the MCC as being holier-than-thou, arrogant and enclosed in an ivory tower.

This was never our intention. The signatories to this statement believe that to combat the grips of fundamentalism and social isolation, we must engage and involve the Muslim community, and in particular the progressive and liberal voices within it.

For these reasons, we have chosen to leave the MCC, an organization which we have devoted ourselves to for several years.

We have decided to establish the Canadian Muslim Union (CMU), an organization which while advocating a separation of religion and state, will also work with and within the Muslim community.

The CMU will seek to engage the larger Muslim community in issues of human rights, human dignity, social justice and alternate progressive and inclusive visions of Islam. In so doing, we aim to instil joy in the celebration of our identities as Muslims and as Canadians with social consciences and a commitment to social justice and human dignity.

I stand corrected. Maybe you do want to put your eggs in the MCC basket.

Edited December 13, 2011 by cybercoma

[Wilber]

But what are those conditions? Hassidic men grow long sideburns. Some Muslim men grow long finger nails. Many Christians wear a cross around their neck. People have tattoos or piercing of their body. Some Sikhs have a symbolic knife. Some lesbians wear baggy pants. Pious Hindu women cover their hair but expose their midrift.

My first instinct is to say that we should live and let live.

-----

There is an elephant in the room however.

Sikhs, Hassidic Jews, Christians and people with tattoos/piercings don't threaten us in the West. Islamists destroyed two large buildings in New York. It is very hard to separate Muslims and the attacks of September 2001 or many other recent terrorist attacks around the world (Bali, London, Madrid, even Munich) generally directed at western targets.

None of those things prevent a person from being identified or seen to be taking the oath. Perhaps we should fingerprint and take DNA samples from all those who enter the country seeking residence so that they can be properly identified before they are granted citizenship.

It seems to me that if a country is bestowing the greatest privilege it can offer to a new resident, it is reasonable to expect that person can be identified and seen to be taking the oath which will get them that privilege. When it comes to live and let live, why does the accommodation always have to be one way?

[cybercoma]

Islamists destroyed two large buildings in New York. It is very hard to separate Muslims and the attacks of September 2001 or many other recent terrorist attacks around the world (Bali, London, Madrid, even Munich) generally directed at western targets.

All dogs are animals, but not all animals are dogs.

And in this case, some dogs aren't even animals.

[dre]

But what are those conditions? Hassidic men grow long sideburns. Some Muslim men grow long finger nails. Many Christians wear a cross around their neck. People have tattoos or piercing of their body. Some Sikhs have a symbolic knife. Some lesbians wear baggy pants. Pious Hindu women cover their hair but expose their midrift.

My first instinct is to say that we should live and let live.

-----

There is an elephant in the room however.

Sikhs, Hassidic Jews, Christians and people with tattoos/piercings don't threaten us in the West. Islamists destroyed two large buildings in New York. It is very hard to separate Muslims and the attacks of September 2001 or many other recent terrorist attacks around the world (Bali, London, Madrid, even Munich) generally directed at western targets.

I just dont see the connection between terrorism and whether or not muslim women wear a head thing when they recite a one sentence 10 second pledge to an outsourced symbolic monarch.

It is very hard to separate Muslims and the attacks of September 2001 or many other recent terrorist attacks around the world

And it will still be equally hard whether or not muslim women take of their hijabs for ten seconds to recite a silly archaic pledge.

Edited December 13, 2011 by dre

[olp1fan]

Somewhere in the world some Jihadist is making an internet video condemning this and threatening our lives

with a bunch of shit that will never happen

[August1991]

None of those things prevent a person from being identified or seen to be taking the oath.

Wilber, make no mistake. Jason Kenney is using the veil/exposing a face to talk about something else.

If bin Laden had not organized the September 2011 attacks, if Islamists/Muslims had not committed other attacks elsewhere, if Iran had not taken American diplomats hostage 30 years ago, we all would accept weird face covering for female immigrants. We in North America are generally tolerant.

We live with tattoos, Hassidics Jews, Sikhs, Crazy Jehovahs. We probably could live with women who cover their face.

----

Elephant in the room?

Here's my question: If bin Laden had not sent these planes against American buildings, if other "Islamists" had not set bombs to kill westerners, would Jason Kenney now be asking Muslim women to remove their veil?

Kenney is not asking pious Sikh, Jewish or Christian women to change their behaviour/clothing. He is asking Muslim women to change.

That's the elephant in the room that neither Kenney nor the politically correct CBC wants to admit.

[olp1fan]

I don't think the Cons are anti muslim

I used to be one of those "Jehovahs" but we just worse Suits

and nothing covered our face

Edited December 13, 2011 by olp1fan

[Battletoads]

there's nothing in the bible that mandates the pope interfere/oppress women with restricting the use of contraception...

I don't see your point, most sane government ignore the catholic church's wishes.

Edited December 13, 2011 by Battletoads

[wyly]

None of those things prevent a person from being identified or seen to be taking the oath. Perhaps we should fingerprint and take DNA samples from all those who enter the country seeking residence so that they can be properly identified before they are granted citizenship.

It seems to me that if a country is bestowing the greatest privilege it can offer to a new resident, it is reasonable to expect that person can be identified and seen to be taking the oath which will get them that privilege. When it comes to live and let live, why does the accommodation always have to be one way?

they have been identified, they passed every stage of verification and qualification to be a citizen but you insist on seeing their lips recite some silly oath knowing that it will humiliate them...what we have here is a resentment of visible religious minority that the right-wing hates and will do everything they can to publicly humiliate with the hope they leave canada...

[olp1fan]

This is getting Canada international attention..as well as Canada getting rid of Kyoto officially

Two smart decisions by the (hate to say it) conservative government

Hopefully they continue to keep making smart decisions but I doubt it

Canada, not so boring now is it world?

[wyly]

I don't see your point, most sane government ignore the catholic church's wishes.

our government follows the pope's directive by not aiding third world women in birth control, obviously our government is not sane...

and you didn't read the entire thread or OP...Kenny's justification is all muslims follow only one brand of islam...not all christians follow the popes brand of christianity and not all muslims follow the saudi brand of islam...

[wyly]

Two smart decisions by the (hate to say it) conservative government

that the cpc has your support only confirms that they're on the wrong track...

[olp1fan]

that the cpc has your support only confirms that they're on the wrong track...

Just cause they did 2 things right doesn't mean I support them

There's still all kinds of crap they're pushing through that I hate and the fact that Harpers people can do anything they want and get away with it without being punished

[grogy]

I don't give a shit what their culture is, in our country you show your face, it is bad enough you can always walk around in public with your face covered, but for the purpose of things like drivers licensees our court appearances, there should be no exceptions, i care less about taking an oath, but i think a point is being made. This is Canada, the culture that built this country and made it a desirable destination for people everywhere has certain standards, some of those make us better places to live than elsewhere, defending some of those basic customs isn't wrong. In some areas where that faith is practiced terrible physical punishments are still ordered against 'criminals', wife killing is condoned, yes we are better than that, our customs have proven to be better than theirs.

[olp1fan]

I don't give a shit what their culture is, in our country you show your face, it is bad enough you can always walk around in public with your face covered, but for the purpose of things like drivers licensees our court appearances, there should be no exceptions, i care less about taking an oath, but i think a point is being made. This is Canada, the culture that built this country and made it a desirable destination for people everywhere has certain standards, some of those make us better places to live than elsewhere, defending some of those basic customs isn't wrong. In some areas where that faith is practiced terrible physical punishments are still ordered against 'criminals', wife killing is condoned, yes we are better than that, our customs have proven to be better than theirs.

I totally agree, people sit on the fence of this issue and its so annoying! You cannot be for human rights and then defend the Muslim culture at the same time like wyly and cybercoma have been doing

..well you can but you'd be a hypocrite!