cybercoma Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 You don't see the oddity in your telling a woman she's wrong about the condition of women here?Not when she ignores the countless studies done on inequality faced by women in Canada and the US. Her anecdotal opinions are meaningless when it comes the empirical evidence of the discrimination that exists against women as a group. One woman's experience does not indicate how women are generally treated in society and it does not contradict the group's statistics. The empirical evidence shows that they are more likely to fall behind men in all of the areas that I have already mentioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Why is dedication to Islam a rejection of Canadian society, but a dedication to Judaism or Christianity isn't? Is Islam against the law here? Another red herring. If Jews or Christians covered their faces during this ceremony my opinion would be the same for them. Your attempt to make this about discrimination of a religious minority doesn't hold water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Consumed? You know, a friend of mine put on some weight after having her two kids. She really misses being hot, she says. She misses the way men would look at her when she entered the room, and be so eager to help her with anything she wanted. Don't get the idea most women hate that men think they're attractive... She misses being hot because she can't be appreciated for anything else. Our society doesn't allow it. Her value is tied to her appearance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 The courts? Is this policy being challenged in court? Oh yeah. I guarantee youll see a charter case here, but no I havent heard of one shaping up yet. Its too early for a court challenge but I think its a forgone conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 She misses being hot because she can't be appreciated for anything else. Our society doesn't allow it. Her value is tied to her appearance. Do you have any idea how sexist that outlook is? Any at all?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 So where is this huge crime wave by women in burkas that justifies intrusion into the freedom to dress as you please? Waiting to hear because I must have missed that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Another red herring. If Jews or Christians covered their faces during this ceremony my opinion would be the same for them. Your attempt to make this about discrimination of a religious minority doesn't hold water. Im not so sure. The fact they are making a law preventing this leads me to believe thats its been allowed up until now. Maybe even for decades. Is it just a coincidence that this law comes at a time when distrust of muslims is at an all time high, and westerners and muslims are killing each other in fairly large numbers? Possibly... but if you look at how we have treated "enemy aliens" and people with strange customs in the past, this seems to fit pretty good. This thread is evidence that muslims and their customs are very unpopular with many Canadians, and those unpopular people and practices are typically the ones that DO find themselves the subject of these sorts of appeals to populist angst. Its EASY to pick on unpopular minorities... and quite possibly good politics judging by the participants in this thread. Edited December 13, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 You don't see the oddity in your telling a woman she's wrong about the condition of women here? What's odd, too, is that he is saying women are second class citizens because of his belief that women's self worth is tied up in their looks; because that's all women are appreciated for. Talk about sexist! Not to mention ignorant - that he has the gall to tell me, a woman in this society, that my value, that my daughters' value, is based on our looks - that that's all we are appreciated for - that that's what we place our self worth on - is disgusting to the core. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Oh yeah. I guarantee youll see a charter case here, but no I havent heard of one shaping up yet. Its too early for a court challenge but I think its a forgone conclusion. Not at all. It would take a group or individual to bring this up. The Muslim organizations are actually quite moderate in Canada and are probably even in favour of such a policy. So where is this huge crime wave by women in burkas that justifies intrusion into the freedom to dress as you please? Irrelevant. No one is telling anyone how to dress. Everyone must show their face in the Oath of Citizenship. No goalie masks are allowed either. This thread is evidence that muslims and their customs are very unpopular with many Canadians, and those unpopular people and practices are typically the ones that DO find themselves the subject of these sorts of appeals to populist angst. You truly think that forcing women to cover themselves up from head to toe and, in the culture from which they came, beating or killing them if they do not do so is an OK thing to do? There are MUSLIMS who are against this practice!!! Does that make them anti-Muslim? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1195052/Why-I-British-Muslim-woman-want-burkha-banned-streets.html This is simply a practice that oppresses and subjugates women. I am glad that most Canadians are against this practice. It shows real progress. Its EASY to pick on unpopular minorities... The only minority I am picking on is the men who perpetuate this practice of oppressing women who want to bring it to Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Not at all. It would take a group or individual to bring this up. The Muslim organizations are actually quite moderate in Canada and are probably even in favour of such a policy. Well... Ill bet ya 20 bux. Deal? This is an attorneys wet dream. Its literally a perfect charter case, and not only will every person ever subject to it have standing in the courts, but lawyers will be actively trying to seek someone out willing to test the case. And caselaw in this area is rather clear, and theres plenty of it. The bar is set very high for the government to legislate against religious customs. There has to be a very concrete and compelling reason. Edited December 13, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) And caselaw in this area is rather clear, and theres plenty of it. The bar is set very high for the government to legislate against religious customs. There has to be a very concrete and compelling reason. Hmmm....dont be so sure dre. The Court of Appeal in Alberta overturned a decision and forced the Hutterites to get photographed if they want a licence. The case was, prior to the ruling, a special DL was produced for them. This may have standing when a lawyer thinks about taking the case. (although we both know one will regardless) Edited December 13, 2011 by guyser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) You truly think that forcing women to cover themselves up from head to toe and, in the culture from which they came, beating or killing them if they do not do so is an OK thing to do? Its you that wants to use force to dictate what women can wear or not, not me. My position is she can do what she wants to. She can choose. And furthermore this law deals with one ceremony that takes a few minutes. Pretending this addresses any injustices such as muslim women being forced by muslim men to wear the hijab is just silly. In any case that would be illegal and immoral just like forcing them not to wear one if they so choose. Irrelevant. No one is telling anyone how to dress. Everyone must show their face in the Oath of Citizenship. No goalie masks are allowed either. This fallacious argument has been addressed already both by the courts and in this thread. The defense of a law that deprives a group of a religious freedom, based on the justification that its applied universally will not work. Read the charter. This is a silly case to even try making. The only minority I am picking on is the men who perpetuate this practice of oppressing women who want to bring it to Canada. No thats not true. You assume incorrectly that all of the women that participate in this custom are forced to do so by men. Some women wear it by choice based on tradition or the belief that their sky-god will appreciate it. You want to take away their choice... albeit only for a few minutes during a meaningless symbolic pledge to a foreign monarch. Edited December 13, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Hmmm....dont be so sure dre. The Court of Appeal in Alberta overturned a decision and forced the Hutterites to get photographed if they want a licence. The case was, prior to the ruling, a special DL was produced for them. This may have standing when a lawyer thinks about taking the case. (although we both know one will regardless) Thats a perfect example of what Im saying. Theres a clear and compelling reason for a driver to carry photo id, and for drivers license photos... one that the government/police cannot easily work around (reasonable accomodation). I dont think an exception SHOULD be made in that case. If these drivers had no picture ID then it would be almost impossible to identify them. And same goes for this case. The government is going to need to show compelling evidence of a problem presented by these garments than cannot be easily solved. I think it will be a little bit harder in this case, because unlike the driver identification argument, in this case it seems like theres probably some easy ways to "reasonably accomodate". Like I said though thats at least a decent coherent argument that would be considered in the courts, and I dont know enough about the process to pre-judge it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 In these oppressive cultures to be allowed to be beaten, treated as a second class citizen, even stoned to death for even having allegations (by men) that you are an adulterer would be hell on earth. It is barbaric. Anyone wanting to import that to Canada should be sent packing. what goes on in some other countries is irrelevant to the issue at hand...the fact that you and others repeatedly bring it back up points to the real reason, you support persecution...you hate these people and sticking it to some hapless women is your only legal way of attacking them, making them suffer for not being like you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 what goes on in some other countries is irrelevant to the issue at hand...the fact that you and others repeatedly bring it back up points to the real reason, you support persecution...you hate these people and sticking it to some hapless women is your only legal way of attacking them, making them suffer for not being like you... Ding, ding, ding. It's going on here...imported, real and killing women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 I hope you realize that this statement is no better than the one made by the judge in Ontario that said women invite men to rape them by dressing a particular way. It doesn't matter how a woman dresses in any culture, there are going to be men who can't control themselves. Women are constantly threatened by inappropriate advances, sexual harassment, abuse and rape. Actually no, I don't realize that. I thought my comment was directed towards the source of the problem, men who can't control themselves, not their victims. If Kenny and the Conservatives really want to create a meaningful shit-storm they should screen incoming men for their backward attitudes towards women. A public education campaign about inappropriate advances, sexual harassment, abuse and rape might be in order too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 It's not left over. It still exists and it's more insidious because we give the appearance of equality when it doesn't actually exist in practice. job equality laws for example are a joke, toothless legislation that still cannot and do not prevent women from being fired for the offense of pregnancy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 Actually no, I don't realize that. I thought my comment was directed towards the source of the problem, men who can't control themselves, not their victims. If Kenny and the Conservatives really want to create a meaningful shit-storm they should screen incoming men for their backward attitudes towards women. A public education campaign about inappropriate advances, sexual harassment, abuse and rape might be in order too. which highlights the useless oath taking as patriotic nonsense...people lie, they will tell you anything you want to hear, promising not to beat your wife or obey our laws and respect our way of life, they'll do exactly as they please once they're done with the oath...the testimony at the ontario honor killing trial displays exactly that, this family had no intention of respecting our laws despite their oath taking... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 which highlights the useless oath taking as patriotic nonsense...people lie, they will tell you anything you want to hear, promising not to beat your wife or obey our laws and respect our way of life, they'll do exactly as they please once they're done with the oath...the testimony at the ontario honor killing trial displays exactly that, this family had no intention of respecting our laws despite their oath taking... Are you crazy? Patriotic nonsense? I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen. I have absolutely no doubt that if we stopped forcing immigrants to recite that one sentence pledge to our outsourced monarch, they would immediately go on violent crime sprees, possibly even targetting the queen herself. Why do you support allowing immigrants to murder us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 some women wear it by choice based on tradition or the belief that their sky-god will appreciate it. You want to take away their choice... albeit only for a few minutes during a meaningless symbolic pledge to a foreign monarch. isn't a wonderful contradiction, the right wants someone to offend their personal sky god so they can subjugate themselves to a foreign potentate... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 She can choose. Naive. You think these women are choosing this custom? Really? You want to take away their choice... albeit only for a few minutes during a meaningless symbolic pledge to a foreign monarch. Yes. For all the reasons I stated above. For many, the Oath of Citizenship is the start of a new life... Don't presume to tell these folks that their oath is meaningless drivel. My parents and siblings would say otherwise. you hate these people and sticking it to some hapless women is your only legal way of attacking them, making them suffer for not being like you... Utter nonsense. I don't want them to be oppressed by men... oh, how I hate them! LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 (edited) IMO, I think the veils should come off for the oaths. It's a question of citizenship. We need to see their mouths speak the words of the oath to this country. However, this is just my opinion, and this is a very controversial topic because it is also a matter of religious Charter rights. I don't think Mr. Kenney has the power to make such a demand/law without it going through the courts (unless it had already?). This fallacious argument has been addressed already both by the courts and in this thread. The defense of a law that deprives a group of a religious freedom, based on the justification that its applied universally will not work. Read the charter. This is a silly case to even try making. The Charter also has a "reasonable limits" clause. Are there not reasonable limits to religious freedoms? Should we allow female circumcision in Canada based on religious tradition? Should I be able to rape or slap my baby, or urinate on my baby if it's part of my religion? Or any other nutso tradition (from a Canadian perspective)? Canada cannot possibly permit everything and anything just because it's a "religious tradition" and therefore protected by the Charter. We must decide as a country what we should permit and what we shouldn't. No thats not true. You assume incorrectly that all of the women that participate in this custom are forced to do so by men. Some women wear it by choice based on tradition or the belief that their sky-god will appreciate it. You want to take away their choice... albeit only for a few minutes during a meaningless symbolic pledge to a foreign monarch. It's offensive to me that you think the oath is a "meaningless symbolic pledge". Aren't you a Canadian??? Are wedding vows meaningless to you as well? Or any promise? The pledge also has legal implications. From wikipedia: "The Oath of Citizenship is today a legally binding oral and written contract intended to ensure that new Canadian citizens promise to obey the laws and customs of their new country, fulfil their duties as citizens, and recognize the authority of the monarch as the personification of various entities and concepts." Also, the Queen isn't a foreign monarch. She is the Queen of Canada, as is stated clearly in the Oath. You may not like it, and I'm not the most thrilled by it, but until it changes you must accept it and pledge allegiance to the Queen because the monarchy is a core part of our country and she is our head of state. Edited December 14, 2011 by Moonlight Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 Are you crazy? Patriotic nonsense? I have absolutely no doubt that if we stopped forcing immigrants to recite that one sentence pledge to our outsourced monarch, they would immediately go on violent crime sprees, possibly even targetting the queen herself. Why do you support allowing immigrants to murder us? you're right whatever was i thinking!....immigrants will be running amuck without the all powerful mojo of the official oath to keep them in line.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 It's offensive to me that you think the oath is a "meaningless symbolic pledge". Aren't you a Canadian??? Are wedding vows meaningless to you as well? Or any promise? The pledge also has legal implications. .if the oath is important why doesn't every canadian take it??wedding vows are meaningless that's why we get written/signed documents and the same applies to citizenship, the oath taking is ceremonial formality for public Kum ba yah moment...oaths prevent no one from lying never have never will, the only people believe otherwise live in world with pink skies and never ending rainbows and unicorns.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 14, 2011 Report Share Posted December 14, 2011 (edited) It's offensive to me that you think the oath is a "meaningless symbolic pledge". Aren't you a Canadian??? I dunno! I was born here but I didnt say the pledge... so I guess all that makes me Canadian is the geographical location of the uterus I slid out of. Not sure If I can be trusted if I didnt take the pledge The Oath of Citizenship is today a legally binding oral and written contract intended to ensure that new Canadian citizens promise to obey the laws and customs of their new country, fulfil their duties as citizens, and recognize the authority of the monarch as the personification of various entities and concepts Sorry this is just silly. The idea that immigrants need to recite a ceremonial one sentence pledge in order to be bound by Canadian law is utterly irrational. This has no bearing what-so-ever on how whether or not immigrants obey our laws. Also, the Queen isn't a foreign monarch. She is the Queen of Canada, as is stated clearly in the Oath. You may not like it, and I'm not the most thrilled by it, but until it changes you must accept it and pledge allegiance to the Queen Excuse me? I will pledge allegience to absolutely god damn nothing. My allegience to the government is a PRIVILEGE that they must continue to EARN on an ongoing basis. It doesnt get "pledged". Edited December 14, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.