.

[jacee]

How about our standard of freedom?

Freedom of religious choices is individual.

It is not imposed by others.

.

[Smallc]

Freedom of religious choices is individual.

It is not imposed by others.

.

Freedom of religion has limits. Oppression of women isn't covered.

[guyser]

And BTW ... 'religious freedom' means you are free to follow such practices as are appropriate for your sincerely held religious beliefs, regardless of whether or not a formal religious organization requires it.

Not quite. There the two pronged approach along with the reasonable accommodation .

See Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren for another instance.

[jacee]

Freedom of religion has limits. Oppression of women isn't covered.

Women have religious choices.

They make them for themselves.

End of story.

.

Edited March 18, 2015 by jacee

[Guest]

Women have religious choices.

They make them for themselves.

End of story.

.

Do you really believe that?

[Queenmandy85]

Freedom of religion has limits. Oppression of women isn't covered.

Tell that to the Roman Catholic Church.

[Smallc]

Tell that to the Roman Catholic Church.

As an atheist you'll fine I'm not much for defending churches.

[Keepitsimple]

Let's agree for a moment that niqabs are a symbol of oppression (an interpretation, it may surprise you to learn, that I agree with; just read my posts on this very subject from 2011 when this debate first arose). What are you proposing be done about it, exactly? What does forcing women to remove their face coverings at certain times do to advance the cause of equality? I suspect you don't have any answers for these questions because you haven't really thought any of this stuff through, but just like to puff out your chest and pretend the CPC applause lines you parrot actually mean something.

Now we're actually starting a debate......and on the contrary, I do have an answer - although it's just a tiny step towards an answer. Your question is: What does forcing women to remove their face coverings at certain times do to advance the cause of equality? Well - every journey starts with the first step - and that first has to be ridding ourselves of the paralysis of political correctness on this issue - to take a stand that the niqab is a symbol of oppression....and this (the Oath) is a perfect opportunity to take a tiny step in that direction. It won't be "solved" with one action - but a number of careful, incremental actions that encourages people to discard their niqabs and to make it clear to immigrants who subscribe to this culture that discarding the niqab is one of the very few concessions that they will be asked to make in exchange for the bountiful future that they seek.

[jacee]

Do you really believe that?

Do you really believe you should impose your decisions on women who haven't asked your opinion?

.

.

[Bob Macadoo]

Now we're actually starting a debate......and on the contrary, I do have an answer - although it's just a tiny step towards an answer. Your question is: What does forcing women to remove their face coverings at certain times do to advance the cause of equality? Well - every journey starts with the first step - and that first has to be ridding ourselves of the paralysis of political correctness on this issue - to take a stand that the niqab is a symbol of oppression....and this (the Oath) is a perfect opportunity to take a tiny step in that direction. It won't be "solved" with one action - but a number of careful, incremental actions that encourages people to discard their niqabs and to make it clear to immigrants who subscribe to this culture that discarding the niqab is one of the very few concessions that they will be asked to make in exchange for the bountiful future that they seek.

I think you actually missed the question. "What are you proposing be done about it, exactly?"

He didn't ask for your Keatsian platitudes; how would you exactly parlay this into real action on liberating oppressed muslim women?

[jacee]

Your question is: What does forcing women to remove their face coverings at certain times do to advance the cause of equality

You really believe that men "forcing" women to do something against their will is a positive step toward "equality"?

Edited March 18, 2015 by jacee

[Argus]

Define "people like this"?

.

Religious fanatics with retrograde social values.

[Argus]

The immigrants of the future will be the ones paying our bills when we're old.

Not these immigrants. According to Stats Canada figures I have posted many times the economic earnings of immigrants from the middle east and western Asia are so low that they're mostly not paying taxes at all. They're not paying enough to support the services they consume, let alone supporting others.

[Argus]

Including but not limited to.....those who ascribe the position of every womens reason to wear a hijab/burqa.

Right?

I'm still waiting for you to give me a reason why anyone would wear the niqab which isn't related to her religious fanaticism.

Because... it's so fashionable?

[Argus]

Never mind the broader picture of the violation of womens rights across the country...right? Afterall, our esteemed PM

certainly doesnt give a shite about the perils of the Status of Native women who dissappear at an alarming rate.

A rate which is virtually identical to the rate at which women in any other community disappear, and a solution rate which

is about the same, too. So where is the story here?

[guyser]

I'm still waiting for you to give me a reason why anyone would wear the niqab which isn't related to her religious fanaticism.

Because... it's so fashionable?

Well, sorry I do not recall reading that question. However, to answer...I dont know why one would wear anything out of the ordinary. Frankly it doesnt matter a whit.

Its that persons choice.

I dont understand women (or men) who tattoo their lover/spouse name on their body, wear orange hair,studs up and down the face including devils horns on top.

[guyser]

A rate which is virtually identical to the rate at which women in any other community disappear, and a solution rate which

is about the same, too. So where is the story here?

If that is true but perhaps my choice of words was suspect. The broader picture I was talking about in reply to squid was that persons grave concern for a few women vs the picture painted about abuse and violence against same.

[Argus]

Well, sorry I do not recall reading that question. However, to answer...I dont know why one would wear anything out of the ordinary. Frankly it doesnt matter a whit.

Again, making my position clear. I am not in favour of clothing bans by government.

What I am in favour is banning immigration from people with retrograde social views. And anyone who thinks women should wear a shroud would be so defined, to me.

[guyser]

Again, making my position clear. I am not in favour of clothing bans by government.

Alright, point duly noted.

What I am in favour is banning immigration from people with retrograde social views. And anyone who thinks women should wear a shroud would be so defined, to me.

Do any of us know how many come to this country this way under the immigation sector vs the number who come under our obligations with respect to refugees?

I have to think that the former is way smaller than the latter. The only ones who I ever see wearing it are the Somali women , who I understand are largely refugees and not migrants .

[Argus]

If that is true but perhaps my choice of words was suspect. The broader picture I was talking about in reply to squid was that persons grave concern for a few women vs the picture painted about abuse and violence against same.

The story of this one woman and her niqab are really just encapsulating a number of broader issues. One of those issues, at least as far as some of us are concerned, is the importation of retrograde social views through the importation of people with extreme religious views. Given what I have read with regard to domestic violence in Muslim countries (approaching 90% in some of them) it's impossible to believe all these people abandon their views once in Canada and start believing in non-violence and gender equality. Domestic violence is hardly rare in Canadian households, but my impression is it's much more common in immigrant households, especially from areas of the world where women have so few rights they expect to be beaten, and will even justify the right of their husband to beat them. This is rarely reflected in any kind of public pronouncement. Women from these communities will rarely contact authorities anyway, for a variety of reasons.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Argus

[Guest]

Do you really believe you should impose your decisions on women who haven't asked your opinion?

.

.

Depends on the circumstances. I would have to take each situation at its face value and decide on a course of action. To do otherwise would be to fail in my responsibility towards others.

For instance, "may I prevent your drowning by removing your unconcious body from the car you just drove into the cut?", is probably not a decision I would await. She might be attempting suicide, but if I didn't know that, I would probably err on the side of getting wet.

How about you, can you think of a situation where you might act without permission?

Also, do you really believe what you said in that post?

Edited March 19, 2015 by bcsapper

[guyser]

The story of this one woman and her niqab are really just encapsulating a number of broader issues. One of those issues, at least as far as some of us are concerned, is the importation of retrograde social views through the importation of people with extreme religious views.

Which we are made to understand through Immigration authorities that they attempt to weed those ones out and not issue any travel documents.

Given what I have read with regard to domestic violence in Muslim countries (approaching 90% in some of them) it's impossible to believe all these people abandon their views once in Canada and start believing in non-violence and gender equality. Domestic violence is hardly rare in Canadian households, but my impression is it's much more common in immigrant households, especially from areas of the world where women have so few rights they expect to be beaten, and will even justify the right of their husband to beat them. This is rarely reflected in any kind of public pronouncement. Women from these communities will rarely contact authorities anyway, for a variety of reasons.

I cannot agree nor disagree about the numbers, but would agree it is likely higher from some of those countries .

And no, I doubt that much change occurs for 'those' people, but I do think that the exposure to Canada and our somewhat agreed values that plenty of them (women mainly)see the light going forward. Thats not to say they reach out with any regularity for help.

But I certainly think their children advance the cause for equality and shuffling the old ways of misogyny/abuse to the trash bin .

We have seen children face extreme punishment and death from their 1st gen parents for becoming westernized and absorbing western values and thoughts. But it remains a rarity even though we can suspect some of these parents hold pretty radical (to us) views. As that generation gets older incl the kids we know that they will become far more western.

Kids want to fit in, wherever they are they will do what the other kids do.

[Queenmandy85]

I'm still waiting for you to give me a reason why anyone would wear the niqab which isn't related to her religious fanaticism.

Because... it's so fashionable?

For the same reason you wear pants and underwear...modesty. Years ago, my training officer pointed out that when the Europeans arrived on our shores, they didn't adopt the values of the existing culture.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Queenmandy85

[On Guard for Thee]

For the same reason you where pants and underwear...modesty. Years ago, my training officer pointed out that when the French and English arrived on our shores, they didn't adopt the values of the existing culture.

You nailed it.

[Guest]

For the same reason you wear pants and underwear...modesty. Years ago, my training officer pointed out that when the Europeans arrived on our shores, they didn't adopt the values of the existing culture.

Well, given what happened to the existing culture, one could argue that's a pretty good reason for insisting anyone landing here now does.