.

[Argus]

It's you that keeps asserting that if a person wear a veil, they must be hardcore extremist Muslims.

So prove it.

I think pretty much all honest people accept the obviousness of her own self-proclamation.

Actually, I thoroughly enjoy how this riles the bigots.

You keep using this word as if blithely unaware of your own stunning bigotry. But then, liberals tend to be like that, ignorant as well as blindingly bigoted.

[Argus]

In Islam a woman is equal to a man. In some countries with Muslim majorities the culture of the country is responsible for the hardships on women. Not Islam. Educate yourself. I have. Some Muslim countries have women leaders. USA has never had a woman President.

This is massively ignorant. Islam makes it very explicit that women are the chattels of men. In every way, shape and form women are inferior and subjected to stringent rules the men are free of, including modesty. In Sharia law, a woman's word is worth one quarter that of a man. A man can divorce a woman by simply saying "I divorce you" three times. A woman must get her husband's permission to divorce, and the children will always go to the man. A man man beat his wife, according to Muslim scholars. In the event of death, women are entitled to half the share of an estate a man in the same position/relationship would be entitled to.

[Argus]

Yep, and that is what ticks people off. A brown person with an accent and different clothes has exactly the same rights in Canada as everybody else. The horror.

Why must you continually ascribe your bigotry to others?

[TimG]

The standards have been set.

No this is a debate about what the standards should be. Community standards are based on majority rule and it is not clear that a majority of Canadians support your view on face veils.

[cybercoma]

The Grey Nuns ? Nuns in Quebec wear habits that cover the entire face. It's kind of a bygone tradition, but I saw one as a child and it was terrifying.

Someone think of the terrified children for Christ's sake.

[Argus]

No this is a debate about what the standards should be. Community standards are based on majority rule and it is not clear that a majority of Canadians support your view on face veils.

Depends on where you live. The English Canadian media would have it that anyone who questions a niquab is basically Adolph Hitler, or worse. The French Canadian media are pretty clear in their antipathy for religiously inspired facial coverings or any sort of religious garb.

Oddly, or perhaps not, The English Canadian media won't address this linguistic duality for it might lead to unfavorable statements about Francophones, which, being a minority, is forbidden and would again make one akin to Adolph Hitler.

So among English Canadians, particularly the weak-minded whose opinions are whatever the media tells them it should be, the niquab is a delightful statement of religion, which, by the way, does not suggest the person wearing it is religious in any sort of judgmental way...

Among most Francophones, and the more intelligent Anglophones, the niquab is an instrument of religious, cultural and sexual repression which demonstrates just how severe and fundamentalist the wearer and/or her family are.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Argus

[On Guard for Thee]

No this is a debate about what the standards should be. Community standards are based on majority rule and it is not clear that a majority of Canadians support your view on face veils.

And it is not clear they support yours, except maybe in Quebec were Harper is using this issue to try and steal votes from the NDP. For Harper, everything is about votes remember.

[cybercoma]

This is massively ignorant. Islam makes it very explicit that women are the chattels of men. In every way, shape and form women are inferior and subjected to stringent rules the men are free of, including modesty. In Sharia law, a woman's word is worth one quarter that of a man. A man can divorce a woman by simply saying "I divorce you" three times. A woman must get her husband's permission to divorce, and the children will always go to the man. A man man beat his wife, according to Muslim scholars. In the event of death, women are entitled to half the share of an estate a man in the same position/relationship would be entitled to.

Feel free to read, not that it will matter one bit to your biased ignorance.

http://muslima.imow.org/content/how-islam-confirms-women’s-rights

"The oppression does not come from Islam, but from laws made, in many cases, by Muslim men"

Let's not forget the "rule of thumb" or that women weren't legally persons under our laws or that they couldn't hold property or that in the United States the women's rights amendment didn't happen until the late 70s.

[guyser]

No this is a debate about what the standards should be.

No, this is an affirmation of what the standards ARE, not should be.

And the standard says....go ahead, wear the viel and welcome to Canada. Ignore those who want to make you uncomfortable, but dialogue with them, for they shall soon show their xenophobic ways, all the while ignoring the bigger picture.

Community standards are based on majority rule and it is not clear that a majority of Canadians support your view on face veils.

Ok.

Who gives a flying F*** about community standards? I suppose some do, there are plenty of silly people who think so.

For example...

- in remote areas, community stds say ..park all the cars youve ever owned on front lawn.

- in nicer neighbourhoods please keep your lawn neat and trim.

- Please help out with charity work.

None of which is codified in law, Constitutional or otherwise.

Never met anyone who grasps at the strangest straws available as do you.

[Argus]

Feel free to read, not that it will matter one bit to your biased ignorance.

I read the woman's opinion. She is attempting to suggest certain interpretations made by Islamic scholars are not correct. No doubt the scholars would disagree.

Nothing I said was contradicted by anything she said, by the way, thus my 'massive ignorance' turns out to be YOUR massive ignorance.

Why do you hate woman so much, Cyber?

[cybercoma]

Why do you hate woman so much, Cyber?

I hate loudmouthed bigots who are being left behind by history, but desperately try to keep their antiquated BS alive.

[Argus]

I hate loudmouthed bigots who are being left behind by history, but desperately try to keep their antiquated BS alive.

Really? Because it seems to me that you must hate women and that's the source of your rage and fury whenever anyone questions whether we should keep bringing in all these misogynistic people.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Argus

[guyser]

Depends on where you live. The English Canadian media would have it that anyone who questions a niquab is basically Adolph Hitler, or worse.

Of course none of them are Hitler, or even close. Some of them seem almost as kooky what with their rationalizing that anyone who wears such grab is a terrorist/sympathizes/has bombvest. Or describe them as worthless what with lables as "I saw a sack of cloth walking down the street'....as if a sack could really walk. Man that guy was dope....puffing on the good dope stuff...maaan.

You boil down the reasons and you are left with an overwhleming reality that they dont feel those veil wearers are due respect as fellow human beings.

Then they invoke the old "No true Scotsman" ruse.

But we all laugh and move on since we leave it to those who know much better than us, the Supreme Court.

The French Canadian media are pretty clear in their antipathy for religiously inspired facial coverings or any sort of religious garb.

When they are with you great, use 'em hey ?

When they are against you they are shlumps to be ignored.

Only one good thing can be said about French CDN exenophobiac's...they are consistent. Consistently hypocrites of the highest order. See Nuns in MH's post.

So among English Canadians, particularly the weak-minded whose opinions are whatever the media tells them it should be, the niquab is a delightful statement of religion, which, by the way, does not suggest the person wearing it is religious in any sort of judgmental way...

Among most Francophones, and the more intelligent Anglophones, the niquab is an instrument of religious, cultural and sexual repression which demonstrates just how severe and fundamentalist the wearer and/or her family are.

Is there a link you could post that would be the arbiter of such statements or is this like....ya know...your opinion man ?

Pass the dutchie from the left hand side...

[kungfuthug]

Argus.

A few pages back is a video link I urged you to watch. I bet you haven't. There was a debate on just this topic of inequality on Islam and women. The facts were presented and then if you care to look further they were independently reviewed and proven factual in a follow up video I can post a link to. It was a big news story on CNN and that is how I followed it. Instead of banter get educated.

[TimG]

No, this is an affirmation of what the standards ARE, not should be.

That is your opinion. Not fact.

NAnd the standard says....go ahead, wear the viel and welcome to Canada. Ignore those who want to make you uncomfortable, but dialogue with them, for they shall soon show their xenophobic ways, all the while ignoring the bigger picture.

I guess you are OK with wife beatings and honor killings then. What? You aren't? Then get off your high horse. You agree that we need to draw a line AND that agreement of the victim is NOT sufficient to decide where the line is. Edited February 19, 2015 by TimG

[guyser]

That is your opinion. Not fact.

LOL, not it isnt. It is a fact.

Let me read to you the very first line of the very first post ok?

"The federal court of Canada has struck down the ban on Niqab's at citizenship ceremonies."

So, this is an affirmation of what the standards ARE, not should be. And THAT is a fact.

I guess you are OK with wife beatings and honor killings then. What? You aren't?

NO I am not.

Harm to another person is codified in law.

Wearing a veil is codified in law.

Guess what? They can wear veils. Find something else to worry about since, no harm is done to you, no harm is done to society. Since so very very few bother with the veil, it amounts to nothing but a springboard for xenophobes to spill their guts. Guess where I'm looking right now?

Then get off your high horse. You agree that we need to draw a line AND that agreement of the victim is NOT sufficient to decide where the line is.

Yea...um Tim, hows about you get off that stupid horse you are riding?

COmparing beatings and honour killings with a piece of cloth? Yea...really really dumb.

But hey, you have at it now.

[cybercoma]

Really? Because it seems to me that you must hate women and that's the source of your rage and fury whenever anyone questions whether we should keep bringing in all these misogynistic people.

Argus, stop with the pathetic trolling. Your misogyny is nearly as well documented as your bigotry. All anyone has to do is read the Dalhousie Dentistry Thread to see exactly what you think of women.

[Argus]

Argus, stop with the pathetic trolling. Your misogyny is nearly as well documented as your bigotry. All anyone has to do is read the Dalhousie Dentistry Thread to see exactly what you think of women.

Well, I think they're equals. Which means I hold them to the same standards as I do men. That's at the heart of why you get so enraged on these topics. At heart you're a bigot of the worst kind, that paternalistic white liberal bigotry which sees it as your noble duty to protect inferiors for their own sake. And to you, anyone not a white man is inferior.

But I'm getting weary of your sniveling and whining. It's all you ever do now, and it always smells the same.

[kungfuthug]

ARGUS,

Spend 20 minutes and learn how wrong you really are.

[cybercoma]

Well, I think they're equals. Which means I hold them to the same standards as I do men. That's at the heart of why you get so enraged on these topics. At heart you're a bigot of the worst kind, that paternalistic white liberal bigotry which sees it as your noble duty to protect inferiors for their own sake. And to you, anyone not a white man is inferior.

But I'm getting weary of your sniveling and whining. It's all you ever do now, and it always smells the same.

You keep saying snivelling and whining because I keep rubbing your nose in your own waste. You throw tantrums by calling people or their arguments idiotic or say that they're snivelling or whining. You have absolutely nothing left to offer now that you've been so thoroughly exposed as a misogynist and a bigot. So here we are with you trying to deflect when it's all very clear from your posts exactly what kind of abhorrent views you hold. Stop trying to put down people for pointing them out to you. Maybe some day when you grow up you'll be a little more reflexive. I won't hold my breath.

[Black Dog]

Depends on where you live. The English Canadian media would have it that anyone who questions a niquab is basically Adolph Hitler, or worse. The French Canadian media are pretty clear in their antipathy for religiously inspired facial coverings or any sort of religious garb.

Oddly, or perhaps not, The English Canadian media won't address this linguistic duality for it might lead to unfavorable statements about Francophones, which, being a minority, is forbidden and would again make one akin to Adolph Hitler.

Speaking of Nazi comparisons...

And the Quebec Values Charter Is a political tactic based on identifying 'others' pointing at them, condemning them as dangerous and foreign, and rallying nationalist fervor on your side. It is entirely relevant to point out this is extremely similar to the tactic the Nazis used when they were getting started. I'm not suggesting the PQ are Nazis. I'm saying they're using the same dishonorable tactics.

Argus: against Quebec-style bigotry before he was for it.

So among English Canadians, particularly the weak-minded whose opinions are whatever the media tells them it should be, the niquab is a delightful statement of religion, which, by the way, does not suggest the person wearing it is religious in any sort of judgmental way...

Or, you know, they recognize the freedom to be religiously judgy is the price of allowing religious freedom.

Among most Francophones, and the more intelligent Anglophones, the niquab is an instrument of religious, cultural and sexual repression which demonstrates just how severe and fundamentalist the wearer and/or her family are.

Which is apparently only an issue if people wear clothes to signal that fact.

This will blow your mind, but it is possible to regard the niqab and all it represents with distaste if not loathing while still recognizing that people living here have the right to wear them. that's really the end of it, but if you want to conflate this business with your pet issue of immigration, that's another topic.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Black Dog

[Argus]

You keep saying snivelling and whining because I keep rubbing your nose in your own waste. You throw tantrums by calling

Naw, I'm done with you. I hereby declare you WORTHLESS. You contribute nothing to this site, have nothing of value to say, and are too bitter and enraged to even be of amusement value. I will henceforth ignore you.

I had an empty ignore list, so now it will have a population of 1. You are the only person on this entire site I feel is so utterly worthless that I don't have any interest in seeing their words again.

/flush

[Argus]

And it is not clear they support yours, except maybe in Quebec were Harper is using this issue to try and steal votes from the NDP. For Harper, everything is about votes remember.

As it is for almost all politicians. Or do you think Trudeau is supporting the anti-terror legislation because he likes it?

But Quebec alone isn't enough. They 'might' pick up some seats there, but if Harper thought it would cost him support elsewhere he probably wouldn't appeal. No, there is widespread dislike and distrust of those who wear these sorts of garments, not for their appearance alone, but for what the garments represent.

[Argus]

Argus: against Quebec-style bigotry before he was for it.

Black Dog: if only he was clever enough to understand what I write rather than impute motives behind what I wrote.

This topic is 24 pages long now and nowhere on it, despite all the screaming and insults directed at me from politically correct fascist assholes will you find me criticizing the court's decision. That might have given you pause to consider if you ever paused to consider. It's not like I've ever been reluctant to criticize a court's decision before...

Edited February 20, 2015 by Argus

[cybercoma]

Naw, I'm done with you. I hereby declare you WORTHLESS. You contribute nothing to this site, have nothing of value to say, and are too bitter and enraged to even be of amusement value. I will henceforth ignore you.

I had an empty ignore list, so now it will have a population of 1. You are the only person on this entire site I feel is so utterly worthless that I don't have any interest in seeing their words again.

/flush

U mad, bro?