.

[Argus]

You say to-ma-to.....I say xenophobe.....let's call the whole thing off.

Another stunningly useful contribution to the discussion.

[Argus]

I would imagine the narrow mindedness of the posts is a good clue as to an answer to that question .

I would imagine that if you had the ability to formulate an intelligent reply to my post you'd have done so.

Sadly, that does not appear to be the case.

[Argus]

At the end of the day I think we are better off being open minded than to be bowing down to preconceived notions.

There is a fine line between being 'open minded' and being empty headed.

[Argus]

That's the nature of blow-back for you, in the sense that the population suffering it can't put the reason why they've been attacked into any kind of context they can relate to. It's no wonder blame is assigned inappropriately and attributed to baseless root causes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN3GXj4r_1s

[On Guard for Thee]

There is a fine line between being 'open minded' and being empty headed.

Nope. The fine line, if there is any at all, is between narrow minded and empty headed.

[Keepitsimple]

Amazing how the Liberals can change their principles - their values - so easily. It wasn't that long ago that their last White Knight, Michael Ignatieff whole-heartedly supported Quebec's ban on the Niqab - which went much further than the Citizenship Oath. Ah, but now we have a new White Knight - presumably with new principles and values. Sure.

Link: http://www.macleans.ca/general/ignatieff-supports-quebecs-niqab-ban/

Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-liberals-back-quebecs-veil-ban/article4190090/

Edited March 16, 2015 by Keepitsimple

[Argus]

This pretty much echoes much of how I feel about the niqab, and is, I think, well said in most respects. I think the author is being too critial of Harper, but there's no doubt Harper is taking advantage of public feelings on these outfits.

But while a woman’s right to dress how she wishes should be respected by fellow citizens, recognized by courts, and accommodated where possible – and citizenship ceremonies easily meet the reasonable-accommodation standard – the defence of this right should not be made without necessary caveats, the most important of which is the niqab’s anti-liberal, anti-democratic nature. Defending an illiberal practice in a liberal democracy must be a two-step process where the individual’s decision is protected, but the attitudes underlying the practice are vigorously critiqued. It is the second step that is missing from the debate today.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/banning-the-niqab-harms-an-open-society-so-does-wearing-it/article23469409/

[guyser]

I grant you the point, but would only like to add that it seems mostly orthodox Muslims who are willing to kill because of their repugnant views.

Ok, but lkets change that to only Orthodox ones as it would appear.

Do you think believing gays should be executed is repugnant? What about that a woman can be beaten if she disobeys her husband?

Fair point when taken to the max, my only caveat is there are tenents of Islam that are not likeable apart from the uber orthodox version which we have learned in many instances doesnt even exist in the religion.

You tell me. What purpose does Islam serve in this world?

The same purpose all the other religions serve.

The problem I have is with that term 'some'. I'll accept the majority are not ready to kill for their religious beliefs, but I've seen nothing to indicate that the great majority of orthodox Muslims don't hold those repugnant beliefs with regard to Sharia law.

Of which we have very very few in Canada, Sharia has never nor will ever become ingrained in our CCC and at best (and I doubt highly) be used for religious court the same as Jewish Courts exiost here now.

I mean, how dedicated to this stuff do you have to be to cover yourself in a black shroud wherever you go for your entire life? Why would you get the idea people willing to do that would be lax in their belief in other aspects of orthodox Islam?

Probably pretty dedicated.....or have a husband who rules the roost. But at the same time we have husbands who beat their wives, who dictate mode of dress, who control the lives and movements of their women , all in the name of something other sky god.

The answer to it is education, inclusion and openess.

[LemonPureLeaf]

The niqab needs to be banned across Canada. At no time is it acceptable to wear a niqab or burqa. I don't people driving while wearing a burqa. Oh wait their husbands wouldnt allow a burqa women to drive at all. Its obvious that women who wear such forms of cultural dress alhold extremist views. Extremist when compared to the majority of Canadians. We mustn't support extremism.

[guyser]

Want to ask Russians about what's going on in Ukraine? If I produce a hundred million Russians loudly and indignantly telling you that Russia is only helping the freedom loving people of eastern Ukraine to defend themselves against an evil Nazi regime, and that no Russian soldiers are involved, will you accept that as fact?

No.

But more importantly the why. Because they are all in Ukrained/Russia pretty much without free press nor the ability to see the truth because they are in the UkR/Rsa.

The ones in that article are here, were free to participate in the survey and had no issues with being photographed.

To ascribe your thoughts above would mean to me that these women were forced to answer this way, forced to aprticipate to this from the men who rule the roost, who I might add wouldnt go along with doing . They all express freedom on the subject .

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't 'obligation' imply they have no choice?

I dont think so for the same reason a woman wears a hat to Church, a Yarmulke is worn.

For the same reason that if your neighbour/friend is having a problem (bsmt water/too old to shovel snow etc) you feel an obligation to assist, however you can say no.

It's an obligation, required by their religion. So is obeying their husbands, so is accepting their husbands can beat them if they choose. An expression of their identity? What identity would that be? Not one of an ordinary member of the community in which they reside, that's for sure.

But in the words of the women they surveyed, does it make sense any of them would be there if they lived under that doctrine ?

I say no.

[Black Dog]

The niqab needs to be banned across Canada. At no time is it acceptable to wear a niqab or burqa. I don't people driving while wearing a burqa. Oh wait their husbands wouldnt allow a burqa women to drive at all. Its obvious that women who wear such forms of cultural dress alhold extremist views. Extremist when compared to the majority of Canadians. We mustn't support extremism.

Yeah can't have crazed zealots like this one running around..

I am not looking for Mr. Harper to approve my life choices or dress. I am certainly not looking for him to speak on my behalf and “save” me from oppression, without even ever having bothered to reach out to me and speak with me.

And by the way, if he had bothered to ask me why I wear a niqab instead of making assumptions, I would have told him that it was a decision I took very seriously after I had looked into the matter thoroughly. I would tell him that aside from the religious aspect, I like how it makes me feel: like people have to look beyond what I look like to get to know me. That I don’t have to worry about my physical appearance and can concentrate on my inner self. That it empowers me in this regard.

While I recognize that it’s not for everyone, it is for me. To me, the most important Canadian value is the freedom to be the person of my own choosing. To me, that’s more indicative of what it means to be Canadian than what I wear.

[guyser]

The niqab needs to be banned across Canada.

Why do you hate Halloween? Think of the fun kids and teens....and adults have.

Spoil sport.

At no time is it acceptable to wear a niqab or burqa.

Sure it is, but you'll never get smart enough to know when or where

I don't people driving while wearing a burqa. Oh wait their husbands wouldnt allow a burqa women to drive at all.

There ya go! Solved your own problem.

Its obvious that women who wear such forms of cultural dress alhold extremist views. Extremist when compared to the majority of Canadians. We mustn't support extremism.

Ah...to bad the evidence doesnt support your cockamamie ideas.

Good one Cap'n Canada.

[LemonPureLeaf]

Yeah can't have crazed zealots like this one running around..

. She's chosen to effectively remove herself from our society. We don't carry ourselves like this. We see each others face. I don't want to have what's happening in the UK to happen here. Where Muslims protest and tell western women without niqabs to put some clothes on. That's not my Canada.

[guyser]

. She's chosen to effectively remove herself from our society.

By being out there and interviewed.

That's not my Canada.

Yes well, you didnt pay for it so no worries.

[Argus]

Fair point when taken to the max, my only caveat is there are tenents of Islam that are not likeable apart

from the uber orthodox version which we have learned in many instances doesnt even exist in the religion.

There are a lot of tenets of Islam I don't like and which are believed by vast numbers of Muslims around

the world, even the majority in most Muslim nations. The extent to which people hold those beliefs

should make them, in my opinion, of questionable desirability as immigrants to Canada.

Of which we have very very few in Canada,

How few is few? How many Muslim Canadians would like to see a world-wide caliphate and Islamic law?

The answer to it is education, inclusion and openess.

I would suggest that openness is not blindness, and we would be better off not importing more

such people.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

The ones in that article are here, were free to participate in the survey and had no issues with being

photographed.

They were free to participate so long as their husbands granted them permission, and the only thing

photographed was their eyes, given the rest of them was shrouded.

To ascribe your thoughts above would mean to me that these women were forced to answer this way, forced to aprticipate to

this from the men who rule the roost, who I might add wouldnt go along with doing . They all express freedom on the

subject .

It's the way they were raised, what they were taught was necessary from early childhood, or brainwashed into

believing. It is still a symbol of misogyny and a shroud which cuts them off from life and society. Imagine

never feeling warm summer air on your bare skin, always baking under a shroud on hot, humid days. And making

friends? Who makes friends with a faceless bedsheet? Not many. I doubt these women will ever know anyone

outside their own families and religious communities, which is pretty much what the shroud is designed for.

And for what? For a misguided belief in a misguided religion.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Argus

[guyser]

They were free to participate so long as their husbands granted them permission, and the only thing

photographed was their eyes, given the rest of them was shrouded.

Come on argus, you have no evidence that was the case.(husbands)

It's the way they were raised, what they were taught was necessary from early childhood, or brainwashed into

believing. It is still a symbol of misogyny and a shroud which cuts them off from life and society.

And so is no 'alter girls', no priests being women, and yet....somehow we managa.

Imagine

never feeling warm summer air on your bare skin, always baking under a shroud on hot, humid days. And making

friends? Who makes friends with a faceless bedsheet? Not many. I doubt these women will ever know anyone

outside their own families and religious communities, which is pretty much what the shroud is designed for.

And for what? For a misguided belief in a misguided religion.

And yet, they do feel a nice breeze when they want.

They have friends.

Downtown yesterday, Dundas Sq , plenty of girls wearing the scarf with friends absent of scarf. It would appear then that they do just fine and accpet their choice, as did their friends.

[Keepitsimple]

I've never seen so much support from Canadians on an issue - that really shouldn't be an issue at all. Take off the darn Niqab. Look on any of the news forums that allow comments and well over 90% of responders are in Harper's corner - in fact a large number want an outright ban. As I mentioned before - even the Liberal Party under Michael Ignatieff - when they had over 100 MPs was in favour of Quebec's ban on the Niqab - which went further than just the citizenship oath. But now there's a new White Knight in town and Trudeau Junior is making up his "values" on the fly.

[cybercoma]

I've never seen so much support from Canadians on an issue - that really shouldn't be an issue at all. Take off the darn Niqab. Look on any of the news forums that allow comments and well over 90% of responders are in Harper's corner - in fact a large number want an outright ban. As I mentioned before - even the Liberal Party under Michael Ignatieff - when they had over 100 MPs was in favour of Quebec's ban on the Niqab - which went further than just the citizenship oath. But now there's a new White Knight in town and Trudeau Junior is making up his "values" on the fly.

Who gives a crap what the comments sections look like? If 90% of these morons wanted to send Muslims to a gas chamber, the number of people supporting it still wouldn't make it right. That's not how fundamental rights and freedoms work. They're there to protect everyone from the kind of tyranny you're speaking about.

[guyser]

I've never seen so much support from Canadians on an issue -

Ive never seen so much for support for something the average Canuck has no real clue about.

It really is amazing.

And considering where the bill came from, the statistics behind it ignored due to such low numbers who do it, it definitely was made up on the fly by our PM .

Amazing how that works !

[Black Dog]

I've never seen so much support from Canadians on an issue - that really shouldn't be an issue at all.

Agreed: what people wear shouldn't really be an issue in a free society.

Take off the darn Niqab.

oooh. So close.

Look on any of the news forums that allow comments and well over 90% of responders are in Harper's corner - in fact a large number want an outright ban.

Good thing the vermin that populate such places don't get to make these calls.

As I mentioned before - even the Liberal Party under Michael Ignatieff - when they had over 100 MPs was in favour of Quebec's ban on the Niqab - which went further than just the citizenship oath. But now there's a new White Knight in town and Trudeau Junior is making up his "values" on the fly.

This was the same Michael Ignatieff who was branded a phony and a dilettante and so on by the Conservatives, correct? Just checking.

[LemonPureLeaf]

The "people" who wear the niqab are fundamentalist Muslims who hold very strict views of Islam. They believe in a very literal translation of the Koran. These aren't the kind of views real Canadians value.

When I get back to my hotel room I'm going to post direct quotes from the Koran. Passages that are believed literally by the same fundamentalist Muslims which wear the niqab.

Edited March 16, 2015 by LemonPureLeaf

[overthere]

Raise your hand if you are a true Canadian, and want these 'people' who wear the niqab and their entire families to be placed in special camps until they can be deported to wherever they are from.

If they are from Canada, born here, there may have to be special disposal methods.

All in favour?

[Black Dog]

The "people" who wear the niqab are fundamentalist Muslims who hold very strict views of Islam. They believe in a very literal translation of the Koran. These aren't the kind of views real Canadians value.

When I get back to my hotel room I'm going to post direct quotes from the Koran. Passages that are believed literally by the same fundamentalist Muslims which wear the niqab.

Have you ever talked to one of these "people" or, indeed, any Muslim?

[Argus]

Raise your hand if you are a true Canadian, and want these 'people' who wear the niqab and their entire families to be placed in special camps until they can be deported to wherever they are from.

If they are from Canada, born here, there may have to be special disposal methods.

All in favour?

Boy, the politically correct are in an intellectually bankrupt frenzy on this issue.

Oh yep, yep, objecting to the symbol of hateful misogyny, murderous homophobia and violent religious extremism is EXACTLY the same as wanting death camps! I congratulate you on your perceptiveness! What a shrewd fellow you are!

It's a pity that intelligent discussion is so beyond some people. It's sad to them sitting there by the wayside hurling epithets and insults for want of an ability to think, analyze positions and talk in anything remotely approaching a mature fashion.