.

[Rue]

Lol is that the reason Eyeball? You won't admit your Muslim because you think I don't agree with the concept of someone's face being sexually provocative?

You think that makes you a Muslim terrorist?

That's about the most insulting stereotype of Muslims I have ever heard and that coming from someone claiming to speak on their behalf?

You just proved my point. Look at how your comment patronizes Muslims as if they are all idiots and can't handle a debate and will all turn terrorist.

Got it. If we criticize a particular cultural value it will turn young Muslims extremist.

Talk about passive aggressive bigotry.

Lol.

[Rue]

Guyser;

This debate was not about banning anyone or challenging anyone for their religious views or questioning their right to be Muslim.

So your need to throw out the Jew card not once but twice and then try couch it with a reference to a kirpan is laughable.

Its also absurd for you to have in one breath admitted having raised the Jew card arguing its relevant to do so then in the next breth said I raised it not you.

This is NOT an issue about religion. This is an issue about when and where to express certain cultural/sexual values not the right to have those values. Its not about banning them. Its not about banning people or legislating anything.

Your continued attempt to personally attack me or others and accuse us of being discriminatory about someone's religion or perceived ethnicity is a card you play in the name of justifying your own bigoted responses.

If you can't understand the topic move on. No one is taking your bait.

if you want to go off on tangents suggesting Muslims will turn terrorist if we challenge women covering their faces like Eye or make sweeping bigoted statements like Bug Guy that people who question his opinions hate brown skin,are hateful , etc. knock yourselves out.

Its going to get quite crowded when the lot of you try pile up and try see who stands highest on that mountain of self righteousness.

One other thing You continue to keep raising your father and suggest I made a dead father joke. I did not. Stop trying to bait and engage me over your father. Knock it off. The personal attempts to bait me over your father are what I have challenged and I will say it again, take them off line.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Rue

[guyser]

Guyser;

This debate was not about banning anyone or challenging anyone for their religious views or questioning their right to be Muslim.

The very first line of the very first post, not to mention the big banner up at the top ....

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

I put it in big lettersto help you read and understand which thread you are in.

So your need to throw out the Jew card not once but twice and then try couch it with a reference to a kirpan is laughable.

So you cannot respond to the simple fact that religious icons, whether written in the religions tenets or not (Burqa and yarmulke)are allowed virtually anywhere since this country respects those rights.

So some are ok with you, others are not.

I dont agree, I am not a fan of hypocrisy are putting one religion above the other.

This is NOT an issue about religion. This is an issue about when and where to express certain cultural/sexual values not the right to have those values. Its not about banning them. Its not about banning people or legislating anything.

You might want to wake up and get with the program.YOu couldnt be more clueless here.

Your continued attempt to personally attack me or others and accuse us of being discriminatory about someone's religion or perceived ethnicity is a card you play in the name of justifying your own bigoted responses.

No I like to mock stupidity and hypocrisy, so far I have had some players. So be it.

If you can't understand the topic move on. No one is taking your bait.

Since this is a thread about leaglly banning a Niqab .

Sorry , what was that about 'understanding' ?

if you want to go off on tangents suggesting Muslims will turn terrorist if we challenge women covering their faces like Eye or make sweeping bigoted statements like Bug Guy that people who question his opinions hate brown skin,are hateful , etc. knock yourselves out.

I can understand nuance and other things you have no clue about, but yes, that is what can happen when a govt marginalizes peoples beliefs becuase they are too dumb and xenophobic.

Its going to get quite crowded when the lot of you try pile up and try see who stands highest on that mountain of self righteousness.

Better than standing in a cesspool of hate and hypocrisy . Hows the smell down there?

I did not. Stop trying to bait and engage me ..., take them off line.

Shouldnt have been such a dick in the first place huh?

Take it off line? WTF does that mean?

LOL

[Argus]

I get the 'sorta' feeling and understand how some view it, although for many others, including those who I think are well

educated and knowledgeable I dont understand how this irritates them so. It how I view your position on this. In all

honesty I know you are educated, I just cant seem to wrap my head around the why's of your view. It is where others have

slagged you as racist or whatever , and even thats a natural presumption based on what we know of you.

What you should know about me by now is I have a certain high standard of behaviour in both individuals and groups, and make precious few allowances for gross violations of that behaviour. If I think you're acting like morons, whether you are White (Russians, Serbians) Brown (Pakistanis, Afghans, Egyptians, Indians) or whatever in between, I"m not going to hesitate to state my unflattering opinion of you. If your religion or culture is stupid/backward which most are, then keep it to yourself. I won't go out of my way to attack it but if you stick it in my face I'm going to say how stupid/backward I think it is.

I have long looked at immigration, given the only justification ever used for it is economic, as akin to an HR program, and would wish to hire the best. These are not the best. Not only do they fair poorly economically, but their social customs are backward and dumb. I realize that historically immigrants have come here and largely abandoned the more divergent aspects of their cultures, but I also recognize we're dealing with backward cultural customs which are now backed up by religion. And never before has the gap between the newcomers cultural background and ours been so vast.

Will they all become more 'civilized'? Possibly, maybe even probably. But we have no certainty, so why take the chance? Muslims are a group doubling in size every ten years, and there's certainly precious little indication they're abandoning their old cultural/religious practices. In 20 years they'll be almost ten percent of the population. That's a size where their cultural wants and demands are going to start influencing the cultural value system, laws and regulations around the country where I live. So why should I be happy with that when I know there are better, more highly skilled immigrants out there from countries with cultural value systems much closer to ours?

That said however has the caveat of, and was asked earlier without response, is of these types (Burqa/Hijab/rad Islamists)

how many of them come from immigration vs refugee status? It is my understanding in digging thru the numbers that most of

the Burqa/Hijab ones come thru refugee status. Actually most of them. And Canada has a commitment to take these, there is

very little we can do but take them in and hope for the best.

I don't know how many come as refugees but I would disagree with you about our commitment to take them. There are a lot of refugees around the world, enough to pick and choose amongst them, as the government has shown when trying to fill its share of Syrian refugees with Christians first.

On top of that, we advertise as an accomodatating , come here w whatever you have and find a spot to live and integrate yourself into CDN life. The overwhelming majority do this. Like anything, we get some crappy ones but thats life and not much we can do about that.

Stats Canada say by 2031 more than half the Canadian population will be foreign born. If we're going to keep bringing in masses of foreigners - who are going to outnumber us - we ought to make damned sure they have a commitment to integration and support of our current cultural values and institutions. Thinking they might is not good enough, especially in light of the fact that, as I have stated numerous times, the government has never supported immigration's purpose with any sort of scientific evidence, any sort of study, or any sort of real goals as to what we hope to accomplish and why immigration at these numbers will do that.

[eyeball]

Lol is that the reason Eyeball? You won't admit your Muslim because you think I don't agree with the concept of someone's face being sexually provocative?

You think that makes you a Muslim terrorist?

No, it was Harper's declaration that I'm a Jihadis that did that.

[Keepitsimple]

No, it was Harper's declaration that I'm a Jihadis that did that.

Finally it's clear - you're a supporter of ISIS.....because that's what Harper's "declaration" was all about - so I guess I can understand your sensitivity. It was directed at those who would subscribe to the murderous ideology of those extremists who have no tolerance for anyone who will not succumb to their twisted minds. The vast majority of Canadian Muslims know exactly who Harper is talking about.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Keepitsimple

[Je suis Omar]

What you should know about me by now is I have a certain high standard of behaviour in both individuals and groups, and make precious few allowances for gross violations of that behaviour. If I think you're acting like morons, whether you are White (Russians, Serbians) Brown (Pakistanis, Afghalns, Egyptians, Indians) or whatever in between, I"m not going to hesitate to state my unflattering opinion of you. If your religion or culture is stupid/backward which most are, then keep it to yourself. I won't go out of my way to attack it but if you stick it in my face I'm going to say how stupid/backward I think it is.

YOU MAKE A MOCKERY OF THE PHRASE "HIGH STANDARD", ARGUS.

NO, I'M NOT YELLING. I JUST DONT FEEL THE NEED TO WASTE MY TIME ILLUSTRATING THAT WHEN YOU'VE DONE SUCH A BANG UP JOB OF IT YOURSELF.

AND WHY IS THIS PERSON OF SUCH HIGH STANDARDS SO DILIGENT IN AVOIDING REALITY?

THE PROOF BELOW (AND ABOVE)

I have long looked at immigration, given the only justification ever used for it is economic, as akin to an HR program, and would wish to hire the best. These are not the best. Not only do they fair poorly economically, but their social customs are backward and dumb. I realize that historically immigrants have come here and largely abandoned the more divergent aspects of their cultures, but I also recognize we're dealing with backward cultural customs which are now backed up by religion. And never before has the gap between the newcomers cultural background and ours been so vast.

Will they all become more 'civilized'? Possibly, maybe even probably. But we have no certainty, so why take the chance? Muslims are a group doubling in size every ten years, and there's certainly precious little indication they're abandoning their old cultural/religious practices. In 20 years they'll be almost ten percent of the population. That's a size where their cultural wants and demands are going to start influencing the cultural value system, laws and regulations around the country where I live. So why should I be happy with that when I know there are better, more highly skilled immigrants out there from countries with cultural value systems much closer to ours?

I don't know how many come as refugees but I would disagree with you about our commitment to take them. There are a lot of refugees around the world, enough to pick and choose amongst them, as the government has shown when trying to fill its share of Syrian refugees with Christians first.

Stats Canada say by 2031 more than half the Canadian population will be foreign born. If we're going to keep bringing in masses of foreigners - who are going to outnumber us - we ought to make damned sure they have a commitment to integration and support of our current cultural values and institutions. Thinking they might is not good enough, especially in light of the fact that, as I have stated numerous times, the government has never supported immigration's purpose with any sort of scientific evidence, any sort of study, or any sort of real goals as to what we hope to accomplish and why immigration at these numbers will do that.

[Je suis Omar]

Argus: In 20 years they'll be almost ten percent of the population. That's a size where their cultural wants and demands are going to start influencing the cultural value system, laws and regulations around the country where I live. So why should I be happy with that when I know there are better, more highly skilled immigrants out there from countries with cultural value systems much closer to ours?

//////////////////

How very white of you, Argus.

You are the archetypical citizen/patriot (dog almighty! Americans have made that such a dirty slimy word) content to mouth empty platitudes, of which you have a very feeble grasp of their true meaning.

What part of personal freedom do you not understand?

Edited March 31, 2015 by Je suis Omar

[Rue]

One comment to you Gusyer-did you read the banner you quote? Lol? It doesn't support your hypothesis nor your stereotyping of what my views MUST mean if I challenge the niqab.

In regards to Eye if you are a Muslim and a comment like Harper made causes you to fear being a Muslim then I hear you but think you are wrong as to what his motives are.

I want to make it clear again. This is not a debate about Islam or Muslims or whether they have the right to be either. It has to do with the right of ANYONE of ANY belief to express their belief in public if that belief provides a symbol that defines a woman's face as sexually promiscuous and in need of banning by covering it up.

I think to accommodate such values in a ceremony that welcomes all as equals makes no sense. Its a message that says women are not equal at a ceremony designed to celebrate inclusivity and equality.

Its rather ironic debating a ban on banning faces.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Rue

[jbg]

I have been reading through this thread where a few posters are trying to rationalize their dislike of non-Canadians and of other cultures. Hey folks, it is not illegal to be a racist or bigot or misogynist. You may even try to make it palatable by calling it nationalistic or patriotic or even protectionist.

Full stop.

Is Canada forcing the immigrants to come? Why should Canada subordinate its culture to others. They are coming here, presumably for a better life. If they're coming to spread the Islamosphere world wide, that's not acceptable.

[On Guard for Thee]

Full stop.

Is Canada forcing the immigrants to come? Why should Canada subordinate its culture to others. They are coming here, presumably for a better life. If they're coming to spread the Islamosphere world wide, that's not acceptable.

Nope. Canada is opening the doors so they can come. We have an immigration system that is not based on racist or xenophobic ideas. Luckily we have had more open minded people at the helm.

[jbg]

Nope. Canada is opening the doors so they can come. We have an immigration system that is not based on racist or xenophobic ideas. Luckily we have had more open minded people at the helm.

How about allowing people, not cultures into Canada?

[On Guard for Thee]

How about allowing people, not cultures into Canada?

Because we are a multicultural country. If you want everything to try to be whitewashed for you, go to the states.

[Michael Hardner]

Because we are a multicultural country. If you want everything to try to be whitewashed for you, go to the states.

While I agree with the gist of your argument, I do want to point out that an official Multicultural policy may not make that much of an impact. I haven't seen any proof that there is that much of a different experience for immigrants in Canada vs the US but maybe that's something for another thread.

This much is sure: a melting pot effect does happen, and that's the traditional metaphor for immigration in America.

[Rue]

We are a democracy. As such we shall debate the cultural values we want this country to promulgate. Some of us do not want a country that embraces cultural values that feel a female face is sexually provocative and needs to be covered up. We also question any cultural value or religious value that comes into conflict or contradicts the existing Canadian values.

Its what democracy is about. The right to debate such things and question them. No I will not embrace the kind of cultural values that belong 3,000 years ago.

No I do not want people bringing in values that preach women are sexually provocative and men are so out of control with their urges we need to cover female faces.

That is what this debate was about.

A bunch of politically appropriate individuals tried to deflect, defocus and change the debate to suggest its necessarily anti immigrant,anti Muslim to question the nijab. In so doing they censor debate, and deem it politically inappropriate and that is precisely the kind of cognitive process-the deeming of what is politically appropriate that many of us question.

in such debates it is illogical to say one person's right to cover their face trumps another's to protest such a belief. Its not the issue and never was. The fact I protest such a value doesn't mean I tell the other person not to believe what they do-the point is, if you do it in a place where your choice and my choice are considered equal, you don't at such an arena impose yours on mine, You show respect to me.

No its not respectful to cover your face at a public ceremony. It shows you believe your opinion is more important than the very public you ask to join. It means you are not willing to compromise. Its an example of telling the very people you want to join you will pick and choose what portions of Canada suit you and ignore the rest.

No it does not work that way. You do not walk into a host's home, insult them by demanding they cook a different meal.

If your beliefs are so inflexible you can't show your face in public at a citizenship ceremony have the decency not to go. That way you preserve your right but you don't insult the very country you demand rights from.

This debate is a crock of sheeyit. It is a classic example of a country with people who think the Canadian cllective identity can be defined by NOT having an identity and instead being anything anyone wants it to be.

This country started with specific aboriginal values. It was then added to by British and French laws, cultures and traditions. It was then added to by many ethnic groups who came to Canada and none of us imposed and demanded our values be forced on others.

We came, we adapted, we showed respect for the country and our cultural values were something we practiced in our homes, in our houses of worship, and in after school programs and community organizations but we did not impose them on others.

I grew up a cub scout. I was a Jew who went to a United Church with Catholics, Protestants, mostly Irish, but some French,Brazilian, black.

The whole point of this organization taught us inclusivity and being neutral to all means everyone must be willing to compromise not just some.

I have zero problem deferring to aboriginal, French or British legal values. All 3 form the basis of Canadian law. That law and the symbols for that law

provide me a standard of life my ancestors dreamed of and died never knowing.

That British Parliamentary system is part of those values. No one forces Christianity on me at Christmas time, I have embraced it because its basic courtesy and the Christians I show respect to do the same for me. Its that simple. I know many Muslims who agree with me. We, and I mean we,Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist whatever the phack we are, choose to be Canadians precisely because we choose to compromise.

No do not ask me to embrace non progressive fascist, sexually repressive values or tolerate them. Not a chance.

The hijab to me at a Canadian citizenship ceremony is no different than a KKK member wearing their hood. Its not a religious belief. Its a cultural one based on political values. The government is neutral. It must remain neutral. When it has such a ceremony all its participants must show respect for one another. Its not one way. We are not talking about head coverings. We are talking about covering the face totally. Huge difference.

Its not going to work. It won't work in a society where we show our face on our driver's license, in court and in public for security reasons.

If someone can't make that most basic of compromises, don't ask me to molly coddle them and treat them like they are victims if they don't get to practice intolerance.

[jacee]

Oh well. You lost.

.

[Keepitsimple]

We are a democracy. As such we shall debate the cultural values we want this country to promulgate. Some of us do not want a country that embraces cultural values that feel a female face is sexually provocative and needs to be covered up. We also question any cultural value or religious value that comes into conflict or contradicts the existing Canadian values.

Its what democracy is about. The right to debate such things and question them.

If someone can't make that most basic of compromises, don't ask me to molly coddle them and treat them like they are victims if they don't get to practice intolerance.

Well said Rue - very well said. That's the Canada I love.

[jacee]

Oh well. You lost.

Its not going to work. It won't work in a society where we show our face on our driver's license, in court and in public for security reasons.

We don't have a law that we have to show our face in public for security reasons, and I don't think we want to go down that road.

Only covering one's face in the commission of a crime is illegal.

The court has taken a sensible approach.

.

[Rue]

Wrong again Jacee. If police heave reason to believe you are engaging in crime they can ask you to identify yourself, and if you refuse arrest you for resisting arrest. Reasonable grounds. That is the test used by police to determine if they need see your face.

They can most certainly stop you from driving a car if you do not show your face until you do so they can compare it to your driver's license.

You live in a make believe world.

Go on where your nijab and drive a car through a red light and see if you can start giving the cop a load of b.s. when he asks you to show your face.

Go on quote the Charter all you want. Your position illustrates a feeling of entitlement to protection from the very laws you pretend don't exist when they are not to your liking.

This is not a buffet where you come to Canada and pick and choose only certain laws to follow.

[jacee]

Wrong again Jacee. If police heave reason to believe you are engaging in crime

Precisely ... "reason to believe/crime" ... not just because you are in public.

This is not a buffet where you come to Canada and pick and choose only certain laws to follow.

We have no law that says you can't cover your face in public.

That's absurd.

.

[carepov]

We are a democracy. As such we shall debate the cultural values we want this country to promulgate.

Some of the principle values that I want my Canada to promulgate is tolerance and the freedom to do what you want, wear what you want and say what you want (as long as it doesn't infringe the rights of others).

...

Another value that I would like to see promulgated is for Canada to stop wasting our time and resources on petty issues like this and move on to solving more important issues.

[cybercoma]

Only covering one's face in the commission of a crime is illegal.

Wrong again Jacee. If police heave reason to believe you are engaging in crime they can ask you to identify yourself...

ummm.....

[On Guard for Thee]

Wrong again Jacee. If police heave reason to believe you are engaging in crime they can ask you to identify yourself, and if you refuse arrest you for resisting arrest. Reasonable grounds. That is the test used by police to determine if they need see your face.

They can most certainly stop you from driving a car if you do not show your face until you do so they can compare it to your driver's license.

You live in a make believe world.

Go on where your nijab and drive a car through a red light and see if you can start giving the cop a load of b.s. when he asks you to show your face.

Go on quote the Charter all you want. Your position illustrates a feeling of entitlement to protection from the very laws you pretend don't exist when they are not to your liking.

This is not a buffet where you come to Canada and pick and choose only certain laws to follow.

Just to be clear on a couple of things, you are not required to identify yourself unless and until you are arrested. Second your buffet reference makes no sense. The law has been struck down so there is obviously no need for any choice as to whether or not to follow it.

[guyser]

We are a democracy. As such we shall debate the cultural values we want this country to promulgate. Some of us do not want a country that embraces cultural values that feel a female face is sexually provocative and needs to be covered up.

Yes, we debate what values we want, we dont enshrine them in law.

We are not embracing any values about covering up. But people can debate things any time they want.

Its what democracy is about. The right to debate such things and question them. No I will not embrace the kind of cultural values that belong 3,000 years ago.

No I do not want people bringing in values that preach women are sexually provocative and men are so out of control with their urges we need to cover female faces.

But only with one religion......right? (well thats been obvious all this time in this thread, lo wanting to admit it is verboten)

That is what this debate was about.

You keep saying that for some curious reason. But this thread is about banning it and the SCC saying NO.

A bunch of politically appropriate individuals tried to deflect, defocus and change the debate to suggest its necessarily anti immigrant,anti Muslim to question the nijab. In so doing they censor debate, and deem it politically inappropriate and that is precisely the kind of cognitive process-the deeming of what is politically appropriate that many of us question.

87 pages and someone (people) are trying to stifle debate?

in such debates it is illogical to say one person's right to cover their face trumps another's to protest such a belief. Its not the issue and never was. The fact I protest such a value doesn't mean I tell the other person not to believe what they do-the point is, if you do it in a place where your choice and my choice are considered equal, you don't at such an arena impose yours on mine, You show respect to me.

That is some seriously cocked up reasoning.They are to respect you but not in reverse?

No one is imposing anything on you.

No its not respectful to cover your face at a public ceremony. It shows you believe your opinion is more important than the very public you ask to join. It means you are not willing to compromise. Its an example of telling the very people you want to join you will pick and choose what portions of Canada suit you and ignore the rest.

Thats your opinion too. So what?

There are parts of Canada that I ignore . Thankfully....and again agreed by the SCC , we can do so .

I am no fan of the music at kitchen Ceilidh's . Should I hand in my CDN card now?

No it does not work that way. You do not walk into a host's home, insult them by demanding they cook a different meal.

A private home vs public. Dumb analogy

If your beliefs are so inflexible you can't show your face in public at a citizenship ceremony have the decency not to go. That way you preserve your right but you don't insult the very country you demand rights from.

So it is YOU that wants to impose censoring where they can go or not? Funny that, just above you didnt want to be censored.

Try and keep your arguments from tripping over themselves.

This country started with specific aboriginal values.

It did? Thats what you think?

Assimilation to the white mans worlds is not the same as embracing the aboriginal values.

Did the First Nations want boarding schools and land taken from them....or ceeded as it were ?

It was then added to by British and French laws, cultures and traditions. It was then added to by many ethnic groups who came to Canada and none of us imposed and demanded our values be forced on others.

Until the Govt tried and failed you mean?

That British Parliamentary system is part of those values. No one forces Christianity on me at Christmas time, I have embraced it because its basic courtesy and the Christians I show respect to do the same for me. Its that simple. I know many Muslims who agree with me. We, and I mean we,Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist whatever the phack we are, choose to be Canadians precisely because we choose to compromise.

No do not ask me to embrace non progressive fascist, sexually repressive values or tolerate them. Not a chance.

No one is forcing a niqab/burqa on you. No one is asking you to compromise.

The hijab to me at a Canadian citizenship ceremony is no different than a KKK member wearing their hood. Its not a religious belief. Its a cultural one based on political values. The government is neutral. It must remain neutral. When it has such a ceremony all its participants must show respect for one another. Its not one way. We are not talking about head coverings. We are talking about covering the face totally. Huge difference.

And yet.....she was allowed to be at the ceremony as she was.

The govt is trying not to be neutral, good thing the SCC is.

If someone can't make that most basic of compromises, don't ask me to molly coddle them and treat them like they are victims if they don't get to practice intolerance.

No one ask you to mollycoddle anyone. Thats a construct you make because you feel all hurt and bothered.

Its a silly emotional thing you do.

Too bad, you do have your opinion as others do, including the woman who wants to wear a head/face covering and tell you to go pound sand .

[Argus]

Nope. Canada is opening the doors so they can come. We have an immigration system that is not based on racist or xenophobic ideas.

What is it based on? Every welfare office and public housing area seems to be filled with people who can barely speak English, so is the goal of immigration to provide work for welfare workers?