TimG Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Do you believe Christianity is a religion... If so I suggest you go familiarize yourself with biblical hermeneutics if you want to see arbitrary subjectivity. Then decide if you accept Christianity is a religionIs wearing a crucifix a requirement of Christianity or is it a personal choice? That is the issue we are talking about. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Is wearing a crucifix a requirement of Christianity or is it a personal choice? That is the issue we are talking about. Obviously a choice, as was it with regard the the woman at the very center of this case. Quote
Smallc Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Obviously a choice, as was it with regard the the woman at the very center of this case. It isnt obvious at all. If a particular sect of Christianity mandates it then hpw is that any different than what we're talking about. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 It isnt obvious at all. If a particular sect of Christianity mandates it then hpw is that any different than what we're talking abou A religion can mandate what it will, the state must remain neutral. You can also wear your crucifix at this ceremony if you choose to as well. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Why is it up to a court to determine what is or isn't required in a particular religion? That's rather arbitrary. Because people to go the legal system to decide whether policy...laws should stand ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Smallc Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) Because people to go the legal system to decide whether policy...laws should stand ? Sure, but with a make believe belief system, that seems arbitrary. Edited April 20, 2015 by Smallc Quote
Michael Hardner Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Sure, but with a make believe belief system, that seems arbitrary. What does ? The judiciary ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Smallc Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 What does ? The judiciary ? Making decisions about what is real when we're dealing with something made up (religion) seems rather arbitrary. Quote
eyeball Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Why is it up to a court to determine what is or isn't required in a particular religion? That's rather arbitrary.That's not what happened.All the court did was rule the government has no more right to determine this either. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
jbg Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Irrelevant to topic. Nazi is not a religion. Are you suggesting Muslims shouldn't be admitted to Canada? IE, that Canada should discriminate against immigrant applicants based on their religion? Is that the point you are trying to make? . If someone is willing to come to the civilized world and live as a civilized person they should be welcome. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jacee Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) I'm sure it doesn't ONLY come with head garments. But indications that a person possesses it should be more than ample reason to not accept their application for immigration.That's absurd.Each individual is judged on their merits according to the immigration criteria in place. Are you really suggesting that people be judged on how they dress? . Edited April 20, 2015 by jacee Quote
guyser Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) I again repeat the choice to wear a total face covering is not a religious one. Its a cultural one.Somethging we have been over and over about. Thanks Captain Obvious. Then again, neither are some other religiously indoctrinated items, yet for all intents and purposes they are seen as such. To date not one niqab supporter has addressed my legal argument as to their application of accommodation.Sure they have, but what is patently obvious is your refusal to read instead you like to yell that 'No one answers me". Sorry buttercup, no one wants to send you a personally addressed letter via registered mail. If you argue that law says not permitting a face cover is discriminatory, then using that very same reasoning, someone else can make the argument they have the right to wear a KKK hood or Nazi uniform or appear nude at Citizenship ceremonies arguing that is their right the same way it is the other person's right to wear a niqab You want to mispresent that sight to cover your face as a religious right, then the KKK hood wearer, the nudist can claim it is their religious right as well.Holy stupid analogy Batman ! See. its obvious you refuse to read , just want to come on here and post daitribe afater diatribe repeating the same nonsense ad naseum For the record, and of course available in this thread probably ten times is showing up naked is agains the law. SHowing up in a KKK hood is just dumb but allowed. See, as we do on the internet, we let people do and say things that are dumb and repetitive. So post away. I have yet to hear one niqab supporter tell me they honour the right of a Nazi or KKK supporter to be welcomed as a Canadian citizen at the same ceremony as that covered women replete in their garb as well. Go on just one of you niqab supporters have the balls to address that issue and say you support the right for a KKK supporter to wear their uniform to the ceremony. Lol.Like that will happen. I have yet to hear a one legged diabetic cat lover with 6 toes and a family van say anything either. So what? What makes one covering o.k.and not the other? Better still explain why a person can't come nude as part of their religious beliefs?And you call yourself a lawyer? Here is the reason Counsel. Its against the law. Please dont ask again. Imagine that huh? For me and others, ommon sense dictates there is a time and place for expression of individuality and no just because your religion preaches nudity does not mean you can appear in public nude.Others maybe.....you not so much since you dont read and listen Edited April 20, 2015 by Guyser2 Quote
Argus Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) That's absurd. Each individual is judged on their merits according to the immigration criteria in place. Are you really suggesting that people be judged on how they dress? . Would we judge them amiss if they wore a swastika or had a tattoo of a swastika? Wouldn't that set off warning bells? What if, during the interview, the husband took out a stick and beat his wife? (perfectly legal in Muslim countries). Would that make you feel they were just the right type of immigrants we were looking for/ Edited April 20, 2015 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Bob Macadoo Posted April 20, 2015 Report Posted April 20, 2015 Making decisions about what is real when we're dealing with something made up (religion) seems rather arbitrary. They're not requesting evidence of the religion......only the manner of belief which is perfectly acceptable and far from arbitrary. This is something tangible for the court to evaluate. Freedom of religion is defended by the SC as such they must be able evaluate that envelope. Quote
Smallc Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 I've never had an opinion about the court case. On the other hand, as an atheist, I think it's strange when people rank made up superstitions in order of validity. Quote
Bob Macadoo Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 I've never had an opinion about the court case. On the other hand, as an atheist, I think it's strange when people rank made up superstitions in order of validity. You even have the freedom to think that too. What a great country. Quote
Smallc Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 You even have the freedom to think that too. What a great country. Nice non response. Keep up the good work. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 Nice non response. Keep up the good work. If you didnt get it, you didnt get it. I think he was referring to the freedoms the charter allows us. Which is why this legislation failed. Quote
Smallc Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 If you didnt get it, you didnt get it. I think he was referring to the freedoms the charter allows us. Which is why this legislation failed. As I have repeatedly said, I have no opinion on the legislation or the outcome of the trial. What I have an opinion on is people explaining that it isn't up to anyone else to decide what is part of a religion, while doing the exact same thing in the exact same breath. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 As I have repeatedly said, I have no opinion on the legislation or the outcome of the trial. What I have an opinion on is people explaining that it isn't up to anyone else to decide what is part of a religion, while doing the exact same thing in the exact same breath. Which is exactly what Jason Kenney tried to do, and why the federal court ruled against him. Quote
Smallc Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 Which is exactly what Jason Kenney tried to do, and why the federal court ruled against him. I disagree on that actually. If I make up a religion and decide I need to wear a colander on my head, it is just as valid as Islam. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 I disagree on that actually. If I make up a religion and decide I need to wear a colander on my head, it is just as valid as Islam. You may have trouble convincing anyone of that. Such things as Islam, Christianity, Catholicism etc. have some historical background. But by all means go ahead and put whatever on your head and give it a try. Quote
jacee Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 (edited) You may have trouble convincing anyone of that. Such things as Islam, Christianity, Catholicism etc. have some historical background. But by all means go ahead and put whatever on your head and give it a try.Hell ya! A colander probably gets stronger signals than a tinfoil hat. Smallc I'm curious about what constitutes 'a religion' too. For tax purposes it has to be "theist". But I suspect one wearing a colander on one's head to take the citizenship oath might be considered a mockery of both religion and the oath. . Edited April 21, 2015 by jacee Quote
Smallc Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 You may have trouble convincing anyone of that. Such things as Islam, Christianity, Catholicism etc. have some historical background. They're all based on nonsense. Just because it's old nonsense doesn't mean it's better. Quote
jacee Posted April 21, 2015 Report Posted April 21, 2015 (edited) They're all based on nonsense. Just because it's old nonsense doesn't mean it's better.It has to be a firmly held belief to qualify ... in colander communication with the spirit(s) of god(s).And there may have to be a community of colander heads. (rinsed well and sprinkled with vinaigrette? ) Alas, the Church of the Universe never qualified. http://www.iamm.com/history.htm Edited April 21, 2015 by jacee Quote
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.