.

[cybercoma]

I agree. I don't like the idea of the niqab at all, and I often don't think it is a choice. If it is, who am I to judge?

My position as well and more importantly, if it's not a choice, banning it at the citizenship ceremony does nothing to help those women. It just serves to further isolate them and discourage them from becoming citizens.

[TimG]

Your opinion on the matter depends on what everyone else's opinions are on unrelated matters, eh? That's a silly position.

I am simply illustrating the gross hypocrisy of many who argue against the ban.

[Smallc]

My position as well and more importantly, if it's not a choice, banning it at the citizenship ceremony does nothing to help those women. It just serves to further isolate them and discourage them from becoming citizens.

Which is part of the reason that I really don't care.

[cybercoma]

I am simply illustrating the gross hypocrisy of many who argue against the ban.

So are you for or a against the ban? You're still hedging.

[eyeball]

People who do not like see it as a symbol of oppression to women. They are no doubt correct.

They are also full of the runniest smelliest crap this issue is composed of.

If it's reviled for being misogynistic as Kenny says then why are the misogynists not being held to account? Are we supposed to believe that forcing women to take their veils off in public is actually a dig at the men - is society punishing the men by humiliating their women by forcing them to disobey the men? It seems to me that's what's really happening when it's cast as an issue of misogyny.

Where the hell are women's groups and feminists and why aren't they hopping mad about this?

[dialamah]

They are also full of the runniest smelliest crap this issue is composed of.

If it's reviled for being misogynistic as Kenny says then why are the misogynists not being held to account? Are we supposed to believe that forcing women to take their veils off in public is actually a dig at the men - is society punishing the men by humiliating their women by forcing them to disobey the men? It seems to me that's what's really happening when it's cast as an issue of misogyny.

Its certainly not a policy that is actually going to help these women.

Where the hell are women's groups and feminists and why aren't they hopping mad about this?

The Conservative government shut down 12 of 17 Womens' Centers and cut funding to advocacy and lobby groups. They also won't fund third world clinics if those clinics perform abortions. So, the whole "Kenney/Conservatives are out to save women from a life of debasement by making a few of them take off their niqab" argument doesn't really fly.

[CITIZEN_2015]

So do you support a woman's right to wear a niqab during the citizenship ceremony if it's her free choice?

I don't like neqab and I feel that those who want to wear it by choice are better off staying home than coming here and when they come here if they don't like the way we live then they should go back where they come from instead of trying to change our way of life. All that said I respect a choice and especially a woman's choice. If it is indeed her choice and not cultural pressure or pressure from family, husband then yes she should have the right to wear it.

Edited October 5, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015

[eyeball]

Its certainly not a policy that is actually going to help these women.

The Conservative government shut down 12 of 17 Womens' Centers and cut funding to advocacy and lobby groups. They also won't fund third world clinics if those clinics perform abortions. So, the whole "Kenney/Conservatives are out to save women from a life of debasement by making a few of them take off their niqab" argument doesn't really fly.

I think it's a policy that hurts all women. I still can't believe more women aren't speaking out against just how badly the tactics the politicians are using misses a target that is so central to feminists aims - stopping the objectification of women.

Edited October 3, 2015 by eyeball

[Argus]

Again you prove my point. The *victim* does not take action to help themselves until they are ready to do so. It doesn't matter if their mother tells them how bad the spouse is, or if the cops arrest, charge and jail the spouse - until the victim decides not to be a victim, he/she will just take the spouse back over and over and over.

But we don't just shrug and forget about it. We arrest the spouse anyway.

What you want us to do is shrug and forget about it.

Until SHE decides to remove the niqab any action WE take to do so is pointless, other than to make OURSELVES feel better.

And if the progressives have their way, no one will be telling her it's wrong, or suggesting another way, or hinting at any dissaproval. Instead we'll be telling her how darling she looks in her bedsheet, and how much we respect her choice, and how we admire her determination to stick to her culture.

Which means she won't change, and will raise her children the same way.

People who support immigration love to talk about the history of immigration in Canada. how immigrants, especially the second generation, wound up just like us. But they don't like to dwell much on the harsher aspects. Lots of foreign kids came here, and they had odd foreign clothes and odd foreign habits and ways. And you know what happened? They got taunted and teased and bullied and mocked and ridiculed. Not nice, I know. But they quickly shed their foreign ways and tried to blend in, and they did, and became Canadian. Now I'm not suggesting bullying or taunting or teasing people, but I do feel that we, as a society, need to make our disapproval of these backward cultural values very well known. We need to put pressure on these people, both wives and husbands, because otherwise, nothing is going to change.

Edited October 3, 2015 by Argus

[dre]

Except the state does limit what people are allowed to wear. For example, one cannot walk nude down the street and the only rational reason for the rule is because it is offensive to a large number of Canadians. Niqabs are no different in the sense that they are offensive to a lot of people.

Those baggy shit catcher pants that kids wear half way down their asses are offensive too. Who cares.

And comparing certain kinds of clothing with public nudity is not a valid comparison.

[dre]

But we don't just shrug and forget about it. We arrest the spouse anyway.

What you want us to do is shrug and forget about it.

And if the progressives have their way, no one will be telling her it's wrong, or suggesting another way, or hinting at any dissaproval.

I have no problem with telling her its wrong for members of her family or anyone else to force her to wear anything she doesnt want to wear.

[Argus]

I am suggesting an end to hypocrisy by this gang. On one hand they condemn oppression of women and see neqab as a sign of oppression on one side of their mouth and at the same time having a friendly relationship with the biggest oppressor of women, namely The regime in Saudi Arabia. On one hand condemning human right violations by their adversary (Iran) and at the same time making an ally and friend out of other oppressive regimes like Saudi Arabia. And yes they place sanctions on Iran why not Saudi Arabia?

When it comes to realpolitik, it's a matter of 'we do what we can'. I remember Harper had a big thing about showing China no respect at all because of their human rights. That was kind of ballsy. Nobody else in the world was doing that. Of course, the Liberals and NDP, to say nothing of the business community (you know, those people Harper sucks up to?) were horrified. They wanted him to suck up the Chinese like his predecessors had done. But he wouldn't. Not until the financial crisis hit and things got bad and he had no real choice. Then he did what he had to do.

We are a trading nation. We can't not trade with three quarters of the world. That doesn't mean we have to love what they do, and it sure as hell doesn't mean we have to love it being done HERE.

[Argus]

I agree. I don't like the idea of the niqab at all, and I often don't think it is a choice. If it is, who am I to judge?

A thinking person judges everything around them. And when he sees behaviour which is clearly backward, barbaric, and dumb, he doesn't pretend otherwise.

[Argus]

I think it's a policy that hurts all women. I still can't believe more women aren't speaking out against just how badly the tactics the politicians are using misses a target that is so central to feminists aims - stopping the objectification of women.

Feminists in the west don't have a problem with objectification of women or misogyny as long as it involves brown people.

[Argus]

I have no problem with telling her its wrong for members of her family or anyone else to force her to wear anything she doesnt want to wear.

But you would never do that personally, and the media would never do that. So who is going to do that if not the government?

[dre]

But you would never do that personally, and the media would never do that. So who is going to do that if not the government?

It should be part of the citizenship process to teach women that they are equal in Canada in every way.

Maybe we could use the time wasted on the moronic pledge of allegiance to Queen Elizabeth!

Edited October 3, 2015 by dre

[cybercoma]

The Queen is the personification of the nation. Pledge allegiance to the Queen is pledging allegiance to the state.

[Guest]

So you don't need to see the face at all?How about a party leader?A Prime Minister?

I'd never thought about it until now, but no, I don't. I would like to. I might not like the fact that I can't. But need to? Not if he or she got themselves democratically elected like that.

Hypothetically speaking, that is. I assume that these days we would know what they look like anyway, as photos would exist. I also assume that no-one could get elected while masked.

[dre]

The Queen is the personification of the nation. Pledge allegiance to the Queen is pledging allegiance to the state.

I still dont see any reason for the pledge besides tradition. Its meaningless and I would ditch it.

Edited October 3, 2015 by dre

[angrypenguin]

It should be part of the citizenship process to teach women that they are equal in Canada in every way.

Maybe we could use the time wasted on the moronic pledge of allegiance to Queen Elizabeth!

Absolutely agreed. Women are EQUAL, and when these women come from backgrounds which oppress women, they need to know their government stands behind them for them to at least briefly experience true equality. Their husbands can't say jack because the government has mandated it, as it should be.

Edited October 3, 2015 by angrypenguin

[cybercoma]

Absolutely agreed. Women are EQUAL, and when these women come from backgrounds which oppress women, they need to know their government stands behind them for them to at least briefly experience true equality. Their husbands can't say jack because the government has mandated it, as it should be.

You may be unaware of this, but there are many Muslim women in Canada who wear the niqab against their families' wishes.

[angrypenguin]

You may be unaware of this, but there are many Muslim women in Canada who wear the niqab against their families' wishes.

I am VERY aware of this. If I had it my way, niqabs should be banned (hint: i'm not caucasian). But the citizenship ceremony is one that promotes Canadian values. The husband can be pissed all he wants, but if Canadian legislation is allowing the female to experience Canada in "all its glory", there's nothing the husband or whatever can say about it. That's why I'm FOR the PM's stance on this.

It's sad they have to put it back on against their wishes, but at a citizenship ceremony? Oh come on.

[cybercoma]

I am VERY aware of this. If I had it my way, niqabs should be banned (hint: i'm not caucasian). But the citizenship ceremony is one that promotes Canadian values. The husband can be pissed all he wants, but if Canadian legislation is allowing the female to experience Canada in "all its glory", there's nothing the husband or whatever can say about it. That's why I'm FOR the PM's stance on this.

It's sad they have to put it back on against their wishes, but at a citizenship ceremony? Oh come on.

If you're aware, then you miss the point. The woman who challenged this in court was wearing the niqab by her choice. It had nothing to do with a husband or any other family member. It was her choice. A choice she felt so strongly about that she took the government to court.

[angrypenguin]

If you're aware, then you miss the point. The woman who challenged this in court was wearing the niqab by her choice. It had nothing to do with a husband or any other family member. It was her choice. A choice she felt so strongly about that she took the government to court.

I am aware of that as well. However, there were two individuals. That was the voice of one of them. I guess at this point, I'm looking at the principles behind the matter, and a legit issue was raised.

Also, we don't know if that's her choice privately as well. If anything, she could have been told by her husband how to act.

[ReeferMadness]

So, the Conservatives hire a guy from Australia who has a reputation for wedge politics, particularly in the area of race baiting. The next thing you know, they're making an issue of the niqab. And then they announce they're stripping the citizenship of some of the Toronto 18. Finally, the "barbaric cultural rituals" hotline.

Even by Conservative standards, this is truly disgusting. Harper is pandering to his intolerant, xenophobic base and appealing to the worst in Canadians.