Black Dog Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Women that choose to wear the niqab are probably the most conservative and do not accept all the values of Canadian society. They probably reject gay anything, divorce, dating, and accept polygamy, and other restrictions that are imposed on women) OK. And? You don't need to wear a niqab or even be Muslim to tick any of those boxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 OK. And? You don't need to wear a niqab or even be Muslim to tick any of those boxes. Of course not. I'm just pointing out your illogical thinking that these women are accepting of Canadian values. These women who support the niqab could be just as oppressive towards their daughters. Let's not pretend what the niqab represents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 The heart of the alliance between Conservatives and Bloc is metaphobia, fear of change. The metaphobes are the core vote in both groups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Of course not. I'm just pointing out your illogical thinking that these women are accepting of Canadian values. These women who support the niqab could be just as oppressive towards their daughters. Let's not pretend what the niqab represents. It's also possible that they support choice, which is a Canadian value. According to everything I've found - studies and personal stories - choice is actually what most Muslims support, and the women who wear the niqab most often say it is their choice. The assumption that each individual women is only wearing a niqab as a result of oppression is as senseless as assuming every woman in sunglasses has a black eye because her husband beats her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) It's also possible that they support choice, which is a Canadian value. According to everything I've found - studies and personal stories - choice is actually what most Muslims support, and the women who wear the niqab most often say it is their choice. The assumption that each individual women is only wearing a niqab as a result of oppression is as senseless as assuming every woman in sunglasses has a black eye because her husband beats her.That's not true. Many women who voluntarily wear the niqab are very conservative. I can't post a link here to a study because of my iPhone but I will later. Don't let their university education fool you into thinking they are accepting of women's rights in Canada. Edited October 6, 2015 by WestCoastRunner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Of course not. I'm just pointing out your illogical thinking that these women are accepting of Canadian values. I never said they were accepting of Canadian values. What I was taking issue with was the idea was that their choice of dress was an intentional poke in the eye of those values, as Argus implied. Even if they reject all those things: big deal. That's what pluralism is all about. These women who support the niqab could be just as oppressive towards their daughters. Let's not pretend what the niqab represents. Again: and? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) That's not true. Many women who voluntarily wear the niqab are very conservative. I can't post a link here to a study because of my iPhone but I will later. Yes, I agree they are conservative. But that doesn't mean they don't support choice for other people. Including their daughters. For instance, my sister married into a Muslim family consisting of 5 brothers, all of whom are now married. Of the four sisters-in-law, one is noticeably more devout and wears the hijab whenever she has male relatives in her house and the niqab outside the house. Two other sisters wear the hijab only outside the house. I haven't met the fourth, but judging by the brother she married and her wedding pictures, she's even more relaxed about headdress although she probably would wear at least a scarf over her head when out of the house. My sister dresses in modest Western style, and sometimes includes a headscarf, and sometimes not. All of these women seem to be equally accepted and accommodated by the rest of the family. Obviously, any family of any culture may impose norms on male and female members, but that doesn't mean its a given regardless of what an outsider might think. Edited October 6, 2015 by dialamah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Yes, I agree they are conservative. But that doesn't mean they don't support choice for other people. Including their daughters. They support polygamy. They reject the LGBT community. They reject divorce, abortion. How is that supporting choice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 I never said they were accepting of Canadian values. What I was taking issue with was the idea was that their choice of dress was an intentional poke in the eye of those values, as Argus implied. Even if they reject all those things: big deal. That's what pluralism is all about. Again: and? Yea you did say that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 They support polygamy. They reject the LGBT community. They reject divorce, abortion. How is that supporting choice? So do Christians. What is your point? Incidentally, one of the five brothers is divorced and remarried. Divorce isn't forbidden, it's just frowned upon very strongly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 So do Christians. What is your point? Incidentally, one of the five brothers is divorced and remarried. Divorce isn't forbidden, it's just frowned upon very strongly. My point was addressing bd's post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 So do Christians. What is your point? Incidentally, one of the five brothers is divorced and remarried. Divorce isn't forbidden, it's just frowned upon very strongly. You told me they support choice. Which is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 (edited) You told me they support choice. Which is it?Divorce is not forbidden, it is frowned upon. People do have the choice, just as people here have the choice to do things other people frown upon. Wear a niqab, for example. In any case, I was specifically speaking of niqab wearing when I said choice was supported. You brought in gays, abortion, divorce etc. I haven't claimed, nor would I, that the average Muslim was as liberal or progressive as the average Westerner. Still, there is a wide range of behaviour and beliefs within both cultures, and the most conservative Christian is not that far removed from the most conservative Muslim. Edited October 6, 2015 by dialamah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) I personally think the PM's views on further engaging in this discussion is stupid. I can't think of why he's doing this, other than getting QC votes, which he is not successfully doing atm. Edited October 7, 2015 by angrypenguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 The heart of the alliance between Conservatives and Bloc is metaphobia, fear of change. The metaphobes are the core vote in both groups. The BQ is an obvious one. They're nationalists bent on protecting their language and culture at all costs, even if it means denying minorities their language rights. It's a strange bit of irony. It's not that they're afraid of change. They're afraid of being assimilated into the larger culture of north america and losing their heritage and identity. In turn, they're radically intolerant to anything that's not French. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) How did anything you said, as smarmy and smug as it was, contradict anything I said? It's not a matter of contradicting you. I am stating that you have created a false image of Islam and Muslims in your head and you are using your false image to try to suggest that we should accept discriminating against Muslims. Edited October 7, 2015 by marcus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 Women that choose to wear the niqab are probably the most conservative and do not accept all the values of Canadian society. They probably reject gay anything, divorce, dating, and accept polygamy, and other restrictions that are imposed on women) Canadian values? The phrase is used by our PM when he wants to invoke racist and anti-Muslim feelings among his base. Our PM belongs to an evangelical church. It makes me wonder what his kids are being taught on things like homosexuality, divorce and abortion. When I grew up, I was taught homosexuality was evil, abortion was murder, divorce was wrong, premarital sex was wrong and living together was living in sin. And I know I'm not the only one. So, let's be careful about buying into the PM's arrogance that somehow, we have things to teach Muslims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 Canadian values? The phrase is used by our PM when he wants to invoke racist and anti-Muslim feelings among his base. Or when people want to imagine that he's doing such things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) Or when people want to imagine that he's doing such things. He is doing such things. Two niqab-wearing women attacked in the last couple of weeks, thanks to this "issue". Whether he intended such outcomes might be in question, but as he hasn't addressed it in any way to suggest people not attack these women, but continues with another idea to set up a tip line, one has to wonder if it's deliberate or just overwhelmingly stupid. Edited October 7, 2015 by dialamah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 So Harper has come out stating that if re-elected, the Conservatives will look at banning the niqab from being worn by public servants. That Australian hate hit guy advisor is making his mark in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 So Harper has come out stating that if re-elected, the Conservatives will look at banning the niqab from being worn by public servants. That Australian hate hit guy advisor is making his mark in Canada. It's legislated in Quebec. I guess you think the entire Province are all a bunch of intolerant rubes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 It's legislated in Quebec. I guess you think the entire Province are all a bunch of intolerant rubes?If they support it, yeah. If Saudi Arabia is an oppressive and intolerant regime for legislating what is appropriate wear for women, so is Quebec, France, Belgium and the Netherlands. How sad it is that people think there's a difference between banning a specific item of clothing or requiring it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CITIZEN_2015 Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) No election win (is) worth pitting Canadians against Canadians’: Trudeau says of niqab debate Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau urged Harper to dial back the rhetoric. He said Harper’s divide-and-conquer approach “is unworthy of the office he holds and he needs to stop because no election win (is) worth pitting Canadians against Canadians.” “To the prime minister directly, stop this before someone truly gets hurt,” Trudeau told the CBC radio’s The House. “We have had women attacked in the streets for wearing hijabs and niqabs. This is not Canada, and the kind of leadership and divisive politics that he’s playing is dangerous and irresponsible.” http://www.ottawacitizen.com/life/98no+election+worth+pitting+canadians+against+canadians+trudeau/11421060/story.html Edited October 7, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 No election win (is) worth pitting Canadians against Canadians’: Trudeau says of niqab debate Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau urged Harper to dial back the rhetoric. He said Harper’s divide-and-conquer approach “is unworthy of the office he holds and he needs to stop because no election win (is) worth pitting Canadians against Canadians.”[/size] “To the prime minister directly, stop this before someone truly gets hurt,” Trudeau told the CBC radio’s The House. “We have had women attacked in the streets for wearing hijabs and niqabs. This is not Canada, and the kind of leadership and divisive politics that he’s playing is dangerous and irresponsible.” http://www.ottawacitizen.com/life/98no+election+worth+pitting+canadians+against+canadians+trudeau/11421060/story.html You've got to admire the timing. Trudeau waits until the NDP has absorbed the niqab body blow, and then he turns on the whole "Prime Ministerial material" line. I'm not disagreeing with Trudeau, but I find this an absolute masterstroke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 7, 2015 Report Share Posted October 7, 2015 It's not a matter of contradicting you. I am stating that you have created a false image of Islam and Muslims in your head and you are using your false image to try to suggest that we should accept discriminating against Muslims. That's nice. Now if only you could demonstrate it was false, against the massive, overwhelming flood of evidence that it is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.