Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Coming on the heels of Trudeau's opposition to Canada joining in the ISIS fight, he has now taken another clear position - saying that Harper is wrong to appeal the SCC decision to allow a Niqab to be worn when taking the Citizenship Oath. This thread is not about the niqab - we have another thread that has beaten that one to death. It's about the fact that his position does not play well throughout Canada and especially in Quebec. Quebec is quickly becoming a game-changer for the Conservatives and if they continue their upward momentum - and the Libs continue to drop - we may well see Harper's biggest majority yet. While this link is from Yahoo - where posters tend to be just that - Yahoos........the negative response to Trudeau's position is almost unanimous - just check the comments.

Again - this thread is to discuss the political impact of this issue - not the niqab itself.

Link: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/trudeau-calls-government-reasons-appeal-niqab-ruling-unjustified-220804837.html

Edited by Keepitsimple

Back to Basics

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Coming on the heels of Trudeau's opposition to Canada joining in the ISIS fight, he has now taken another clear position - saying that Harper is wrong to appeal the SCC decision to allow a Niqab to be worn when taking the Citizenship Oath.

Minor correction. It wasn't an SCC decision, or it couldn't be appealed.

The Conservatives' position on this is purely political. Face coverings are extremely unpopular in Canada, and especially in Quebec. Quebecers' attitudes towards this has actually hardened since the two terrorist incidents by Quebec Muslims and the attack on Charlie Hebdo, and the Conservatives are actually looking to pick up maybe 10 more seats in Quebec now as Quebecers no longer consider them 'warmongers' and strongly support their intervention against ISIS.

The Liberals and NDP really don't have a lot of choice but to support the woman wearing the veil, and that puts them at odds with the great majority of Quebecers on what has become a hot button emotional issue.

"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

Posted

Conservatives like to set their hair on fire over this... and it it may poll well... but most people really don't rank this issue very high on how they would vote (other than perhaps the "hard right wing").

Posted

Conservatives like to set their hair on fire over this... and it it may poll well... but most people really don't rank this issue very high on how they would vote (other than perhaps the "hard right wing").

And Quebecers...

"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

Posted

Quebec is seen as a minority group, they can be as bigoted as they want.

How dare you criticize a minority group, you filthy bigot!! :o

"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

Posted

And Quebecers...

Yes... but I don't think they will change their vote over this... I agree with the gov't on this issue. I certainly wouldn't vote for them because of it.

Posted

Yes... but I don't think they will change their vote over this... I agree with the gov't on this issue. I certainly wouldn't vote for them because of it.

I was born and raised in Montreal. Quebecers can be very engaged and emotional with issues like this - especially in view of the very public and charged debate over "reasonable accommodation" that has been going on for several years. We'll know more with some follow-up polling.....but it has the potential to be a "watershed" moment where people start to give grudging support to the Conservatives in light of disappointment with Liberals.

Back to Basics

Posted

. Face coverings are extremely unpopular in Canada, and especially in Quebec.

Except in places like, anywhere north of Toronto (up in Elliot Lake on the weekend, seems almost everyone wore one), Ottawa, Sudbury , Th Bay and all points in between, all of the prairies, everywehere outside of lower mainland BC, the entire north of NWT Yukon Iqaluit, Quebec....lots of enjoyment there,and many other places.

In tiny miniscule pockets of Ottawa (apparently) they are not welcome. Its pretty much confined to one house/apt/condo.

Posted

Yes... but I don't think they will change their vote over this... I agree with the gov't on this issue. I certainly wouldn't vote for them because of it.

I disagree with Harper on this issue, and I will vote for him.

I don';t think he gives a s**t either way. But as has been said, it plays well to some.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

It's about the fact that his position does not play well throughout Canada and especially in Quebec.

I take it you are pleased at this news?

Anyhow, we posters here frequently comment on how the average citizen is not knowledgeable about politics and their machinations.

I am guessing this is one of those times where Canadians dont know much about the legalities and will go on emotion, of course fueled by xenophobia. The entire other thread is proof of that.

Posted
I am guessing this is one of those times where Canadians dont know much about the legalities and will go on emotion, of course fueled by xenophobia. The entire other thread is proof of that.

you forgot hatred and bigotry.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

you forgot hatred and bigotry.

That's an ironic statement considering the topic. I support the right of people to wear whatever they want, but to argue that people wear this with any legitimate desire is very dishonest. But I don't really care if they wear it. On the other hand, I can see why people oppose it, in this particular instance.

Posted

That's an ironic statement considering the topic. I support the right of people to wear whatever they want, but to argue that people wear this with any legitimate desire is very dishonest. But I don't really care if they wear it. On the other hand, I can see why people oppose it, in this particular instance.

I'm simply adding some true motives -hatred and bigotry- to this sentence:"I am guessing this is one of those times where Canadians dont know much about the legalities and will go on emotion, of course fueled by xenophobia."

People fear change and a woman with a veil In Canada, is frightening to some. And I do argue that people wear veils with legitimate desire and sincerity. It is not my place to judge their motives. Certainly this woman is articulate enough and has expressed herself clearly, and who am I to suggest she is some kind of robot? Not agreeing with her reasons is very far from saying she is coerced, and that anybody who believes her is very dishonest.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

Except in places like, anywhere north of Toronto (up in Elliot Lake on the weekend, seems almost everyone wore one), Ottawa, Sudbury , Th Bay and all points in between, all of the prairies, everywehere outside of lower mainland BC, the entire north of NWT Yukon Iqaluit, Quebec....lots of enjoyment there,and many other places.

In tiny miniscule pockets of Ottawa (apparently) they are not welcome. Its pretty much confined to one house/apt/condo.

I find it interesting you criticize others for snarky trolling, but don't have a problem engaging in it yourself...

"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

Posted

I find it interesting you criticize others for snarky trolling, but don't have a problem engaging in it yourself...

LOL

Thats funny. Where in the post is snarkiness?

Would it be the fact that all those places I listed go against your post that Canadians have a thing against face covers ?

Well, that sure aint snarky trolling.

Posted

LOL

Thats funny. Where in the post is snarkiness?

Would it be the fact that all those places I listed go against your post that Canadians have a thing against face covers ?

Well, that sure aint snarky trolling.

Troll.

"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

Posted

And I do argue that people wear veils with legitimate desire and sincerity.

That's fine. As far as I know we're not talking about a ban on veils etc. We're talking about not allowing them for the purpose of photo-identification and for earning citizenship or PR status. Confirming identity is an extremely important part of operating a fair and safe society. It's EXTREMELY reasonable to suggest that someone's unique or specific cultural desires do not take precedence over that, nor should they.

It's also not unreasonable for people to be suspicious of someone wearing a face-veil. That's basic human nature, though for a lot of people it's certainly grown into additional stereotypes and cultural judgments.

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted

Troll.

You are on a roll today ! Well done.

I take it that you now realize the folly of suggesting that CDN's are largely against face covers when CDNS by and large deem them necessary .

The point is, we shouldnt outlaw something lots of use, and the laws and rules in place work exceedingly well.

No ID at a voting booth, bring/have someone who can vouch for you .

Want to wear a veil at a voting booth, bring/have someone who can vouch for you.

Works juuuuuuuuust fine. Lets move onto the economy or some such.

Posted

We're talking about not allowing them for the purpose of photo-identification and for earning citizenship or PR status.

Lets take the first part. You show up to vote, no ID.

Well?

Somene has to vouch for you, it was acceptable yesterday, ten years ago five years ago...but now its worrisome? Why?

Confirming identity is an extremely important part of operating a fair and safe society. It's EXTREMELY reasonable to suggest that someone's unique or specific cultural desires do not take precedence over that, nor should they.

Except there was never any concern before as relates to'Confirming identity is an extremely important part of operating a fair and safe society."

See above.

It's also not unreasonable for people to be suspicious of someone wearing a face-veil. That's basic human nature, though for a lot of people it's certainly grown into additional stereotypes and cultural judgments.

Really moon?

Do schoolkids/bikers/halloween/adults out icefishing/walking in winter make you suspicious?

I doubt it. Never did me, so what changed?

Posted

That's fine. As far as I know we're not talking about a ban on veils etc. We're talking about not allowing them for the purpose of photo-identification and for earning citizenship or PR status. Confirming identity is an extremely important part of operating a fair and safe society. It's EXTREMELY reasonable to suggest that someone's unique or specific cultural desires do not take precedence over that, nor should they.

It's also not unreasonable for people to be suspicious of someone wearing a face-veil. That's basic human nature, though for a lot of people it's certainly grown into additional stereotypes and cultural judgments.

I agree, but again that is not an issue in this circumstance. It has been agreed that this person has already identified herself to the satisfaction of citizenship authorities. All the paperwork and certification of identity is done. She has already 'earned ' citizenship in every way that matters. She has stated she will cheerfully take the oath. If it was an issue of confirming her identity I would agree `100%. It isn't.

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted
Do schoolkids/bikers/halloween/adults out icefishing/walking in winter make you suspicious?

It is all those hockey players in bulky gear wearing masks and helmets that have me worried. Are the Saudis breeding hordes of dwarf loonies? Are there explosive vests under that Chucks Hardware jersey? Is that a sinister mustache behind the cage?

Science too hard for you? Try religion!

Posted

It's been stated also that she said she would go into a another room and show her face to the officials, then go back and take the swearing in. So why make a big deal on this, the very thing that Western countries preach to others countries.!

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,896
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    postuploader
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Politics1990 earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Akalupenn earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • User earned a badge
      One Year In
    • josej earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • josej earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...