Iranians can choose; why not Canadians?

[Machjo]

In Afghanistan, the Taliban did not give women a choice as to whether to cover their faces.

Irán, that quasi-democratic oppressive republic with all of its human rights violations, at least lets women choose whether or not to cover their faces. Most Iranian women wear the headscarf (sinse the law still requires them to cover their hair), but in Irán's far south, some women choose to wear the niqab.

If even an oppressive government like Irán's lets women choose whether or not to cover their faces, why can't Canada, a constitutional monarchy, give women the same freedom to choose?

[TimG]

If even an oppressive government like Irán's lets women choose whether or not to cover their faces, why can't Canada, a constitutional monarchy, give women the same freedom to choose?

Spare us the melodramatic BS. No one is saying people can't walk down the street in an a face mask designed to turn women into non-entities. The only thing that is being said is that in certain situations one must show your face and one of those situations is when swearing an oath before a judge. Frankly, I find it bizarre that anyone would think that swearing an oath in a facemask is acceptable. I guess that just means that a lot of people think that oath swearing is a joke and that is why I think we should get rid of these ceremonies. Edited October 11, 2015 by TimG

[CITIZEN_2015]

The whole niqab thing is a plot by conservative party to divert attention from their miserable records which include many misdeeds past 10 years. Worst is to fall into their trap and debating whether it is a good thing or a bad thing giving them publicity and change vote intentions on that basis.

No it is not a good thing but I am not going to fall into trap and even consider voting for them because they wish to ban niqab during the citizenship ceremony and public servants (which btw in latter case this means banning them from streets too unless they takeoff their niqab right before entering the government department where they work. Btw, there is no public servants wearing niqab so conservatives are building support over NOTHING. It is a clear plot and a clear diversion and the polls show that intelligent Canadian voters don't fall into their traps anymore. Canadians have started to remember years of scandals corruptions secretive undemocratic behavior from a certain party overshadowing their niqab plot as polls show.. It is a Saudi thing. Yes the same country which these niqab opponents signed a 20 billion dollar deal to supply military equipment to!!!!. Hypocrites!!!!!!.

A very interesting article to read!!!

http://www.independe...s-a6688476.html

Canada elections: Anti-Muslim prejudice is a nasty theme of campaigning as the liberal nation's democracy loses its way

“The niqab is a distraction – a culture war fabricated to take voters’ minds off the real issues in this election,” the centre-rightToronto Globe and Mail announced in an editorial. “Don’t fall for it. Wearing a veil is one thing – wearing a blindfold is another altogether.

Edited October 14, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015

[The_Squid]

Why would we give a crap about what Iran does? And only for this issue, or do you like a lot of Iranian laws?

France bans the niqab. We are much more like France than Iran. So why not follow the French example?

[Big Guy]

I find it astounding how polarized the views on the niqab have become.

One side believe that the niqab is a symbol of oppression of women.

The other side believes that the niqab is a symbol of women choosing to show their independence of choice of dress.

It is a symbol - a thing that represents or stands for something else, especially a material object representing something abstract.

If you believe that in your mind the niqab symbolizes oppression then why do you reject the freedom of others to believe in their minds that the niqab symbolizes freedom of choice?

Which of the symbols at the following are correct?:

https://www.brainbashers.com/opticalillusions.asp

Edited October 11, 2015 by Big Guy

[The_Squid]

This thread should be merged into one of the other ones.

[BC_chick]

Agreed. I thought they'd do that yesterday with the newest niqab thread but it didn't happen. There are too many threads about such a non issue.

[TimG]

The other side believes that the niqab is a symbol of women choosing to show their independence of choice of dress.

Some people view the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of racism others believe it is a expression of "Southern Pride". Yet people have no problem demanding that it be banned because a subset of people view it as a racist symbol.

How many people would be OK with someone swearing a citizenship path wearing a KKK hood? I know some people would be fine with it but I think many of the people saying that a niqab is OK would draw the line at a KKK hood. The fact is symbols matter and a citizenship ceremony is about symbols. It is perfectly reasonable to ask that people wear things that reflect Canadian values and niqabs do not represent those values anymore than a KKK hood even if a few ISIS sympathizers want wear it "by choice".

[bush_cheney2004]

....It is perfectly reasonable to ask that people wear things that reflect Canadian values and niqabs do not represent those values anymore than a KKK hood even if a few ISIS sympathizers want wear it "by choice".

True, but a "KKK hood" has far more historical precedence in Canada compared to the niqab. The Klan is part of Canadian history.

[eyeball]

Some people view the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of racism others believe it is a expression of "Southern Pride". Yet people have no problem demanding that it be banned because a subset of people view it as a racist symbol.

How many people would be OK with someone swearing a citizenship path wearing a KKK hood? I know some people would be fine with it but I think many of the people saying that a niqab is OK would draw the line at a KKK hood. The fact is symbols matter and a citizenship ceremony is about symbols. It is perfectly reasonable to ask that people wear things that reflect Canadian values and niqabs do not represent those values anymore than a KKK hood even if a few ISIS sympathizers want wear it "by choice".

I think we should just do away with the stupid citizenship ceremony altogether now that it's become such a symbol of divisiveness.

[PIK]

The whole niqab thing is a plot by conservative party to divert attention from their miserable records which include many misdeeds past 10 years. Worst is to fall into their trap and debating whether it is a good thing or a bad thing giving them publicity and change vote intentions on that basis.

No it is not a good thing but I am not going to fall into trap and even consider voting for them because they wish to ban niqab during the citizenship ceremony and public servants (which btw in latter case this means banning them from streets too unless they takeoff their niqab right before entering the government department where they work. Btw, there is no public servants wearing niqab so conservatives are building support over NOTHING. It is a clear plot and a clear diversion and the polls show that intelligent Canadian voters don't fall into their traps anymore. Canadians have started to remember years of scandals corruptions secretive undemocratic behavior from a certain party overshadowing their niqab plot as polls show.. It is a Saudi thing. Yes the same country which these niqab opponents signed a 20 billion dollar deal to supply military equipment to!!!!. Hypocrites!!!!!!.

A very interesting article to read!!!

http://www.independe...s-a6688476.html

Canada elections: Anti-Muslim prejudice is a nasty theme of campaigning as the liberal nation's democracy loses its way

“The niqab is a distraction – a culture war fabricated to take voters’ minds off the real issues in this election,” the centre-rightToronto Globe and Mail announced in an editorial. “Don’t fall for it. Wearing a veil is one thing – wearing a blindfold is another altogether.

Like a lot of us have said , multiculturalism is killing this country. All it does is take away the rights of actual canadians. To have canadians fighting over people wanting ot forced to cover there faces proves it. Trudeau SR ruined great nation, his son will finish it off.

Edited October 16, 2015 by PIK

[CITIZEN_2015]

Like a lot of us have said , multiculturalism is killing this country. All it does is take away the rights of actual canadians. To have canadians fighting over people wanting ot forced to cover there faces proves it. Trudeau SR ruined great nation, his son will finish it off.

It is idiotic to differentiate between those assumed citizenship as immigrants and those born here (as their parents or grandparents immigrated). One thing about Canada is that either we are all immigrants or sons and daughters of immigrants unless you are native Canadian (real Canadians).

I restrainted myself from using a more realistic word to describe best these kind of people who consider those born here (or white only or Christians only) as actual Canadians. When it comes to paying taxes we are all equal and pay our share but you are saying that when it comes to rights then there are those who you regard them as always outsiders and then those actual Canadians. Canada is a multicultural society and is thriving because of that. If you don't like it then LEAVE and by doing so this country would become even better. Bye bye.

Edited October 16, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015

[dialamah]

multiculturalism is killing this country. All it does is take away the rights of actual canadians.

How in the world does multiculturalism take way the rights of Canadians, "actual" or otherwise? There is not one thing an immigrant does that I must also do; there is also nothing that I am forbidden to do, because of immigrants. This statement makes absolutely zero sense.

Edited October 16, 2015 by dialamah

[Rue]

Well said Tim.

[On Guard for Thee]

How in the world does multiculturalism take way the rights of Canadians, "actual" or otherwise? There is not one thing an immigrant does that I must also do; there is also nothing that I am forbidden to do, because of immigrants. This statement makes absolutely zero sense.

It makes less than zero sense, because it seems only to be some sort of feeble attempt to be inflammatory, and to fear monger. Which seems ubiquitous from the right just now.

[Rue]

Dialamah I disagree with you on most of what you say but on this one I respectfully agree in discussion but I do with to defend PIK. I do not wish to put words in PIK's mouth but I am familiar with his opinions. I think what he is in fact stating is being of a different culture in itself is not the issue-demanding you put that culture at all times ahead of a larger culture already existing in Canada, causes problems that eat away at unified society.

PIK is not against me being a Jew. He would criticize me not for being a Jew but for demanding certain rights in the name of being a Jew, if those rights contradicted the greater values of Canada. He is not against my religion or culture. He is going to get pissed if I use that religion or culture to ask for things different from him or that put him down or suggest I am more privileged than he. He is a Canadian. If I put myself ahead of Canada, then I insult him is what he is saying and I would be insulting if I come to this country and can't recognize it has values that take priority over my individual ones. That is what he is saying. That is what most of us are saying.

I have no problems for example with the Lord's Prayer. It was a pre-existing prayer in schools. Everyone calls it a Christian prayer. I have heard people say get rid of it as its offensive to non Christians. Did they ask me? No. People just assumed because I am not Christian I did not like the prayer. No it is not offensive? How could it be? The words are inoffensive. Its also not just a Christian prayer, thirdly its actually a prayer that is non denominational. They also said it would be offensive to atheists. Bull. Atheists just don't say it. They weren't collapsing when they heard it. Give me a break. Suddenly in the name of multi-culturalism out goes the prayer, the mention of Christmas all kinds of other things celebrated in Canada that may have Christian origins but are what we are in Canada. Geez. Christmas? Its a celebration for everyone but what we are told its not?

There's this weird thing going on that anything Christian now openly is unpopular and seen as problematic, but with other religions, we are told be accommodating. Why the double standard? I am saying that as a Jew. I see Christians as being discriminated against. I don't like it done to me, so why them? Why? I see some ultra orthodox Jews started putting up menorahs in public places. Sorry I don't need them. I don't feel in any way threatened by a Christmas tree or have psychological issues requiring a menorah be placed up. Hanukah is a minor holiday. For me celebrate it but the majority of Canadians are not, I am not interested in shoving it in their face. I am not so insecure I need to do that. I never met a Christian who told me I shouldn't celebrate Hanukah so why would I tell a Christian don't celebrate Christmas? The majority of people are Christian why can't they celebrate their holidays? They respect me, why should I not respect them?

Me personally I agree with TimG.

To me its not a Muslim issue. Its a face cover issue. I would say to anyone of any religion who feels they should be able to cover their face taking an oath-no. Pull it up during the oath, then pull it down after you take the oath. Its not much to ask.

It's a little thing to ask. If you can't do that well sorry I disagree.

First off I do not think you are being reasonable-why-because if we allow anyone to wear a mask for religious reasons then the swearing in ceremony or oath taking becomes a farse. Why-because we can't see the person's face-the very thing we need to see when we pledge an allegiance to the state-why-because the state is us-you, me, and if you can't swear an allegiance and look at me, as I look at you, your message is-I am not worthy-hell yes I am. How do you swear an allegiance to me and the collective called Canada while at the same time sayingI am not worthy of looking at your face?.

Hell if you can't just that once, make such a basic common courtesy gesture towards me-where do you get off telling me I must treat you in the very way you refuse to do with me? Where is the reciprocity? Why do you get your way and ignore mine?

Sorry I don't buy it-I do not buy your belief is so important, it takes priority over not just mind but all of Canada's. How arrogant. it allows you to segregate yourself and say I am not worthy of you.

That's my view. Its not anti Muslim-its anti anyone who covers their face. Your being Muslim is not the issue.

The basic rule is simple, all our religions have it, treat people the way you want to be treated. Most of us treat people with respect. We find it disrespectful when someone says we are not worthy of looking at their face.

Excuse me, do not tell me I have have sexual urges that I can't control that make me unworthy of looking at your face thank you very much.

I ask you what and how will covered women claiming its their religious right to stay covered now say to KKK or other bigots or people who will want to cover their face at such ceremonies?

What next, togas? Sure we can accommodate it all and then what open it up to becoming a circus? What PIK and others are saying is there must be limitations. No you can't come to the ceremony nude because its your religious belief. There is a time and a place.

Perspective is what PIK is saying. There is a time and place for multi-culturalism-mix it and impose it through the state and not as an individual to another individual as a common courtesy, then it becomes necessarily discriminatory against some groups in favour of others. Multi-culturalism to be genuine is what people show in basic common courtesy. States can't legislate that. What they can do is breed resentment by trying to shove certain beliefs in our faces.

I hate Trudeau for pandering to ethnic groups. He is the most racist of the 3 candidates. His tactics complete with minorities standing holding middle class red signs and his hand smacking his heart gesture are all tactics created by Dr. Goebels.

He has no clue this Trudeau that his appeal to multi-culturalism is in fact a coded appeal to stereotyping and inciting people and making them feel threatened without his help.

Bull. Do not use my ethnic status to get my vote. Screw you Trudeau. I am not some sheep. Don't smack your hand on your heart. It may as well be a Hitler salute because all you are doing is gesturing to your sheep to have them moo in unison. Not me Justin. Kiss my Jewish petunias.

I do not need you pandering to me telling me I am special if and only if I vote for you. Save your elitist, condescending racist message for someone else. My equality is not dependent on you-it comes from basic, common courtesy I show others and they then show me. Trudeau does not get it because he's a spoiled rich boy. How about you? Are you saying its ok for Muslims to have a face covering but no one else?

I don't think though you have given much thought to the precedent showing preferential treatment in certain circumstances triggers. I think you stop after only considering what these women want.

Open your vision to more than just what these women want. This is a country where state and religion should be separated to assure all peoples are treated the same.

How do I know I will get equal treatment from a Muslim if they are a civil servant wearing a covering or for that matter their particular garb if they find out I am Jewish? In reverse, if I wear a yamacha will you as a Muslim feel I treat you equally? Please be honest.

My experience has been the more visible in appearance Muslims are, the more likely they make anti Israel comments to me that express hatred for all Jews. How about you-do you feel Jews hate you? You think Christians hate you? I am sure you have.

Neutrality is what we need from all of us.

The niqab is a symbol of not wanting to be equal to others and so it triggers resentment. It is a statement that says I demand separate treatment.

No do not segregate faces. That is no different than segregating blacks or Muslims, period. Its a ghetto. That niqab is a symbol of a closed society, an exclusive society, a ghetto that only permits a certain belief to flourish behind it incompatible with the majority outside that covering. No do not ask me to condone putting up any barrier any cultural curtain. Save it for someone else.

Edited October 16, 2015 by Rue

[Bonam]

How in the world does multiculturalism take way the rights of Canadians, "actual" or otherwise? There is not one thing an immigrant does that I must also do; there is also nothing that I am forbidden to do, because of immigrants. This statement makes absolutely zero sense.

Immigration does not take away the rights of Canadians, you are correct. But "multiculturalism" is not just immigration. Multiculturalism is the set of social policies designed to encourage all the different cultures to be "celebrated" as part of the "cultural mosaic". That all sounds good, until you look at what is involved in the implementation of multiculturalism. Specifically, consider things like the "human rights commissions". These extra-legal bodies are given the power to entangle people in lengthy and expensive and potentially life-ruining proceedings based on speech that is deemed offensive, but is not in contravention of any of Canada's actual laws. Therefore, the policies and entities that have been put in place to support the agenda of multiculturalism do most definitely infringe on the rights of Canadians, specifically free speech rights (which the HRC's say don't exist in Canada).

[Big Guy]

Some people view the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of racism others believe it is a expression of "Southern Pride". Yet people have no problem demanding that it be banned because a subset of people view it as a racist symbol.

How many people would be OK with someone swearing a citizenship path wearing a KKK hood? I know some people would be fine with it but I think many of the people saying that a niqab is OK would draw the line at a KKK hood. The fact is symbols matter and a citizenship ceremony is about symbols. It is perfectly reasonable to ask that people wear things that reflect Canadian values and niqabs do not represent those values anymore than a KKK hood even if a few ISIS sympathizers want wear it "by choice".

You have to be careful when you decide that a symbol means the same thing for everybody. Hey TimG, a person wears a blue ribbon on their lapel. What does it mean to you"

One of the following?:

mouth cancer awareness]

Peace

dysautonomia awareness

Sjögren’s syndrome awareness

transverse myelitis awareness (royal-blue ribbon with the words Transverse Myelitis Awareness)

Von Hippel–Lindau disease awareness

tuberous sclerosis awareness

human trafficking and sex slavery awareness (navy blue)

Stevens–Johnson syndrome awareness

DARK BLUE

colon cancer awareness

Electronic Frontier Foundation: freedom of speech online,

Canada's National Non-Smoking Week

Blue Ribbon Coalition: responsible use of public lands for the benefit of all recreationists

hydranencephaly awareness

chronic fatigue syndrome awareness

addiction-recovery awareness

Pro-Choice

Orthostatic Tremor Awareness

hidradenitis suppurativa Awareness Campaign

Huntington's Disease Awareness

In support of Hong Kong Police (see Anti occupy movement)

PKU - Phenylketonuria awareness

You think maybe the wearing of a symbol means whatever the wearer wants it to mean?

Try a few more at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_awareness_ribbons

[dialamah]

Rue,

Thanks for such a thoughtful response. I am a little confused by your first line ... "Dialamah I disagree with you on most of what you say but on this one I respectfully agree in discussion but I do with to defend PIK". Did you mean to say you agree with me on most of what I say, but this time you respectfully disagree? It's the addition of "respectfully" that I find confusing, as it's generally used with "disagree".

Regarding your (PIK's) contention that the white, Christian, "old stock" Canadian culture should not have to accommodate 'new' customs in seeming preference to their own. Years ago, I read a court decision about this, which I'll try to accurately paraphrase. The court said that individuals of a dominant culture in a society enjoys a considerable degree of comfort, familiarity and privilege that minorities did not. Often, individual's within the dominant culture are unaware of their privilege because they take it for granted. Those of a minority culture, on the other hand, are constantly exposed to signs of their 'otherness' in many ways - from laws to normal, everyday customs. The court said that therefore it is up to the dominant culture to accommodate such people, so that they could also feel included - or at least, not excluded. Its a way of balancing out the relative lack of power of minorities vis-a-vis the power of those who are white Canadians, born and raised. So, for instance, prayer in school being eliminated wasn't so much because non-Christians make "demands" of us, but that its not unreasonable for them to ask that traditions of the dominant culture that actively exclude them not be mandatory in public places. For me, personally, not being of a religious type, I hated that time every morning when I had to 'pretend' to be someone I was not. Thankfully, by the time I got to high school, it was no longer an issue. But till then, that morning prayer made me feel extremely uncomfortable - and I am a third generation Canadian.

I don't know if you've travelled outside of Canada much; I haven't, but I have been to Egypt, where my culture is not the dominant one. It's hard to describe just how unsure of oneself you can feel when nothing is familiar - not the language, or the way the people look and dress, their customs and expectations. I was only a visitor, so it was transient, but it gave me a whole new perspective on the courage it takes for immigrants to come to new countries, and how extremely difficult it can be to fit in.

The niqab. In the short time it was a campaign issue, it went from the potential government saying "Let's ban it for citizenship ceremony" to "Let's ban it in public service" to "And we'll also set up a hotline for cultural barbaric practices". That's a pretty scary example of how quickly things can escalate from what seems like a reasonable expectation to targeting a minority. On this board, there are people who are absolutely certain a complete ban of the niqab is the only reasonable option. That's the problem I see with the niqab - it so quickly escalated to the idea of implementing laws that target a specific and very small group of people, relative to the entire population of Canada.

France has decreed that the niqab does interfere with the social contract we all agree to, and thus has banned it in public. Now women who wear the niqab either do not leave their home, or they risk being arrested. It's unfortunate that they have to make those kinds of choices over what is only a piece of cloth. I hope the Muslim women of Canada will not be faced with the same choice at any time in the future.