Citizenship vs. hijabs/niqabs/burkas. Fight!

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Puck Nutty, Feb 22, 2015.

  1. Puck Nutty

    Puck Nutty Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    487
    Location:
    Hogtown
    This story has been stewing in Canada for a few days now since our PM said it was "offensive" to "most Canadians" that Muslim women would wear head coverings during the citizenship swearing in ceremony.

    This whole mess started when Ms. Zunera Ishaq successfully convinced the Supreme Court that it was unlawful for officials to require her to remove her niqab during the recitation of the oath of citizenship. She proposed a compromise by offering to show her face to a female officer in a private place, but was told that her face must be seen during the recitation as well.

    Mr. Harper outwardly stated that he objected on the grounds that these customs are oppressive to women and thus fly in the face of Canada's values.

    However, critics feel that this is Mr. Harper's way of stoking his Conservative base by rallying them against Islam and any potential security threat they may cause, real or imagined.

    So, what say you? Religious freedom or border security and patriotism? What rules the day?
     
  2. kramerfan86

    kramerfan86 Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,572
    My view on muslim head scarves has always been so long as the woman is not being forced into it then people should back off and not be such jerkoffs.
     
  3. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    43,059
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    Until she incorporates, I don't think she should be able to exercise religious freedoms. Until then, she should earn her citizenship like most Canadians - naked with the risk of being slapped by a medical professional.
     
  4. Puck Nutty

    Puck Nutty Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    487
    Location:
    Hogtown
    A viewpoint which is far too reasonable for the political sphere.
     
  5. jackelgull

    jackelgull An aberration of nature

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Messages:
    3,252
    Location:
    Within the realm of impossibility
    I've never understood the hate against the head scarves. It just seems bizarre and silly. The fact that people go to such elaborate lengths defending it as separation of church and state is even sillier and more bizarre to me. But I have never had, or ever will have any influence on anybody else, so I suppose I don't really have any other reaction besides, "It isn't my problem if a PM from Canada wants to be a jerk."
     
  6. kramerfan86

    kramerfan86 Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,572
    Oh most obviously, following the islamic religion is a refusal to assimilate! I mean if a pentacostal woman wore her dress that would be cool, but a head scarf for islam? Anti-freedom!
     
  7. Puck Nutty

    Puck Nutty Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    487
    Location:
    Hogtown
    Not to mention that Jewish women often wear wigs as per religious custom, thus "disguising" their appearance as well. The Amish of course have strict rules on how people must dress, but this is not viewed as oppressive, but rather a choice made by the individual.

    It seems that critiquing Jewish and Christian practices remains a political minefield, but Islam is fair game.
     
  8. Arwon

    Arwon

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    19,489
    Location:
    Canberra
    "You must wear exactly the right amount of skin coverings"
     
  9. FriendlyFire

    FriendlyFire Codex WMDicanious

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    20,782
    Location:
    Sydney
    For a secular country, face must be shown for police, law enforcements, secular documents and identity at a minimal.

    Canada dose have the right to deny citizen ship to whom they so choose. This just seems very odd requirement, I certainly would have no issues removing any religious symbols if I wanted to emigrate to Canada and wanted to integrate. Seems like a huge beat up over nothing, Canada has an excellent track record of intergration. Just have high education / skill requirements / standards for selecting immigrants.
     
  10. El_Machinae

    El_Machinae Colour vision since 2018 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    47,082
    Location:
    Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
    He's incorrect. ID photos are one thing, but this is dumb.
     
  11. Puck Nutty

    Puck Nutty Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    487
    Location:
    Hogtown
    This particular case applies to just one woman, who by all accounts, was willing to show her face to a female officer in private for ID purposes. The dust up came when they then required her to keep her face unveiled for the entirety of the ceremony.

    I guess they were afraid she would suddenly switch up with another woman when they weren't looking? I dunno.
     
  12. FriendlyFire

    FriendlyFire Codex WMDicanious

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    20,782
    Location:
    Sydney
    That was a very poorly worded.
    What saying is that immigration skill, education and willingness to integrate are far more important then a fight over religious coverings. Provided she understands that Canada is a secular country and is ok with removing it for ID, Law enforcement. Better off for Canada to look elsewhere to change / fix its immigration policies.

    Given that Canada has excellent record of integration, chances are within 1 generation her children will have abandoned strict Muslim teachings.
    I also don't see why she cannot remove her covering if it is required by law and not make such a huge fight over this.
     
  13. kramerfan86

    kramerfan86 Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,572
    Well see that's the thing based on the story she does understand the need to remove it for legal reasons and she offered to do so, what she wasnt willing to do it for a ceremony that did not really require it.
     
  14. Puck Nutty

    Puck Nutty Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    487
    Location:
    Hogtown
  15. Valka D'Ur

    Valka D'Ur Hosting Iron Pen in A&E Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,344
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
    I thought it was Jason Kenney who was adamant about this. So he was parroting Harper's views all along, and now that Kenney is no longer in the Immigration portfolio, Harper has to say this for himself?

    That said, I have to say that for a formal ceremony, I have to agree. If she won't agree to forego the niqab for the ceremony in front of a mixed group of people, let her do so in front of a female official, in a women-only ceremony. But she should show her face.

    The thing is, this is not a mere head scarf. A hijab is nothing more than a very large scarf. I used to wear scarves when I was younger, back in the '60s. That's how my grandmother was raised - that in public places such as going shopping or what-have-you, females should wear scarves. Thank goodness she stopped making me do that once I started school, since I always found it uncomfortable and it was harder to hear what people were saying.

    The niqab is a completely different matter. I see women in those and am immediately uncomfortable because I can't see their facial expressions. It's impossible to tell if their body language and facial expressions match their words. It's very difficult to judge whether someone is trustworthy or not if the nonverbal cues aren't there to read as well.
     
  16. Tahuti

    Tahuti Writing Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    9,492
    Gender:
    Male
    You can also reason the other way around: They don't show their facial expressions, so let's just assume they handle in good faith!
     
  17. Valka D'Ur

    Valka D'Ur Hosting Iron Pen in A&E Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,344
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
    Would you automatically trust someone who only shows their eyes? Around here, anyone who is dressed like that for any reason other than it being -20C with windchill or Halloween tends to be looked at with suspicion. Some stores and offices and the public library don't allow people to wear hats, hoodies, or sunglasses on the premises. Yes, there are a fair number of Muslim women here. But none of those I've seen have worn the niqab. Hijabs aplenty, yes. But no more covering than that.
     
  18. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Super Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    47,880
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    I don't have a problem with religious dress that covers the face, even completely. But if such a person is engaged in public communication with others and they are asked to uncover their face, they should have to do so. That would include store clerks, teachers of them or their children, government officials, public safety workers and taxi/bus drivers. I think that recognition is part of being a member of an open society. If anyone wants to be secretive and stay covered all the time, then they should stay home. Walking down the street covered would be fine, but when interacting with others, upon request, they should have to reveal their face.
     
  19. Zelig

    Zelig Beep Boop

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    17,064
    Location:
    Canada
    I'd be fine with this, except I'm against letting people practice gender discrimination when choosing who they wish to receive government services from.
     
  20. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    43,059
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    I would never put you in charge of a government-run brothel.
     

Share This Page