U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-17-2013, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
12,744 posts, read 8,833,918 times
Reputation: 7352

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I did not name you specifically. That said many of the reactions on here and elsewhere are completely over the top and basically confirm my hypothesis.

Some of the generalized comments about Québécois and French Canadians that are being thrown around in reaction to the charter are way more racist than the charter itself or its proponents could ever be.

Somehow the irony is lost on some people that labelling an entire group of 8 million people (fairly easily identifiable by its characteristics that distinguish it from the rest of the country) as racists, is actually racist in itself.
I know you didn't name me specifically, but it still came off as a blanket statement about those who oppose the charter.
Any comments that generalized Quebecois and other groups are of course ignorant, I just take those out of the equation within the discussion and focus on what is really happening. I like you, have no patience for blanket statements regarding any group or minority.

I enjoy your posts Acajack, but accepting over the top comments on a discussion board as any sort of valuable measurement to confirm your hypothesis is in itself faulty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-17-2013, 05:00 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
12,744 posts, read 8,833,918 times
Reputation: 7352
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman249 View Post
You said something about religious freedom and existing laws. I simply gave you examples where existing laws are not applied strictly enough precisely because the crime is committed within the garb of religion.

You did not give examples you mentioned incidences.

While this is a different debate, many religious scholars have argued that the burqa is nothing but a symbol of misogyny/ female subjugation. That said, in many cases, wearing the burqa breaks a host of Canadian laws - so are you now is favor of banning the burqa?

No, I am not in favour of the burqa. I am in favour of religious freedom. What percentage of women in Canada wear the burqa? In France aprox 2000 women wear full muslim veil, out of 4 to 6 million muslims. Their law banning the burqa in public is overkill.


And what religious community am I painting with the same brush? Is this a phrase people just like throwing around on this forum every time someone questions religion.

You stated as your argument for this Charter

"While few in number, many present/ past religious acts in Canada have broken the law and have not been prosecuted:
1. Hate speeches against the U.S. and other NATO countries in several religious institutions in Canada
2. Ongoing abuse/ subjugation of women in some segments of societies "

You admit there have been few incidence of the law being broken. So why this charter? Is it not painting all religious people as some sort of fanatics who must be reigned in?


What if's are the basis of a debate like this. What if's were used in the Supreme Court to ban the niqab during court proceedings.

There are reasonable what if's and unreasonable. Banning the burqa ,or at least making them show their faces, at citizenship oaths, was reasonable, because knowing the person is reciting the oath is integral to taking it. The bikini what if's and antenna what if's, are not reasonable.

You clearly do not understand how Canadian law operates. You earlier said that someone in a bikini would probably not be hired as a school teacher. You are right. But would someone in a burqa be hired as a school teacher? If No - then could this person go to court citing "discrimination on religious grounds"? So you cannot deal with this on a case by case basis.

The court knows the difference between a frivolous case, ie bikini religion and a valid case of discrimination.

You are probably right. Some say that this law it too much, others argue that it does not go far enough. One day you will understand the true motive behind this proposal (someone <brilliantly> alluded to the REAL REASON on this very thread).
I fully understand all the hypothesis of the reasons for this charter. That doesn't mean we can't debate the charter itself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2013, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
12,744 posts, read 8,833,918 times
Reputation: 7352
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
speaking of hazards, I saw a bunch of women in niqab taking the escalator in Addis Ababa, and somehow the lower part of the garment got sucked into the escalator, preventing the woman from moving forward at the end of it, and the following women in the same clothes ended up all bunching into each in scream.

Fortunately nobody was hurt in the end.
Such clumsy outfit does pose a safety hazard, not to mention the difficulty with seeing things clearly by wearing the burqas.
I saw someone wearing a scarf get caught between revolving doors once. I think we should ban scarves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2013, 05:13 PM
 
1,701 posts, read 2,003,597 times
Reputation: 1027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natnasci View Post
I fully understand all the hypothesis of the reasons for this charter. That doesn't mean we can't debate the charter itself.
You make some good points. But this does not tackle to central issue - I would really like to see your response to my post # 190

"Freedom of Religion" in Canada is not as black and white an issue as you and others are making it out to be. See POST # 190.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2013, 05:44 PM
 
34,550 posts, read 41,708,762 times
Reputation: 30006
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman249 View Post
Jambo101 you talk about Canadian law (and values) without knowing much about them. Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right that allows followers the freedom to assemble and worship without any limitations. This has nothing to do with with the RIGHT to wear a burqa to a classroom. You tell me why they should be allowed?

.
To my way of thinking you either have freedom or you dont, when you are living in a place that legislates what language you must speak, what schools you can send your kids, what language you can post on signs and now the prospect of what you can or cant wear.
If that sounds like freedom to you then we are going to have to agree to disagree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2013, 06:03 PM
 
307 posts, read 187,505 times
Reputation: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101 View Post
To my way of thinking you either have freedom or you dont, when you are living in a place that legislates what language you must speak, what schools you can send your kids, what language you can post on signs and now the prospect of what you can or cant wear.
If that sounds like freedom to you then we are going to have to agree to disagree.
This is most evident when you've previously tasted freedom elsewhere, lived in Quebec, and then left Quebec. Once you're gone, and out of that environment it will come full circle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2013, 06:31 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
12,744 posts, read 8,833,918 times
Reputation: 7352
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman249 View Post
Jambo101 you talk about Canadian law (and values) without knowing much about them. Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right that allows followers the freedom to assemble and worship without any limitations. This has nothing to do with with the RIGHT to wear a burqa to a classroom. You tell me why they should be allowed?

Time and Time again, courts in Canada have flip-flopped over demands by religious groups or individuals citing religious freedom for their demands.

Here are some examples:
1. The Supreme court of Canada ruled on December 20, 2012 that the niqab would not be permissible in courts of law in the majority of cases.
2. In 1985 a court case involving an employee of the CN Railway, a Sikh whose religion required that he wear a turban, lost his challenge of the CNR policy that required him to wear a hard hat. The SCofC amended this ruling (later) but stated that employers can cite Bona fide occupational qualifications in such cases and refuse to hire Sikhs wearing turbans.


On the other hand there have been cases like this:
3. In 1995, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld the exemption for Sikhs from wearing the "Mountie hat" as part of the RCMP dress requirements.
4. In 2006, the SC of Canada ruled that Sikh children can wear a kirpan or knife/ dagger to school based on freedom of religion.


So please do not try to paint this argument as a true-Canadian vs fake-Canadian kind of argument. This is clearly not a black and white issue.

Amongst all this name calling (e.g. Muslim hater, fake Canadian) .... you and many others have missed the point. Laws and rulings like the one in our discussion set a precedent. If burqas, turbans, etc are allowed in the public space citing religious freedom - then by the same logic Sikh kids are allowed to carry kirpans (dagger/ knife) to the classroom. You don't believe me? Ask the Supreme Court of Canada.
At your request I have gone back to post 190.

I don't see these cases as flip flopping. The first case regarding the niquab is reasonable. We are talking when the court of law must see the face of the witness or the accused. It just makes sense.

The second case is a health and safety issue. Of course if your job requires you to wear a hard hat, especially for insurance purposes, that becomes paramount over anything else.

The mountie's hat is not a health and safety issue. It was a uniform issue. It is not in the same camp as the CN employees complaint. The decision was a sound one. What horrible thing has happened since mounties have been able to wear the turban as part of their uniform? The CN case, could of ended in injury or death.

A person wearing a headscarf at work is going to result in what?

Ask for the Kirpan, read this article. It's quite informing.

Understanding the Kirpan | World Sikh Organization of Canada
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2013, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
564 posts, read 881,219 times
Reputation: 984
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdw View Post
Charter of Values is not just an attack on minorities, it's an attack on everything democracy stands for. People should be ashamed, supporting this kind of thing.
Agree 100%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdw View Post
Women in Canada have nothing to fear if they choose to not wear religious clothing. The law is on their side. They do it because they want to, and they should continue to have the right to do it.
Some of them do have something to fear. The law may be on their side, but the law is not always there to protect them behind closed doors. Honor killings, physical abuse, emotional abuse. All of these are legitimate fears for women who do not comply. Authorities usually cannot act until a crime has already taken place.

Not all women come forward; many seem to accept it as their lot in life to be a doormat or indentured servant. Devoted to their families, they often suffer in silence. But by living in a country like Canada, they will become exposed to different ideas and gradually absorb them through osmosis.

My hope isn't that the government will ban anything, but that oppressed women start to wake up on their own and leave this way of thinking behind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2013, 08:02 PM
pdw
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
1,473 posts, read 1,974,404 times
Reputation: 857
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthYorkEd View Post
Agree 100%.



Some of them do have something to fear. The law may be on their side, but the law is not always there to protect them behind closed doors. Honor killings, physical abuse, emotional abuse. All of these are legitimate fears for women who do not comply. Authorities usually cannot act until a crime has already taken place.

Not all women come forward; many seem to accept it as their lot in life to be a doormat or indentured servant. Devoted to their families, they often suffer in silence. But by living in a country like Canada, they will become exposed to different ideas and gradually absorb them through osmosis.

My hope isn't that the government will ban anything, but that oppressed women start to wake up on their own and leave this way of thinking behind.
I agree with you here. Maybe saying "nothing to fear" was insensitive on my part, and for that I apologise. The point I want to make is that we should prosecute the killers and abusers, not religious women.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2013, 12:16 AM
 
34,550 posts, read 41,708,762 times
Reputation: 30006
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman249 View Post
Jambo101 you talk about Canadian law (and values) without knowing much about them. Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right that allows followers the freedom to assemble and worship without any limitations. This has nothing to do with with the RIGHT to wear a burqa to a classroom. You tell me why they should be allowed?

.
At the moment there is no law on the books denying some one the ability to work in the public sector in head coverings such as hijabs,turbans or kippas or any other form of clothing that represents ones faith, this civil liberty is about to be taken away from Canadians by a law at the moment called the Charter of Quebec values. the law is needless ,useless,unnecessary and discriminatory and open to a veritable chasm of interpretation , as there seems no logical reason to implement such legislation one is left with the conclusion it represents racist and xenophobic attitudes of Quebecs separatist government and its supporters who seem to be afraid of diversity within their culture and by getting rid of visible minorities and ultimately the Anglos the vision of a pure elitist francophone master race in Quebec is closer to realization..

Last edited by jambo101; 09-18-2013 at 01:27 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top