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 10-04-2015, 07:05 AM
 
18,273 posts, read 10,374,392 times
Reputation: 13332

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Souriquois View Post
Some women who wear the niqab feel it's empowering because they're not confined to beauty standards that are placed on women, don't have to put on make-up, and they don't get cat called.

It's men making these arguments, women rarely get a say.

So, if we acknowledge some women might find it empowering; is that a significant reason to challenge the "tradition" of a foreign country so as to impose one of your own? Remember; we are talking only of "tradition" and NOT religion now.

By-the-by; Niqab row: Canada's government challenges ruling Zunera Ishaq can wear veil while taking oath of citizenship | Americas | News | The Independent

In what would seem to me to be a direct contradiction to the "supposed" raison-d'etra of the niquab wearing; every picture I see of the challenger shows remarkably effective and alluring eye make-up. Just say'n.

If it were women making these decisions; how do YOU think it would play out, given the aversion MOST modern women would have to wearing anything dictated due to satisfactorily displaying chastity to a selected deity among hundreds?

Your post does give pause for thought to me along the lines of "accommodation" only. I'm thinking of someone terribly scarred from some battle zone who faces embarrassing themselves beyond our comprehension.

The Oath of Allegiance should not be about making someone happy or comfortable by accommodating their "chosen cultural tradition".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-04-2015, 09:13 AM
 
261 posts, read 203,023 times
Reputation: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Souriquois View Post
Both Western and Middle Eastern cultures are sexist. And all I see in these kinds of debates is a bunch of men arguing about who's version of oppressing women is better. It's men making these arguments, women rarely get a say.
Women are part of the debate. They express their opinion, some for allowing the niqab, others against. During the debate on the proposed Charter of secularism in Quebec, some women were in favour of it on feminist grounds, others against also on feminist grounds.

And while the Western world hasn't reached perfect equality between men and women, it's still a lot better than most other societies. Consider that women who for example are against the niqab usually frame it in terms of not reversing the gains of women in the last 50 or 100 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Gatineau, Québec
21,946 posts, read 27,348,673 times
Reputation: 8603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Souriquois View Post
Some women who wear the niqab feel it's empowering because they're not confined to beauty standards that are placed on women, don't have to put on make-up, and they don't get cat called.
.
That's an odd form of empowerment when the upshot of wearing a niqab is almost always a serious impairment of your career and socio-economic opportunities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Gatineau, Québec
21,946 posts, read 27,348,673 times
Reputation: 8603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migratory Chicken View Post
Women are part of the debate. They express their opinion, some for allowing the niqab, others against. During the debate on the proposed Charter of secularism in Quebec, some women were in favour of it on feminist grounds, others against also on feminist grounds.

And while the Western world hasn't reached perfect equality between men and women, it's still a lot better than most other societies. Consider that women who for example are against the niqab usually frame it in terms of not reversing the gains of women in the last 50 or 100 years.
Yes women are definitely part of the debate all across Canada and in Quebec. Certainly in Quebec the vast majority of women (including many high profile Muslim women or women of Muslim origin) are against the niqab. Basically every single women's group in Quebec is against it.

If anything, in my social circle, there are more men who are wishy-washy on the niqab than women. All of the women without exception are dead-set against it. Including two (nominally) Muslim women I know.

I've never heard any female say here that opposing the niqab is about ''men telling women what they can or can't wear".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 10:32 AM
 
5,097 posts, read 2,486,575 times
Reputation: 4657
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwit View Post
If you are not capable of relating to cultures outside your immediate experience, then there really isn't any more to be said to that. If your viewpoint of how a democratic society works is based on a western Biblical interpretation, then I must respectfully disagree.
That is an incorrect. A foreigner's demand to conceal one's nose and mouth while swearing a citizenship oath to Canada is not about culture here or there. It is about Canada and Canadian values, and about new citizens clearly communicating their commitment to Canada. Clear communication is not possible when the nose and mouth are obstructed.

Furthermore, more than 80% of Canadians believe that new citizens should not conceal their face when swearing an oath for citizenship. Democracy, respecting the majority, should support the wishes of the 80%.


"I think it's completely wrong-headed to associate the niqab with Islam," Kenney said.
"The niqab reflects a medieval tribal custom that reflects a misogynistic view of women."
Kenney is correct that the vast majority of Muslim women, in Canada and worldwide, do not wear a veil and do not see it as a religious requirement. On the other hand, it just happens that those who wear it tend to be Muslims."
Conservatives crank up values clash by taking aim at 'barbaric cultural practices' - Politics - CBC News
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 10:35 AM
 
5,097 posts, read 2,486,575 times
Reputation: 4657
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwit View Post
You have said this repeatedly and just as repeatedly that is simply not true. The Bible used by Christians of all denominations contains an admonishment to dress modestly. This is interpreted in different ways by the many different denominations, your refusal to understand that notwithstanding. It isn't any different for the Koran.
Let's be clear on who it is that wants to interpret face concealment through the definition of modesty per a religious book, even though there is nothing in any religious book that requires men and women to conceal the nose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 10:47 AM
 
5,097 posts, read 2,486,575 times
Reputation: 4657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Souriquois View Post
Canada ALREADY has an accommodation for women in the niqab. They can go to another room with another woman to take it off to verify their identity, then they can put it back on, go out, and swear the oath. The woman who is involved in the case has done this many times through the immigration process, getting her drivers license, etc.

That's how this has ALWAYS been done.

It's only become an issue with the election. Really, Harper has been PM since 2006, had a majority since 2011... he could have changed the law then. But he didn't, did he? No, this comes up in the election that he was losing.

He threw a dead cat on the table because he was losing in the polls.

And now we're talking about the dead cat (I responded to the thread on the Australian idiom here)

Though it's not like the other parties are innocent in throwing dead cats on the table. Justin Trudeau's is weed. He said he wanted to legalize it long ago, it was known, but threw that dead cat back on the table. I think that was a distraction strategy "Hey guys, remember, I want to legalize weed!"

Mind you, I'm all for legal weed. It could bring in revenue for the country, actually. Tax it, use the money to invest in health care, schools, infrastructure, etc. Like Colorado. That can bring in revenue, banning the niqab won't. So that cat might not be dead, he threw a live cat on the table.
This is not an election issue. This has been winding through the courts for years,

"The woman at the centre of the niqab battle has told the Federal Court of Appeal she wants to get her citizenship by the Oct. 19 election so she can have a say in ‘‘how the country that I love so much should be run.” The federal government, though, argues the public interest in a delay outweighs any harm to her.

Two weeks ago, the appeal court upheld a lower-court ruling that overturned a federal ban on face-coverings for those taking the citizenship oath, paving the way for Zunera Ishaq to get her citizenship by Oct. 19.

But Ottawa immediately filed a motion seeking to stay that decision until the matter could be heard before the Supreme Court of Canada. As of Tuesday, no decision had been made on the stay request, but if it is granted, there is no chance Ishaq will become a citizen in time to vote.

... A policy effectively requiring citizenship-ceremony participants to be seen taking the oath was introduced in December 2011."

Woman at centre of niqab controversy tells court she wants citizenship in time to vote | National Post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Toronto
12,581 posts, read 11,139,702 times
Reputation: 3738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lieneke View Post
That is an incorrect. A foreigner's demand to conceal one's nose and mouth while swearing a citizenship oath to Canada is not about culture here or there. It is about Canada and Canadian values, and about new citizens clearly communicating their commitment to Canada. Clear communication is not possible when the nose and mouth are obstructed.

Furthermore, more than 80% of Canadians believe that new citizens should not conceal their face when swearing an oath for citizenship. Democracy, respecting the majority, should support the wishes of the 80%.


"I think it's completely wrong-headed to associate the niqab with Islam," Kenney said.
"The niqab reflects a medieval tribal custom that reflects a misogynistic view of women."
Kenney is correct that the vast majority of Muslim women, in Canada and worldwide, do not wear a veil and do not see it as a religious requirement. On the other hand, it just happens that those who wear it tend to be Muslims."
Conservatives crank up values clash by taking aim at 'barbaric cultural practices' - Politics - CBC News
Its funny you should say the niqab reflects a medieval tribal custom because essentially isn't that what religion is minus the medieval part in most cases? Religion is essentially a custom. I really think the issue of the niqab is a matter of choice to the woman. We can associate all kinds of things to it like misogyny and the like, but ultimately if it is important to her and her own belief system than we should leave it at that. Essentially religion is that, a belief system for the individual. We may not agree with a variety of belief systems, but I do think there is a necessity for us to respect difference even if it makes us uncomfortable.. As long as i'm not forced, or anyone isn't forced (which in Canada nobody is forced to) wear a niqab than if it is something freely worn due to personal belief system than really all the power to them. What it represents, well what does the Niqab truly represent to the woman who wears it - perhaps we should ask her.

As for the citizenship ceremony, I totally agree about confirming the identity part. It looks like there is an accommodation for that. Goal is to confirm identity, goal accomplished by the practice that is in place today regarding the accommodation detailed by other posters. As for clearly communicating, are we certain this can't be done through the niqab or is that the visual of it simply disturbs us and our 'Canadian values'

Last edited by fusion2; 10-04-2015 at 11:34 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 11:39 AM
 
5,097 posts, read 2,486,575 times
Reputation: 4657
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2 View Post
Its funny you should say the niqab reflects a medieval tribal custom because essentially isn't that what religion is minus the medieval part in most cases? Religion is essentially a custom. I really think the issue of the niqab is a matter of choice to the woman. We can associate all kinds of things to it like misogyny and the like, but ultimately if it is important to her and her own belief system than we should leave it at that. Essentially religion is that, a belief system for the individual. We may not agree with a variety of belief systems, but I do think there is a necessity for us to respect difference.. As long as i'm not forced, or anyone isn't forced (which in Canada nobody is forced to) wear a niqab than if it is something freely worn due to personal belief system than really all the power to them.

As for the citizenship ceremony, I totally agree about confirming the identity part. It looks like there is an accommodation for that. Goal is to confirm identity, goal accomplished by the practice that is in place today regarding the accommodation detailed by other posters. As for clearly communicating, are we certain this can't be done through the niqab or is I that the visual of it simply disturbs us and our 'Canadian values'
The foreigner who is attempting to re-write Canadian law has referenced religion to bolster her choice to conceal her face and obstruct her mouth when she swears the oath of citizenship. It is well known (or should be) that concealing the nose and mouth have nothing to do with religion. I consider it problematic that someone would falsely claim that face concealment is based on religion.

Kenny and Harper have described concealing the face as tribal, barbaric, medieval, and related to misogyny.

Since concealing the face is nothing more than a personal preference, and it obstructs the mouth, it should not be allowed when new Canadians must be seen swearing the oath during Canadian citizenship. If a single foreigner, rather than the Canadian majority, can dictate what is allowed and not allowed when taking Canadian citizenship, then Canadians have completely lost their rights. The goal of the citizenship ceremony is to see new Canadians swear an oath, not to confirm what their nose looks like

I met a man from Ireland a few years ago and he would have loved to have covered his face when he had to swear allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth ll, Queen of Canada. " The Oath of Citizenship is today a legally binding oral and written contract intended to ensure that new Canadian citizens promise to obey the laws and customs of their new country, fulfil their duties as citizens, and recognize the authority of the monarch as the personification of the state and various entities and concepts." (link)

There are probably many people who would prefer to mumble though their oath to obey the laws and customs of Canada, especially those who don't want to obey the laws of Canada when obtaining citizenship.

Last edited by Lieneke; 10-04-2015 at 11:53 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2015, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Toronto
12,581 posts, read 11,139,702 times
Reputation: 3738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lieneke View Post
The foreigner who is attempting to re-write Canadian law has referenced religion to bolster her choice to conceal her face and obstruct her mouth when she swears the oath of citizenship. It is well known (or should be) that concealing the nose and mouth have nothing to do with religion. I consider it problematic that someone would falsely claim that face concealment is based on religion.

Kenny and Harper have described concealing the face as tribal, barbaric, medieval, and related to misogyny.

Since concealing the face is nothing more than a personal preference, and it obstructs the mouth, it should not be allowed when new Canadians must be seen swearing the oath during Canadian citizenship. If a single foreigner, rather than the Canadian majority, can dictate what is allowed and not allowed when taking Canadian citizenship, then Canadians have completely lost their rights.
You keep throwing around 'the Foreigner' here Leineke as if they are an Alien from Alpha Centauri that just landed their UFO on Canadian soil 5 minutes ago. These people have been in Canada for years and are Permanent Residents are they not?.. I would not exactly call them a 'Foreigner'

Essentially though, I don't really see it in the light you do. Why I drew a parallel between a religion and a so called tribal custom is essentially I don't see the difference. They are both belief systems. So I look at this very practically, do we accomplish the goal of identifying someone with the current accommodation. Check - yes we do.. Does the Niqab prevent the person from swearing their oath and clearly communicating.. Yes or no? If it is a thin veil I'm not sure the person can't clearly communicate. Have you spoken to a woman in a Niqab to find out?

As for rights, we have to be careful about majority views in any society. There was a time the rights of many people were suppressed because the majority view supported denial of rights and freedoms that today the majority would support. I would hope we are a more elevated and transcendental society than that and that we see our nation as one that can progress in terms of human rights and freedoms and not set behind the pardon the pun, cloak of traditional and rigid Canadian values.. Furthermore, i'm not sure how modifying the laws of our land to support the rights and freedoms of all its people is violating anyone's rights. I think if you take emotion and the concept of 'values' out of the equation and just look at this logically it would make a difference in how you see the issue.

Last edited by fusion2; 10-04-2015 at 12:21 PM..
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