[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Malthus]

Viper, if you had the choice between the swearing in ceremony allowing veils and head coverings, but it no longer referenced the Queen but aprather Canada only; or the swearing in ceremony playing up the royal connections but disallowing headwear, which would you choose?

Basically, what's the bigger issue? Hats or allegiance to the crown?

Ironically, the crown is a kind of hat  ... it's all about the hats!   

[Valmy]

Canada was founded by strong people in funny hats

[Malthus]

Canada was founded by strong people in funny hats

Canada was founded by strong people looking for materials to make hats. 

http://www.hbcheritage.ca/hbcheritage/history/social/FashionPopularCulture/beaverhats

[Valmy]

With Canada being so funny hat-centric one would think these funny hat wearing immigrants would be more welcome.

[viper37]

Again it is a ceremony. From my relatives who had such ceremonies, it seemed like the main effect was it made them feel really proud about what they had done to join their chosen country (/discard their old one).

It's a little more than a ceremony, it's an official act in front of a judge.  I know the number a new citizens increase substantially just before an election, but it's still an official act, in front of an officer of the law who need to confirm your indentity.

I can't go there with a Klan hood, why should someone else go covered?

On day one you want to set up an antagonism between a new citizen's allegiance to her new country and her religious faith? Why?

Because he/she needs to understand that Faith is a private matter in this country, not a public one.
This is how Canada should be.

Ah so is your assumption that only a woman who agrees in the oppression of women would ever adopt a face covering?

It is my assumption that her radical faith is more important than anything else in this world, that she can not make any compromise on it and as such is unwilling to integrate in our society.

I don't understand your KKK example. Would I find that distasteful? Sure, if I knew about it. Is that a good enough reason to deny someone citizenship? I don't think so / if there was something of racial violence in their background, the process would have uncovered that before there were ever invited to a ceremony to anoint(?) their citizenship.

The KKK example is about the robes and the hood.  If I were a French citizen willing to become a Canadian citizen, I could not participate while wearing this.  I probably could not even participate wearing shades.

Are they going to not show up or are they just going to still be there but be disaffected non-citizens?

The goal of immigration is to integrate newly arrivals into our society.  If they put a wall in front of them from day 1, you significantly reduce their chances of integration and participation into our society.

[crazy canuck]

The language isn't as strong as in Quebec because nobody outside of Quebec agrees with you.

I guess Harper and his cabinet are all from Quebec, then

Harper and his cabinet want votes in Quebec

[viper37]

Looking at it from the opposite angle, you are really making it more difficult for those who would like to testify in a manner that is in accordance with their religious beliefs to actually volunteer to testify. Seems like that would have negative outcomes on your muslim residents (both citizens and non-citizens alike).

Then their religious beliefs will have to change, or they will have to seek an alternate country where this is a welcome practice.  We do not have to adapt to strange&fringe religious customs, it knows no end.

Seperation of State and Church means that religion has no place in the government.  Any religion.  I know it's a difficult concept to understand in a country where 95% of the population are believers.

[Valmy]

Is that a realistic possibility?  Seems crazy to pander to people who will never support you.

[garbon]

Wow, it seems really antiquated that people can do what they want as long as they keep it in their homes, their bedrooms.

[crazy canuck]

Is that a realistic possibility?  Seems crazy to pander to people who will never support you.

If that was directed at my comment then I am not sure what you are talking about.  The only reason the Conservatives are taking this position is to pander to the intolerance in Quebec.

[Grey Fox]

Is that a realistic possibility?  Seems crazy to pander to people who will never support you.

It is. He can win 15-20 seats in Quebec.

[viper37]

I don't know what you are saying here.

Follow up the twitter topic with Grallon.

So a woman who has taken the steps to apply for and attain Canadian citizenship isn't signalling that she wants to be part of Canadian society? Wearing a face cover negates all of that work and marks her in opposition to the state?

Wearing a face cover in an official ceremony where she needs to be indentified.
If she can't remove it for a few minutes in front of a judge, she does not recognize the supremacy of the law over religion.  That means she is either:
a) a religious fanatic and we have enough of these in the government right now
b) an integrist pushing for more intolerance in our society
c) part of a beachead movement by the Muslim Brotherhood or other organizations to change laws&cultural habits in occidental countries.  Again, we have enough of those here.  What we need are working immigrants, not religious zealots.

You are asking her to set aside her religious beliefs for no legitimate reason except that you find the wearing of veils to represent something distasteful to you.

No.  I'm asking her to remove the veil any time she needs to be identified.
I am still unsure about wearing the veil in public places, but I lean toward a full ban, since it's an obvious security risk.

Why is it such a big deal that she remove a veil for a couple minutes then?

Ask her that question.

Are you think that once the veil has been lifted in public for a short amount of time that the scales will be metaphorically lifted from her eyes and she'll renounce her previous customs/beliefs? Are you expecting some sort of miraculous transformation that can only be completed by veil removal?

That's symbolic.  It means she has taken the first step to integrate in our society.

Also, where do you draw the line? Should Sikh men be required to let there hair out as it is disrespectful for men to keep their heads covered indoors?

Can we see their face and identify them correctly?  Yes.  No problem.
Can they drive a motorbike without a helmet because it doesn't fit with their hair cover?  No.  Helmet is mandatory for everyone.  Some call it prejudice, I call it equality under law.

[viper37]

When the Canadian National Anthem is played all non-traitors remove their hats.  It is obvious Sikhs stand with the terrorists.

Nobody removes his hat in Canada by -40C.

[Valmy]

Is that a realistic possibility?  Seems crazy to pander to people who will never support you.

If that was directed at my comment then I am not sure what you are talking about.  The only reason the Conservatives are taking this position is to pander to the intolerance in Quebec.

What was unclear?  I was doubting the ability of the Conservatives to win seats in Quebec so I was questioning the wisdom of pandering.  Especially if it might cost them elsewhere.

[Valmy]

Is that a realistic possibility?  Seems crazy to pander to people who will never support you.

It is. He can win 15-20 seats in Quebec.

I stand corrected.  Well we will see if he does.