Canada to join Talebans in enforcing dress code on women

[Ideologue]

Ide.

Viper is feminine.

So, La viper 37

Lol.

[garbon]

I don't think you're racists.  I think you're simply forgetting that tolerance of non-physically harmful expression has to be pretty uniformly distributed (i.e., to men and women, atheist and Muslim, straight and gay), be content neutral (not favoring atheistic or Christian expression over Islamic), and be rationally related to a legitimate government objective (which I do not believe enforcing fuzzy social mores about hats to be).

Most people aren't in the habit of tolerating toxic substances within their organisms.

G.

Most people aren't in the habit of calling others 'toxic substances'. Nor do they talk about substances coming into their organisms.

[viper37]

Mais pourquoi?  Qui est blesse?  Simples signes de l'heritage culturel ne sont pas plus nocifs en eux-memes d'un T-shirt.

Tu ne pourrais porter un t-shirt "Fuck the law" au tribunal.

Je pense que le mieux de leur donner la liberte d'ete stupide.  Ils finnesent par fondre da la pot--leur point de fusion est beaucoup plus faible.

Le problème, c'est qu'ils restreignent la liberté des autres, accentuent la pression sur les nouveaux arrivants et importe un système de valeur (pas seulement que le voile) incompatible au nôtre.

But "superiority" is setting the bar pretty low, given we're talking about Islamoids.

True.  But in face of legal challenges everywhere, we must be firm.  Even when the muslims call canadians racists.

[viper37]

I thought we were talking about Quebec where women want to wear veils. Are Islamists in power in Quebec?

Not yet, but many among them fear they are imposing their laws.  Like Italians and organized crime.  If you let them tax merchants because it's part of their culture, you get yourself other problems.
At some point, you have to put limits.

Sorry but I find it hard to buy that narrative. I see women walking around in veils here in New York and I doubt they are trying to destroy the prevailing liberalism of the city.

Wearing it the streets is not the same as wearing it inside government buildings, for voting, for testifying, for education, etc.
IIRC, the US doesn't allow a woman to wear the veil when taking her picture for the driving licence in any state.  I couldn't wear a cap in school during an exam, why should a woman be allowed to wear a veil?  Why accept for others what we deny to ourselves?

Honour crimes are on the rise, and we must prevent any part of that ideology from implanting itself here.  Immigrants are welcome, but they must understand this is not an islamic country.  We will not remove a christmas tree because it is offensive to them, nor will we refrain from wishing "Merry Christmas" to others because they themselves don't celebrate it.

But you're talking about different things. There is a good argument as to why we'd want to be able to see who is testifying.

Freedom of expression: i have the right to wear what I want.
Freedom of dressing how I choose.
Freddom of religion: i have the right to show my religious sign, the veil being akin to a cross.  The fact that you can't see clearly the face of the person is irrelevant, if we're talking about religion.  You are essentially placing religious rights below other rights.  But now, you say it's ok to do it.

There isn't really a compelling argument that we need to see who is in a class room

Teachers like to be able to observe their students, to engage in a meaningful conversation with them, to check if the person in class is really the one who is registered, etc, etc.
Besides, it is a government building: no religious signs should be visible.  Religion is officially out of public schools since a few years.  And we do subsidize muslim and jewish schools where they can wear whatever they want, so long as they comply to the general education guidelines.

[viper37]

I think you're simply forgetting that tolerance of non-physically harmful expression has to be pretty uniformly distributed (i.e., to men and women, atheist and Muslim, straight and gay), be content neutral (not favoring atheistic or Christian expression over Islamic),

That's multiculturalism, and it's been a failure, in Canada and abroad.
Our cultural heritage is derived from Christianity.  We don't hold any prayer anymore in schools and public office (well, Saguenay is the exception, they're fighting up to the Supreme Court for that...), but I don't mind a crucifix on the wall of the National Assembly, just as I don't mind a crescent in a predominantly muslim town hall.  But veil,hats, knives, no.  Imho, the RCMP should never have accepted the turban for the Sikh.  Now we're stuck with cases where entrepreneurs must defend themselves in court because their Sikh employees don't want to wear the protective hat for construction workers.

Without this common sense even-handedness, rights become simply a matter of privilege rather than freedom, and we become more like the Islamic societies we should rightly abhor (and bomb).  Which is why the Taliban moniker, if over-the-top, sometimes fits when Quebecois (and of course many, many, many Americans) get really frothy about it.

How have we been frothy, really?  By requiring a muslim to comply with the no religious signs in schools?  I couldn't wear a crucifix over my clothes in public school, and there's no prayer being recited.  In our society, it's judged normal to see someone's face when interacting with them.  I don't care what they do at home, or in the streets.  But in the parliaments, the schools, the voting booths, I believe things are different.

And I am offended that some bureaucrat of the Government of Canada has seen fit to forbid all employees from wishing Merry Christmas because it's offensive to some.  Just as I am offended that a Montreal subburb has removed it's Christmas tree due to complaints from Muslim immigrants.  This is not the way I want this country to be.  I should not have to change to adapt to those who come here.  If I move elsewhere, I will adapt, or I will leave.  Same for them.

I will not "erase" myself to please some obscurantists and their useful idiots.

[Ideologue]

Tu ne pourrais porter un t-shirt "Fuck the law" au tribunal.

Au contraire.  Regadez-vous http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen_v._California.  Je peux.

(Peut-etre pas dans la salle du tribunal actuel.  Cela serait probablement contempt of court.)

Edit: and anyway, un voile n'est pas obscenes, de toute metrique.  But again, court is a special place, where heightened restraints on conduct can occur (yet evidently not enough to keep me from writing fuck on my jacket so long as I am not directly involved in a case).  Schools can use heightened restraints as well, true, but I would say to a lesser or different degree.

Le problème, c'est qu'ils restreignent la liberté des autres, accentuent la pression sur les nouveaux arrivants et importe un système de valeur (pas seulement que le voile) incompatible au nôtre.

Je suis d'accord, surtout.  Cependant est la travail des systemes juridiques afin d'identifier les elements de la culture qui menacent reelemente (par example, meurtres d'honneur) et de supprimer ces aspects.  Laissez la reste a conditionnement social.  Il est comment nous detruit les cultures de tout de monde en Amerique.

[dps]

We will not remove a christmas tree because it is offensive to them

Yet you want them to remove a veil because it's offensive to you.

[Ideologue]

I think you're simply forgetting that tolerance of non-physically harmful expression has to be pretty uniformly distributed (i.e., to men and women, atheist and Muslim, straight and gay), be content neutral (not favoring atheistic or Christian expression over Islamic),

That's multiculturalism, and it's been a failure, in Canada and abroad.
Our cultural heritage is derived from Christianity.  We don't hold any prayer anymore in schools and public office (well, Saguenay is the exception, they're fighting up to the Supreme Court for that...), but I don't mind a crucifix on the wall of the National Assembly, just as I don't mind a crescent in a predominantly muslim town hall.  But veil,hats, knives, no.  Imho, the RCMP should never have accepted the turban for the Sikh.  Now we're stuck with cases where entrepreneurs must defend themselves in court because their Sikh employees don't want to wear the protective hat for construction workers.

Without this common sense even-handedness, rights become simply a matter of privilege rather than freedom, and we become more like the Islamic societies we should rightly abhor (and bomb).  Which is why the Taliban moniker, if over-the-top, sometimes fits when Quebecois (and of course many, many, many Americans) get really frothy about it.

How have we been frothy, really?  By requiring a muslim to comply with the no religious signs in schools?  I couldn't wear a crucifix over my clothes in public school, and there's no prayer being recited.  In our society, it's judged normal to see someone's face when interacting with them.  I don't care what they do at home, or in the streets.  But in the parliaments, the schools, the voting booths, I believe things are different.

And I am offended that some bureaucrat of the Government of Canada has seen fit to forbid all employees from wishing Merry Christmas because it's offensive to some.  Just as I am offended that a Montreal subburb has removed it's Christmas tree due to complaints from Muslim immigrants.  This is not the way I want this country to be.  I should not have to change to adapt to those who come here.  If I move elsewhere, I will adapt, or I will leave.  Same for them.

I will not "erase" myself to please some obscurantists and their useful idiots.

But that's just it.  I don't see it as a personal change you have to make.  I mean, I see people in niqabs (or some kind of veiling system, I know enough to know they're different) even here, believe it or not.  I usually have a visceral reaction of "That poor, dumb, probably oppressed bint."  But it doesn't strike me as an existential threat to my society.  And as for Christmas trees and the like... well, old tannenbaum can stay, but public employees should not be saying "Merry Christmas" anyway, in their formal role.  It's not a big deal.

I'm not saying you're necessarily frothy.  That was more directed at G, who is froth incarnate (and the world is better for it).

[Jacob]

Well Viper, if that's how you want to roll how about you stop speaking French?

[Ideologue]

Oh shit that reminds me, I meant to make a Francophone joke:

Tu ne pourrais porter un t-shirt "Fuck the law" au tribunal.

Parce il dit "Fuck the law" ou parce est en Anglais?

[Valmy]

I remember graffiti in Paris saying 'Fuck the Police' amongst a bunch of French stuff so maybe they have adopted this handy and emotionally evoking phrase.

Though I do recall some other guy came along and crossed out one 'Fuck the Police' and sprayed a french equivalent below it.  Ici on parle Francais.

[garbon]

Not yet, but many among them fear they are imposing their laws.  Like Italians and organized crime.  If you let them tax merchants because it's part of their culture, you get yourself other problems.
At some point, you have to put limits.

Okay - Marty. Not sure how you can equate allowing people to dress in different ways with extortion...

Wearing it the streets is not the same as wearing it inside government buildings, for voting, for testifying, for education, etc.
IIRC, the US doesn't allow a woman to wear the veil when taking her picture for the driving licence in any state.  I couldn't wear a cap in school during an exam, why should a woman be allowed to wear a veil?  Why accept for others what we deny to ourselves?

Again that is different. There is a compelling reason as to why you need to have your face uncovered for a license photo.   Anyway, I'm sorry that you had to deal with such oppression - I could have worn a cap during an exam, although it is true that some professors would have been annoyed as it is against cultural custom. Anyway, I don't think we deny ourselves the ability to wear veils.

Honour crimes are on the rise, and we must prevent any part of that ideology from implanting itself here.  Immigrants are welcome, but they must understand this is not an islamic country.  We will not remove a christmas tree because it is offensive to them, nor will we refrain from wishing "Merry Christmas" to others because they themselves don't celebrate it.

This seems like a mish-mosh of things other than veil wearing. You seem to think that immigrants can't be allowed to espouse any parts of their native cultures because it necessarily threatens "ours". I'm not sure what that has to be the case.

Freedom of expression: i have the right to wear what I want.
Freedom of dressing how I choose.
Freddom of religion: i have the right to show my religious sign, the veil being akin to a cross.  The fact that you can't see clearly the face of the person is irrelevant, if we're talking about religion.  You are essentially placing religious rights below other rights.  But now, you say it's ok to do it.

Not really sure what you are trying to say here. I'm not saying that at all.

Teachers like to be able to observe their students, to engage in a meaningful conversation with them, to check if the person in class is really the one who is registered, etc, etc.
Besides, it is a government building: no religious signs should be visible.  Religion is officially out of public schools since a few years.  And we do subsidize muslim and jewish schools where they can wear whatever they want, so long as they comply to the general education guidelines.

You can't engage with someone if they are wearing a veil? Surely they put themselves at a disadvantage but that's on them.  I do recognize that their probably are some issues for exams/public school level at making sure that the registered person is truly that individual - although I'm not sure that means veils should be out right banned.  Anyway, when I was in school - kids could still wearing small crosses on their necks and Jews could still wear yarmulkes. That had nothing to do with public schools supporting religion.

Anyway, I'm now confused as to what you are supporting. You think no religious signs should be visible but it makes sense to support saying Merry Christmas and keeping public Christmas trees? Sounds more like you are okay with religious symbols as long as they are ones that you support.

[garbon]

And I am offended that some bureaucrat of the Government of Canada has seen fit to forbid all employees from wishing Merry Christmas because it's offensive to some.  Just as I am offended that a Montreal subburb has removed it's Christmas tree due to complaints from Muslim immigrants.  This is not the way I want this country to be.  I should not have to change to adapt to those who come here.  If I move elsewhere, I will adapt, or I will leave.  Same for them.

Muslims aren't the only ones who make such complaints. Here many Atheists do such.

[The Brain]

If you cover your face where I work you're not getting in. End of story.

[Sheilbh]

I remember graffiti in Paris saying 'Fuck the Police' amongst a bunch of French stuff so maybe they have adopted this handy and emotionally evoking phrase.

Though I do recall some other guy came along and crossed out one 'Fuck the Police' and sprayed a french equivalent below it.  Ici on parle Francais.

And how.  One of my favourite moments in French cinema:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gFenEV9N2U

I love the floating over the estate and then the cow.  It's wonderful.