Uncover Faces in Quebec

[FreeRights]

this is canada, this is the year 2017, is the burka not a sign of repressing women on this side of the world anyway

You could make the safety argument if you want, which in and of itself doesn't really have a lot of data behind it in the first place, but the argument you make here is an entirely different matter.

Do you think providing women the option to wear the burka, repressive as it is, is somehow less more repressive than actually dictating what they can and cannot wear? That's a mind boggling position to be arguing.

[Ka-El]

Do you think providing women the option to wear the burka, repressive as it is, is somehow less more repressive than actually dictating what they can and cannot wear? That's a mind boggling position to be arguing.

It's called hypocrisy - the meaning of which eludes some the more dull-witted who love to throw the term around.

[the truth]

*removed*

[Ka-El]

*removed*

[the truth]

*removed*

[Ka-El]

*removed*

[Chyren]

Has anyone asked that "community" who wear that their opinions? Do they wear the item as a symbol of repression or is it a religious item? Remember when people were asked to hide their "crosses" and other religion from the workplace?

I'm sure if the community was approached in a meaningful way that a solution outside the law would be easier to get.

Its tough when there's so much online hate toward a subject because people are different.

This story is far from over.

[seewood]

Has anyone asked that "community" who wear that their opinions?

On CBC today they had a discussion and one was a burka/niqab wearer. her response was she wore it because it was it is part of the Islam faith she follows, where evidently in Islam it was not mandatory to wear the head gear.

I don't mind the bill. As mentioned previously it seems the burka has been used for ulterior motives by various actors on the world stage. In this day and age, just because it has not been used by a suicide bomber in the west does not mean it will never happen. If a bomber for example was dressed in a burka and blew themselves up with mass casualties, we are guaranteed to have a burka-backlash and a howl to ban them.....
I just hope it never happens.

[spooker]

On CBC today they had a discussion and one was a burka/niqab wearer. her response was she wore it because it was it is part of the Islam faith she follows, where evidently in Islam it was not mandatory to wear the head gear.

I don't mind the bill. As mentioned previously it seems the burka has been used for ulterior motives by various actors on the world stage. In this day and age, just because it has not been used by a suicide bomber in the west does not mean it will never happen. If a bomber for example was dressed in a burka and blew themselves up with mass casualties, we are guaranteed to have a burka-backlash and a howl to ban them.....
I just hope it never happens.

We're doing that too much ... trying to solve something that has not happened because we can imagine it ... in the end creating a new problem that is real ... in this case by making transit unpalatable for a segment of religious users ... which, considering the fact that most municipalities are trying to get more people to use alternate modes of transportation isn't supporting the goals ...

[Veovis]

This was the same thing people lost it on Harper for. Why not find a solution instead of just swinging the never ending ban hammer.

Show themselves while voting to ensure identity....not unreasonable, however have one of their Imam or allowed individuals work at the voting station to accommodate the issue.....or something else, I don't know but this has never been a positive solution, and will have more ramifications and problems then it fixes.

Thinking of solutions would be nice, but then again....we are talking politicians here people.

[Osoyoos_Familyof4]

This law is backwards and repugnant, as is the more restrictive garments worn by some if the more fundamentalist Muslim women.

The type of garments they wish to ban are an insult to women and must be challenged by more mainstream Muslims, not the province of Quebec.

As opposed as I am to the veil, I am opposed to legislation more. I have no doubt that in time, more fundamentalist women will choose to resist the garb as they discover their personal freedoms and feel protected to abstain and object it.

If the "issue" is really not about racism and about being able to see faces to protect us against terrorism, what about every hipster with a beard, wearing an oversize pair of wayfarers and a slouchy knit cap? They show the same amount of skin as some women wearing a face-covering burka.

[The Green Barbarian]

If the "issue" is really not about racism .

Not sure how many times this has to be explained but it is impossible to be racist against a religion. If the Burka ban is racist then it is also racist to ban crucifixes and Buddhist symbols from government services too.

[Osoyoos_Familyof4]

My Oxford Dictionary includes in the definition of "race" a division of ethic and cultural values in addition to but not excluded to physical characteristics.

Therefore the term racism is an appropriate definition when declaring the Quebec proposition as racist.

[The Green Barbarian]

My Oxford Dictionary includes in the definition of "race" a division of ethic and cultural values in addition to but not excluded to physical characteristics.

Therefore the term racism is an appropriate definition when declaring the Quebec proposition as racist.

Ok then you must really be angry about Quebec banning crucifixes. If not then you should look up "hypocrite" in your Oxford dictionary.

[the truth]

This law is backwards and repugnant, as is the more restrictive garments worn by some if the more fundamentalist Muslim women.

The type of garments they wish to ban are an insult to women and must be challenged by more mainstream Muslims, not the province of Quebec.

As opposed as I am to the veil, I am opposed to legislation more. I have no doubt that in time, more fundamentalist women will choose to resist the garb as they discover their personal freedoms and feel protected to abstain and object it.

If the "issue" is really not about racism and about being able to see faces to protect us against terrorism, what about every hipster with a beard, wearing an oversize pair of wayfarers and a slouchy knit cap? They show the same amount of skin as some women wearing a face-covering burka.

why twist this into something its not, if they do not like the laws of the land they are free to get the f out