Frankly what is being proposed here, is to limit the freedoms of people that we are uncomfortable with.
As has been stated many times before, wearing the Niqab by the time the ceremony happens poses no security or identity risk. The proper precautions for identity have already been taken.
So essentially what is being argued, is to make an example of these women. Women who are probably just genuinely unfamiliar and uncomfortable with the normal attire of the regular Canadian woman. They know no different.
As soon as we start arguing that Canadians should look a certain way, or we should minimize the types of attire that make us uncomfortable -- we are headed in a dangerous direction.
I agree that the Niqab is a symbol of oppression. However, I think these women need to come to grips with their new freedom on their own terms. Its kind of ironic that in order for them to escape their former oppression, now we have other people in their new "free" nation telling them what to do.
Its a personal freedom issue. No one has the authority to dictate what someone else feels comfortable in (as long as there is no security risk to anyone else).
If we start legislating what is or is not Canadian, we are going to enter some dangerous territory.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
|