It's totally a wedge issue that (should be) largely irrelevant to this election campaign. If that's true then the Herald article is misrepresenting what he was getting at.
Interestingly enough though, by commenting on it he is giving the niqab issue an even higher profile.
From the article:
Quote:
He also said the Conservatives were spending millions of dollars of “your and my money” on what is basically an un-winnable appeal.
“If you’re doing it so you can gain a few points somewhere in rural Quebec, well, I expect more from my leadership than that.”
__________________
Trust the snake.
The Following User Says Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
Nenshi is off the mark on this issue. I fail to see how any progressive liberal minded person can support the wearing of the niqab or burka. Wearing of these items is a practice that is rooted in sexism and inequality and it should be discouraged.
It's actually possible to consistently and reasonably hold this position and still think that banning it is a bad idea:
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
If so, then I think I agree with him, and wish he would just have said that in so many words. Nenshi is a very smart dude who can formulate reasonable positions backed by compelling arguments. I've seen him do it.
Keep in mind that this is the Herald summarizing a radio interview. The odds are high that he did just that in the original source.
It's obviously a symbolic issue, not really a practical one. It makes no difference to anyone really other than to say that tolerance has a limit. We happily allowed a public junior high school in Toronto to hold mosque services during school hours and on school property where 13 year old girls had to worship in the back, and sit out completely if they were menstruating. I'd like this sort of thing to not happen here. I don't want to live among people who treat women much less girls like this. It's not just different from my belief, it's offensive and actually counter to my beliefs.
So I don't really think women should be banned from wearing modesty clothing if they want because I give them credit for doing so under their own auspices. But at some point misogyny does become an issue and I'm not super upset about a point being made here.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OMG!WTF! For This Useful Post:
Yes, I read that. The headline states: "Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi blasts Tories’ niqab ban", which indicates to the reader that he takes issue with the ban itself rather that the Tories' use of it as a wedge issue in the campaign. Would you not agree?
You're making an assumption that women would choose not to go through with getting their citizenship rather than revealing their face. I doubt that would be the case and the vast majority would continue on with getting their citizenship. Those few who refuse would still be permanent residents subject to the protections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Symbolic gestures are important. The goal of this policy is to illustrate to these women, and more importantly to their male family members, that wearing of the niqab is incompatible with Canadian values. If they are showing their face to gain citizenship anyway, what is the harm in requiring this at the ceremony?
The staged ceremony was idiotic but I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic at hand.
The result might very well be that these women stay home instead. Why do you "doubt that would be the case"?
I agree that the symbolism is important, but I go the other way. Part of what being Canadian is to me is freedom - to express yourself and adhere to whatever religion you like. Making someone remove their niqab, against their beliefs, is the opposite of this. The "harm" in taking it off in a room of strangers is making them compromise their self expression and beliefs... for what? To show their face even when the oath taking is ceremonial and they have already validated their identity? I'm sure we can figure out a way around this for the literally two out of 680,000 people who have requested it.
I see the niqab as a reflection of a patriarchal worldview - but some women who wear it don't. Rather than speak for them, I defer to these women and their beliefs.
For a deeper understanding of Nenshi's views on C24 and the effect of the Niqab citizenship ceremony non-issue, this is a good listen from his recent speech at the Lafontaine-Baldwin Symposium.
For a deeper understanding of Nenshi's views on C24 and the effect of the Niqab citizenship ceremony non-issue, this is a good listen from his recent speech at the Lafontaine-Baldwin Symposium.
I have no problem with the mayor expressing his views and I agree with him on this issue.
What bothers me is his constant holier than thou attitude using words like "disgusting", and always dismissing those who disagree with him as small minded and ignorant. He gets front page play because, yes, he's the mayor, and in no small part because of his background. If he wants to be constructive, he should engage in a mature discussion.
I know people who work with him who are quite tired of his childish pouting whenever he does not get his way.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Manhattanboy For This Useful Post:
Symbolic gestures are important. The goal of this policy is to illustrate to these women, and more importantly to their male family members, that wearing of the niqab is incompatible with Canadian values.
I'm a Canadian, and it's not against my values for women to wear this thing. In fact, I'd say it's even un-Canadian for us to insist they change their clothes at this little ceremony.
Anyway, it's all moot. The way I understand it, if there are no men in the room, they'll remove the garment. Seems like a pretty simple fix to me. If what we really want is them to remove their niqab during the citizenship ceremony, it can be done. No harm, no foul, right?
I wonder why this isn't an option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarley
If they are showing their face to gain citizenship anyway, what is the harm in requiring this at the ceremony?
What is the harm in not requiring it? None. That's the harm.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to RougeUnderoos For This Useful Post:
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
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Igottago For This Useful Post:
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.
We are headed in a dangerous direction if we indiscriminately allow behaviors to be protected in the name of religion. If we were uncomfortable with niqab, we'll be talking about banning it altogether like that in Europe and not just the the few precious moments during the ceremony.
I will argue that removing it during the 10 minute citizenship ceremony doesn't violate personal freedom particularly when those women have to show their faces already before that.
When I go to a worship place, I follow their rules, removing shoes, hats, no eating and drinking and so on. I don't deem that as a violation of my personal freedom.
This is a small issue in and of itself but we are heading a slippery slope if we allow people to dictate what is acceptable or not base on a particular religion, custom and tradition.
Last edited by darklord700; 10-01-2015 at 09:15 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to darklord700 For This Useful Post:
We are headed in a dangerous direction if we indiscriminately allow behaviors to be protected in the name of religion. If we were uncomfortable with niqab, we'll be talking about banning it altogether like that in Europe and not just the the few precious moments during the ceremony.
I will argue that removing it during the 10 minute citizenship ceremony doesn't violate personal freedom particularly when those women have to show their faces already before that.
When I go to a worship place, I follow their rules, removing shoes, hats, no eating and drinking and so on. I don't deem that as a violation of my personal freedom.
A federal building or wherever they hold these is not a "worship place".
Anyway, I just read that since this policy was enacted, exactly two people have been affected by it. Two people.
This has become an election issue, and it costs a fortune. That's no-nonsense, prudent conservative governance right there!
I propose that women who have taken their husband's name be barred from taking part in the citizenship ceremony. This outdated, patriarchal practice is rooted in sexism and inequality and should be discouraged. Sure, some women may choose to do it, but they just don't realize they're being oppressed. It's up to us to tell them they're being oppressed, and the best way of doing that and upholding their rights is by humiliating them into changing their name back (at least for the duration of the citizenship ceremony) or else denying them citizenship altogether.
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Swift For This Useful Post:
We are headed in a dangerous direction if we indiscriminately allow behaviors to be protected in the name of religion. If we were uncomfortable with niqab, we'll be talking about banning it altogether like that in Europe and not just the the few precious moments during the ceremony.
.
The only behaviours we should be concerned about are the ones that affect the security of the citizens of this country. If that security is not at risk, we don't need to take action.
Selective freedom is not something that should happen in Canada.
__________________
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
Nenshi is off the mark on this issue. I fail to see how any progressive liberal minded person can support the wearing of the niqab or burka. Wearing of these items is a practice that is rooted in sexism and inequality and it should be discouraged.
Obviously I believe that people are free to dress as they please and I fully support this; If a woman decides to clothe herself in a veil, then so be it. The problem is that the majority of women who wear the veil do so under the influence of an extremely patriarchal culture and many do not have a choice in the matter. As a society, we should not be supporting this and allowing the practice to occur at a citizenship ceremony goes far beyond reasonable accommodation.
Court decisions in Canada have indicated that it is acceptable to require an individual to present their face uncovered under various circumstances in order to establish identity (eg. border checkpoints, police identification, testifying under oath in most cases, etc.). The citizenship ceremony should be considered another one of these situations. If a woman wishes to become a Canadian, she should unveil herself and present herself on an equal footing with other Canadians. As the SCC noted in their 2012 decision on the subject, "wearing the niqab is incompatible with the constitutional values of openness and religious neutrality in contemporary democratic, but diverse, Canada.”
Having said that, this issue is a distraction and not something that would factor greatly into my voting decision.
The ceremony is just a big party at the end of the process. It's like grad, hardly the same as testifying under oath.
I propose that women who have taken their husband's name be barred from taking part in the citizenship ceremony. This outdated, patriarchal practice is rooted in sexism and inequality and should be discouraged. Sure, some women may choose to do it, but they just don't realize they're being oppressed. It's up to us to tell them they're being oppressed, and the best way of doing that and upholding their rights is by humiliating them into changing their name back (at least for the duration of the citizenship ceremony) or else denying them citizenship altogether.
Aha! You've been posting with a false first name, and now we know, Jonathan!
Last edited by Kjesse; 10-01-2015 at 10:07 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kjesse For This Useful Post:
I have seen this cartoon so many times posted as if it demonstrates some sort of wisdom in its false equivalence and it frankly pisses me off so god damned much.
This is a consequence of failing to wear the niqab in this "male dominated society".
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
I have seen this cartoon so many times posted as if it demonstrates some sort of wisdom in its false equivalence and it frankly pisses me off so god damned much.
This is a consequence of failing to wear the niqab in this "male dominated society".
