View Poll Results: Should the Niqab be allowed during a citizenship ceremony?

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    30 40.00%
  • No

    34 45.33%
  • Don't know

    1 1.33%
  • Don't care, just politics

    10 13.33%
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011
Results 1,001 to 1,065 of 1065

Thread: Niqab citizenship ceremonies Trudeau versus Harper

  1. #1001

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^This clothing is designed to treat the women men "own" as property / forcing them to do mens will / keeping them hidden where they belong. Its sad you think that's great in a secular society - I don't. No need for whataboutisim - if you want to start a thread on high heels, go ahead, I don't support forcing that anymore than the poor women forced by their families in Canada to wear the burka.
    Let's hear from the Canadian women in question, shall we?

    Canadian survey of women who wear the niqab reveals choice 'may be a bit of a youth movement'

    The vast majority of women surveyed who wear the niqab in Canada are not only willing to remove their veils to be identified, but feel it is part of their responsibility to do so, according to the most extensive research of its kind.


    The niqab has become a polarizing issue in the federal election — with the Conservatives vowing to limit its use in certain circumstances — but interviews with niqabists themselves suggest some political assumptions about them are incorrect.


    In fact many of the women interviewed for the study Women in Niqab, by Concordia religion and Islam professor Lynda Clarke, were “irritated” by the widely held belief that they were being forced to wear the veiled garment.

    ---
    Their reasons for wearing the niqab were “highly personal and individual,” the study found, with “expression of Muslim identity” figuring prominently in the explanations, although the women were split on whether they thought the practice was mandatory.


    What surprised Clarke was how “integrative” the women are, despite choosing to cover everything but their eyes. She said she would not have been surprised if niqab wearers would also want to live in separate communities, but that is not what the study found.


    She noted the women interviewed also tend to be patriotic and happy with Canada.


    And, while Stephen Harper has said covering one’s face with a niqab is “rooted in a culture that is anti-women,” some of the subjects equated wearing the niqab to a kind of freedom, saying it gave them confidence and security.

    http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/...youth-movement

    Gee, they have different reasons for wearing Islamic dress and feel that it's their choice. Now, I may ne=ot be able to see exactly how they arrived at their choice, it's just that, THEIR choice. I don't expect them to tell me how to dress, for whatever reason, and, as long as it's their choice, then it's simply that. They don't need my or anyone else's approval or permission to do so.

    Meanwhile, your hero, Donald Trump is sucking up to the most conservative Islamic country with nary a whisper about the rights of women there. But that's cool because they've got oil and they're not Iran.

    Although maybe most of the women in the study wore the niqab with free will, other women don't have that luxury. Below are some news articles, but the main point is that even women living in Canada are forced to wear these garments against their will.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...lash-1.4002891

    "According to an agreed statement of facts presented in court, Aqsa had been experiencing conflict at home and clashed with her family because she chose to wear Western-style clothing and didn't want to cover her hair with the traditional hijab head scarf."

    http://torontosun.com/news/national/...aughters-hijab

    "Gatineau police said Friday their investigation suggests the level of violence escalated once the man discovered the girl was removing her hijab when she was away from the family home."
    "Be kind whenever possible. It is always possible." - Dalai Lama

  2. #1002

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^Wow, back up the bus. If you actually read my posts I'm not advocating banning anyone from wearing anything. I'm trying to reason why anyone, male or female, feels to the need to wear something in the name of religion. Religion comes from the soul, the heart, your being, not in the way of a garment. You could be wearing a tuxedo and be one of the most devote. Wearing certain garb maybe sets a person apart to being a member of a certain religion but a piece of cloth or adornment is not going to change you into a religious person. That's a whole different level of thinking.
    Why does someone feel the need to wear a shirt with a sports team logo on it? It's basically just advertising for a commercial entity. Wearing a sports jersey isn't going to change you into an athlete. Athleticism comes from physical strength, dexterity and endurance.

    Why do some people wear designer labels while other hang out in jeans and a t-shirt?

    And why should your feelings on the matter make any difference at all on what other people want to wear? Why do you feel the need to make them conform to what you feel is "normal" or "necessary"?

    What about Joey's forcing women to wear high heels, even though there's health problems associated with them? Or should they just quit and find another job? Or, maybe, we should as a society stand up and say "That's not right. It's not a necessity for them to do the job of serving food and drink and you cann't force them to do it any longer?

    JOEY restaurant server forced to wear heels despite ‘bleeding’ feet

    An Edmonton woman has given her JOEY restaurant serving job the boot over a bloody high heel argument.


    “My friend’s feet were bleeding to the point she lost a toe nail and she was still discouraged and berated by the shift manager for changing into flats,” Nicola Gavins wrote on Facebook on behalf of her unidentified friend, who resigned from the downtown location following the incident.


    We reached out to Gavins but hadn’t heard back by the time of publishing.


    She also accused the chain of making its female staff purchase a $30 dress uniform “while male staff can dress themselves in black clothing from their own closets,” and for not paying its staff for training.

    ---
    A former JOEY hostess recalled being told in 2007 that she’d only get promoted to a server if she “lost weight and got hotter.”


    “‘Oh ya after like six months of running around in heels, you’ll really slim down,'” she claimed to have been told. “Keep in mind the most I ever weighed was 125 pounds.”


    As for getting “hotter,” that apparently involved her hair being longer.

    ---

    Health experts have repeatedly cautioned women about the negative impacts of wearing high heels.


    “Chronic high heel use can affect the ankles, the knees, the low-back, the hips,” chiropractor Stacia Kelly told us last year.


    https://globalnews.ca/news/2694492/j...bleeding-feet/
    There you go again with more lame comparisons. Your not trying to equate sports shirts and sports logos with religious garb are you as it's like comparing chalk and cheese. Yeah someone serving at Joey's forced to wear heels. Well we have labor laws against such things. Where do people go when their religion tells them they have to wear certain garments to feel certain things. Who can they complain to on that score. The world is supposed to be progressing from the dogma of regressive religions. If we could all move towards a world of perfectly nice people not constrained by centuries old oppressive notions we would all be in a lot better place.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  3. #1003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^This clothing is designed to treat the women men "own" as property / forcing them to do mens will / keeping them hidden where they belong. Its sad you think that's great in a secular society - I don't. No need for whataboutisim - if you want to start a thread on high heels, go ahead, I don't support forcing that anymore than the poor women forced by their families in Canada to wear the burka.
    Let's hear from the Canadian women in question, shall we?

    Canadian survey of women who wear the niqab reveals choice 'may be a bit of a youth movement'

    The vast majority of women surveyed who wear the niqab in Canada are not only willing to remove their veils to be identified, but feel it is part of their responsibility to do so, according to the most extensive research of its kind.


    The niqab has become a polarizing issue in the federal election — with the Conservatives vowing to limit its use in certain circumstances — but interviews with niqabists themselves suggest some political assumptions about them are incorrect.


    In fact many of the women interviewed for the study Women in Niqab, by Concordia religion and Islam professor Lynda Clarke, were “irritated” by the widely held belief that they were being forced to wear the veiled garment.

    ---
    Their reasons for wearing the niqab were “highly personal and individual,” the study found, with “expression of Muslim identity” figuring prominently in the explanations, although the women were split on whether they thought the practice was mandatory.


    What surprised Clarke was how “integrative” the women are, despite choosing to cover everything but their eyes. She said she would not have been surprised if niqab wearers would also want to live in separate communities, but that is not what the study found.


    She noted the women interviewed also tend to be patriotic and happy with Canada.


    And, while Stephen Harper has said covering one’s face with a niqab is “rooted in a culture that is anti-women,” some of the subjects equated wearing the niqab to a kind of freedom, saying it gave them confidence and security.

    http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/...youth-movement

    Gee, they have different reasons for wearing Islamic dress and feel that it's their choice. Now, I may ne=ot be able to see exactly how they arrived at their choice, it's just that, THEIR choice. I don't expect them to tell me how to dress, for whatever reason, and, as long as it's their choice, then it's simply that. They don't need my or anyone else's approval or permission to do so.

    Meanwhile, your hero, Donald Trump is sucking up to the most conservative Islamic country with nary a whisper about the rights of women there. But that's cool because they've got oil and they're not Iran.
    Well if we are all free to choose what we wear why don't you go into your bank of Tuesday wearing a balaclava with sunglasses. Or try going to your next funeral in an adult diaper with a soother in your mouth. To top it of when you go to work wear a pair of speedo's or thongs with matching flip flops. Tell them it's your choice and there is not a damned thing they can do about it. After all, by your standards it's a free and open society and you feel we all should be able to wear whatever we want even if local customs don't dictate it.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  4. #1004

    Default

    Because there's a difference in exercising your choices responsibly and choosing to act like an ***. And if local customs is what you're basing your argument on, we should all be wearing native dress from the 1500's. Customs change. Societal norms change. It wasn't all that long ago that taverns had two separate rooms, one for men and one for "ladies and escorts". Society somehow managed to adapt to these changes and we can adapt to a very, very small group of veiled women.

    And Moa, as I've been saying through this whole discussion, forcing women to wear the veil is wrong. Those men are totally in the wrong. Just like you are for wanting to force women Not to walk around veiled. Or do you feel more kinship with this guy?

    A Man Ripped Off A Muslim Woman's Hijab, Screamed 'This Is America!'

    A North Carolina man ripped off a Muslim woman's hijab and screamed "This is America!" during a Southwest Airlines flight late last year, court documents revealed Friday.


    Gill Parker Payne, 37, of Gastonia, North Carolina, pleaded guilty in a New Mexico federal court Friday to a misdemeanor hate crime charge of using force to intentionally obstruct the woman's free exercise of her religious beliefs.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/m...b060aa781a48b9
    And local custom calls for men to wear suits and women to wear white dresses when they get married. Someone better track down this couple outside the Citadel and tell them that they're offending Canadian values.

    Last edited by kkozoriz; 01-01-2018 at 08:21 AM.

  5. #1005

    Default

    Exactly

    Such a simple concept that goes over the heads (literally and figuratively) of Gemini and Moa.

    Forcing women to wear a niqab is as equally as wrong as forcing them to remove it.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  6. #1006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Why do you post this picture, which is fine? If Islamic extremists (who require their property wear the Niqab or Burka) had their way, it would be banned. Screaming, what about this and what about that, has nothing to do with the niqab or burka which are designed to repress and hide female sexuality. We all get it that you think it’s great that women can supposedly choose to hide themselves because their religion has made them so ashamed / brainwashed about how horrible the shame of sex is (per the Koran). But the harsh reality is that a burka and niqab are not about empowering women, they are not about cultural tradition like the picture above, it only exists in prevalence in countries where men have taken power away from women and forced it on them. Its about hiding the property men think they own as we can see in countries like Afghanistan where women can longer dress safely in a picture like this you just posted. it’s interesting you cheer on that male driven repression in name of religious freedom - I don’t, I think it’s pathetic and as Canadians we should be encouraging women to be free, not enslaved by the men in their families here in Canada because of some nonesense interpretation of a nonesense text.
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-01-2018 at 09:42 AM.

  7. #1007

    Default

    It was in response to Gemini saying
    you feel we all should be able to wear whatever we want even if local customs don't dictate it.
    Try to keep up.

    And you're totally ignoring the story I posted earlier where there are women who CHOOSE, of their own free will, to dress in a way that you don't approve of. You cannot conceive of a woman who would want to wear a niqab or a burka or a hijab, therefore they MUST be being forced into it. To you, there is not other possible reason.

    There's Muslim men who think that if a woman is't wearing some form of head covering then they're dressing like a prostitute. Meanwhile, you're so far on the other side that you believe that if they are wearing such a garment, then the must be oppressed. You're both ignoring the woman's right to choose for themselves, of which there are many. Granted, in some places, it is enforced by law, but those tend to be the countries that those on the right tend to cozy up to the most, like Saudi Arabia.

  8. #1008

    Default

    ^women wear the niqab / burqa because their men don’t permit them to do otherwise, or like you say men have brainwashed them that to do otherwise is to be like a “prosititute”. But what they don’t realize is that while a prostitute (man or women) might sell sexual services for money in a consensual exchange, by contrast they have been brainwashed since childhood via male dominated sexist religion, through no fault of their own, and are slaves being far lesser treated in secular society than an adult entertainment provider is. While your and PRT continue support the scumbags and scumbag religions that steal freedom from these women, some of us (most Canadians per polls) instead want Canadaian society and laws to help free them instead of encourage the spread / enslavement of more women.
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-01-2018 at 09:55 AM.

  9. #1009

    Default

    So, the women in the National Post article (a well known lefty publication) are all brainwashed? And you consider it your sacred duty to save them from themselves? The Supreme Court is wrong? The Charter is wrong? Only Moa and those that agree with him know what is best for Muslim women everywhere? Thank goodness they've got you there to take care of them since they are obviously incapable of doing so for themselves.

    By all means, speak out against men who force women to wear a burqa or similar. However, if you're also going to include women who choose for themselves to do so, then you'd better speak out against yourself as well since you are also dictating to them what is considered appropriate.
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 01-01-2018 at 09:57 AM.

  10. #1010

    Default

    ^Quebecs law hasn’t been held unconstitutional and the ceremony issue never reached the Supreme Court. Most Canadians (polls show Quebec’s laws are popular throughout Canada) don’t want a society where cultural norms force women out of view based on religious dogma but carry on cheering for more of that. PS most Muslim women in Canada have enough freedom such that they don’t wear the niqab or burka, they are lucky enough that can be much better than that.
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-01-2018 at 10:01 AM.

  11. #1011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Because there's a difference in exercising your choices responsibly and choosing to act like an ***. And if local customs is what you're basing your argument on, we should all be wearing native dress from the 1500's. Customs change. Societal norms change. It wasn't all that long ago that taverns had two separate rooms, one for men and one for "ladies and escorts". Society somehow managed to adapt to these changes and we can adapt to a very, very small group of veiled women.

    And Moa, as I've been saying through this whole discussion, forcing women to wear the veil is wrong. Those men are totally in the wrong. Just like you are for wanting to force women Not to walk around veiled. Or do you feel more kinship with this guy?

    A Man Ripped Off A Muslim Woman's Hijab, Screamed 'This Is America!'

    A North Carolina man ripped off a Muslim woman's hijab and screamed "This is America!" during a Southwest Airlines flight late last year, court documents revealed Friday.


    Gill Parker Payne, 37, of Gastonia, North Carolina, pleaded guilty in a New Mexico federal court Friday to a misdemeanor hate crime charge of using force to intentionally obstruct the woman's free exercise of her religious beliefs.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/m...b060aa781a48b9
    And local custom calls for men to wear suits and women to wear white dresses when they get married. Someone better track down this couple outside the Citadel and tell them that they're offending Canadian values.

    This is another ill thought out non comparison to the niqab. The couple in this picture look wonderful, happy. The women is not covering her face. Their clothing is bright, cheerful in keeping with the occasion. Their custom did not dictate she wear a face covering that may have inflamed some guys into arousal. Keeping the little women in her place by covering her identity on supposedly the happiest day of her life. Yes, I know, don't tell me western brides wear a veil for half the service but it's optional and not dictated to them by their men folk.




    Tell me in what world is this picture O.K. what purpose does it serve?

    https://www.google.ca/search?q=musli...w=1231&bih=525
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  12. #1012

    Default

    You are so judgmental.

    Just because you cannot see their expression, you assume that they are oppressed and terribly unhappy.

    Meanwhile you see a photo of a couple and she has a smile so you think she is blissfully happy. Maybe she is posing for a photo and may end up in a loveless arranged marriage.

    I would rather not judge people from a photo.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 01-01-2018 at 12:20 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #1013

    Default

    ^Oh good lawd. What kind of answer is that. I don't know if the people wearing the full body coverings are happy or not, their happiness was not the point.
    Imagine going into a room full of people dressed like that then trying to explain who you talked to or describing them to other people. Imagine telling a young girl you went to a function were the women all had their faces covered because in the 15-16 th. hundreds a male deemed it right for a women to cover her modesty and in later years other males interpreted that to mean she cover her face as not to arouse them. Imagine men controlling women's dress in the name of religion when that was not Muhammad's intent.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  14. #1014

    Default

    ^Oh good lawd...

    Imagine writing in a forum where we can't see your face or know your anonymous identity except by what you say...

    I can tell much about you without ever seeing you face. Beauty is only skin deep. Ugliness comes from your heart. Or lack there of...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  15. #1015

    Default

    ^Oh my, this face covering discussion really is going right over your head isn't it. I suggest you educate yourself on it as you seem rather out of your depth judging by the personal attacks you are making.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  16. #1016

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Because there's a difference in exercising your choices responsibly and choosing to act like an ***. And if local customs is what you're basing your argument on, we should all be wearing native dress from the 1500's. Customs change. Societal norms change. It wasn't all that long ago that taverns had two separate rooms, one for men and one for "ladies and escorts". Society somehow managed to adapt to these changes and we can adapt to a very, very small group of veiled women.

    And Moa, as I've been saying through this whole discussion, forcing women to wear the veil is wrong. Those men are totally in the wrong. Just like you are for wanting to force women Not to walk around veiled. Or do you feel more kinship with this guy?

    A Man Ripped Off A Muslim Woman's Hijab, Screamed 'This Is America!'

    A North Carolina man ripped off a Muslim woman's hijab and screamed "This is America!" during a Southwest Airlines flight late last year, court documents revealed Friday.


    Gill Parker Payne, 37, of Gastonia, North Carolina, pleaded guilty in a New Mexico federal court Friday to a misdemeanor hate crime charge of using force to intentionally obstruct the woman's free exercise of her religious beliefs.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/m...b060aa781a48b9
    And local custom calls for men to wear suits and women to wear white dresses when they get married. Someone better track down this couple outside the Citadel and tell them that they're offending Canadian values.

    This is another ill thought out non comparison to the niqab. The couple in this picture look wonderful, happy. The women is not covering her face. Their clothing is bright, cheerful in keeping with the occasion. Their custom did not dictate she wear a face covering that may have inflamed some guys into arousal. Keeping the little women in her place by covering her identity on supposedly the happiest day of her life. Yes, I know, don't tell me western brides wear a veil for half the service but it's optional and not dictated to them by their men folk.




    Tell me in what world is this picture O.K. what purpose does it serve?

    https://www.google.ca/search?q=musli...w=1231&bih=525
    But the couple in the first picture aren't conforming to local customs. Look at local weddings and the vast, vast, vast majority have the groom wearing a suit & tie and the woman in a white dress. Who do these people think they are ignoring our "local customs" (your words)?

    It's not about what anyone is wearing. It's wether or not the woman is being forced to wear or not wear something. Moa, for example, simply cannot conceive of a case where a woman would honestly want to wear a veil of some sort. It's like trying to explain aerodynamics to your dog. The concept just cannot penetrate.

    In the case of Gemini, it's because he believes that women shouldn't be veiled and that that gives him the right to tell the women that choose to do so that they are wrong. And he wants that enforced into law.

    What about someone who doesn't believe that Muslim women shout wear headscarves? Should their opinion be taken into account as well since the scarves are part of their religious identity?

  17. #1017
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,806

    Default

    http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/...ng-trial-hears. WTF are these fuqers doing here in the first place. At least Australia had the sense to kick them out of the country, but of course good old naive canada rescued them. Rescued alright. We should be encouraging and have blanket advertising for girls and women to phone police and tell many others if there are such strange goings on in their household. Help them to escape these situations and lock these bastards up. This is the west after all. This is NOT THE MIDDLE EAST.
    Last edited by Drumbones; 01-01-2018 at 02:29 PM.

  18. #1018

    Default

    ^2011

    They are criminals and were dealt with according to Canadian law.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  19. #1019

    Default

    Duplicate post deleted
    Last edited by KC; 01-01-2018 at 04:08 PM.

  20. #1020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/...ng-trial-hears. WTF are these fuqers doing here in the first place. At least Australia had the sense to kick them out of the country, but of course good old naive canada rescued them. Rescued alright. We should be encouraging and have blanket advertising for girls and women to phone police and tell many others if there are such strange goings on in their household. Help them to escape these situations and lock these bastards up. This is the west after all. This is NOT THE MIDDLE EAST.





    Inside the Shafia killings that shocked a nation

    “The evidence, utterly heartbreaking, left no real doubt about the truth. Before they died, the Shafia sisters were caught in the ultimate culture clash, living in Canada but not allowed to be Canadian. They were expected to behave like good Muslim daughters, to wear the hijab and marry a fellow Afghan. And when they rebelled against their father’s “traditions” and “customs”—covertly at first, then for all the community to see—the shame became too much to bear. Only a mass execution (staged to look like a foolish wrong turn) could wash away the stain of their secret boyfriends and revealing clothes.

    Rona, it turns out, was simply a convenient throw-in, the infertile first wife who died as she lived. An afterthought.

    “They committed treason from beginning to end,” Shafia declared, during another one of his intercepted rants. “They betrayed kindness, they betrayed Islam, they betrayed our religion and creed, they betrayed our tradition, they betrayed everything.” ...”


    http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/i...cked-a-nation/


    Cheating their lawyer too.

    Mohammad Shafia, convicted in so-called honour killings, ordered to pay wife's legal fees - Montreal - CBC News
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...fees-1.4043176


    In other news, well, not all news but incl. letter to the editor:


    Supreme Court says woman and brother should be extradited to India in 'honour killing' case - Politics - CBC News

    Top court says surrender order from then Justice Minister Peter MacKay after 2000 killing was justified

    Kathleen Harris · CBC News
    September 8, 2017


    “A B.C. woman and her brother, accused of masterminding the murder of her 25-year-old daughter, should be extradited to India to face justice, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled.

    India had requested Malkit Sidhu and Surjit Badesha, the mother and uncle, respectively, of Jaswinder (Jassi) Sidhu, be extradited to face trial for a charge of conspiracy to commit murder in the 2000 death.

    Jassi Sidhu's body was dumped near a canal after her throat was slashed, allegedly targeted for secretly marrying a man of much lower social status instead of the older man her family had arranged for her to wed in Canada. ...”


    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/extr...ndia-1.4280430

    Quite interesting insights into ‘values’ evidenced during Trudeau’s time in power vs Harper / Jason Kenny’s time in Power.


    Why have Liberals removed references to barbaric acts?
    LETTER TO THE EDITOR Dec 10, 2017
    Facebook

    “Former prime minister Stephen Harper said that in the Canadian Immigration Guide, barbaric acts like honour killings would not be tolerated in Canada.

    For some reason Justin Trudeau thought those acts should not be called barbaric.


    Now the Liberals have removed the reference to barbaric cultural practices from the draft version of the new immigration guide.

    ...”

    http://www.chroniclejournal.com/opin...42736ef3f.html



    New citizenship study guide highlights Indigenous Peoples, Canadian responsibilities | Toronto Star

    The current “Discover Canada” guide dates back to 2011 when the previous Conservative government did its own overhaul designed to provide more information on Canadian values and history.

    Some of the Conservatives’ insertions attracted controversy, including increased detail about the War of 1812 and a warning that certain “barbaric cultural practices,” such as honour killings and female genital mutilation, are crimes in Canada.

    Getting rid of both those elements was what former Liberal Immigration Minister John McCallum had...”


    “...Instead, the proposed new guide breaks down the responsibilities of citizenship into two categories: voluntary and mandatory.

    Voluntary responsibilities are listed as respecting the human rights of others, understanding official bilingualism and participating in the political process.

    Obeying the law, serving on a jury, paying taxes, filling out the census and respecting treaties with Indigenous Peoples are mandatory.

    “Today, Canadians, for example, can own their own homes and buy land thanks to treaties that the government negotiated,” the draft version says. “Every Canadian has responsibilities under those treaties as well. They are agreements of honour.”

    The draft guide delves extensively into the history and present-day lives of Indigenous Peoples, including multiple references to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s report on residential schools and a lengthy section on what happened at those schools. The current guide contains a single paragraph.

    The draft also devotes substantive sections to sad chapters of Canadian history when the Chinese, South Asians, Jews and disabled Canadians were discriminated against, references that were absent or exceptionally limited previously.

    The new version also documents the evolution of the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender groups, as well as other sexual minorities. Bureaucrats had sought to include similar themes in the 2011 book but were overruled by then-immigration minister Jason Kenney, with their efforts reduced to a single line on gay marriage. ...”


    https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...ibilities.html



    Man convicted of killing daughter in clash over hijab dies in Ontario prison - Toronto - CBC News
    February 28, 2017

    “...His son, Waqas, 26, was also sentenced to life for second-degree murder. Both the father and the son ...”

    Aqsa, a Grade 11 student, was strangled to death in her bedroom in the family home. She was attacked after her brother took her home from a school bus stop.


    According to an agreed statement of facts presented in court, Aqsa had been experiencing conflict at home and clashed with her family because she chose to wear Western-style clothing and didn't want to cover her hair with the traditional hijab head scarf. ...”


    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...lash-1.4002891



    Bolding is mine
    Last edited by KC; 01-01-2018 at 04:09 PM.

  21. #1021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Because there's a difference in exercising your choices responsibly and choosing to act like an ***. And if local customs is what you're basing your argument on, we should all be wearing native dress from the 1500's. Customs change. Societal norms change. It wasn't all that long ago that taverns had two separate rooms, one for men and one for "ladies and escorts". Society somehow managed to adapt to these changes and we can adapt to a very, very small group of veiled women.

    And Moa, as I've been saying through this whole discussion, forcing women to wear the veil is wrong. Those men are totally in the wrong. Just like you are for wanting to force women Not to walk around veiled. Or do you feel more kinship with this guy?

    A Man Ripped Off A Muslim Woman's Hijab, Screamed 'This Is America!'

    A North Carolina man ripped off a Muslim woman's hijab and screamed "This is America!" during a Southwest Airlines flight late last year, court documents revealed Friday.


    Gill Parker Payne, 37, of Gastonia, North Carolina, pleaded guilty in a New Mexico federal court Friday to a misdemeanor hate crime charge of using force to intentionally obstruct the woman's free exercise of her religious beliefs.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/m...b060aa781a48b9
    And local custom calls for men to wear suits and women to wear white dresses when they get married. Someone better track down this couple outside the Citadel and tell them that they're offending Canadian values.

    This is another ill thought out non comparison to the niqab. The couple in this picture look wonderful, happy. The women is not covering her face. Their clothing is bright, cheerful in keeping with the occasion. Their custom did not dictate she wear a face covering that may have inflamed some guys into arousal. Keeping the little women in her place by covering her identity on supposedly the happiest day of her life. Yes, I know, don't tell me western brides wear a veil for half the service but it's optional and not dictated to them by their men folk.




    Tell me in what world is this picture O.K. what purpose does it serve?

    https://www.google.ca/search?q=musli...w=1231&bih=525
    But the couple in the first picture aren't conforming to local customs. Look at local weddings and the vast, vast, vast majority have the groom wearing a suit & tie and the woman in a white dress. Who do these people think they are ignoring our "local customs" (your words)?

    It's not about what anyone is wearing. It's wether or not the woman is being forced to wear or not wear something. Moa, for example, simply cannot conceive of a case where a woman would honestly want to wear a veil of some sort. It's like trying to explain aerodynamics to your dog. The concept just cannot penetrate.

    In the case of Gemini, it's because he believes that women shouldn't be veiled and that that gives him the right to tell the women that choose to do so that they are wrong. And he wants that enforced into law.

    What about someone who doesn't believe that Muslim women shout wear headscarves? Should their opinion be taken into account as well since the scarves are part of their religious identity?
    I think you missed the memo where I stated it's the face coverings I have an issue with not the rest of the garb. The bride and groom shown in the picture look absolutely stunning and if the rest of the wedding party were as well dressed as them it must have been a great spectacle. The wearing of face coverings in Islam was a edict invented by men. The Profit Muhhamad did not say women should wear face coverings but along the way it was warped into that way by men who took it upon themselves to translate it that way. Women to wear face coverings so men would not gaze upon them and become aroused. Or the other line, to cover their modesty. Islam has very few (if any) women guiding their religion. The Islamic religion is basically one and the same when it comes to law also. I realize not all who worship Islam stand by the notion that women should cover their faces. Some middle eastern countries are coming into the 21st. century and it's no longer the law for their women to wear face covering. However, there are groups (like any religion) who are old school and still expect this male idea to be carried out. The wearing of a veil is not compulsory under Islam but certain men made it into law and still want their women to follow through. Fast forward to Islamic culture moving west. We don't oppress women here, we don't expect them to cover their faces. We want to see their faces. We want them to be one with us and equal with us. We want to embrace their faces, wrinkles and all. It's what we are used to. How can a culture be open when the women in that culture have face covering.
    On another note: I can't believe that I have posted on this thread since 2009 and you still think I am a male. Oh, maybe you think that way as your old fashioned and a bit of a male dominate yourself.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  22. #1022

    Default

    12 vs a whopping 212 !!!!
    ( That’s 212 in just one province! )

    WTF!!!!

    Honour killings in Canada: even worse than we believe - The Globe and Mail

    GERALD CAPLAN
    SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
    PUBLISHED JULY 23, 2010
    UPDATED MARCH 27, 2017


    If you are already sufficiently appalled knowing there've been 12 despicable "honour killings" in Canada since 2002, don't read any further. This is only the tip of a nightmarish iceberg, I'm afraid.

    For some reason, the term honour killings seems to be reserved for murders committed by male family members against daughters or sisters in South Asian or Middle Eastern communities. These unimaginable crimes have been receiving much high-profile notoriety in the Canadian media, as they surely deserve.
    All Canadians must now know of the tragic murder of 16-year old Aqsa Parvez of Mississauga, strangled to death three years ago by her brother and father.

    But I'm confident that not one in a million is aware that in Ontario alone, from 2002 until only 2007 (the latest data), 212 women have been killed by their partners. That's 42 every year, compared with 12 so-called honour killings in all of Canada in the past eight years. Women killed by partners are known as domestic homicides, and, unless especially gruesome, are barely worth a mention in the media. Maybe there's just too many of them to be newsworthy.
    ...”




    What accounts for the high profile of these relatively small number of murders in Canada? Why do we know little or nothing about the larger epidemic of women killed, almost routinely it sometimes seems, by boyfriends or husbands? Is it less terrible to be strangled to death or shot or have your throat slit by them than by family members? Is it just too commonplace to bother paying attention to? Do we still harbour that sneaking suspicion that women murdered by partners have somehow brought it on themselves?

    Yet both kinds of murders have a common root. Both are honour killings, reflecting a twisted, pathological male sense of honour. Both are executed by men who feel they haven't received their due deference, men who consider "their" women, whether daughter or partner, to be their chattel, to do with as they choose. Have we smug white Canadians forgotten that you don't have to be a Muslim or South Asian to regard women this way?

    Or do we focus on so-called honour killings precisely because the victims are Muslims, or South Asians, or Middle Easterners? By giving such prominence to these communities and their cultures, are we not denigrating them? For all our ostensible acceptance of multiculturalism, are we not feeding our lingering prejudices against certain specific minorities among us? Look at it purely statistically. If so-called honour killings are in fact culturally approved by their communities, as is often charged, shouldn't we expect far more than 12 in the entire country in eight years? And if the rest of us truly embrace a culture that repudiates violence against women, why are so many of them still being murdered? ...”


    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...rticle1314263/
    Last edited by KC; 01-01-2018 at 04:20 PM.

  23. #1023

    Default

    ^^Went to a Catholic wedding. The bride wore a veil. How dare they impose this on women!

    Oh the horror Gemini!
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  24. #1024

    Default

    And how many women are in power in the Catholic faith?

    Gemini is opposed to face coverings. This woman is opposed to headscarves. I guess her belief is just as valid as yours then.

    Woman has hijab pulled, is punched and spat on in attack in Ontario supermarket: police

    Police are searching for a suspect after they say a woman wearing a hijab was shopping with her infant at a London, Ont. supermarket when an angry assailant suddenly spat on her, punched her repeatedly and tried to pull off her headscarf.


    London police said that after the female suspect failed to remove the hijab, she started pulling the woman’s hair and then fled the area.

    https://globalnews.ca/news/2777144/w...o-supermarket/
    Or are you the only arbiter of what's right for a Muslim woman to wear, regardless of their own feelings on the matter?

    And I suppose that this attacker was in the right for expressing his opposition to Muslim headgear.

    On a Vancouver SkyTrain full of people, just one came to help teen in religious attack

    She had just boarded the Canada Line at Waterfront station when a man suddenly got up and began screaming insults and threats at her. She says the man said he was going to kill “all Muslims” and then “raised his hand” and made death threats toward her.


    “I wanted to film him but I was afraid he was going to hit me,” she wrote. “He was using horrific words as he was aggressively making actions when he tried to grab my head and shove it to his crotch.”


    Fadel said as other passengers sat or stood passively, “out of nowhere” the man hit her.


    “And everyone watched as he did so. Everyone stayed seated and did not utter a word, but one man,” she continued. “One guy, just like me on his way home from work, got up and pushed the guy away and stayed in front of me until the man got off at Vancouver City Centre.”

    http://vancouversun.com/news/local-n...rd-canada-line
    After all, neither of these attackers are Muslims but they bot want to tell them what is appropriate for Muslim women to wear. The difference between you and them is simply a matter of degrees. The two women above covered their head and women wearing the niquab cover a bit more of it, including the face.

    Orthodox Jewish women are prohibited from wearing pants. Maybe they should be your next target.

  25. #1025

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    ^^Went to a Catholic wedding. The bride wore a veil. How dare they impose this on women!

    Oh the horror Gemini!
    I think the biggest horror is you have a comprehension problem or you don't actually read peoples post you just blatantly jump in and spout. The issue of veils at weddings has already been covered. Please try to keep up.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  26. #1026

    Default

    Oh I read and comprehend.

    I just don't agree with your views of imposing your standards on others.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  27. #1027

    Default

    He's got no problem with men imposing their views on women, He just thinks that he's the one that should be doing it. He knows better than the women themselves.

    Once again, men imposing the wearing or not wearing of a face covering = BAD

    Letting the women decide for themselves = GOOD

    it's really that simple.

  28. #1028

    Default

    ^Is the 'he' you are referring to PRT?.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  29. #1029

    Default

    I think he means she; that means you.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  30. #1030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I think he means she; that means you.
    Well I think I would rather hear it from the organ grinder and not his monkey. That means you.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  31. #1031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Oh I read and comprehend.

    I just don't agree with your views of imposing your standards on others.
    Probably because you have very few standards of your own.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  32. #1032

    Default

    Wow, insulting two posters with a single comeback.

    I know a xenophobe when they talk like you on this and other threads where you expound your views.

    Sad.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 02-01-2018 at 05:46 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  33. #1033

    Default

    ^I get it, you don't have anymore answers so now you start using the big words. Yawn.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  34. #1034

    Default

    You really have some anger issues that you need to deal with.

    Seek help.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  35. #1035

    Default

    ^Yes gramps.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  36. #1036
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,806

    Default

    I wouldn't worry about these two Gemini. Everybody on C2E knows the three amigos, PRT, KKK, and Noodle are the biggest pains in the a s s and full of BS posters in here. Their aim in life is to get under the skin of whoever they can and be as obnoxious as possible. Pretty well all other posters seem like good people except these three, avoid their spewing of venom.

  37. #1037
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,806

    Default

    Haha, I feel better now.

  38. #1038

    Default

    You forgot Medwards.

    You always forget Medwards.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  39. #1039
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,806

    Default

    He's only a half. Three and a half amigos. Thanks for reminding me. I'll always remember when he invited C2Eers to his local pub and he was buying, then he forgot to show up. Haha
    Last edited by Drumbones; 02-01-2018 at 04:56 PM.

  40. #1040

    Default

    this
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  41. #1041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I wouldn't worry about these two Gemini. Everybody on C2E knows the three amigos, PRT, KKK, and Noodle are the biggest pains in the a s s and full of BS posters in here. Their aim in life is to get under the skin of whoever they can and be as obnoxious as possible. Pretty well all other posters seem like good people except these three, avoid their spewing of venom.
    I'm hearing you. I really don't take it much to heart. PRT's attitude is ha ha ha any thing goes. He just never left his 70's hippy vibe behind. Noodle, more of a lone wolf but joins his pack now and again. KKK the most intelligent, dogmatic and amicable of the three. Medwards, only here for the beer. Me and Drumbones - just listening to the band.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  42. #1042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    this

    Probably why most of your post are the way they are.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  43. #1043

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Wow, insulting two posters with a single comeback.

    I know a xenophobe when they talk like you on this and other threads where you expound your views.

    Sad.
    I think that's unfair and unwarranted. Gemini is entitled to espousing what her opinions are without having them labelled as xenophobic due to it. I think theres been enough over labelling like that going on in recent years here, and in the world.

    I disagree with Gemini sometimes, agree with her at other times but I find one of the most annoying things on any discussion board is strawman attack and errant labeling.

    Certain labels can apply with all of us, I'm partial to rat b-aaastard myself, but the Xenophobia type labels get used summarily and often with little or no substantiation.
    Last edited by Replacement; 02-01-2018 at 06:23 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  44. #1044

    Default



    Just about sums PRT up.




    ..............and the rest of the SJW.


    https://www.google.ca/search?q=liber...=1514953270122
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  45. #1045

    Default

    Seek professional help.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  46. #1046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I wouldn't worry about these two Gemini. Everybody on C2E knows the three amigos, PRT, KKK, and Noodle are the biggest pains in the a s s and full of BS posters in here. Their aim in life is to get under the skin of whoever they can and be as obnoxious as possible. Pretty well all other posters seem like good people except these three, avoid their spewing of venom.
    Considering how contemptible & deplorable I find a large swath of the posters, including yourself, your admonishment is like candy to me.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  47. #1047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I wouldn't worry about these two Gemini. Everybody on C2E knows the three amigos, PRT, KKK, and Noodle are the biggest pains in the a s s and full of BS posters in here. Their aim in life is to get under the skin of whoever they can and be as obnoxious as possible. Pretty well all other posters seem like good people except these three, avoid their spewing of venom.
    Considering how contemptible & deplorable I find a large swath of the posters, including yourself, your admonishment is like candy to me.
    You just proved Gemini's poster, squarely in 2, borderline 3, - you don't even bother at 1 now. I assume you are either running from that posters playbook (probably what you learned from Alt-left Liberal fake news), or you are just intellectually incapable of making an argument without disparaging the person you are arguing with - its all a bit sad, hopefully you grow up slightly one day and learn to at least occasionally debate the post not the poster.
    Last edited by moahunter; 03-01-2018 at 08:17 AM.

  48. #1048

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    You just proved Gemini's poster, squarely in 2, borderline 3, - you don't even bother at 1 now. I assume you are either running from that posters playbook (probably what you learned from Alt-left Liberal fake news), or you are just intellectually incapable of making an argument without disparaging the person you are arguing with - its all bit sad, hopefully you grow up a bit one day and learn to at least occasionally debate the post not the poster.
    OM NOM NOM NOM NOM.



    After years of you ignoring posts that actually do debate the topics while you move the goalposts around faster than the Commonwealth groundskeepers before a summer concert, why would we even bother? You've shown your true colours, that you're incapable of growth or basic human empathy & that you've got zero qualms about pushing your own hateful rhetoric into every conversation you can weasel your way into under the guise of "debating both sides" & getting personally offended when your personal beliefs get (rightfully) stepped on in the course of the conversation. I'm sorry that you, MrO, Drumbones, Gem, HL, et al are all sensitive snowflakes looking for a safe space to push your authoritarian, fascist, alt-right, racist, xenophobic, regressive, illiberal agendas but I've no interest in enabling you to make that space out of C2E.

    (Hilarious that you try to be the "better person" while simultaneously engaging in the exact behaviour you're decrying. Nothing like your own personal brand of stupid, ignorant hypocrisy to make me chortle in the morning.)
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  49. #1049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    I'm sorry that you, MrO, Drumbones, Gem, HL, et al are all sensitive snowflakes looking for a safe space to push your authoritarian, fascist, alt-right, racist, xenophobic, regressive, illiberal agendas but I've no interest in enabling you to make that space out of C2E.
    Speaks for itself really right in number 2, and speaks more to you than any of the posters you disparage.
    Last edited by moahunter; 03-01-2018 at 08:28 AM.

  50. #1050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Speaks for itself really right in number 2, and speaks more to you than any of the posters you disparage.

    Keep posting memes, they're the backbone of every cohesive & rational argument. Time to haul out Karl Popper again it seems...



    Or do you only read text superimposed on images when it's in IMPACT?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  51. #1051

    Default

    ^You don't even understand who Karl Popper is, I can assure you he would not have supported the climate change theory which is completely unfalsafiable, and he would not have supported mindlessly calling someone he disagreed with a Nazi to try and win an argument.

  52. #1052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^You don't even understand who Karl Popper is, I can assure you he would not have supported the climate change theory which is completely unfalsafiable, and he would not have supported mindlessly calling someone he disagreed with a Nazi to try and win an argument.

    • Deflect
    • Delay
    • Deny
    • Discount
    • Deceive
    • Divide
    • Dulcify
    • Discredit
    • Destroy
    • Deal


    I don't mindlessly call you an illiberal, regressive, fascist authoritarian & your continued attempts to try and make it seem like I made this call out of spite in some sort of vacuum & not after an avalanche of evidence to support that assessment, entirely of your own making, has littered the forums for years are goddamn hilarious. You've literally said in your own words that you're okay with some backpedaling on human rights issues in Alberta if it means higher corporate profitability. That's illiberal & regressive by definition. You've stated multiple times in multiple ways that you believe the government shouldn't have to follow its own laws, a perfect encapsulation of authoritarian beliefs. And you sprinkle your own weird blend of fascism on just about everything you touch, like glitter made of hate you can't quite get rid of.

    If you don't want to be called out for deplorable beliefs, keep them out of society/the public sphere & inside your head where they belong.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  53. #1053

    Default

    Yeah, conservatives as such peace loving sorts.



    "Make them taste their own blood", indeed.

    Of course, he's no banned from Twitter and having a snowflake meltdown

    Meanwhile, he's under FBI investigation for directing his deputies to harass someone who dared to ask if he was Sheriff Clarke. Apparent;y simply asking and then shaking your head while walking away is treasonous in this guys world.

    'Make them taste their own blood': Sheriff David Clarke sends graphic tweet slamming press amid reports of FBI probe

    According to the affidavit, obtained by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Clarke told six of his deputies last January to detain passenger Dan Black after their plane landed in Milwaukee. Black said in a written complaint against Clarke that he saw the sheriff on the flight but wasn't sure if it was him at first.


    After Black passed him, he asked the man if he was Sheriff Clarke, and Clarke responded that he was, according to the complaint. Black shook his head as he continued moving to his seat, at which point Clarke asked Black if he had a problem, and Black replied no, the document said.


    According to a screenshot obtained by the FBI, Clarke texted a deputy afterward to do a "field interview, no arrest unless he becomes an a--hole with your guys."


    "Question for him is why he said anything to me. Why didn't he just keep his mouth shut?" the text read.


    An official investigation into the incident found that Clarke had used his position as sheriff to "direct his deputies to stop and question Black without legal justification." But prosecutors said in May that they would not pursue charges over the incident.


    Clarke resigned as sheriff in August to become a spokesman and adviser to a pro-Trump super PAC. Clarke was an early and ardent Trump supporter and, like the president, frequently takes to Twitter to slam his critics and the press.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/david...eports-2017-12

  54. #1054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    I wouldn't worry about these two Gemini. Everybody on C2E knows the three amigos, PRT, KKK, and Noodle are the biggest pains in the a s s and full of BS posters in here. Their aim in life is to get under the skin of whoever they can and be as obnoxious as possible. Pretty well all other posters seem like good people except these three, avoid their spewing of venom.
    Considering how contemptible & deplorable I find a large swath of the posters, including yourself, your admonishment is like candy to me.
    Sounding more like a stuck record every day. You should have made a new years resolution to get laid more often. Maybe soften out your constant sour mood. Just saying.
    Last edited by Gemini; 03-01-2018 at 09:44 AM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  55. #1055

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    To should have made a new years resolution to get laid more often. Maybe soften out your constant sour mood. Just saying.
    I love how the tighty-whitey-alt-righties think I'm some sort of angry, rage filled sourpuss because I **** all over their attempts to spew hateful rhetoric. Comedy gold & couldn't be farther from the truth.

    (Unfortunately the regularity at which I can get laid is firmly in the hands of the federal government for the next few months at least, but your junior-high-level attempted insult is duly noted. I definitely am enjoying having my wife home for another week though, wink wink nudge nudge.)
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  56. #1056

    Default

    ^Predictably response. Not interested.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  57. #1057

    Default

    The state vs the individual - or is it - the men vs the women:

    Iran: One of the bravest women in the world stands up for freedom -- The West should stand with her | Fox News

    The forced wearing of the hijab is a potent symbol of the mullahs’ oppression, especially of women.

    There are uglier, less visible examples. A woman’s testimony in court, and her inheritance rights, legally valued at half that of a man’s. Domestic violence against women is not a crime. A woman may not marry or travel abroad without the permission of her male guardian and can be married off at age 9.

    The State Department lists other shocking injustices in its latest human rights report, including: ...”


    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...-with-her.html

  58. #1058

    Default

    It's about those with power, usually men, forcing their will upon those with less or no power, usually women. It's not about the niqab or the hijab or the burqua. Saying that that is all it's about is losing sight of the real problem.

  59. #1059

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    The state vs the individual - or is it - the men vs the women:

    Iran: One of the bravest women in the world stands up for freedom -- The West should stand with her | Fox News

    The forced wearing of the hijab is a potent symbol of the mullahs’ oppression, especially of women.

    There are uglier, less visible examples. A woman’s testimony in court, and her inheritance rights, legally valued at half that of a man’s. Domestic violence against women is not a crime. A woman may not marry or travel abroad without the permission of her male guardian and can be married off at age 9.

    The State Department lists other shocking injustices in its latest human rights report, including: ...”


    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...-with-her.html
    ................and yet the women here who made the Canadian Citizenship ceremony all about her by defiantly making a stand to wear hers, and it was allowed. According to her she had a choice to wear it or not so instead of removing it when asked thought it would be better to get her 15 minutes of fame in and caused a scene on what was a memorial day for some people but for all the wrong reasons. All the while her husband in the background encouraging her to keep it on. If you had a choice lady in that instance you should have took it off. If your going to make a scene at least let the people see the face of the person making it.
    Now this lady in Iran making a stand to take it off as it's a symbol of male oppression. I hope the women all over the world break free of the stifling conditions they live in. Hopefully the repercussions for her are not to harsh but I will not hold my breath.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  60. #1060

    Default

    Yes, let's have a bunch of people tell her to do one thing and another bunch tell her to do something else.

    Here's a thought. How about we encourage her to make her own decision and we all stand back and accept it?

    You're just looking to replace one authority figure with another.

  61. #1061

    Default

    ^There are times in life we have to go with the flow. I know customs can sometimes be tiresome but usually they have been honed over hundreds of years. It's a certain conformity we live by and all societies have them. It's every day occurrence's and customs that we live within. If we visit other countries and mingle with the people from there most of us will fall in with their customs. We might not particularly agree but do it anyway to maybe not cause offence or a scene. Yet there is always one or two who feel the need to cause tension. Instead of saying 'sure I can do that' they say 'I'm not doing that' for no there apparent reason than they can.
    They don't care how they are spoiling it for others or the scene they are causing. It's all about them. What can I get out of this and who can I moan to because I was trying to get my own way.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  62. #1062

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^There are times in life we have to go with the flow. I know customs can sometimes be tiresome but usually they have been honed over hundreds of years. It's a certain conformity we live by and all societies have them. It's every day occurrence's and customs that we live within. If we visit other countries and mingle with the people from there most of us will fall in with their customs. We might not particularly agree but do it anyway to maybe not cause offence or a scene. Yet there is always one or two who feel the need to cause tension. Instead of saying 'sure I can do that' they say 'I'm not doing that' for no there apparent reason than they can.
    They don't care how they are spoiling it for others or the scene they are causing. It's all about them. What can I get out of this and who can I moan to because I was trying to get my own way.
    Honed over the centuries yes, but sometimes honed by those with the power over others and without the approval by those without the power. Other times the rules were just made up and codified and fixed in time by a few select people. Everyone thereafter is stuck living by the rules, perceptions, biases and thinking of those few long dead people living in different times.

    So what are your thoughts on the Famous Five, the Edwards case, Lord Sankey and his living tree doctrine?




    Scott Reid: The court case that changed everything – National Post

    http://nationalpost.com/opinion/scot...ged-everything





    A Tree Grows in Canada - NYTimes.com




    JBS Calgary
    Great article. But no reference to the NYT's Adam Liptak's piece on how the US constitution is no longer being emulated as a model?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/us...ppeal-with-peo...

    The US charter is not only creaky, and stingy with rights, but next to impossible to update (notwithstanding Jefferson's advise to get a new one every 19 years). Some argue it's a model of what not to do.

    It seems the model being followed is not the US Bill of Rights, but the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...roves-to-be-ca...

    http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/02/08/...al-superpower/

    Here's the academic background, from Wash U (St. Louis) & UVA Schools of Law:

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=1923556
    Oct. 17, 2013 at 1:51 p.m.



    Tom Killeen Toronto

    How interesting that our (Canada's) Supreme Court would deny "personhood" to women when parsing the British North America Act, which was signed into law by... Queen Victoria.
    Oct. 17, 2013 at 12:35 p.m.

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/comments/...in-canada.html
    Last edited by KC; 31-01-2018 at 07:18 PM.

  63. #1063

    Default

    ^So are you thinking the constitution should be changed just because someone wanted to be awkward?. What are you tryin to say here?
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  64. #1064

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^So are you thinking the constitution should be changed just because someone wanted to be awkward?. What are you tryin to say here?
    It’s the few fighters, maybe sometimes for very self-serving reasons that things change. Moreover, our constitution focused on certain rights but not others. As society changes and different issues arise, the view of the rights of the constitution should change.

  65. #1065

    Default

    The Islamic veil across Europe - BBC News

    Excerpt:

    “Countries across Europe have wrestled with the issue of the Muslim veil - in various forms such as the body-covering burka and the niqab, which covers the face apart from the eyes.
    The debate takes in religious freedom, female equality, secular traditions and even fears of terrorism.
    The veil issue is part of a wider debate about multiculturalism in Europe, as many politicians argue that there needs to be a greater effort to assimilate ethnic and religious minorities.

    Germany
    On 6 December 2016, Chancellor Angela Merkel said the wearing of full-faced veils should be prohibited in Germany "wherever it is legally possible".
    ...”

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-13038095

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •