Has Quebec bitten off more than it can chew?

[Notanumber]

Do the Catholics? As soon as they tear down the crucifix in the National Assembly and outlaw crosses on top of church spires, we can talk. Until then, it's a denial of religious freedom based on racism. When all religions are banned from putting up these things (how many murdering armies had a cross at the front?) then you're right. Until then, you're just another redneck hater.

Women have no rights under Islam. They are told what to do and punished if they don’t do it.

If I was an Islamic woman god forbid, I would wear the veil or any other attire required of me in preference to suffering a religious beating from my husband.

In Quebec, these oppressed women are being given a lifeline of personal freedom by the authorities.

I wouldn’t object if people want to cover their faces with religious tattoos provided those faces are exposed to allow identification.

How often do you see the wives of this political club wandering the streets in face covering garb?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Islamic ideology is forcing Muslim women into making political statements by making them wear desert attire where there is no desert. Even a camel would not need to wear a veil in Quebec.

The only people forcing an ideology are the MNAs of Quebec.

Requiring conformity through the force of law is antithetical to a free society.

If anyone objects, it gives them the excuse for violence to enforce submission.

Domestic violence is already illegal.

Does Islam have special needs, why should its followers demand special privileges?

This isn't a matter of special privileges; it's a matter of not being singled out for special restrictions.

Whether it can be enforced and how long it will remain are different questions but this is worth reading - An Excellent Response to the Stupidity of Muslim ‘Feminists’ who Defend the Hijab and Niqab

IOW, "I disagree with this woman's decision, therefore I feel justified in taking away her right to make it?"

The article also criticized hijabs. Is banning them the next step?

 

[Notanumber]

Domestic violence is not illegal under Sharia Law. In fact, it is encouraged.

If I was an Islamic woman god forbid, I would transgender for my own wellbeing.

 

[Wirey]

Women have no rights under Islam. They are told what to do and punished if they don’t do it.

If I was an Islamic woman god forbid, I would wear the veil or any other attire required of me in preference to suffering a religious beating from my husband.

In Quebec, these oppressed women are being given a lifeline of personal freedom by the authorities.

I wouldn’t object if people want to cover their faces with religious tattoos provided those faces are exposed to allow identification.

How often do you see the wives of this political club wandering the streets in face covering garb?

These 'oppressed' women choose to wear that veil. Their business, not the governments. And the Klanners don't have wives. You need a penis to land a wife.

 

[Notanumber]

These 'oppressed' women choose to wear that veil. Their business, not the governments. And the Klanners don't have wives. You need a penis to land a wife.

These 'oppressed' women are coerced into wearing that veil. Their husbands business, not the theirs. And the Klanners don't have wives. You need a penis to land a wife, seems a little homophobic.

When they do this to a fellow man just imagine what they do to their women. No wonder they wear the veil.

https://www.memri.org/tv/shoes-and-...-studio-when-debate-turns-freestyle-wrestling

 

[Wirey]

And the Klanners don't have wives. You need a penis to land a wife, seems a little homophobic.

I meant they are little-dicked losers who can only feel like a man by pushing their racist agenda on others. They could be gay as well I suppose, it's a free country.

 

[Revoltingest]

I meant they are little-dicked losers who can only feel like a man by pushing their racist agenda on others. They could be gay as well I suppose, it's a free country.

I've never looked under the sheets.
What have you found there?

And I caution you....
Do not recycle The Pope's response to the query
on THC forums about what's under his dress.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Domestic violence is not illegal under Sharia Law. In fact, it is encouraged.

Domestic violence is illegal under the Criminal Code.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

These 'oppressed' women are coerced into wearing that veil. Their husbands business, not the theirs.

And you want to coerce them into not even being able to leave the house?

 

[Notanumber]

And you want to coerce them into not even being able to leave the house?

I want free western countries to allow them to be free from the all-controlling Islamic ideology that they had the misfortune of being born into.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I want free western countries to allow them to be free from the all-controlling Islamic ideology that they had the misfortune of being born into.

Controlling what people wear is not the way to achieve a "free western country." Denial of freedom - i.e. what you're advocating - is antithetical to freedom.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In related news, a motion has been introduced in the Quebec legislature that calls attention to its hypocrisy on the so-called "religious neutrality" bill:

Time to remove crucifix in National Assembly, Nadeau-Dubois says


So it seems some good might come out of all this after all.

 

[Notanumber]

Can anyone remember seeing full face covering veils on western streets before 9/11?

Quebec is not the only place - Burqa bans, headscarves and veils: a timeline of legislation in the west

 

[Notanumber]

Here in the UK CCTV is major deterrent against crime. The authorities rely on it because police numbers are being cut back due to lack of finances.

What use would CCTV be if everyone wandered the streets with their faces covered?

There are plenty of places in the UK where I would not be allowed if my face were covered.

I don’t like it but I have accepted it for the greater good of society.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Here in the UK CCTV is major deterrent against crime. The authorities rely on it because police numbers are being cut back due to lack of finances.

What use would CCTV be if everyone wandered the streets with their faces covered?

There are plenty of places in the UK where I would not be allowed if my face were covered.

I don’t like it but I have accepted it for the greater good of society.

It would also make the police's job easier if we made it illegal to have lock codes on our phones, but free societies don't base their laws around facilitating a police state.

But I think you're operating under some bad assumptions about how things work in Canada.

A possibly illuminating story: as a university student, I got to tour the City of Toronto's Traffic Operations Centre. Toronto has an extensive network of cameras, but they're for traffic management, incident detection, and emergency response to collisions, not crime prevention or investigation. In the control room with a big bank of monitors, the manager of the Traffic Operations Centre told us the guidance he gave to his operators to make sure they didn't violate any privacy protection laws: "unless a police officer comes in with a warrant, if someone's standing next to their car, the maximum zoom level you should use is 'I think that might be my mother, but I can't be sure.'"

That's the sort of privacy regime we're operating under here. Given that, why have a law requiring people to remove their face coverings? All the possible answers are xenophobic.

It's not for the purpose of making citizens be generally identifiable at all times, since this isn't a legitimate purpose under Canadian law. It's also not for "religious neutrality," as was originally suggested (and if this was ever in doubt, the fact that the Quebec legislature just voted to keep the prominent crucifix in their legislative chamber should make that abundantly clear). What's left but xenophobia?

 

[Wirey]

It would also make the police's job easier if we made it illegal to have lock codes on our phones, but free societies don't base their laws around facilitating a police state.

If that doesn't explain it, nothing will. Well said.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

@Notanumber - I asked you a question that I'd appreciate an answer to:

The article also criticized hijabs. Is banning them the next step?

 

[Notanumber]

It would also make the police's job easier if we made it illegal to have lock codes on our phones,

Using your example, if the authorities made it illegal to have lock codes on our phones, but certain sections of society could have lock codes on their phones, would that be acceptable to you?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Using your example, if the authorities made it illegal to have lock codes on our phones, but certain sections of society could have lock codes on their phones, would that be acceptable to you?

Not analogous to the situation in Quebec.

 

[Notanumber]

Not analogous to the situation in Quebec.

I will take that as a definite NO then. Thanks.