Very interesting... a new law in Quebec will require Muslim women to remove their niqab at all Provincial services:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1003 ... mmodations

I know that there have been discussions about this type of legislation in Europe, but I didn't realize that it was being considered in Canada. I wonder what the backlash will be from radical Islam?

Not sure how I feel about this one. On the one hand, it's a stupid religious cultural habit that needs to go away, and a blatant symbol of the organized misogyny that is Islam. On the other hand, it's legislating acceptable clothing. Are they really hurting anyone by wearing what they wear?

I'm curious as to how others feel about this.

Keyser Soze wrote:Very interesting... a new law in Quebec will require Muslim women to remove their niqab at all Provincial services:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1003 ... mmodations

I know that there have been discussions about this type of legislation in Europe, but I didn't realize that it was being considered in Canada. I wonder what the backlash will be from radical Islam?

Not sure how I feel about this one. On the one hand, it's a stupid religious cultural habit that needs to go away, and a blatant symbol of the organized misogyny that is Islam. On the other hand, it's legislating acceptable clothing. Are they really hurting anyone by wearing what they wear?

I'm curious as to how others feel about this.

It probably has to do with being able to identify the person.

Good for Quebec.
No shirt, no shoes, no face, no service.

Keyser Soze wrote:Very interesting... a new law in Quebec will require Muslim women to remove their niqab at all Provincial services:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/1003 ... mmodations

I know that there have been discussions about this type of legislation in Europe, but I didn't realize that it was being considered in Canada. I wonder what the backlash will be from radical Islam?

Not sure how I feel about this one. On the one hand, it's a stupid religious cultural habit that needs to go away, and a blatant symbol of the organized misogyny that is Islam. On the other hand, it's legislating acceptable clothing. Are they really hurting anyone by wearing what they wear?

I'm curious as to how others feel about this.

It applies only in official environments: government, voting, etc. It's for identification purposes and has nothing to do with religion. How the hell are we supposed to identify people if they are dressed up in bed sheets from head to toes? WTF? Is voting a Halloween party?

Is it acceptable to wear a turban if you are an RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) officer? Let's say I'm an RCMP and I decide one day I wanna wear blue jeans, because my religion or my culture tells me so. Is that acceptable?

Whatever you decide to wear on the street as a simple citizen is your choice. You wanna become a government employee? Ditch the fucking burka or turban and wear the required uniform. Period.

Turbans are acceptable. in fact last year in the UK there was a call for a bulletproof version to be made available for the police.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8039921.stm

Irish Catholic burkas aren't allowed, so why should Muslims ones be OK?

Rule 3: Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are aligned on target and you are prepared to fire.

This new piece of legislation forbidding Muslim women from wearing the Niqab not only when working in Government buildings but also when seeking Government provided services, goes a long way to show the differences in social attitudes between innovative Québec and the stodgy ROC (Rest Of Canada).
The Québec decision is the result of various considerations:
* Defend the Muslim woman from the family imposition of religious, outdated customs like female circumcision.
* Prevent the use of Niqab to hide a terrorist.
* Allow other people to interact not only with the speech but also the facial expressions of the woman.
However, public servants can continue to wear religious symbols like a cross or Star of David or even the partial veil known as the hijab worn by Muslim women - just so long as a person's face is in full view.
The Quebec Council on the Status of Women applauded the bill as an effort to champion gender equality in public services.
Other Canadian governments have been more wary of wading into the murky realm of identity issues, a point that might explain the strong reaction to the niqab controversy across the country.
I'am afraid the ROC is still dreaming in Technicolor about the glorious future of a multicultural Canada. It aint gonna happen!

I can't argue with anything you say there Federico, very good points.

So much of communication is visual, and facial expressions are such an important part of human interaction. Precisely the reason why the niqab is such a clear symbol of hatred of women, as it impedes their ability to communicate and de-humanizes them.

It has been said many times that the Muslim face covering for women is not a religious requirement. It is peculiar to only a few of the more misogynistic countries that like to use Islam as the excuse. There are many Islamic societies around the world where this mode of dress is not apparent or encouraged.

If motor-cyclists have to remove their crash-helmet when entering premises like banks, government offices, etc., then I see no reason to allow any covering of the face whatsoever.

Imagine the situation where motor-cyclists belonged to a 'Bikers Religion' and that wearing of the crash-helmet was a mandatory requirement in public - not because the 'religion' said so but because the bikers' leader decreed it. And used the 'religion' as the excuse.

They'd get 'laughed out of court'.

Rollerlocked wrote:Rule 3: Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are aligned on target and you are prepared to fire.

You mean like John Travolta in Pulp Fiction? Now that did make a sticky mess.

Nice one Quebec.

Alan B wrote:It has been said many times that the Muslim face covering for women is not a religious requirement. It is peculiar to only a few of the more misogynistic countries that like to use Islam as the excuse. There are many Islamic societies around the world where this mode of dress is not apparent or encouraged.

If motor-cyclists have to remove their crash-helmet when entering premises like banks, government offices, etc., then I see no reason to allow any covering of the face whatsoever.

Imagine the situation where motor-cyclists belonged to a 'Bikers Religion' and that wearing of the crash-helmet was a mandatory requirement in public - not because the 'religion' said so but because the bikers' leader decreed it. And used the 'religion' as the excuse.

They'd get 'laughed out of court'.

Very Strong Point.

Thank You. I shall remember it.

Rollerlocked wrote:Rule 3: Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are aligned on target and you are prepared to fire.

Perhaps he was preparing to shoot at god....

As I wrote previously, the Province of Québec is far ahead of the ROC when it's time to reassert the predominance of French-Canadian culture above all the others, and to hell with multiculturalism (it doesn't work anyway).

Soon after declaring inadmissible the wearing of a veil covering the face when working in a Government building or using Government facilities, the new law was recently implemented.

As reported by the Globe and Mail,

"Quebec Muslim woman ordered to unveil or leave French course".

"One morning recently, a young Muslim woman whose face was hidden by a religious covering was pulled out of her government French class near Montreal and told to unveil or leave the course.
“Aisha,” a 25-year-old permanent resident from India, is the second such case to come to light in Quebec. Last month, the same ultimatum was given to Naema Ahmed, an Egyptian-born woman whose case sparked an uproar and led to landmark provincial legislation against religious face veils.
Aisha says she could not remove her niqab. “It’s like ripping off my modesty, like someone asking me to take off my clothes,” she said.
And Aisha, whose British-born husband grew up in Montreal, wants to study French full-time."

I wholly approve of this measure and reproduce one of the many comments which were raised by the article:

"PESHAWAR, Pakistan - Two suicide bombers dressed in burqas blew themselves up Saturday in a camp for refugees fleeing military offensives in northwestern Pakistan, killing 41 people and wounding 62, officials said."

Federico wrote:As I wrote previously, the Province of Québec is far ahead of the ROC when it's time to reassert the predominance of French-Canadian culture above all the others, and to hell with multiculturalism (it doesn't work anyway).

You're right there - Quebec does not tolerate anything that challenges their unique culture. Interesting that there is not the typical Muslim backlash of protests, Imams speaking out about discrimination, etc. Despite there being few Muslim women in Quebec that actually wear these outfits, it's the sort of 'affront to Islam' that the Muslim communities usually revolt against.

Perhaps the quiet acceptance of the law will embolden some of the other Provinces to do the same?

Thanks for posting the G&M article Federico, I hadn't seen it.

Keyser Soze wrote:

Thanks for posting the G&M article Federico, I hadn't seen it.

You are most welcome KS.

It seems rational behavior is finally getting the upper hand on supine political correctness as more and more countries adopt the policy "a hidden face is unacceptable in a progressive society".
Indeed, after France and Québec, now Belgium is considering a ban on face coverings by Islamic women.
As reported by Richard Allen Greene in CNN.com:

"The latest round in the battle of the burqa kicks off Thursday in Belgium, which could become the first country in Europe to ban face coverings worn by observant Muslim women.
Lawmakers are considering a ban in all public places on niqabs, veils that cover the face, as well as burqas, which cover the face and everything else from head to toe.
They're motivated both by security and morality, they say.
"We think all people in public places must show their face," says Denis Ducarme. And, he says, "We must defend our values in the question of the freedom and the dignity of the woman."

An example of how deleterious misguided attempts at multiculturalism may be, can be found in the latest issue of The Globe and Mail.

"Ujjal Dosanjh, a former Liberal cabinet minister and onetime British Columbia premier, says Sikh extremism is on the rise in some parts of the country, and blamed, in part, “politically correct” Canadians who let it happen in the name of diversity.
Mr. Dosanjh, who was savagely beaten in Vancouver in 1985 after speaking out against religious violence, said Canadian multiculturalism has allowed extremism to take root in Sikh and other ethnic communities.
That militancy is worse now, he said, than a generation ago when extremists blew up an Air India flight, killing 329 people, most of them Canadians. Ironically, Mr. Dosanjh said separatist extremism is more entrenched in some Canadian Sikh communities than in Punjab, the Indian region where the Khalistan movement – named after the theoretical Sikh country – originated."
In other terms, you give generous hospitality and full latitude to implement their customs in the adoptive country to a people with entirely different values, and they reward you by blowing up your airplane.