JonboyE

There should be no reason why a woman be forced to remove a hijab unless you are also going to say a Sikh must remove their turban.

That said, I agree with your general point that it is a bit silly to castigate other faiths, cultures or countries because we think they tell woman what to wear, and then demonstrate our freedom by telling woman what they can or cannot wear.

SchnookoLoly

I think an important distinction is that none of the other religious garbs, whether it be robes or turbans or kippahs or whatever, obstruct the face, which is such a central part of our ability to communicate and recognize each other. And I say communicate in terms of non-verbal communication - facial expressions and so on, in addition to general identification. Someone can be wearing a turban, and you still know who they are. I suspect this is also why the less conservative veils - including hijabs (which only cover the head and neck) are not under such scrutiny.

Shard

Agree. And there is also the sub-text in the garment. Sari's for example are beautiful and, although from a different cultural heritage, seek to venerate rather than subjugate women.

Former Lancastrian

But as many have pointed out it is not a religious requirement to actually wear it. Im OK with them wearing it even at a citizenship ceremony but again during the swearing of the oath all faces must be uncovered so that each person can be seen to be taking the oath. If her face except for the eyes are being covered then she cannot be seen to be taking the oath.
This is a rather good article on a person defending the niqab ban

Salim Mansur: Defending the niqab ban | National Post

There again this is just his opinion or his interpretation and this is what is sadly being misconstrued or reported by others.
Ms. Ishaq argued that removing her niqab (a full face covering worn by some Muslim women), as required by the CIC regulation, would be an infringement on her religious beliefs, which are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Isnt this her interpretation of what her beliefs are as the Quran doesn't mandate that the niqab or burka be worn as part of their religion.
Neither Islam, nor Hanafi rites or jurisprudence as part of Islamic belief, make such a requirement obligatory for Muslim women. The wearing of the niqab by a small percentage of Muslim women is a modern custom turned into religious mandate and enforced by coercion in public by Muslim extremists in Pakistan and some other Muslim majority countries.

Jericho79

Not sure why you keep repeating this, as no one is disputing it.
I've already repeatedly granted that in certain circumstances, it should be removed.

orly

I'd say being covered head to toe is indecent.

Former Lancastrian

But many media outlets are disputing this with inaccurate reports. At no stage as Harper said that they CANNOT wear it nor that they CANNOT wear it at a citizenship ceremony. This is what Harper actually said

“We do not allow people to cover their faces during citizenship ceremonies. Why would Canadians, contrary to our own values, embrace a practice at that time that is not transparent, that is not open and frankly is rooted in a culture that is anti-women,” Mr. Harper told the Commons Tuesday. “That is unacceptable to Canadians, unacceptable to Canadian women.”

Im not agreeing with Harper merely pointing out the inaccuracies. Lots of comments on blogs and media articles are suggesting this is a security issue etc etc. Of course politicians wont speak plain English or give a convoluted reply.
Harper should have said something like
She is free to wear the niqab but must uncover her face while reciting the oath of citizenship. End of story.

Novocastrian

Ah, but being the end of story is not what Harper wants. This is all one more transparently non issue designed by back room staff and endorsed by Harper's psychosis to divert attention from the fact that the economy is what he's been planning his election campaign around for a long time.

Given the current plight of the economy, that's obviously a rather less attractive prospect then he'd hoped. So, Plan B. Roll out the provocative social conservative crap like this, discover a "terrorist plot" every other day to dominate the news cycle and,and, and.

JamesM

I agree.

At Hooters it is orange hot pants and yellow vests. The girls also have an all black outfit that they bounce around in occasionally.

Jericho79

There are others (not me) who say bikinis are indecent (well, maybe sometimes). Some people think public displays of affection are indecent.

If niqabs were a public decency issue, they'd have been tried in the courts.

Jericho79

I'm less concerned with what Harper says, and more concerned with the rhetoric that it stoked. As you say, read the blogs and social media comments. It has provoked a very anti-muslim sentiment, for what is essentially, a non-issue.

JonboyE

I quite enjoyed this one ...

Lawrence Toet's mailout inspires more poll ideas on Reddit - Politics - CBC News

Oakvillian

Excellent! I like the sub-editor's choice of quote for the subheading: "Are you (a) Conservative or (b) Wrong?"

Also the conclusion of one reader: "either you abhor false dichotomies or you support terrorism!"

orly

I'd imagine wearing a bikini as a matter of course, or to your citizenship ceremony, would be rightly laughed at and disallowed.

bats

When we took our citizenship oath we were told that if you wore the niqab then you could show your face in private. It's no big deal.

I wouldnt want to belong to a relgion that told me how to dress but there are plenty out there of all creeds.

Harper is a twat using the women's rights issue as a reason