Quebec passes law banning facial coverings in public.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Old people are. They were raised by people who followed the church that made a deal with the English people to let Quebec speak french. From that moment it became somewhat of a defence mechanism to be intolerant to English people. That changed a lot throughout the years, the younger generations are not separatists and much more open minded, most even go out of their way to learn English because they understand that we are part of an English speaking country and French is a mostly useless language in the world.

Being linguistically handicapped by laws forcing French here is a really fucking bad thing, people are starting to realize this, better late as fuck than never.

I haven’t interacted with very many younger people from Quebec so you might be right if so that’s good.

[Synros]

Still wrong. Canada has an obligation to ensure people's freedom of religion is not infringed upon. I would also suggest you educate yourself on islam before spewing non-sense.

Ah yes, the "Educate Yourself" fallacy. A common sign that YOU are in fact the one who has no fucking idea what Islam is about. Get your head out of your ass, & stop falling for this romanticized "Religion of Peace" version of Islam that the Far-Left pushes. You're literally defending a Fascist ideology that still publicly hangs LGBT from cranes, stones women for not covering their hair, & marries off 8yo girls.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms DOES NOT protect aspects of religions that break the laws in Canada, or runs opposite of how the government conducts itself. Again, Canada is under zero obligation to bend for Sharia. You're an absolute disagree.


[Infracted - Religion-bashing]

[Helgrimm]

There's no real rational reason for women to have facial coverings. Ban it all. Religion is a disease. Reason and logic should take priority.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Yes but mostly for very old reasons about the conflict between english and french colonists and the church making a deal to let quebec speak french when the french actually lost to the english.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, people can twist shit around all they want and ignore the meaning of words too. That's just religious discrimination at this point but I guess it's too long to say/type haha.

I think you miss understand my point. People can and do use bring a Muslim to be racist to people who are not Muslim but might look it ie beard turban ect. Instead of being openly racist they will instead imply that some one who isn’t a Muslim is. It would just be out of ignorance but it would be racist to imply that any brown person in a turban is a Muslim and there for equate being a Muslim with being bad.

[McFuu]

Ah yes, the "Educate Yourself" fallacy. A common sign that YOU are in fact the one who has no fucking idea what Islam is about. Get your head out of your ass, & stop falling for this romanticized "Religion of Peace" version of Islam that the Far-Left pushes. You're literally defending a Fascist ideology that still publicly hangs LGBT from cranes, stones women for not covering their hair, & marries off 8yo girls.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms DOES NOT protect aspects of religions that break the laws in Canada, or runs opposite of how the government conducts itself. Again, Canada is under zero obligation to bend for Sharia. You're an absolute disagree.

Other than being misinformed, this should be meme status here because of, "You're an absolute disagree."

[Swalload]

There's no real rational reason for women to have facial coverings. Ban it all. Religion is a disease. Reason and logic should take priority.

100% agree but we are not yet in a day and age where people are willing to learn something that goes against their belief even if evidence shows the better side.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

There's no real rational reason for women to have facial coverings. Ban it all. Religion is a disease. Reason and logic should take priority.

Banning religion though isn’t reasonable or logical.

[Helgrimm]

Ah yes, the "Educate Yourself" fallacy. A common sign that YOU are in fact the one who has no fucking idea what Islam is about. Get your head out of your ass, & stop falling for this romanticized "Religion of Peace" version of Islam that the Far-Left pushes. You're literally defending a Fascist ideology that still publicly hangs LGBT from cranes, stones women for not covering their hair, & marries off 8yo girls.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms DOES NOT protect aspects of religions that break the laws in Canada, or runs opposite of how the government conducts itself. Again, Canada is under zero obligation to bend for Sharia. You're an absolute disagree.

To say Islam is all the things you profess is unfair. Christianity is a pro-slavery, anti-woman religion if you follow the bible. Just as is Islam if you follow the Quran. Modern Christianity in America is just a less radicalized version. The problem is the cultures that Islam are present in are so far behind western cultures, their religion is too. Modern cultures pacify religion; Christianity has become a mere remnant of itself because religion is the understanding of primitives. Those who don't understand turn to religion, those who know turn to science.

[Synros]

You can how ever use a religion as a scape goat to be racist. Like when people call Sikh’s muslims because there looking for a reason to hate brown people.

If you're referring to that incident with Jagmeet, she was clearly referring to the NDP as a whole, and their pushing of Sharia Law through M103. I've watched that video a dozen times, and at no point does she directly call him a Muslim. She's also said the same things about Liberals and Justin Trudeau. What's your mental gymnastics to explain that one away?

As always, certain people are making this a race issue, to avoid having to confront the valid points she brought up. Like how the NDP and Liberals being bought and paid for by the Muslim Brotherhood, and how the purposely vague wording of M103 is a backdoor for Sharia Law.

[Krawu]

Honestly people, this is Canada we're talking about, so I highly doubt this is about "Islamophobia" or whatnot.

I really don't know if I should be for or against this ban. The implications on personal freedom don't escape me, and I also understand the side arguing for this. Personally, since I have no problem with Muslims but am also against intrusive government measures on mundane stuff like clothing, I don't really care too much either way.

But I do know that Islam works without covering women's faces. Out of the 6 friends that I have that are fairly strict Muslims(no haram food, don't miss any call to prayer, fast during Ramadan) with an SO none are making their girlfriend or wife cover their face. About half wear a headscarf and modest but otherwise ordinary clothing, the rest just wear whatever. One has a girlfriend who isn't even Muslim herself (which is prohibited if you don't know).
I've talked to them about it a time or two, and they all pretty much said it's just as dumb as the Christian custom during the Middle Ages when married women also had to cover their hair or face social ostracism.

So I'm leaning towards approval that this was written into law, because it doesn't just cut the religious freedom for some people, but it also allows those who don't want to have to cover their face but would otherwise be forced to more freedom than they had before.

Anyways, I'm glad I don't have to be the people who had to deal with this, because no matter what you decide, someone is going to be majorly pissed off.

And I can't leave without quoting part of the song "Shiroyama" by Sabaton, the lyrics of which fit situations like this perfectly:

It's the nature of time
that the old ways must give in.

It's the nature of time
that the new ways come in sin.

When the new meets the old
it always ends the ancient ways.

And as history told
the old ways go out in a blaze.

[Swalload]

I think you miss understand my point. People can and do use bring a Muslim to be racist to people who are not Muslim but might look it ie beard turban ect. Instead of being openly racist they will instead imply that some one who isn’t a Muslim is. It would just be out of ignorance but it would be racist to imply that any brown person in a turban is a Muslim and there for equate being a Muslim with being bad.

Yeah thinking that all brown people with a beard are muslim that's racist because you make assumption based on that person's race. Hating Muslims is not racist tho, that's what I was trying to say in the first place.

[A dot Ham]

It's a violation of their First Amendment rights.

In Quebec?

[Helgrimm]

Banning religion though isn’t reasonable or logical.

It is if you can enforce it. Religion as it is, is counterrproductive to human advancement and liberty.

[A dot Ham]

@Tennisace, why is Canada so racist towards it's Muslim inhabitants?

[Infracted - Abusing mention feature]

I'm starting to wonder if Endus is sleeping with Tennisace... he seems to be johnny on the spot to come to her defense. Despite the fact that she does her own brand of spamming and trolling... while skirting the forum rules... but in the words of Kermit... that's none of my business.

[urasim]

It is if you can enforce it. Religion as it is, is counterrproductive to human advancement and liberty.

So it's reasonable to force people to adhere to your view of reality? It's logical to ban something that will likely cause problems for you down the road by the people you're pissing off?

It may be counterproductive, but that's not for you to decide what an individual finds productive or not. Yeah, liberty, like banning things...

[Lorgar Aurelian]

If you're referring to that incident with Jagmeet, she was clearly referring to the NDP as a whole, and their pushing of Sharia Law through M103. I've watched that video a dozen times, and at no point does she directly call him a Muslim. She's also said the same things about Liberals and Justin Trudeau. What's your mental gymnastics to explain that one away?

As always, certain people are making this a race issue, to avoid having to confront the valid points she brought up. Like how the NDP and Liberals being bought and paid for by the Muslim Brotherhood, and how the purposely vague wording of M103 is a backdoor for Sharia Law.

Ya I wasn’t talking about jagmeet and I have no idea what Trudeau didn’t I don’t fallow any thing he does. I’m talking from person exerpance as some one who lived in Brampton or brown town as some people call it for 20 years in a nabhorhood surrounded by mostly sihk’s. From my personal experience racist people will try and call any brown people they don’t like Muslim as they think it’s fair to criticize them on that and not being brown, this would include some racist family members I have when they came to visit.

I don’t really care about the NDP or liberals but that doesn’t change that people can use religion as a scapegoat to be racist.

[Swalload]

Honestly people, this is Canada we're talking about, so I highly doubt this is about "Islamophobia" or whatnot.

I really don't know if I should be for or against this ban. The implications on personal freedom don't escape me, and I also understand the side arguing for this. Personally, since I have no problem with Muslims but am also against intrusive government measures on mundane stuff like clothing, I don't really care too much either way.

But I do know that Islam works without covering women's faces. Out of the 6 friends that I have that are fairly strict Muslims(no haram food, don't miss any call to prayer, fast during Ramadan) with an SO none are making their girlfriend or wife cover their face. About half wear a headscarf and modest but otherwise ordinary clothing, the rest just wear whatever. One has a girlfriend who isn't even Muslim herself (which is prohibited if you don't know).
I've talked to them about it a time or two, and they all pretty much said it's just as dumb as the Christian custom during the Middle Ages when married women also had to cover their hair or face social ostracism.

So I'm leaning towards approval that this was written into law, because it doesn't just cut the religious freedom for some people, but it also allows those who don't want to have to cover their face but would otherwise be forced to more freedom than they had before.

Anyways, I'm glad I don't have to be the people who had to deal with this, because no matter what you decide, someone is going to be majorly pissed off.

And I can't leave without quoting part of the song "Shiroyama" by Sabaton, the lyrics of which fit situations like this perfectly:

I think that's very true. Quebec is becoming less religious by the minute, churches are closing down etc, just by natural selection basically. People are allowed to believe and practice but in the everyday life it's not part of our culture anymore.
I think a law like this will just help their religion move on and evolve into something more acceptable in a social situation without preventing them from believing in it.
In the 70's they were not forced to wear that, and we can all agree it made a lot more sense, why not go back to that? A much more acceptable, less restrictive and demanding way of practising the very same religion?

Quebec 2020 will look like Iran 1970. What a time to be alive. Can't wait to try to explain that shit to my grand-kids when they don't understand wtf is going on in their history books (or futuristic holograms and shit I guess).

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Yeah thinking that all brown people with a beard are muslim that's racist because you make assumption based on that person's race. Hating Muslims is not racist tho, that's what I was trying to say in the first place.

I wasn’t refuting that hating muslims isn’t racist I was just stating that people use hating muslims as a cover to be actually racist.

[Swalload]

So it's reasonable to force people to adhere to your view of reality? It's logical to ban something that will likely cause problems for you down the road by the people you're pissing off?

It may be counterproductive, but that's not for you to decide what an individual finds productive or not. Yeah, liberty, like banning things...

That's not "his" view. It's a fact that he happens to be pointing out. Don't take it out on him, take it out on reality I guess, if you can.

[Thagrynor]

Not that I'm excusing religious and cultural oppression, but...

I'm pretty sure most, if not all of these instances can be a government employee on some level, or at least a "public worker". You can probably find several dozen more examples.

This is safety gear. It is a) needed to prevent injury/illness/disease and b) removable if needed and by request. The way I read the above quote, the law would be targeting face coverings that would cover most/all of the face and that the wearer is likely to refuse to remove upon request/as needed for safety. It is a fair distinction.