Canada Law on Facial Veils Fuels Fierce Debate

[Kraenen]

So much for religious freedom. Either ban all religious symbols and garb or none.

You have the same opinion on freedom of speech too, right?

- - - Updated - - -

Facial expressions have a heavy cultural component, and it's clear that it's not a fundamentally necessary component of communication. Blind people, for instance, have no real way to read facial expressions, and they get on okay. Facial expression as the basis for communication stopped being a major factor around the time we invented complex language. Still useful, but it's not the meat, it's the spice, to draw an analogy.

You're pulling this out of your ass, with some rhetorical fallacies to boost your ignorance ("they get on okay" is not a valid argument). Dr. Ekman's work conclusively showed that facial expressions are universal, not provincial and they don't have a "heavy cultural component".

[Kalis]

The Niqab and its ilk is hardly common even among Muslims either, except when state-imposed that is. So I don't see why it's OK for a minority of Christians to wear covering apparel but a minority of Muslims wearing it is no bueno.

No Christians wear an equivalent to the niqab.

Nuns are a religious order, their headwear is closer to the chador or hijab, outside of that are women who place a square of cloth on their head whilst in church, but that isn’t worn normally.

[Jastall]

No Christians wear an equivalent to the niqab.

Nuns are a religious order, their headwear is closer to the chador or hijab, outside of that are women who place a square of cloth on their head whilst in church, but that isn’t worn normally.

The point isn't that it's equivalent, it's not. The point is that a small minority among Muslims wear the Niqab so I don't understand why it's such a ginormous problem.

[Deleted]

What pure unadulterated rubbish from someone whose whole view about Islam in the Western world seems to be literally born out of the pages of far-right websites rather than actual experience and knowledge on the matter

I actually do know a great deal more about it than the average person -- about its history, theology and practice alike. The inevitable conclusion is that its net worth to humanity is definitely negative. There's nothing good or useful that other cultures would not already possess in far more refined forms, but there is a lot of disgusting stuff that most others have gotten rid of centuries ago.

Even in the middle east they aren't 'forced to' by law. They are, however, forced to for fear of harm, which the country does nothing to help with. That is manipulation - It isn't technically disallowed, but because the religion is so fervently followed in the middle east, that is where the harm comes from which prevents people from speaking out.

That doesn't exist in America. Our country treats that kind of harm very seriously. They aren't "manipulated", and "coerced" is not a problem - That means they've been spoken to and convinced, of their own free will, that they would like to wear it.

Yet it does exist, both in America and Europe. Ever heard or "honor killing" or other honor-based violence practiced by certain groups against their women?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_..._United_States

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/409135...ing-murder-uk/

It's not uncommon for a girl's own family members to threaten, beat or even kill her if she becomes "too Westernized".

Of course, in public the community leaders say they condemn such acts. But what they speak when they think no outsider is listening can be quite different, as has become evident time and again when investigative journalists have infiltrated mosques in different Western countries and recorded what's actually going on there.

This is nothing but hateful and prejudiced rhetoric, without any basis in fact whatsoever.

You in particular aren't exactly a position to make such claims about others.

[Kalis]

The point isn't that it's equivalent, it's not. The point is that a small minority among Muslims wear the Niqab so I don't understand why it's such a ginormous problem.

I didn’t say it was a huge problem, I said it’s a sign of fundamentalist Islam, which it is.

Most of the problems of extremism within Islam, don’t typically come from the group that is regarded as second class humans by Muslim fundamentalists.

The niqab is culturally incompatible with the West, but that is largely because fundamentalist Islam is culturally incompatible.

[Super Kami Dende]

The difference being that theft has a clear demonstration of harm.

Wearing something that covers your face, on the other hand, does not.

Yet it gives the ability to conceal ones Identity in the Act of a crime, which is literally the entire point. AS I said it is Law in my Country that certain places you are not allowed to enter with an object or Item of clothing which conceals your Face/Identity. Being a Religious Garb should not allow you to bypass the laws of a Country.

National Laws should always override Religious Freedom. Especially in Secular Countries. It's why Child Brides are against the Law, when seen as perfectly fine within certain Religions.

[Noradin]

you can accommodate their views and have them disrobe for verification in a private room with a female staff member to verify their ID, or some such.

I do not agree with the notion that a female staff member should be required to view the face.
That is sexist. It would force any place that requires identification to keep a female on staff simply for this purpose (or deny service which is worse and open to abuse).

- - - Updated - - -

Wearing something that covers your face, on the other hand, does not.

Unless the other side is required to check your face and to hire female staff to do that.

[Deleted]

Why does anyone think women need to cover their breasts as a form of modesty, but guys can go shirtless no problem?

Same exact thing, really.

The root is that some women don't want to be judged for their looks. The Niqab pretty conveniently prevents that. Don't take it from me, I linked you testimonial and poll evidence from Muslim women themselves on this.



Facial expressions have a heavy cultural component, and it's clear that it's not a fundamentally necessary component of communication. Blind people, for instance, have no real way to read facial expressions, and they get on okay. Facial expression as the basis for communication stopped being a major factor around the time we invented complex language. Still useful, but it's not the meat, it's the spice, to draw an analogy.

This post is all kinds of embarrassing and insulting.
From equating faces with breasts (while simultaneously taking issue with equating the treatment of symbols) to handwaving how massive an impediment to communication blindness is.
Pathetic.

Arguing with two posters who've explicitly spoken against bans.
Expressing a dislike for the face covers, yes.
Yet viciously throwing baseless accusations of prejudice when this dislike is expressed in a capacity other than hollow lip-service.
You are, at best, deliberately unhelpful. But more than likely, you're just the actual problem: giving fundamentalism the benefit of the doubt and actively tolerating its intolerance.
For the sake of any Muslim cause, show some decency and step aside.

[cuafpr]

Its already is lol

then what's the point of all the fuss? if its equal across everything sorry not sorry to the people upset over it.

[Shiny212]

Many countries already ban masks, including religious masks. It has nothing to do with their self-expression and everything to do with public safety.

[Deleted]

This stone age religion has no place in any modern society. Period.

[Spectral]

Many countries already ban masks, including religious masks. It has nothing to do with their self-expression and everything to do with public safety.

There's very little in the way of serious concerns about safety stemming from Islamist female garb though. The crime rate for that group is sufficiently low that it'd be pretty silly to think that the primary reason to not want niqabs around is public safety.

[endersblade]

Banning women from wearing what they want to stop oppression is pretty blatantly ironic, not sure how people don't get that.

Fight the stupid ideas, not the stupid clothing.

Considering WEARING it in the first place is a sign of oppression, you're right, it IS ironic.

- - - Updated - - -

This stone age religion has no place in any modern society. Period.

I 100% agree, but I also agree that applies to ALL religions.

[Rennadrel]

There's very little in the way of serious concerns about safety stemming from Islamist female garb though. The crime rate for that group is sufficiently low that it'd be pretty silly to think that the primary reason to not want niqabs around is public safety.

And yet those crimes do happen, by men in particular, in the Middle East. Preventative action is the best form of action.

[Tico]

Why can't someone follow his/her religious practices in a free country?

[Freighter]

Why can't someone follow his/her religious practices in a free country?

There's no requirement to wear a niqab in the first place.

[Rennadrel]

Why can't someone follow his/her religious practices in a free country?

Because there is a thing called the law that everyone has to abide by equally, no special treatment should be made for someone because of their religion or their "choices" as far as culture. Don't want to expose your face in public? Then you shouldn't be allowed to obtain a drivers license, see a medical professional, vote or buy alcohol, because all of those things under the law, require for the entirety of your face to be visible to those you interact with.