m_shortpants
Member
Hijab and Burqa are two very different things.
Quebec judge refuses to hear women's case until she removed Hijab
- Thread starter Maninthemirror
- Start date
- Status
Hijab and Burqa are two very different things.
gutter_trash
Banned
Jean Charest received flack for having the birth name of John James on his birth certificate for being too English, he replied at the decenters by stating that he is proud of his Irish heritage from his mom's side.I was referring specifically to rednecks in Alberta, I wasn't calling all Albertans rednecks
In Quebec, having a ''too English'' sounding name can cost you from public office.
The provincial National Assembly is the least diverse of all the big Canadian provinces
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Lol Couillard already gets so much shit for living in Saudi Arabia for a few years and rumours that he grew a beard because he turned Muslim. Nationalists are like birthers.
CrunchyFrog
Member
As long as it doesn't impact testimony I really don't see the issue with it. As for respect of decorum, you don't get much more formal than a hijab. It's an understandable reaction, but the wrong one, IMO.
Oops, sorry Morrigan Stark!
And you're welcome.
With the exception of a few drive-by posters, the non-religious people here mostly expressed their worries in seeing exceptions made to rules for religious reasons, when everybody should be treated equally, whatever their (lack of) beliefs. These people have almost all been asking to drop stupid rules that prevent people appearing in courts as they are, be it with a veil, a turban, a baseball cap or a tinfoil hat on their head.
Now, people calling all things religious bullshit, fairy tales or even mental illness are just expressing their opinion, which -like any opinion- you may agree with or not.
Disagreeing with them doesn't automatically make them warriors, though.
Finally, I'd like to ask: do you really expect religious people to abandon their faith and join the non-religious crowd because they're nice folks?
I'd be happy to make you an apple tart and discuss why I ceased to believe in God, but lol.
And you're welcome.
Who are those belligerent asses you're talking about?
With the exception of a few drive-by posters, the non-religious people here mostly expressed their worries in seeing exceptions made to rules for religious reasons, when everybody should be treated equally, whatever their (lack of) beliefs. These people have almost all been asking to drop stupid rules that prevent people appearing in courts as they are, be it with a veil, a turban, a baseball cap or a tinfoil hat on their head.
Now, people calling all things religious bullshit, fairy tales or even mental illness are just expressing their opinion, which -like any opinion- you may agree with or not.
Disagreeing with them doesn't automatically make them warriors, though.
Finally, I'd like to ask: do you really expect religious people to abandon their faith and join the non-religious crowd because they're nice folks?
I'd be happy to make you an apple tart and discuss why I ceased to believe in God, but lol.
Liferebooted
Banned
Good for him, no hats allowed in court. Equal rights for all.
Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
"Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a)freedom of conscience and religion;
(b)freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c)freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d)freedom of association."
Yup, what a "funny definition" I have.
But wait! There's more!
Section 15:
"15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability."
gutter_trash
Banned
The biggest flaw with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the "notwithstanding clause" where provinces can opt out.
Quebec used that clause in the past to bypass the Charter when they implemented Bill 101 (language law)
Quebec used that clause in the past to bypass the Charter when they implemented Bill 101 (language law)
Dr.Guru of Peru
played the long game
The judge comes off as petulant and stubborn here. Not a good look.
The woman was doing nothing to disrespect the court. This is not a case of preferential treatment. This is a case study on why judges should not have the power to cancel hearings on the basis of solely their own discretion.
The woman was doing nothing to disrespect the court. This is not a case of preferential treatment. This is a case study on why judges should not have the power to cancel hearings on the basis of solely their own discretion.
Of course you would declare the biggest flaw with the Charter being a clause that has only really affected Quebec to date.
What about the giant caveat that is Section 1? Reasonable limits?
victreeb3l
Member
Stupid judge.
In a way that is not open, inviting, or respectful.
Emperor_Uriel
Member
This reeks of prejudice, no doubt about it. Judge should've let this one slide, especially given how intense issues relating to Islam have gotten recently.
With that said, I also think it's perfectly valid to argue that the woman should've just taken the hijab off. As a non-religious person, I'm not at all afraid to admit that it puts me on edge whenever someone takes the most superficial elements of their faith this seriously.
Best compromise would've been: Hear the case, rule fairly, then kindly mention that, in the future, participants in a court case will be expected to wear secular attire only.
And stop making people swear on the Bible, for God's sake.
With that said, I also think it's perfectly valid to argue that the woman should've just taken the hijab off. As a non-religious person, I'm not at all afraid to admit that it puts me on edge whenever someone takes the most superficial elements of their faith this seriously.
Best compromise would've been: Hear the case, rule fairly, then kindly mention that, in the future, participants in a court case will be expected to wear secular attire only.
And stop making people swear on the Bible, for God's sake.
Sure thing. Except for that pesky constitution and all.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Being reminded of the Ten Commandments and moral codes actually does reduce lying and cheating. I mean you might be against it morally, but experimentally it's been proven to be effective in reducing dishonesty
But why? Is there some rules that say individuals have to wear secular attire to participate in society or court? I could see you argue for some items based on safety reasons, but nothing in this case indicated that problem
gutter_trash
Banned
Of course you would declare the biggest flaw with the Charter being a clause that has only really affected Quebec to date.
What about the giant caveat that is Section 1? Reasonable limits?
Pierre Trudeau caved in too much to the Provinces demands in 1982, now we are stuck with a document which has an opt out clause
I guess if you remove the people who were being belligerent asses then you might be confused as to who I am talking about. It's one thing to express concern, and that's a legitimate thing to do - that being said, it's an irrelevant thing to do. We've been making exceptions for people's religious reasons for a very long time, and I don't think is a bad thing when in the right context. It's fundamentally not much different than stuff like... providing bathrooms for men and women. You can make them all just use the same bathroom, but it doesn't hurt having two. In this case -specifically- this woman gets no special privileges wearing her Hijab. Asking her to take it off would be like... asking someone to cut their hair before they came to court. Basically bullshit with the only intended purpose being inconveniencing the person, not at all ascertaining the truth and providing justice.
I don't know what you're even going with here. Religious bullshit is all over the place, and there are other bullshit things that bother me as well. Expressing these things are not a problem "I think Hijabs are dumb" is a different argument than "I don't think people should wear Hijabs in court".
I've been aiding in people moving away from religion on this very forum for half a decade. What seems to always work with me is not ridiculing a person, or their beliefs, but talking about them like they are adults and with respect, and disagreeing on good faith. Instead of saying "Lol, religion is so fucking dumb" or something of the sort, or saying "Religion should be banned!" - things that get people's hackles up, and doesn't encourage people to look at anything constructively. I feel like when you make Muslims feel like they have a group of people 'against' them, sometimes the last thing they want to do is 'join' that 'group' (atheists).
An opt out clause which has been used, like, four times provincially and never federally in 32 years. I'm really not stressing over it at this point.
RustyNails
Member
I have migraine problems caused by light sensitivity, if a judge would ask me to remove my hat I'd see it as badgering me as well. If the judge can see my face there shouldn't be a problem. A Hijab should thus be totally fine.
I'm also an atheist, I'm not against religion though, I just don't practice it. We're not all overly zealous types.
I'm also an atheist, I'm not against religion though, I just don't practice it. We're not all overly zealous types.
Hardcore militant atheist satanist here. A secular society does not imply the people are secular. As such it's unreasonable to deny a person for not being secular. I understand the common retort to this. "It's just clothes, whats the big deal?" and assuming that question is asked in honesty the answer would be that for whatever reason that garment is a very important part of that persons psyche and identity and for them it's not "just a hat". The dress code of the court seem to be based around modesty rather than strict adherence to secular guidelines and even without applying empathy to the person that alone should distinguish a hijab from a baseball cap.
If one wants to make the argument that all dress code is silly then by all means, but to equate a culturally and psychologically important thing with other common thing is concerning when it does nothing but pressure people to abstain from society and it's benefits.
What one thinks of hijab or religion is beside the point. There is no benefit to be gained for not accounting for the state of mind of a person.
I personally think the concept of certain clothes being sacred, holy or even important is very silly (harmful even) but that doesn't stop others from feeling different. Their hearts simply work on a different frequency and I have no interest in putting the screws to people who are reasonably doing what they feel is right. To me it's just a piece of cloth and as such I lose nothing by someone wearing it who truly feels it's an important part of themselves. It's the religions themselves that I abhor, not it's followers. Making it harder for people to just live their lives is reprehensible and for me personally, a sin.
If one wants to make the argument that all dress code is silly then by all means, but to equate a culturally and psychologically important thing with other common thing is concerning when it does nothing but pressure people to abstain from society and it's benefits.
What one thinks of hijab or religion is beside the point. There is no benefit to be gained for not accounting for the state of mind of a person.
I personally think the concept of certain clothes being sacred, holy or even important is very silly (harmful even) but that doesn't stop others from feeling different. Their hearts simply work on a different frequency and I have no interest in putting the screws to people who are reasonably doing what they feel is right. To me it's just a piece of cloth and as such I lose nothing by someone wearing it who truly feels it's an important part of themselves. It's the religions themselves that I abhor, not it's followers. Making it harder for people to just live their lives is reprehensible and for me personally, a sin.
Said the guy using absolutes. lmao
This has got to be sarcasm, right? Not serious post ..
- Status