Friday, March 19, 2010

Sorry Canada, Don't lecture Quebec on the Niqab

As those of you who read this column on a limited or ongoing basis can attest, I'm a great defender of personal freedom. I argue passionately over the excesses that I believe are imposed against the English and minorities in Quebec.

That being said, I must denounce the sanctimonious admonitions of Quebec's position in regard to the niqab, offered by liberal know-it-alls, on the op-ed pages in many Canadian newspapers. I take great offence to having our Quebec collectivity attacked as intolerant or racist, just because we are having a legitimate debate on the limits of religious fundamentalism in our province.

Quebec doesn't need lessons in democracy from anyone. We have legitimate and critical differences,  based on the precarious state of the French fact in Canada as well as the precarious state of Anglophones in Quebec. These debates affect our lives and are not academic exercises in some debating class. 

So in Quebec we are used to talk, real debate, where issues that affect our daily lives are examined publicly with an objective to controlling our own destiny.

Just this week the city of Montreal tolerated the fourteenth annual march by anarchists that has once again invariably resulted in destruction of public property. Every year, there are calls to limit or ban this march of idiots and every year the consensus remains- that to attack these moron's right to protest, is to attack our very own liberty. So we endure the mayhem, year after year.
So Canada, don't lecture us that we are simple-minded intolerants.  

Should there be a debate over the niqab?
You bet there should be.
 In Canada, we all accept that religious and personal freedom is not absolute. We place limits on acts or behavior where they conflict with our fundamental beliefs in democracy, equality and freedom of person.
We don't allow anyone, in the name of religious or personal freedom to marry a minor, refuse a blood transfusion for a loved one, make animal sacrifices, engage in polygamy or mutilate the body of young girls. All these practices are legal somewhere else in the world but not here. Those who want to import these concepts to Canada are in for a rude awakening.

So the debate over the niqab is just another legitimate debate in regards to religious fundamentalism.

Liberals will argue that the niqab is just a piece of clothing, but it is anything but. Regardless of personal choice, the niqab tells women that they are unworthy of being seen in public, or that the public (men) are unworthy of seeing them. Women, who in the guise of religious modesty tell society that they cannot interact with men, violate our basic principle and tenant of an egalitarian society. To indulge this precept is to diminish what we are.

Many women who wear a veil talk about personal choice as if it is the Holy Grail (excuse the Christian connotation) of dispensation (again..err). On the basis of personal choice people defend all sorts of stupid behaviour, but it doesn't make it acceptable. Society can legitimately place limits on stupid and destructive choices.

There is an underlying truth that women who wear the niqab are second class citizens in the matrimonial home, regardless of what they say. It is a symbol of subjugation, again, regardless of what they say.

Quebec has acted boldly in saying no to this religious extreme. We have as much right to ban the niqab as we have to ban other religious excesses. It isn't racist or intolerant and it sends a clear message to those who would come to live among us.

While Quebec is branded intolerant by the liberal press in Canada, the vast majority of citizens in Canada are silently in agreement with our position and respect our decision to face the issue.

I'm sure the citizens of France, England, Holland, Denmark and the other European countries overrun by Islamist fundamentalists, rue the day that they didn't stop to decide on the future course of their country.

Quebec is not intolerant of Muslims, Quebec is afraid of extremism and like it or not, the niqab is part and parcel of that extremism.

Quebec is showing a degree of bravery that the other governments of Canada are loath to undertake.

No matter, the people will decide. Once the principle of no veils in public is established in Quebec, the other provinces will gain the political fortitude to do the same. Fundamentalists will understand that they will be challenged and that Canada will not accept their principles of exclusion, nor accept their misogynist practices.

I hope the rest of the country will thank us for having the intestinal fortitude to confront what is inherently anti-Canadian, even if we are mere Quebeckers.
One day, perhaps you will thank us.

22 comments:

  1. "I take great offence to having our Quebec collectivity attacked as intolerant or racist, just because we are having a legitimate debate on the limits of religious fundamentalism in our province."

    You got it all right. It's not about excess of liberalism over individual freedom, it's about the forever obsession of the ROC for Quebec bashing (and as a federalist, it's a hard constatation indeed).

    If it was for Alberta, Ontario or any province as a matter of fact who had that debate, would Globe and Mail freaks be talking about it?

    Let me bet 2$ on "I don't think so."

    regards,

    TM

    ReplyDelete
  2. I do not agree with this statement:

    <>

    But I am not going to debate it now. For today, I agree completely that niqab, chadr, burqa, veil, whatever you wanna call it has no place in our daily life. My angle is safety and security.

    I can not believe that they expect people to accept them as they are wihout knowing them. How do we identify someone if not through face? How can we be sure that the person we are talking to is the one we believe she is? Voice can be mimicked and plenty of women have similar body shape. When it is -30C I wear a face mask outside but of course once I get indoor I will remove it. Can you imagine if there is a group of 5 women dressing like that walks in Birks? What will the guard think?

    ReplyDelete
  3. "argue passionately over the excesses that I believe are imposed against the English and minorities in Quebec." What do you do for helping the other's minorities in Rest of Canada ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey, why is the sentence with what I do not agree deleted? Or is it being censored?

    ReplyDelete
  5. To Troy...

    That's the way it was received. I was puzzled myself, when I saw it. I have no way of deleting portions of comments. I can only choose not to publish those that are offensive.
    Try re-posting...

    ReplyDelete
  6. TO editor: ''I can only choose not to publish those that are offensive.'' Maybe you
    should close your blog because all I read is offensive and bit anger against Québécois ! Maybe you should look at yourself in the mirror befor giving lesson of open mind !

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Quebec is showing a degree of bravery that the other governments of Canada are loath to undertake."

    Quebec has been targeting its minorities for over thirty years, dictating to them how they must live, in what language and what type of education they must receive. This isn't bravery but an extension of its policies to a new immigrant group. Throwing out a kid from a soccer game because of her religious headgear had nothing to do with the fear of religious extremism. It was a purely racist action that can now be conveniently whitewashed by other superficial concerns.
    101 veils the same intolerance toward the anglo and ethnic communities but it also parades as a measure to protect the 'threatened' millions who feared they might be assimilated by their minority populations.

    If the province was truly concerned about extremism it would not elect individuals like Parizeau who foster such sentiments, nor would it harbour groups like the St Jean society and the patriotes who fuel the flames of extremism, intolerance and racism. The criticism of a new minority within the borders of this province is part of the ongoing hypocrisy on behalf of the Quebecois that they are merely concerned with the principles of democracy and an equitable society, just as long as it conforms to their own culture, speaks its own language, does not make public displays of its religion (unless a crucifix is involved), and generally confines itself in small enclaves away from the majority of the 'pure'.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "should close your blog because all I read is offensive and bit anger against Québécois"

    It's a well earned anger and we have the freedom to express it. Just because you get away with shutting down schools that you find offensive and threatening, and just because you get away with silencing opposition and criticism within the province with overbearing legislation and a political system that is only equitable if you're part of the unilingual majority, it does not mean you can do the same on the www. Typical Quebecois arrogance.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "If the province was truly concerned about extremism it would not elect individuals like Parizeau who foster such sentiments, nor would it harbour groups like the St Jean society and the patriotes who fuel the flames of extremism, intolerance and racism."

    Parizeau? Old story, you know, it's been a while since he was prime minister...

    As for harboring groups like the SSJB, well, sorry, but they don't represent the majority's view of things. Or should I generalize as you do and conclude from the existence of some batsh*t crazy right wing group in the ROC that all anglos think like them?

    This being said, I do not agree with the anonymous commenter calling for the closing of this blog. I happen to disagree from time to time with its editor point of view, but he has the right to speak his mind, and most of the time, he does it in balanced fashion.

    So much for your "typical Quebecois arrogance", then, (I'm a french-canadian quebecois).

    We should really avoid overgeneralizing, don't you think?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Issues like the Niqab should have been addressed BEFORE the immigration was altered to bring in people from such types of backgrounds. An ounce of prevention,,, well you know the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "We should really avoid overgeneralizing, don't you think?"

    I'll be more inclined to agree when the OLF and 101 become history with the support of the majority of Quebecers. So far I'm lumped into the 'autres' category and don't wish to extend any courtesies that are denied to me.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Great article!! Excellent!!!

    I've tweeted your article on twitter and said:

    To all ultra-liberal carpet bugs from the ROC, here is an article from an English federalist Quebecker to straighten out your spine (next)

    I came up with one of my own in French spiced up with a few insults of my own to vent out frustration from reading such piece of junk from the ROC and all ultra-liberal ass kissers from the G&M and the Calgary Herald for instance:

    http://tymmachine.blogspot.com/2010/03/le-canada-molasson-la-globe-and-mail-ou.html

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's unfortunate that the Anglo-canadian elites in the ROC do not realize that Quebec simply decided to put a limit on a relative freedom, the freedom of religion. In that sense, Quebec is simply applying the 1st article of the Charter of rights and freedoms:

    1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

    This says that rights and freedoms are subject to reasonable limits, and the niqab case is a reasonable limit in my mind.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "This says that rights and freedoms are subject to reasonable limits"

    But it also includes,

    "(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

    (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;"

    The niqab, however distasteful to Western eyes, is a form of religious expression. But it is Quebec that we're talking about, and in this province freedom of expression is at times circumscribed by the language you choose to express yourself in, and by the size of the letters you might chose to voice this communication. Like the perpetually unscrupulous defense attorney who specializes in loopholes, Quebec policies revolve around attempts to bypass rights as they might pertain to minorities.

    "We have as much right to ban the niqab as we have to ban other religious excesses. It isn't racist or intolerant and it sends a clear message to those who would come to live among us."

    I suspect that First Nations people felt much the same when confronted by the continuous arrival of European immigrants. But it didn't stop the Jesuits and protestant preachers from destroying indigenous religions with their own extremism that also relegated women to a secondary status. Nor did it stop the attempts by the new European arrivals to eradicate the indigenous cultures they encountered. This was extremism at it's worst.
    Modern day immigrants only seek a better lot in life and in no way attempt to enforce their way of life on us. So what's the beef? Live and let live and don't buy into the anti Muslim propaganda that's been used to justify the wars in the middle east. They never had anything to do with Muslim extremism or women's rights.


    "I'm sure the citizens of France, England, Holland, Denmark and the other European countries overrun by Islamist fundamentalists, rue the day that they didn't stop to decide on the future course of their country."

    I see. So these Muslim countries were good enough to colonize, to be robbed of their natural resources, to be forced into military and work service for the colonizers, but not good enough to live among them.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Reply to anon at 7:11 AM;

    What revisionism. A million thoughts come to mind here. Just a few;

    The Europeans left the muslim countries. Are the muslims going to ever leave Europe?

    Europe was victimized by the Islamic world first. The Iberian peninsula was conquered by the moors for 700 years and the Balkan peninsula was overrun and ravaged by the Turks for 500 years. The Barbary pirates enslaved more then a million Europeans. This was the reason France went into Algeria in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  16. @ last Anon...

    I'm pretty sure France did not colonize Algeria as payback. It's kind of absurd, really. They were after other people's resources, as all colonizers are.

    But you're right to bring to attention the fact that muslim countries were also conquerors in the past. The only thing that it proves, though, is that humans are really not peaceful creatures. Nobody can really claim victimhood above everyone else, except maybe the native-canadians, although if you speak to some of them, some will tell you that mohawks were imperialistic toward natives of different cultures (cree, montagnais, hurons, among others).

    The previous Anonymous commenter miss the point of this post: as a modern (and let's hope moderate) society, we have the right to ban religious excesses, especially in the public space. Sure, we westerners have done wrongs in the past, but should we then tolerate anything because of that? I'm not sure that two wrongs will make it right... And it would lead to absurd situations, as when Ontario courts (briefly) considered letting muslim extremists rules their affairs according to the charia, something that the majority of muslim canadians, moderates themselves, certainly don't want.

    ReplyDelete
  17. To ANON ''I'll be more inclined to agree when the OLF and 101 become history with the support of the majority of Quebecers. So far I'm lumped into the 'autres' category and don't wish to extend any courtesies that are denied to me.''

    If I follow your logic, you want that Québec became another time a kind of Rhodesia, you know when you were'nt able to live and work in french- And french was the language of the MAJORITY !! Sorry for you, but Bill 101 will not be a part of history ! It will be normal like any other place, people will have interaction with the majority by a same common language that in fact IS FRENCH. It's about the same if I go to Ontario, Alberta,if I want to share a common language it will be ENGLISH. Your democracy is false and full of racism, the reality is that WE don't have to pay for our proper ASSIMILATION ! The choice is simple, you living in your Ghetto and continue to make some bullshit analysis of Québec or you open your mind and try to integrate the Québec society. Québec is part of Canada but Canada is not a part of Qubec, simple equation...Leave the First Nations, Federal gov have NO lesson to give because THEY are voted the INDIAN LAW that leave them in the same situation for so many years 1876 for being exact !

    ReplyDelete
  18. "but Canada is not a part of Qubec"

    Of course it is. The Anglophones and Allophones of Montreal make up the Canadian presence within Quebec, as do federalist Francophones in Montreal and the regions.

    There is a lot of Canada within Quebec, although I'm sure you hate that fact and prefer to turn a blind eye to it.

    ReplyDelete
  19. ''Of course it is. The Anglophones and Allophones of Montreal make up the Canadian presence within Quebec, as do federalist Francophones in Montreal and the regions.

    There is a lot of Canada within Quebec, although I'm sure you hate that fact and prefer to turn a blind eye to it.'' Dear Adski, maybe you should take a book on the creation of Canada and more generally on political science ! As you (don't) know, there's divided powers between the federal government and the provincial government.It's not a government under control of a other one ! Field of competences !

    ReplyDelete
  20. ''... just because you get away with silencing opposition and criticism within the province with overbearing legislation and a political system that is only equitable if you're part of the unilingual majority, it does not mean you can do the same on the www. Typical Quebecois arrogance.'' SNIFF, SNIFF you make really pity !!:) What a joke your comments ! Just respect the majority by using the common language ! We'll do the same in the ROC !

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'm completely in agreement with this blog and I'm a member of the NDP which means I'm a leftist, not an evil fascist conservative. I'm not a stupid leftist though, I do believe in socialism but I also believe that Canada is a superior place to live compared to all the Islamic "paradises". It's the reason why people flow here from there and not there from here. I'm a university student in Quebec and I really cannot STAND people who come here and try to dictate to us how our country should be when there's was so horrible that they left. I'm non-religious and think religion is a complete sham. Therefore, I have NO RESPECT whatsoever for religious "freedom" which should really be called "The right to ram your stupid belief in fairy tales down the throats of people who are smarter than you are." I was happily shocked when Turkey banned religious crap and I said "Right-on!" when France banned ALL religious nonsense from their government institutions as well. I like the way Quebec is run, the French have gotten the short end of the stick throughout Canada's relatively short history. Quebec is set up so the French, and ONLY the French will ever rule this province and that's how it should be. Ontario on the other hand is run by the special-interest groups that Quebec tells to get stuffed.

    I'm a born Quebecker who lived in Ontario for most of my life. I heard the Ontarians ranting and raving about Quebec the whole time I was there. You know what? Quebec is far more CANADIAN than Ontario is these days. In fact, all other provinces except Alberta are more Canadian than Ontario. Ontario and Alberta have turned into the United States with their "pro-corporate" mentalities while all the other provinces are "pro-citizen" in comparison. I moved back to Quebec to go to university (Yes, there are English Universities) because I don't get butt-raped with tuition fees like I would anywhere else. It's actually cheaper for me to rent an apartment here for a year and pay Quebec tuition than it would be to live rent-free with my mother and attend an Ontario school. I'm probably getting a better education too because my school doesn't have Teaching Assistants that they can treat like crap and have them go on strike. The only thing that I can say for Alberta is that I'm glad they outlawed temp agencies. I can't even say that for Ontario. I was paying $1200 per year in Ontario for car insurance. I move to Quebec and suddenly I pay under $120 PER YEAR. Sure, I have to pay about $350 per year in licencing fees but I don't care about that. Why can't Ontario do this like Manitoba does? Because Ontario's government has corruption too. The difference between Quebec and Ontario corruption is that Quebec's is cultural while Ontario's is monetary.

    ReplyDelete