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.

Quebec Intellecutals Not so Smart

Last week I predicted that Quebec's Human Rights Commission would come down hard on the niqab and burqa and am only surprised that it happened so quickly. As I said then, the handwriting is on the wall, public opinion is solidly against women wearing veils in public. The Commission ruled that the RAMQ (Health Commission) could ask a niqab-clad women to remove her veil for the purposes of taking a photo for it's ID card and that any request to be served by a female be ignored.

The commission further ruled that members of the general public could not request to be served by another worker in the case of being confronted with a government employee wearing headscarf, nor ask to be served by someone else because the clerk speaks with an accent (Duh!)

The second ruling is not as stupid and unnecessary as it sounds. It is becoming somewhat of a public sport to taunt women wearing not only veils but head scarves. The anti-religious movement is growing bolder and bolder.

On Tuesday a group of mostly academics published a declaration demanding that the province become officially and practically secular (very much like the United States government.)

In a published document entitled "Déclaration des Intellectuels pour la laïcité" (Declaration by Intellectuals in favour of Secularism) a group of mostly academics puts forth the case for keeping religion out of public life.
The first thing that struck me is their profound conceit in naming themselves "intellectuals" a term usually bestowed upon oneself by others. I can't fathom a group of Anglos publishing a manifesto and calling it a "Declaration by V.I.P.'s in favour of Secularism.)

It must be a cultural thing, because I have actually seen a room called the "Salle de reception VIP" at Montreal's Trudeau airport. Again, in English culture, it is presumptuous and uncouth to refer to oneself as a "VIP" or an "Intellectual."

At any rate the so-called 'declaration" is a legal-like defence of secularism and pretty much repeats the old arguments as to why Quebec public life should be religion-free. I won't get into that discussion here.

What bothers me is the incredible intellectual dishonesty in Section Two of the declaration entitled;

2. La laïcité fait partie de l'histoire du Québec

(Secularism is part of the Quebec History)

This section is utter nonsense. Anyone who signed, should be ashamed to have put their name on such an obvious misrepresentation.

The declaration sets out to prove that the drive for secularism today, isn't anything new and certainly not a reaction to the current debate over immigrants, accommodations, Hasids, veils, Islamists and Kirpans, etc. etc.

Ridiculous. If you believe that statement, I've got a good deal on some swampland in Florida for you.

The declaration gives one or two lame-ass examples of the so-called attempt to rid Quebec of religion in the past, but as everyone knows, Quebec has been dominated by religion and the Catholic Church for 350 years, with a break from that domination beginning only in the 1960's. The power of the Church wasn't really broken until the mid 1970's, so any talk about a history of secularism is trash.

The following statement in that declaration neatly sums up the 312 word, nonsense account of how Quebec has always cherished secularism;

"Secularism is part of the historic landscape of Quebec"

Whaaaat!!!! Ha! Ha! Ha! I can't think of any statement less true.

Before the 1960's Quebec was the least secular jurisdiction in North America.
The Church's control over the people of Quebec was so absolute that priests told women how many children to have and men what kind of work to do. They even imposed their own poll tax. Priests were wielded more power than elected politicians!

Even public schools were run by the Church and this until the 1970's.

Until the schools were finally de-confessionalized, French speaking Jews, Muslims and other non-Christians were sent to Protestant English schools because Priests wouldn't tolerate heathens sitting in the same class as Catholics.

Even in these Protestant English schools, a healthy dose of Christianity was doled out on a daily basis, starting with the morning rendition of the "Lord's Prayer" and a selection from the little red hymn book, that each student kept in their flip-top desk. Every Quebec-bred, non-Christian over fifty years old can belt out "Onward Christian Soldiers" with the best of the Sunday school crowd.

Secularism in Quebec. Where? When?

A crucifix still sits over the Speaker's chair in Quebec's Parliament and town councils across Quebec still insist on Christian prayers before town hall meeting.

To pretend that Quebec had a inkling of secular tendencies in the past, is a blatant lie, because it hardly has any now.

J'accuse!!

By the way, looking over the long list of signatories I couldn't find an Anglo name and of course the manifesto is only available in French..... How's that, for the open and plural society that the declaration describes!

French vs. English Volume 9

Too many English Songs?

On Friday January 22, all the TV networks broadcast an all-star appeal for aid in Haiti. There was an American broadcast, a Canadian one as well as a separate show put on by French artists in Quebec. Writing in Tribune libre de Vigil, Pierre Schneider complains that there were too many songs sung in English during the French language show. He went on to say that the English broadcast was comprised of English only songs, but alas is misinformed, as there was a Creole tune offered by Wyclef Jean.

Sportswriter sounds Off Again?

Even Sports writer and resident Anglo basher Réjean Tremblay couldn't complain about the fact that the Montreal Canadiens dumped Francophone hockey goon Georges Laraque, who was hired to defend his team mates with his fists and turned out to be a cowardly lion. 

He did however lament that the next Francophone on the Canadiens 'hit list' is Maxime LaPierre and advised him to score a few more goals, as well as change his name to 'Max Stone' to safeguard his job.

Language buffoon sounds off again
Mario Beaulieu, president of the  Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste of Montreal is a busy guy, flitting around the province denouncing all who get in the way of his dream of an independent French-only Quebec.

He freaked out over Bell Canada's decision to name it's high-speed Internet service "FIBE" a word not found in the French language, so obviously English.

It fell to a  Bell spokesperson to inform Mr. Beaulieu that "FIBE" is not an English word either, and is a play on both the English term "FIBER-OPTIC" and the French term "FIBRE-OPTIQUE." 

No matter, Mr. Beaulieu hinted that a boycott is in order. LINK(fr)

English signs set off panic
An English safety sign placed by a contractor alongside a similar sign warning pedestrians to use the other side of the street, sent French language militants into a furious rage that resulted in a complaint to the city of Montreal. After an investigation, the offending sign was removed to the relief of panicked language purists who firmly believe that those who can't speak French should be punished by having construction crap fall on their heads.

A bilingual sign in a coffee shop asking patrons to return their trays was the target of a complaint to the Quebec language police. When the office didn't move fast enough to have the sign removed, a furious online "WOE IS ME" campaign was started.

Sleep Country boycott is on
Calling Sleep Country Canada's refusal to change it's name in the Hull area of Quebec "Predatory," (Can someone explain that to me?) the Mouvement Montréal français has officially called for a boycott of the chain.

Is Mario Beaulieu Dastardly Clever or Just an Idiot

The Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste de Montréal is the oldest radical sovereignist organization in Quebec and is run by Mario Beaulieu.

You may recall that it was this organization that objected to an Anglophone band performing in English at the festivities at the Fete Nationale celebrations last summer, before being humiliated in the press and subsequently, being forced to back down. LINK

Mr. Beaulieu likes to make the rounds of television talk shows promoting the French language and sovereignty in general. He moans and groans at the unfairness of it all and chastises the government for not doing enough to protect French. He spouts all sorts of statistics to support his point of view, which pours forth in an endless font of facts and figures.

Problem is, that most of what he says is either misleading or outright lies.

A speech he gave at the founding convention of the French watchdog group Mouvement Laurentides français came across my RSS reader and just before consigning it to the trash bin, I decided to give it a screening.

Mr. Beaulieu  continued on his "Woe is Me" theme, but as I watched the video, I realized that the things that he was saying, didn't ring true.

Notwithstanding his smooth delivery, the facts he was spouting were not facts at all. This, combined with moronic logic, bad math and faulty assertions and conclusions had me asking myself if this guy was cleverly and deliberately misleading or was he just plain stupid.

Watch the video and make up your own mind. Idiot or Dastardly Clever?
What do you think, please vote?

Is Violent Anti-Religion Extremism in the Cards for Quebec?

On Wednesday I wrote about the niqab clad women who was kicked out of French class. I remarked that it signalled a change in the official attitude of the government and could signal a dangerous deterioration in relations with minority communites.

In reaction, a reader,  Pierre-Luc commented that;

 In Charlesbourg (a suburb of Quebec City) a citizen kicked out a Muslum from a supermarket.
(À Charlebourg, y'a un citoyen qui a kické out une musulmane intégriste d'un supermarché)

He referred me to a link that played a portion of the radio-show Radio de Quebec that discussed the matter and quite frankly when I listened to the extract I was disturbed.

It seems that the good citizen assaulted a Muslim women in a Quebec City supermarket and forcibly ejected her from the store because he was offended by her veil.

The radio panel and the idiot assaulter spent a great deal of time discussing the veil and it's evil impact on Quebec society, while conveniently forgetting to mention that the attacker committed nothing less than a criminal assault.  Nobody even mentioned calling in the police.

The attacker was quite pleased with himself and declared any one wearing religious regalia in public, 'fair game.'
Attitudes have changed dramatically in Quebec, vis-a-vis accommodations and it seems that it is now open season on women wearing veils.

What's next? Bearded Hasids, Turban wearing-Sikhs, Sari-clad Indians?

There is an anti-religion movement growing in the province, led by a radical coterie of secular, white Francophones, failed Christians, and I'm shocked that it has developed so rapidly.

Is there a vigilantism growing in Quebec, in the spirit of the Nazi BROWNSHIRTS that terrorized minorities in pre-war Germany?
Is this the beginning?

Next week I shall write about this unprecedented attack by secularists on all religions.