Saturday, September 08, 2007

Burqa's Law

Back in my previous life, I had several run ins with Elections Canada bureaucrats -- who I always believed lacked an understanding of the importance of free expression.

Now it seems they also lack something else: common sense.

How else can you explain their preposterous policy of allowing Muslim women to vote veiled?

As David Harris of the Canadian Coalition for Democracies put it, ""Elections Canada’s initiative violates the basic premise of public voting in Canada and the principle of equality of all Canadians before the ballot box. It is an invitation to fraud, misrepresentation and the debasing of our democratic electoral system."

Exactly. And last time I looked Canada wasn't an Islamic Republic? So why are we suddenly enacting sharia law? What's next public floggings and beheadings?

Let's hope the leaders of all parites unite to change this policy.


Anonymous said...

Right you are. Please mail or phone your MP and demand action. There's also a mail form at Elections Canada you can bombard. This decision is literally the thin edge of the Sharia wedge.

Anonymous said...

And of course the NDP claims there are only a few cases and it's not a serious issue.

But that's exactly how Creeping-Sharia works in the West , first you demand as many little things be changed while you have the status of 'Minority' so these Sharia law norms become enshrined
Then , as the population of Muslims grow it becomes easier to push for more Sharia law in Canada , but once Islam reaches the tipping point we start to see the Jihad to enforce Sharia on people and Election a Islamic Government to create a Caliphate
just as Imam Aly Hindy said on the Michael Coren Show when Hindy wanted public hangings for adultry in canada.
Paul Martin was the first gutless weasel to give in to demands by the Saudis , Martin ordered the Airport Customs Guards to no longer force Muslim females to prove they are the person in the Passport when visiting canada.

Tony said...

When Election Canada makes rulings like that, it makes me wonder who is in charge, as it seems that they did not put some serious thought into this decision.

They are undermining a good and perfectly logical requirement for voters to show their faces, for no other purpose but to pander to a minority group. How is Elections Canada now going to justify having one group of people reveal their faces, while allowing another group to wear masks on their faces and not reveal their identities?

Steve Stinson said...

This is willful ignorance on the part of Elections Canada. Quebec looked very closely at this and rejected it. It was the right decision. If EC persists in this lunacy, I'm wearing a mask to the polls on election day.

Anonymous said...

Well a face helps identify a person so they should have to show thier face. Fingerprints are even more effective identification, so they should be used. DNA samples get even better, they are real hard to fake.
Of ocurse I am exagerating, but to make a point. We are getting so used to accomodating government demands for identification we forge that just tmaybe they already ask for too much.
John Shaw

Monkey Loves to Fight said...

I disagree here. While the rule says that one must show their face, we also have freedom of religion and if one's religion prohibits showing their face, we are in fact discriminating against their religion. I am not fearful of Canada becoming an Islamic state as Muslims only make up 2% of the population and even at the current rate of growth will likely never go over 10%. In addition, the vast majority of Muslims who immigrate to Canada move here because we are a secular society and want to keep it that way.

When I worked at grocery store while going to university, one could only have a moustache, no other facial hair, but since Sikhs and Orthodox Jews cannot shave at all, the company would grant exceptions to them rather than force them to follow the rules. The same thing happened with turbans in the RCMP.

I am very proud we live in a multicultural country and want to keep it that way.

Anonymous said...

"Quebec looked very closely at this and rejected it."

Just a slight correction, if I may ...
Quebec's Chief Electoral Officer initially made a decision similar to Canada's C. E. O but: (CBC website)
“Muslim women will have to remove their face coverings if they want to vote in Monday's Quebec election, said the province's chief returning officer.
Marcel Blanchet announced Friday he was reversing an earlier decision that would have allowed Muslim women wearing niqabs to vote on March 26 without showing their faces.
The initial decision, reported in Montreal newspapers, sparked fierce debate in Quebec.”

Anonymous said...

What a pathetic society we've become.

I wonder if this ruling applies allows me to vote while wearing a ski mask?

In describing the election in Ontario I read a blog where Ontario was described as a province of lemmings.

Scrap that...make that a country of lemmings.

Unknown said...

I am so confused. What is wrong with having female election workers check ID?
Then again, asking Elections Canada to have some common sense is like asking government to respect people.

Anonymous said...

There's a lot of disinformation in this post. Typical of the disingenuous hack, Gerry Nicholls.

¢rÄbG®äŠŠ said...

If an individual has two pieces of ID, one of which shows their address and neither of which shows their photo, why should they be required to show their face? To prove they're human?

Steve, if you wear a mask to the polls on election day, it will in fact reveal more about you than not wearing a mask.

Frank, there's also a mail form you can use to vote without showing up at all. I usually vote naked, and haven't had any complaints.

I believe that most people who disagree with Elections Canada's position on this (i.e., refusing to read in to the law something that is not there) would go one step further and say that niqabs shouldn't be allowed in public at all. Does anyone here believe that?

M@ said...

Yes, Elections Canada initiative in obeying the will parliament, as expressed in the laws they pass, is out of line. They should decide what the law was supposed to mean and act on that, rather than adhering to what the law actually says.

And they don't get a free pass just because they advised the appropriate committee, as the law was being drafted, to address this problem. Not even if they advised the committee twice. It is obviously Elections Canada's responsibility to actually change the minds of the MPs who draft and vote on the bill, through superhuman mental powers if necessary.

Let's hope someone will step in and deal with this rogue, out-of-control, law-abiding agency. They are clearly the biggest problem the current government faces.

-- oh, other than the election spending laws they apparently broke last year. I wonder why the pundits aren't talking about that? Could it be that they're too smart to bother with actual issues, so they just let the PM call the tune?

Dance, pundit puppets. Dance.

Chimera said...

"While the rule says that one must show their face..."

Really? Where does it say that, please?

Crabgrass and m@...excellent points (although I have to admit that I find the mental image of anyone's voting naked a bit disturbing; all those dangly bits in danger of getting caught in the election machinery, y'!)

Gerry, bottom line is you're off the target on this one. The good news for you is that you're not alone. Time to live up to the title of your blog.