France starts ban on full-face veil

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Bear will be very upset to hear you say that.;-)




You bet your sweet bippy I would!!!

Thongs for men? I doubt that, lol.
So long as no one infringes on thongs for Bears!!!
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
The veil has nothing to do with religion it is part of the custom of the Muslim world.
They are in France, has anyone noticed? If you want to move to France and they
pass a law obey it. I think the world of education is upon the ancient Muslim world
and it is time they became a part of it. If you are moving to a brave new world, be
a part of the new life experience.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
This would never fly here, Charter guarantees fundamental freedom of religion. If they tried it, and I don't see that ever happening, I can't see the SCC upholding it.

Personally I'd like to see the burka go the way of the dodo.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out though.
The Charter doesn't trump security issues, not does it survive once Military Law takes over.

Anonymous Coward is a generic term for any web handle.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
So much for closing that door.

The Charter doesn't trump security issues, not does it survive once Military Law takes over.
Talk about paranoia, get help or up the meds.

Anonymous Coward is a generic term for any web handle.
Yep, that would describe you perfectly. Since I've actually met members from CC, while other members have my personal phone number and have communicated with me, outside the forum, I'm only anonymous to morons and psychopaths like yourself. For obviously good reasons.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
How lucky for them, they get a self-confessed **** disturber and a proven liar. What a pitiful man/boy you are.
 

El Barto

les fesses a l'aire
Feb 11, 2007
5,959
66
48
Quebec
The veil has nothing to do with religion it is part of the custom of the Muslim world.
They are in France, has anyone noticed? If you want to move to France and they
pass a law obey it. I think the world of education is upon the ancient Muslim world
and it is time they became a part of it. If you are moving to a brave new world, be
a part of the new life experience.
This seems to be a recent problem... Muslims have been there for afew generations, the previous generation were not cause the problem , apperently they were not fundamentalists.... these are.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
The Charter doesn't trump security issues, not does it survive once Military Law takes over.

Anonymous Coward is a generic term for any web handle.
If the Charter doesn't trump security issues, then explain the kirpan.

If by Military Law you mean Martial Law, that is also incorrect. The Emergencies Act, which replaced the War Measures Act in the 1980's, actually states the opposite with respect to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Anonymous would apply to anyone who is not using their legal name (so I assume you're including yourself). Coward is a subjective term.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
If the Charter doesn't trump security issues, then explain the kirpan.
I wasn't aware they were allowed on international or domestic flights. When the blockade was happening and the Captain was asked to gather certain items classified as a 'weapon' those knives were also gathered. Even in this current time are turbans exempt from search? I don't know but I would be surprised if they were exempt. Does the charter give a person the right to waer a cap when getting a passport photo, no.

If by Military Law you mean Martial Law, that is also incorrect. The Emergencies Act, which replaced the War Measures Act in the 1980's, actually states the opposite with respect to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I wanted to emphasize it was combat troops with authority to open fire with live rounds and no demand for as many survivors as possible. The only time I can use as an example is when Trudeau declared it. I doubt anybody was allowed to wander around wearing bulky clothing and a full-face 'mask'.

Anonymous would apply to anyone who is not using their legal name (so I assume you're including yourself). Coward is a subjective term.
It was a generic term used on a site that didn't require signing in, you have to sign in here to post, nobody is anonymous to the staff.
Who cares, that is what the C stood for, a real coward wouldn't even post, trolls liked to cause they could vent. The site used IP's so nobody was an AC to the staff.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I wasn't aware they were allowed on international or domestic flights. When the blockade was happening and the Captain was asked to gather certain items classified as a 'weapon' those knives were also gathered. Even in this current time are turbans exempt from search? I don't know but I would be surprised if they were exempt. Does the charter give a person the right to waer a cap when getting a passport photo, no.


I wanted to emphasize it was combat troops with authority to open fire with live rounds and no demand for as many survivors as possible. The only time I can use as an example is when Trudeau declared it. I doubt anybody was allowed to wander around wearing bulky clothing and a full-face 'mask'.


It was a generic term used on a site that didn't require signing in, you have to sign in here to post, nobody is anonymous to the staff.
Who cares, that is what the C stood for, a real coward wouldn't even post, trolls liked to cause they could vent. The site used IP's so nobody was an AC to the staff.
And my point is that nothing is absolutely trumping anything. There will always be instances where personal liberty will come into conflict with the overall concerns of the citizens of a society. There is a far difference between eliminating someone's right to show their religious affiliation in public (ie. banning the burqa) and making a reasonable allowance or concession, while still respecting those rights (such as privately confirming the passport identity of a muslim woman in an airport security check), in addressing safety concerns.

The War Measures Act, which is what Trudeau used in the October Crisis, was replaced with the Emergencies Act because it conflicted with the Charter and was, therefore, unconstitutional.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
Italy should have been the first to ban it.
Have you ever seen someone eating spaghetti with a burka......messssy
 
Last edited:

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
You were right the first time. It is sad, it shouldn't be banned. I have no idea what Frances constitution says. But I hope that Canada does not follow suit. It would be a sad, sad day in Canada, if we simply just chuck the Charter.

Get hep, and fixed. If you procreate, Canada is doomed.

I could see Quebec going that route and using the notwithstanding clause to get around the pesky charter
 

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
I want Canada to ban the burka just like France.
This is our country, built on Christian ideology and we should fight to keep it this way. It is managing our country our way, and not the muslim way, that has made this country one that everybody wants to come to.

If the muslins don't like it, too bad for them, tell them to get the hell out.
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
I want Canada to ban the burka just like France.
This is our country, built on Christian ideology and we should fight to keep it this way. It is managing our country our way, and not the muslim way, that has made this country one that everybody wants to come to.

If the muslins don't like it, too bad for them, tell them to get the hell out.

What's next then?

The hijab?

How about a yarmulke or a Tilak, are they next?
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
The War Measures Act, which is what Trudeau used in the October Crisis, was replaced with the Emergencies Act because it conflicted with the Charter and was, therefore, unconstitutional.
Are you sure that would protect our rights when the SPP allows for US (or Mexican troops to provide security when Martial Law is the rule of Law?