"Police say women would face charges for refusing to remove niqab for mugshots"
This article and debate has arisen in Montreal Quebec. The Montreal Police are saying that if anyone women refuses to remove her niqab for mugshots, or passports or in situation where it is imparitive that a complete facial is required charges would be laid.
In the aticle Farhat Mirza,vice president of the Council for the advancement of Muslim professionals in Montreal seen in the picture above believes this to be ludicrus. Farhat states that there are only "25" women in Montreal who wear the niqab and that the police are going overboard in requiring there be a law to require women to remove thier niqab.
The first thing that comes to my mind is how does this woman know for certain that there are only 25 women in all of Montreal that wear the niqab? Who's to says that at any given time there couldn't be a woman visiting from another country wearing her niqab and a situation might require her to remove it for safety purposes.
This article brings to light a very delicate subject of religious practises and the law. The niqab has been a flash point in an ongoing debate in Quebec about how far people should go to accommodate religious minorities.
I remember one of my first experiences with accommodating religious minorities was when the Sikhs were asked to remove their turbans when they entered a Canadian Legion. The rule at legions is that you do not wear a hat of any kind in respect for their fallen comrades. That was a very heated debate. Then the next thing I heard was about Sikhs wanting to wear their ceremonial swords into court houses and courtrooms. Again the Sikh community believe it is their religious right to wear these garments. The next came when the Sikh community wanted to wear their turban as part of their Royal Canadian Mounted Police uniform. After much debate it was decided that they could wear their turban instead of the hat worn by all other RCMP officers.
So now we are faced with another situation....should woman of the Muslim faith who wear the naqib be made to remove it for security purposes? To date there has not been an incident that it has been required. Montreal police are requesting a policy be established just in case the need should arise.
I have mixed feelings on all of these issues. We don't allow people to bring knives or guns into a courthouse or courtroom. Although the Sikh say it is a religious reason for them to carry their sword...I am not implying that they would attempt to use it...but it is a weapon...a weapon that could be used by anyone. This person could end up being assaulted and their sword taken away by the assailant thus putting others in jeopardy. As for allowing Sikhs to wear a turban instead of the RCMP standard uniform hat....again....the turban could end up being a weapon used against the officer or someone else....also...and I know this might not go over well....but if you know that this is the uniform of the organization that you want to join...then you take it for what it is.. and you can make a choice of whether you would like to join or not. Don't ask the organization to change for you because of your religious beliefs. That's like saying...I really want to be a pilot...but I have really bad eyesight but I wear corrective lenses so I should be able to fly a 747....I don't think so! Why should any organization have to change their rules because of your religious beliefs? You make the decision to join that organization or not.
There are days when I just don't want to have to wear the uniform I wear at work...but those are the rules...if I don't like them...there's the door.
It is my understanding that rules are put in place for the safety and protection of self and others. If the rules do not meet those criteria then by all means challenge them.
In the case of the niqab...I think there is a safety issue for the officers involved and possibly for public safety.
Interesting case.....I wonder how it will turn out.
5 comments:
*standing ovation*
I feel the same way as you do and get so sick of having to be so-called "politically correct" all the time. When these people immigrate to Canada, they must as they say, "when in Rome, do as the Romans." If they don't like it, then go back to where you came from. I'm sick and tired of Canada being such an "immigrant" society when we are based on western European society and culture and Judeo-Christian beliefs.
Whew! I guess I said my piece! lol
*hands and legs raised*
Totally agree.
In many things, we cannot change our environment, thus its us that needs to change. Either our decisions or our actions.
We have the same problems here in the UK. I am of the same mind as Leslie - 'when in Rome do as the Romans do' or leave.
I'm more than willing to allow other religious groups as much freedom as is humanly possible...however, there is a limit and in some instances, common sense must prevail.
With the women and the facial covering -if a photo for identification purposes is required and the face is covered, how can one possibly then identify one person from another simply by the eyes?
With the swords and head pieces -I agree -"when in Rome" sounds pretty darned reasonable to me.
In the U.S. one of the big issues is language and that so many things must now be given in both English as well as Spanish. Isn't that then discriminating against other ethnic groups? If someone from Russia comes here, do they all understand either English or Spanish? (Or substitute any other country there in place of Russia, ya know.) Frankly, I think the "when in Rome" thing should apply to language too. When my ancestors came here from Sweden, they spoke only Swedish but it was up to them to try to learn as much English as possible in order to be able to communicate with people in this country where English had been the language of choice for several centuries. If I were to leave here and move to say India, should I expect that country to provide translations of everything written and/or spoken in each province there or should I try to learn as much of the language as possible? Again -"when in Rome" and I don't think that is politically incorrect in thinking that way nor do I think it says I am anti-immigrants either. Other countries are not considered to be "Anti-immigrant" or "Anti-tourist" if they expect us to observe their rules, to learn their language, why should we be expected to do this? I have no problem with immigrants keeping their native tongue to use in their own homes, etc., but I do think if they chose to come here, they should also choose to abide by the rules set in place over the years in this country too then.
Great post, Mary Ann and a lot of food for thought there -perhaps by others of different nationalities/religions, etc., in thinking things through and using common sense.
Jeni.....there is a city on the mainland called Richmond. Richmond now is primarily made up of people from China, Korea, Vietnam,and others of Asian background. When you go shopping in Richmond especially at some of the local markets you can barely find a sign in English....street signs as well as items marked in the store are written in the language of the store owners. The thing with Canada we are a country with two official languages....English and French. But in Richmond not only is it hard to find English but French well just forget it! I don't know how that community has been allowed to get away with it...I don't think anyone has challenged it....Don't get me wrong....I love to visit Richmond and it's diverse culture....I just want to know what I am buying and to be able to speak to someone who speaks English.....
Post a Comment