Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Quebec to follow Ottawa on veiled voters

Canadian Press

Latest comment posted at 8:03 PM EDT 27/10/07

Charest expected to introduce legislation on Thursday to compel all voters to uncover their faces at polling stations ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. siren call from Canada writes:
    So, no more mail in ballots allowed I suppose.
  2. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Voters should be required to prove that they are who they SAY they are . . . to the satisfaction of the persons to whom we give the task of such certification. Logically, this might involve showing your face, to see if matches a DL photo or passport photo. If this requirement violates your religion, you have two choices: (1) Don't vote, or (2) Get another religion. Some choices in life are, after all, pretty easy, eh ?
  3. FOREMOST AUTHOURITY from Western, Canada writes: It's a good start
  4. Diogenes the Cynic from North York - Salamanca, Spain writes: Can't solve a single problem that is real? 'Solve' 'problems' that do not exist. Impotent lot!
  5. Stewart Baker from Ottawa, Canada writes: Next step--what about driving while head is covered and view out of 'mail slot' is limited?
  6. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: How strange is it to think the voting systems integrity is threatened by face coverings. Only those votes associated with a registered voter and verified by the polling station, will be counted. Are they expecting an terrorist army of masked people to all vote one way? Or is this an even exchange? Our freedom for our security.

    I'd rather have freedom.
  7. James Young from Brantford, Canada writes: This is only the tip of an ice-berg.

    The Canadian Charter states: 'Freedom of Religion'. This is not carte blanche to do as any religion decides, but the constitution doesn't state this fundmental fact.

    This must be corrected to 'Freedom of Religion' is always subject to Secular Law. Secular Law being the Law of the Land.

    In the AFghan constitution: Article 2 [Religions]

    (2) Followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith and perform their religious rites within the limits of the provisions of law.

    Canadian Troops are dying to defend this right in Afghnsitan. Why not apply the same provisions in Canada?

    Durgan.
  8. Stuart Hammond from Vancouver, Canada writes: I voted by mail once. Did Elections Canada care what I was wearing on my head at the time?
  9. Margaret Jackson from Toronto, writes: Hey, I have NEVER showed picture ID to vote. While they don't need to verify who I am using picture ID, I don't feel that I need to show my face.
    I am wearing a veil anytime I vote from now on...and again, I won't show picture ID.

    This law is about as sensible as making a bald man show his knees to vote.
  10. Canada First and Always from Canada writes: And just how are those Canadian citizens who are allowed to vote in federal elections but who are temporarily living abroad supposed to vote? Isn't the voting done by mail in this case as has always been in the past? Rather makes a mockery of this silly foolishness concerning 'face covers', doesn't it? Hard to prove that voters aren't wearing 'face covers' when they mail in their votes from abroad.

    In our household, we have an American citizen who was able to mail in his 2004 US federal election vote from here in Canada. Nobody asked him to show his face or provide anything with his picture on it. This is really wasting everyone's time and pandering to some pretty insecure and, I think, bigoted people.
  11. Canada First and Always from Canada writes: James Young from Brantford, Canada writes: Canadian Troops are dying to defend this right in Afghnsitan. Why not apply the same provisions in Canada?
    ______________

    Religion had absolutely no part in our troops being sent to Afghanistan.
  12. Lalo Lad from Toronto, Canada writes: I am a Roman Catholic and I'm pretty upset to see all this drama and the reaction of some of my fellow citizens. The muslim community is in disbelief because they have always maintained that women have no problem uncovering their veils for voting. I think our leaders should be dealing with more important stuff instead of trying to score cheap political points.
  13. Frankie @^_^@ from Canada writes: ah come on. Does this mean I cant wear my zorro mask when I vote.
  14. Crying Outloud from Virgin Islands (British) writes: I can't believe Quebec is following Ottawa's lead.

    Worlds are colliding..........
  15. Gnarly kanuck from Ottawa, Canada writes: how do I know you're real.... same as at the ballot box... Veils are a non issue so long as others do not have to produce finger prints or DNA at the ballot box
  16. w sykora from Canada writes: Nice to see Stevie and Jean together again, this time pandering to the bigots and the paranoid. Must be a sure vote-getter!
  17. Theodore Street from Canada writes: I agree with at least trying to bring this legislation on board...in that veils make a mockery of the idea of a fair, tamper-free election process...as do hanging chads.

    If the people affected by this are disillusioned by our laws, perhaps they should realize that if it weren't for Mother England and Republic France we wouldn't be going to the polls. ( And we need not mention democracy in Saudi Arabia: yada yada we've heard that before). And Fatima and sisters, you'll must read Irshad Mangi's book -- there's no need to submit to the harsh status quo.
  18. Denis Love from Victoria BC, Canada writes: I've been voting for a very long time and I too have never been asked for identity. Even took along the little card they send me in the mail. Nobody asked for it so I didn't show it. They did ask me my address. But I'm white male and older,

    Let's get real here folks. Some women wear veils( and they to date have never shown concern at having the person at the booth see their faces). But for what unless harpo decides we should all have identity cards, maybe finger print us and so on.

    This is race related. Lots of muslims don't wear head coverings at all. Is there no real important things to do to increase folks interest in actually voting. My God has the governemnt got nothing better to do? The Elections Canada stuck to his guns and is one of the few who has ever read the instructions.
  19. Lefties Live in a Pretend World from Toronto, Canada writes:

    I wonder how long it will take for the young fertile Islamic members of our society to challenge the old exhausted calcified and infertile status quo.
  20. Stude Ham from Outremont, Canada writes:

    this is such a high priority of the harper muzzlement that it must pass that kind of legislative crap at utmost speed stalling all other business behind this attempt to uncover voter faces?

    now the best part... will the ottawa bill will come with a confidence attachment?

    how gross will it get before we finally get our chance to

    DUMP HARPER!
  21. James Young from Brantford, Canada writes: >Canada First and Always from Canada writes: James Young from Brantford, Canada writes: Canadian Troops are dying to defend this right in Afghnsitan. Why not apply the same provisions in Canada?
    ______________
    Religion had absolutely no part in our troops being sent to Afghanistan.<

    Extrapolate. For 'Christ's Sake' it is the concept. But on second thought defending religion would be a better reason for being in Afghansitan, than the silly reasons that have been presented over the last six years.
    Durgan.
  22. Liam . from Canada writes: If, as a previous poster wrote, muslim veiled women don't have a problem with showing their face to vote then legalizing it shouldn't be a problem I would have thought.

    The objective of the voting laws are to maintain the integrity of the voting system. One person, one vote and let's verify who is making the vote. I don't think it's all that cumbersome considering it's one of the few tools we hvae at our disposal to affect change in a democracy. Logic would seem to dictate, we would want to get it right.

    Absentee ballots are meant for people who wil be away from the country on election day and, no, they dont care what you're wearing when you write out your ballot in a foreign country.

    One change I would like to see is to make voting mandatory as it is in Australia. The last three Federal elections have seen a voter turnout of 62.2%. That's hardly a reason for a government to claim they have a mandate. A reasonable inference can also be made that a significant amount of posters here did not vote in the last couple of elections.
  23. Al B from Toronto, Canada writes: Much ado about nothing. They may as well have legislated on the diameter of a bagel. Another attempt to smear the Muslim.
  24. Gnarly kanuck from Ottawa, Canada writes: STAND UP AND BE COUNTED...... For those of us who do not wear hijabs's....is there anything that proves we are indeed who we say we are.... no... so let these women respect their religion and cast their ballot..... once they are given their ballot they divulge their identity and their name is struck from the list (just like the rest of us) so there is no problem .
  25. Gnarly kanuck from Ottawa, Canada writes: Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Voters should be required to prove that they are who they SAY they are . . . to the satisfaction of the persons to whom we give the task of such certification. Logically, this might involve showing your face, to see if matches a DL photo or passport photo. If this requirement violates your religion, you have two choices: (1) Don't vote, or (2) Get another religion. Some choices in life are, after all, pretty easy, eh ?
    ///////

    HEY.... Justice... You show yours and I'll show mine.... In this country you do not need to provide photo nor DNA ID in order to vote... has never been an issue so far... when was the last terrorist attack by a foreigner in this country?
  26. Steven Koning from Bloomfield, ON, Canada writes: Intolerance of Intolerance There are many Canadian values. They are all based on the one and only principle that supports them and without which there would be no common Canadian values. That first principle is that we all must be intolerant of intolerance. Meaning that those who are racist, or who promote * intolerant religious beliefs* cannot and must not be tolerated, neither by the general tolerant public, nor by the community, nor by the provinces, nor by first nations, nor by the federal state. Denying blood transfusions to Jehova Witnesses' children is intolerable. Forcing female circumcision is intolerable. Allowing women to be stoned or treated as second class citizens based on some religious belief is intolerable. Whoever practices such intolerance needs to be dealt with by censure, scorn, and the law. Our freedoms are based on intolerance of intolerance. There can be no middle ground. Unfortunately, too many Canadians think that somehow multi-culturalism means allowing intolerant groups to practice their intolerance. Our elected representatives fortunately do understand that this is not so. Each generation needs to learn this lesson anew, and we are learning it because of the islamo-fascist drive for world supremacy for their intolerance of any other beliefs.
  27. C. B. from Montreal, Canada writes: The same applies to Montreal, concerning the fact that Muslim representatives categorically state that these women always do remove their veils when asked to. The fact remains, though, that a person veiling his facial identity, for whatever motivation, raises questions; I know if I see someone partly or wholly masked (execept in freezing weather), I will try to avoid this person as he/she may have rather evil intentions, or simply may only want to impersonate somebody else and steal his vote.
  28. Denis Hull from Canada writes: wearing face concealing devices or apparel should not be encouraged or legal, at any bank when making withdrawals or at polling stations when making ones mark on a ballot...
  29. Peter Cromerovich from Erehwon, Canada writes: All persons mailing in ballots must identify themselves visually to the mailbox. I am told this hajib thing affected 16 voters in Quebec, none of whom objected to visually identifying themselves to a female official. Can none of you see that this is a divide and conquer religiously racist move by Harper. A binary tempest in a teacup and you are all falling for it.
  30. P Jones from NB, Canada writes: There should be no veiled voting OR mail-in voting. If you want to vote, you SHOULD have to do it in person and provide positive ID ... period.
  31. John Silverman from Canada writes: Am I the only one who has to show ID to vote? I've always had to show ID, even when I have the voting card showing I am registered. They were very strict about this in our recent Ontario election for example.

    Perhaps some ridings are less strict... but I think it should be law that you must show Photo ID and your face in order to vote.
  32. Nick Wilson from Toronto, Canada writes: Thank you Stephen Harper for standing up for Canada. If muslims think their freedom has been curtailed by this new law, they still have the liberty to leave Canada and return to their advanced democratic countries. After all, 30 years ago, there was no muslims in Canada and we were doing just fine and we could do just fine without them again. That said, I've nothing against the presence of secular or moderate muslims in our country. I am just opposed to the presence of those muslims who think the Sharia (which is a 7th century artefact) should prevail over the law of the land. Clearly, a large segment of the muslim population values are not compatible with the Canadian society and it's time to tell these fellas that they are not welcome in our country as they threaten our identity, our values and heritage that we cherish so much. Canada is our country (the British and french Canadians) and we have every right to pass every law we deem appropriate.
  33. Zeeshan Hamd from United States writes: Half of the posters here have no idea what they are talking about. They've probably never actually voted in Canada.

    In places where one is required to show a photo ID, women are already required to remove their veil (eg. showing passport when flying somewhere).

    When voting, you are not expected to give a photo ID. IF you're not giving a photo ID, then why do you need to show your face? It does nothing to 'prove who you are', since no one looks at a photo ID and ensures that a face matches.

    These women can still vote by mail, and they don't have to uncover themselves.

    Laws that make sense should pass. But symbolic laws that appeal to people's underlying racism (while adding no practical value) are pathetic. Canadian governments should be above it.
  34. Jason Roy from Stude Ham from Outremont, Canada writes:, Canada writes: Stude Ham from Outremont, Canada writes:

    'this is such a high priority of the harper muzzlement that it must pass that kind of legislative crap at utmost speed stalling all other business behind this attempt to uncover voter faces?

    now the best part... will the ottawa bill will come with a confidence attachment?

    how gross will it get before we finally get our chance to

    DUMP HARPER!'

    Hey Stude (and other partisan lemmings); pull your heads out of your derriers for a minute, open your eyes and see that your respective parties are also supporting the federal legislation.

    If you're gonna slam Harper, slam your own as well.

  35. Vern McPherson from writes: I think Quebec ought to ban bikers in leather from voting. Let them put a suit on or something decent. And no tatoos.

    Why so Catholic nuns wear those silly head wraps ? (I know, not many of them do anymore).

    How about a Catholic Priest in a series of dresses saying mass ? Everyone knows guys wear pants eh....... What if he were to run over to the polling booth in his black full flowing hassock and look really funny ?

    If fools voting in pirate masks and brown paper bags over their heads are the target of the COns lawmaking efforts why not say so ?
    'Desguises not permitted' is all that would be required.

    Why the attack on one 'cutural practice' and not the rest ?

    And Quebec thinks it's a 'nation' ? WOW !!!

    Well it must be a nation. harper said so.
  36. Vern McPherson from writes: Unless the COns completely change the ID section in the Election Act a simple amendment about veils will not work.
  37. I 'm Canadian from Toronto, Canada writes: This law should extend to public places such as goverment buildings, banks, offices, schools, airports and while YOU ARE DRIVING(How can you see things clearly if you veil is on). It 's just common sense and not too much to ask.
  38. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: I have voted without photo ID - just a hydro bill. Another time I just signed my name. In both instances they could see my face, but it meant nothing. So why is Harper coming up with a `must show your face' law rather than a `must show your photo-ID card'? Cause he wants to softly pander to xenophobic people who are more likely to vote for his party. REPEAT- the show your face rule does nothing if it is not accompanied by a show your photo id one - So harper is really doing NOTHING!
  39. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Make the law a `show PHOTO-ID card AND show your face' one Mr. Harper. Make your conservative civil lib types from Alberta have to show the government their card and their face too - or stuff it.
  40. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: Charest to Dumont: Take that! And don't forget, I am the one in charge of that spectacle about reasonable accommodation, taking care to keep Montreal out of the spotlight as much as possible and to focus on the places where the voices against reasonable accommodation are the loudest, and where they are of the least value.
  41. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: This is a low in Canadian political history comparable to those things from our ignorant past that keep coming back to embarrass us--just when we thought we had become a civil society and all that stupid prejudice was behind us.

    I cannot imagine the government of Brian Mulroney or Jean Chretien acting from such blatant bigotry. The Harper government plays to our basest instincts. They propose legislation to put pressure on and marginalize a few hundred Canadian citizens--women who have never harmed anyone and are following a religious tradition--just to appeal to our irrational fears and prejudices, for their own political advantage and nothing else.

    I used to worry about this government because of its shallow amateurishness and venality; now it is manifesting something much more vile: a witch-hunt mentality, and a willingness to demonize religions, groups, and people to play to its intolerant base.

    Time for an election.
  42. Gnarly kanuck from Ottawa, Canada writes: BTW..... for those who don't vote yet like to complain.... the balance in the system is at the Poll... you go to the designated poll number.... if someone has already taken your ballot then that is the time to bring up the isssue....odds are they don't have your address and poll number as they are randomized...(same house does not mean same ballot).... I bet there are a ton of non voters Biatching about this.
  43. Not the Alliance from In my opinion, the Harper Gov't is Incompetent., Canada writes: Once again Harper and Charest doing the coordinated dance routine. For some reason I get the feeling that this is all about Harper locking up the 'Us vs THEM' vote in Quebec.

    Do you think we're going to see any undercover cops in veils, carrying rocks soon??
  44. Elmer Walker from Delta, Canada writes: Think it's a great idea. However, I also think we should have to present picture ID when we go to vote.
  45. Lisa Jones of the Anglo-Celtic nation within a nation from Canada writes: Crying...why are so many people like you so pathetically ignorant about politics? Charest and Harper are both conservatives. Harper's people spend all of their spare time meeting with Charest's people in secret in Quebec. Harper is obsessed with Charest's government. This current move was carefully planned out by both of them. In fact the entire country is now run by Alberta and Quebec...which is pathetic considering the fact that Ontario puts in over half of all revenue taken in by the federation. Ontario giveth and Quebec taketh.
  46. M M from Toronto, Canada writes: How important is this issue? Does anyone have an idea that how many voters we expect at the voting station who will be covering their face? Since Sept 11 incident, this kind of non-sense targeting the Muslims has become a mean of bread and better for many. It has given an opportunity to many, who otherwise had no career, to become politicians, journalists, etc. One of the worst things about Canadian politics is that we have not seen a leadership since past 2-3 decades. Our politicians and bureaucrats need to be matured and sensible. There are real issues affecting Canadians and rest of the world that to be dealt with urgently.
  47. Bland Blonde from Blue Bend, Canada writes:

    Funny--

    There are the usual Harper-bashing comments.

    Guess the opposition parties are gearing up to oppose this piece of vote-grabbing bigotry.

    OOPS!

    Spoke too soon; it will pass UNANOMOUSLY!

    Nobody wants to alienate the red-neck vote.
  48. Jedburgh Abbey from Canada writes: So absentee voters will now have to show up in person?

    The logic is crystal-clear!
  49. Violet Eichorn from Ontario, Canada writes: What!!! I can't vote with a mask on? What is this country coming to. I was hoping to vote in the next fed election wearing my halloween costume.
  50. Collins Gem from Canada writes: Veiling for religious reasons? In the unfolding of this great, vast Cosmos, does anyone really think that an omnipotent God in the sky would pause to double-check that a woman is hiding behind a veil on voting day? No, I think some man came up with this veil idea. Religions are a great way for men to control other men and women.
  51. Michael Jahonneson from Vancouver, Canada writes: w sykora from Canada writes: Nice to see Stevie and Jean together again, this time pandering to the bigots and the paranoid. Must be a sure vote-getter!

    ----

    Not been following the events in Europe lately?
  52. Mike Brown from Canada writes: Canada First and Always from Canada writes: James Young from Brantford, Canada writes: Canadian Troops are dying to defend this right in Afghnsitan. Why not apply the same provisions in Canada?
    ______________

    Religion had absolutely no part in our troops being sent to Afghanistan.

    ---------------------------

    Yeah, its about rights. I think you might be confused.
  53. K Kennedy from Canada writes: Damn, Charest is sure getting fat from the photo posted. Double chin and everything, but I forget that most of these political types who've been in the game so long inevitably pack on the pounds while developing keisters as wide as the seat they occupy in the legislature. You can trace the fatness from photos of Charest just 10 years ago. And to think these types are actually lecturing and setting policy on obesity among the youth.
  54. F H from Canada writes: I think the idea of Photo ID and bared faces is a grand idea IF it's a law for all voters, which would of course automatically cancel the ability of any of the over 80,000 voters who mail in their votes. Proportionately, they're a far greater concern when it comes to fraud than the roughly 100 women in Canada who use the niqab.
  55. michael sanderson from Magog QC, Canada writes: If you think that visual identification is a BAD idea, I'm sorry, but you're an idiot. Whatever the catalyst to bring this to discusion- voting without visual confirmation is very third world. We take for granted that our system is secure because we're civilized,unfortunately democracy doesn't necessarily ensure honesty,ie. Watergate,wasn't that about FIXING an election??
  56. Collins Gem from Canada writes: It's simple ... let veiled women mail their votes in.
  57. George S from Toronto, Canada writes: I belieive the type of muxlim women who wear veils, not all muslims wear this, are allowed to show their faces to other women. If the certain polling stations were staffed by only women wouldn't the veil thing become a non-issue because then all voters could reveal their faces regardless of belief.
  58. Pamela Achurch from Peterborough, On, Canada writes: This issue is ridiculous, petty and small minded. There has not been a problem with veiled women and voting. Also, the numbers of women who are veiled is so small that they constitute no threat to electoral integrity. It is a an anti Muslim statement coming from the Government of Canada. I am ashamed of Harper once again. It is pandering to the anti immigrant rednecks in the conservative ranks. He is really desperate for votes and needs to give the right wing whackos a tidbit once in a while to keep them in line until he gets the power to deliver the agenda they want. This country is in trouble.
  59. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: Ethnocentrism is alive and well in Canada..is stoning far behind???
  60. Leon Russell from Gatineau, Canada writes: This whole question of 'reasonable accomodation' is a total diversion from the real problems. It started with the shock-jock radio people asking the elections people what would happen if someone showed up to vote in a burqa. Then Mario Dumont surfed on it and the other well-publicized RA examples.The success he's had with riling people up about it has forced the other parties to have to address a non-situation in order to take the wind out of Dumont's sails. It's a tempest in a teapot, a temporary media-created phenomenon, and we are already taking steps to exorcize it in a civil manner, thankfully.
  61. Frank Lee My Dears I Don't Give A Damn from Toronto, Canada writes:
    Historically the veiling of women is not an original or fundamental practice in Islam. The koran doe not command all women to cover their heads. This practice did not enter the islamic world until some 3 generations after the death of the prophet. Then muslims copied the practice from the Byzantium christians, where it was worn by women of the upper classes and was a mark of status.
  62. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: A veil is in itself a political statement, and that statement is loyalty to a culture based outside of Canada. The geographical center of Islam is in the Middle East, and every devout Muslim turns his back on Canada and faces Mecca when he prays. Making the veil come off is our way of asserting that loyalty to Canada must be demonstrated, and must come before loyalty to Middle Eastern nationality.
  63. Ken Cowan from Paris, France writes: This is a totally discriminatory and bigoted reactioin on the part of the politicians. And it is highly cynical too - as it is being done only to garner votes from 'ordinary' Canadians.

    In France, to vote, I must produce an identity card with a photo. Therefore, asking a Muslim woman to uncover her face would be normal. In Canada where no such I.D is demanded, it becomes moot.
    Shame on the politicians for jumping on the Muslim-bashing bandwagon.
  64. Raison d'Etre from United States writes: This is really insulting. Why are we wasting time on legislation targeting a handful of people? Has a Muslim woman ever refused to show her face? And, what about someone who has severe facial burns and as a result has her face bandaged? I live abroad so I always mail-in my ballot. I appreciate that I can do this easily. I wish the governments in Ottawa and Quebec would stop targeting a fragile religious minority to get a few bigot votes.
  65. R J from St. Catharines, Canada writes: Good on Quebec! Time to stop catering to foreigners who don't want to conform or follow our rules, yet expect me to conform to their way.
    Don't like it, go back to your home country!

    Kudos to the Danes who don't take any B.S from people entering their country to live!
  66. Mister Fartleberry from Toronto, Canada writes: What a hardship considering many come from countries where they cannot vote to begin with. How about a new law about wearing disguises in banks now.
  67. Job Patstone from Canada writes: I believe Quebec adopted this law first, did they not.
  68. dallas mcquarrie from Regina, Canada writes: A win for the bigots! Exenophobia rocks!
  69. shaun narine from Fredericton, Canada writes: This is shameful, and it's frightening how racist Canada is becoming, particularly towards Muslims. It's doubly disturbing how politicians are pandering to this. The federal government actually changes the laws just to ensure that it can take a slap at the mostly fictional veiled Muslim voters. Let me repeat that: changes the laws. For those who don't know, the Canada Elections Act allowed - and still allows, if you consider mailed-in ballots - people to vote who don't or can't show their faces. The Elections Officer was only enforcing the existing law when he allowed veiled Muslim women to vote - which, given the fact that veiled Muslim women have already said they would remove their veils before voting, was a provision that was probably never used. Yet, just for the sake of bashing Muslims, the government of Canada has altered the election laws, catering to the most decrepit and ignorant part of the electorate. And, of course, the Quebec government follows suit - because xenophobia in Quebec is hitting another all-time high. I wish we had political leaders who actually stood up for intelligence and tolerance rather than these idiots who are more than willing to cater to the lowest and most disgusting common denominator.
  70. George BrownIII from Christmas Island writes: Siren you are absolutely right, let them take that away too for the dozen of people who go voting in veil. Now I can understand why Saudi Arabia does not allow women to vote. Whate else, lifting the veil in liquor and beer stores too or buying smokes? Stevie and Jean are first and foremost conservatives.
  71. diana diana from Toronto, Canada writes: If you have proper identification to vote I don't see why you would have to remove a 'religious' attachment. As a Canadian feminist woman I find the veils that some muslim woman wear to be offensive I just can't talk have a conversation with someone who has their face covered. Also, symbolically the veil represents oppression to Canadian woman. Thank goodness we will not see very many of these veiled woman working with the public as they aren't allowed to work or to drive a car. They live in a great country with every opportunity for advancement with education and opportunity but will never be able to utilize the freedom we enjoy. There is no adaptation for this religious group.
  72. S Phillips from Canada writes: History will be the judge
  73. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: It is vile and shameful that Canada's governments are enshrining bigotry in our laws. This is simply pandering to those who feel threatened by our multicultural society, and it is no doubt just the first step in an insidious movement to exacerbate the differences between Canada's cultural communities, rather than emphasising what we have in common and bringing out the best in all of us.

    Some politicians play to our worst instincts to win votes. If we write laws that stigmatize a few hundred harmless Muslim women over their headware, where will it stop?
  74. Nathan Weatherdon from Canada writes: The question of whether it breaks their religion is a personal decision. Clearly most Muslim women don't have any problems showing their face to vote, but there are some who feel it is very important (and this is true whether or not the majority of Muslims do not share their interpretation).

    Actually, I'm pretty sure even the most extreme interpretations would allow those women to show their face to other women. Perhaps a 'women only' polling station could be offered, rather than telling these women that there is a tradeoff between democracy and religion.

    In any case, the whole mail-in voting thing shows the absurdity of this whole thing.

    If the next election is put off past the spring, I may very well be voting by mail in the next election. I'm just imagining getting a photo of myself putting my vote into the postal box with a covered face. I'll send a copy to Harper and Jean thanking them for pandering to bigots.
  75. Martin Bradshaw from Toronto, Canada writes: This is pandering to islamophobia. I've voted by mail, never showed my face, yet my ballot was counted without controversey. Now I am suppose to believe that showing my face is absolutely necessary, not because I am voting by mail but becacuse a small minority of a small minority could, hypothetically if they increased in numbers a hundred fold, corrupt the integrity of our democracy? What rubbish. I haven't heard any female muslims asking for special permission or 'accomodation', any veiled woman in this country has been able to vote for almost decades without issue - just like by mail.

    I am very disappointed that Liberals and NDP can't see popular intolerance for the INTOLERANCE that it is. And its pretty obviously a RACISM issue as well, after all I went to a publically funded catholic school, plenty of visible signs of state and religion mixing, visibly worn religious symbols (how many crucifixes are worn around peoples necks in Quebec? The flag of Quebec is a cross afixed with flleur-de-lis.) Why have these very public religious displays never been attacked? > Racism.

    I'd love to see more people speak out about popular intolerance.
  76. Cris Ruziti from Canada writes: Election is not Halloween event.... Period............
  77. Bruce Rideout from Victoria, Canada writes: If elections were only held on HALOWEEN nite then it would not be a problem. even the candidates would be unrecognizable. BOO
  78. Kevin Megale from Nelson BC, writes: What a load. Once again, a whole nation does a 360 degree turn to pander to Quebec. And worse, this time it's because we're all afraid to say that Quebec society is racist. Racist. Racist. Imagine a bunch of people showing up to vote in Hallowwen masks. What a bunch of insecure and immature bigots. Perhaps decades of puching down the human rights of others to preserve their supposedly fragile culture has addled their collective conscience, but I for one am not afraid to call a pur laine a pur laine.
  79. L.B. MURRAY from Canada writes: Quebec to follow Ottawa...

    That sounds like good news...

    Why all the fuss?? After all, John Charest is a true blue Conservative at heart, so it's not surprising that he should follow Harper... whatever...

    -
  80. Beyazet Ilderim from Scrarborough?, Canada writes: Covered face is not a religious requirement, it is a statement. To this statement the answer was that if you want to vote, prove that you are who you say you are. It is that simple. I dare the apologists to come with a single statement in the Islam books stating that women shall cover her face. And since this is a statement and obviously many people do not feel comfortable seeing covered faces I would go further requiring that covered face is unacceptable in our culture and thus prohibited. How about this?
  81. pierre lefebvre from Brossard, Canada writes: Glory, Glory, Alleluia, the WE versus THEY cannot accommodate G&M weekend editorial, in its reasoning regarding Herouxville demons. The veil has been unmasked. Lesson learned: G&M should learn to avoid use of provocative titles and encourage insane remarks.
  82. The Infertile Left in Demographic Decline from Toronto, Canada writes:

    I wonder if Ontario will do the same. In the name of social cohesion, a mantra of Dalton Mcguinty, he made it seem that if you were different or taught in a different school, that you were not cohering socially even if your value system was juxtaposed to the value system of the larger, but shrinking secular society.
  83. Collins Gem from Canada writes: In my view, labelling those who are capable of seeing the forest and not just obsessing about one tree 'bigots and rednecks' is just as hysterical a response as the response of the so-called bigots and rednecks to the veil. The lofty, holier-than-thou poseurs who talk about racism are missing a point. To continue the analogy, the veil is the tree. The forest is where it could lead down the road if we should acquiesce to every Islamic demand, among which is Sharia law, which is the kind of law that would normally give these same 'tolerant' citizens conniption fits in another context. Canadian law is good enough. There's no need for any other kind of law here. To allow one small, seemingly innocuous demand would then lead to the next slightly less innocuous demand, now strengthened by a precedent. Ever heard of the 'thin edge of the wedge'?
  84. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: The days when you can make Canadians cower by calling us 'racist', 'xenophopic', or 'bigoted' are long gone. Canadians are better educated about race realities. Name-calling says more about the person doing it than the person it's directed at.
  85. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: There is political correctness as progressives might view it and then there is political correctness as conservatives might view it. I prefer the formers' view; I think it leads to less societal coercion and fewer chances that the rights of people will be trampled on. Time to turn political correctness on its head to understand it a bit more correctly.
  86. siren call from Canada writes: Bruce Rideout from Victoria, Canada writes: If elections were only held on HALOWEEN nite then it would not be a problem. even the candidates would be unrecognizable. BOO
    ........................

    Unlike now where candidates run on one platform and when elected, become unrecognizable.
  87. Dennis sinneD. from Calgary, Canada writes:

    Every voter should be required to show their face and prove their identity via photo ID.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top