Canada’s largest Muslim organisation is outraged over a bill introduced by the Quebec government that would ban headscarves for school support staff and students.

“In Quebec, we made the decision that state and the religion are separate,” said Education Minister Bernard Drainville, CBC News reported. “And today, we say the public schools are separate from religion.”

But the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), who are challenging in the Supreme Court the original bill that forbids religious symbols being worn by teachers, say the new bill is another infringement on their rights and unfairly targets hijab-wearing Muslims.

“This renewed attack on the fundamental rights of our community is just one of several recent actions taken by this historically unpopular government to bolster their poll numbers by attacking the rights of Muslim Canadians,” the NCCM said in a social media post.

    • blackris@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Personally, I think all religions can go fuck themselfes and I also think that you are right, wrapping up women is a tool of oppression.

      But this is exactly the same: Forcing women what (not) to wear. This is bad for those who want to wrap themselfes up and this is bad for those who get problems with their shitty families who don’t want them to go to such places. So fuck that shit, too.

    • Zutti@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Women can make that decision for themselves, individually, based on what they are comfortable with.

      • Brotherinsatan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Just like the women in Iran/Afghanistan. They can do whatever they want there. Put on a bikini, shorts etc. Totally free to do what their husbands tell them to. Maybe I’ll send my two daughters.

      • rylock@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Ah yes, because muslim family units are beacons of freedom, self-expression and feminism. No threats of shunning or violence, ever.

          • rylock@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            23 hours ago

            It gives them a secular place to grow interpersonally and develop their critical thinking skills without a literal shroud of dogma over their eyes.

              • rylock@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                23 hours ago

                Religious dogma does prevent critical thinking, actually. Secular places of learning are critical for the young and easily influenced to be able to develop their own belief structure, or lack thereof, without the influence of family or community exerting often overwhelming social pressure.

          • rylock@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            Great non-sequitor. You’re clearly not obsessed with a certain topic and shoving it into every unrelated conversation, are you?

        • gonzo-rand19@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 hours ago

          What does this even mean? A woman whose family is going to bring her back to their native country for punishment often does so because she won’t wear a covering, which this law will support by forcing women not to cover. A woman who does wear a covering (forced or otherwise) probably won’t be, so your argument doesn’t even make sense.

      • HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Despite all your raging comments in this thread, I still don’t know what your stance is. The weak straw man argument isn’t helping.

        • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Preventing people from practicing their religion is obviously bad. Especially when there is no justification to do so.

          This is akin to Uyghur “reeducation camps” and I am not being hyperbolic. But apparently it is only bad when China does it.

          • HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            24 hours ago

            Yeah I can tell you’re not commenting to convince anyone, you’re just commenting to vent your frustrations. I get it, no worries. I mean the world is pretty shitty right now, and if you’re thinking Canada and China and equally evil authoritarian regimes, yeah I guess all us commenters are equally not worth the effort. Have a good weekend mate, keep up the good fight against… everyone.

            • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              24 hours ago

              You can walk away from the argument when you lose it by pretending to have the moral high ground.

              It only requires ignoring Canada’s origins of forced assimilation into colonial culture