Public principles
Good reasons to stay out of Bill 62. National Post editorial, Oct. 28
I was dismayed to read your conclusion from a recent editorial in which you conclude that “the law is a thinly veiled attack on Muslim women who wear niqabs, which would force them to compromise their religious beliefs.”
Such a view doubtless reflects the ivory tower media consensus on this issue, but it is in no way reflective of the opinion of some 70 per cent of Canadians, judging from the most recent surveys.
I can only assume, therefore, that you believe that the majority of us are outright racists, as this is too often the knee- jerk PC conclusion drawn by our socalled opinion elites. I was dismayed to find that the Post’s editorial put you in the vanguard of perpetuating this appalling slander.
Might you pause to consider that within that majority are reasonable, decent Canadians who have shown an immense tolerance for the fast- changing complexion of our country, but who draw the line when it comes to an essential principle: namely, that civility in the public square cannot survive if even a few among us conceal their faces while interacting with their fellow citizens? I take no issue with conspic uous displays of piety, from the turban and the kippa to the crucifix and the hajib. We don’t have to like these overt manifestations of religious observance; we only need to recognize that such displays are well within the bounds of free expression in a democratic society, because they are.
The concealment of one’s face, however, is qualitat i vely different. It i s an affront to the principles of conduct i n the public sphere, whether it be the result of domestic coercion or an act of brazen militancy. Either is abhorrent to l ong- established and venerated Canadian values, and yet both are routinely the justifications given for the wearing of the niqab. Never mind the fact that countless Islamic scholars have declared there to be no religious basis for the face covering, but rather that it is a purely cultural or “traditional” affectation. Peter Varley, Toronto