Detour

So, I'm going to go on a detour, and not blog about my choir for this post.

Europe has been looking to ban the veil, niqab, that Muslim women wear for quite some time (well, not all of Europe, but rather some countries). Y'know, that in itself disgusts me. I'll confess that I don't know whether those countries have anything similar to Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but I'll go on a limb and say that they do. Their discussing its banning is akin to saying: Christians can't wear crosses. It's a religious garb that's been that way for centuries, and if they are privileged to have freedom of religion, they need to be allowed to wear this.

I see their counter argument that: people should be able to see others' faces, and that this is partly a "counter terrorism" measure. I'm not going to go into the whole religious debate, whether they are anti-Islam or not, but I want to know whether there are bans on people wearing balaclavas, thick and long scarves that cover their faces, a heavy make up. If they truly do, fine. Perhaps this is a law that has been around, and I'll admit to being ignorant. But somehow, I doubt such a rule currently exists... They also mention that it's "impolite" to not be able to see others' faces. If this has always been an issue, has there been laws on this in the past?

Tony Blair said that the garb is "a mark of separation, and that's why it makes other people from outside the community feel uncomfortable.” So... then don't all people who dress differently than "the norm" fit in this category? And is there even a "norm"? EVERYONE dresses differently; we are individuals. Heck. Even people who wear the same thing look different, because they ARE different. Perhaps if we just take Tony's quote literally and paraphrase it a bit, perhaps he really is just commenting that "when people are different, people feel uncomfortable." And perhaps if we read it that way, it's not so bad, since he *could* be relaying this to *everyone* who dresses different, and thus carry the "mark of separation". But somehow, I doubt that...

Anyway, that's the first bit of my rant. The more pertinent issue is that the above quote, Tony's quote, was posted as the Globe and Mail's poll to the public. The quote asks voters whether they agree with that statement or not. So far, 71% of Canadians think YES. WHAT? I've always been proud of Canada's tolerance, and our acceptance of other cultures and and religions, that we celebrate each other's differences. What happened? I am so ashamed of the results of that vote.

Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh. Perhaps I should blame the media and the US a bit more than blaming the Canadians. After all, the media does have a slant on all this stuff, and especially the US media. But we still should not be swayed as such.

I've actually noticed a trend for Globe and Mail's poll. I've been noticing more and more that the voters (and I'll say "Canadians", since G&M is a Canadian publication) have been less and less tolerant. Yes, there is still terrorism, and that Islamic Extremists brought it to the forefront, but just because there are some bad apples, should we really toss out the whole bushel? And all the OTHER acts of terrorisms: what religion have THEY been? Why is there such a double standard?!

And to answer myself, yes, people are afraid of the unknown, the unfamiliar. But we seriously need to work on getting over it.

If everyone can understand the meaning of love and compassion as following the sagacity of the Dalai Lama, the world would indeed be a better place...