Seems like treating a symptom instead of the disease. The symptom is The Veil; the disease is the delusion that God cares one whit about veils.
And of course, it is not restricted to Islam — Christian demands for 10-Commandment monuments is the symptom of the delusion that God cares about monuments.
Here is a clue: God cares how we act toward each other and toward nature and toward ourselves.

The state has a valid interest in security and in seeing who receives state services. It’s quite reasonable.

I disagree strongly with this bill, but the restrictions it imposes on women are overstated in this piece.
First, it only bans niqabs when warranted by special circumstances. The bill reads in its relevant part:
“The practice whereby a personnel member of the Administration or an
institution and a person to whom services are being provided by the
Administration or the institution show their face during the delivery of
services is a general practice.
If an accommodation involves an adaptation of that practice and reasons
of security, communication or identification warrant it, the accommodation
must be denied.”
Second, the law would remain subject to Quebec’s “Charter of human rights and freedoms”, which includes, among other things, the right to freedom of religion and the right to equal protection of the law without discrimination based on religion, gender, or other characteristics.
It is likely that courts will interpret the bill in such a way that a woman’s right to freedom of religion remains strongly protected, and only very serious “reasons of security, communication or identification” warrant limiting that right. So it all depends on how the law is interpreted.
On the other hand, the law may well be struck down altogether, because it appears to be targeting some observant Muslim women directly.
Even though I have argued that the legal effect of this law may eventually be limited, I remain deeply saddened that the people of Quebec have become so concerned with telling the twenty or thirty women there who wear face veils how to live their lives.
Many French-speaking Quebecers feel deeply aggrieved by a history of inequality between themselves and English Canadians, and many are frustrated that the 1995 referendum on independence was won by the no side (with 50.6% of the vote). It is impossible to understand what is happening there without considering the insecurities that have arisen from English-French dynamics in Canada.
Unfortunately, by giving itself a reputation of being less tolerant than other provinces, Quebec may miss out on receiving some immigrants who choose to settle elsewhere. With an aging population, this spells serious economic difficulties down the road. All over a piece of clothing hardly anybody wears!

It is a security issue plain and simple, and today who don’t want more security.

Stupid bill. I doubt very much that this is about security, identity theft, or communication. It’s about the “ew” factor. People just don’t like being confronted with what the veil represents. Be honest.

Those behind this ban ruling will be punished by Allah.

It is a reasonable bill. The people that come to a free society and then FORCE their beliefs on us are unreasonable. If one really feels the need to live that way then they should proceed immediately back to where it is allowed. THAT is reasonable.And as far as Allah punishing anyone, there is many who practice a fraudulent form of Islam and the least of their worries will be dealing with the veil controversy. God is NOT about hate, not about killing, as a matter of fact those that do practice that form is playing God and choosing to kill HIS creations and HE will deal with those that have the misfortune of putting themselves on the same level as God and HE will judge them according to their hate and violence. I am glad that I won’t have to face His wrath as they will.

Maybe we should all peacefully wait for God and Allah to duke it out on their own and see who wins.

I support the ban on Nuslin women wearing veils in public. It can be scary and frightening. Since when it’s okay for these wimen can hide thei idenities under a veil, and that women in other religions are not allowed to cover their faces. Geez. If we let Muslin women wear veils in public. Why not let the KKK wear their hoods in public? The same can be argue about the rights of others who chooses to hide under the cloak of religious freedom. What a sad commentary and a waste.

It’s Quebec’s decision and a good one. Security in 2010 is important. They say it is also protecting communication, and it will.

Georgia Dude: “Since when it’s okay for these wimen can hide thei idenities under a veil, and that women in other religions are not allowed to cover their faces.”
I must have skipped over the bible passage that actually forbids women to wear veils.
“Geez. If we let Muslin women wear veils in public. Why not let the KKK wear their hoods in public?”
Because Muslim women aren’t a hate group? Geez.

behind the veil who knows if it is even a woman or a Muslim for that matter? Smart people think of security before the fact less than smart people wish after the fact.

“Smart people think of security before the fact less than smart people wish after the fact.”
And people who trade freedom for security deserve neither. Of course, it’s easy to do when it’s someone else’s freedom you’re trading.

i have a brother who is deaf and relies on being able to “read” a persons face (lip reading) for communication…if he went to anywhere in a public place for service, government office, bank, school, hospital, etc. he should not be denied his right to be able to communicate because someone has their face (and lips) covered…as a matter of fact, deafness underscores the oppressive and backward nature of “veils”…in fact a veil does nothing more than isolate a person, when you think “communication” then the veil is an anti-social act…anyway, in OUR culture it is a negative thing to have your face covered, male or female…what about respect for our culture? nope, regardless of all the pompous talk about piety, the veil is really nothing more than an act of backwardness…anyway, if you ask me about religion, my position is this: if I can’t sing, if I can’t dance, if I can’t walk freely on the face of the earth with the sun on my face and the wind in my hair, then I’M NOT INTERESTED! Thank goodness I live in Canada where it’s against the law to harrass someone because they’re not interested in religion.