Ontario Legal News Update — February 25, 2013

  • Pure Racism

    Timothy Kinnaird
    Pure racism motivates the ban. There are many alternate ways of confirming identity from retina scans to finger swipes. Racists are fundamentally insecure by reason of their supposed superiority to the rest of us in this world. They can only relax once their black boot is pressed firmly on the face of humanity and any sign of resistance, i.e. diversity, is to be crushed. Be careful my white redneck friends, for it takes but a few percentage points' shift in the polls for a new government to see your white face as a "security threat", and perhaps with far greater reason than your fatuous fight against a few hundred women at best hiding their faces because their faith so compels them.
  • lawyer

    derek booth
    It has nothing to do with feminism It is the start of civil disobedience At a time when a responsible citizen (emergent] would reasonably be expected to adhere to the laws of a country she is hoping to adopt And adopt her ! This kind of dissembling citizen we do not need ! Particularly when it is so simple to obey ! Viewd proportionately the act of removal V disguise and disobedience and dissembling loses !!!!
  • Are you kidding?

    Your Uncle Bob
    "Expected to adhere to the laws of a country" What law forbids wearing a niqab? Further, canadians have a right to believe and wear anything that does not cause harm to others. This issue falls completely flat when you consider the fact that women remove their niqab in private before the public ceremony.

    Finally, if you take issue with the niqab as a "barbaric cultural practice", fine, you have the right to believe that. But to think you're somehow standing up for the rights of canadians or (gasp) the women who wear niqabs, denying citizenship is NOT the way to go about advancing your cause.
cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?