Sometimes things are not as they seem, or perhaps seem as our biases colour them.
I suppose it was inevitable that there would be a polling station protest over the non-issue niqab election issue. If ever there was proof that Stephen Harper and the Conservatives were using this as a wedge, it was his doubling down by promising to extend the ban of the face-covering to include not just citizenship ceremonies, but also for federal public servants.
The thing is, there is not a single woman in the public service who wears one or has even expressed a desire to do so.
I’ve written enough about how unconstitutional, un-Canadian and anti-democratic the niqab ban is. Suffice it to say, it’s wrong to fight oppression with oppression.
I’ve even written a column about why new Canadians should not have to take the oath of citizenship at all. Canadian-born citizens don’t have to, making naturalized citizens do so makes them second-class citizens.
The polling station protest really interested me because when I first heard about it, it was a cowboy in a south Edmonton riding who showed up wearing a bandana over his nose and mouth.
My immediate reaction was, ‘good for him, standing in solidarity with muslim women who choose to wear the veil.’
The polling station worker, who was interviewed about the incident, had a totally different take. He assumed the man was a Harper supporter and was doing it to mock the election process.
Of course, people frequently do the same thing for different reasons. In fact, women wear the niqab for different reasons, whether religious beliefs, expression of identity, modesty, or encouragement by spouses or other family members.
The people who have been showing up at polling stations across the country in costumes wearing masks, or other face coverings, have done so out of different motives as well. One gentleman who appeared at a Newfoundland polling station wearing a mummers outfit (traditional Christmas garb) was trying to make the point that the whole issue is ridiculous.
On my way back from visiting family in Alberta on Monday, we stopped at Tim Hortons in Swift Current. A van pulled up and a man got out. By his dress, I could not have told you anything about him except that he looked like a typical middle-aged Canadian male. Then the women piled out of the van, all dressed identically in their headscarves, bulky ankle-length dresses and aprons.
If the niqab is symbolic of oppression of women as Harper claims to justify his wedge politics, surely, under Conservative logic, these archaic Hutterite costumes are similarly symbolic.
Regardless of our personal opinions, however, in Canada we accommodate religious differences, or at least we did before Stephen Harper. People came here to escape religious persecution. In fact, there are still provinces, including Saskatchewan, that don’t require Hutterites to have photos of their faces on their drivers licences to accommodate their strict interpretation of the second commandment, “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.”
Initially, I thought this issue was not an important ballot box question, but I have changed my mind because it is symbolic of the critical issue of what kind of country we want to be.
I don’t like the fact that it is actually an important issue, but there it is.
At the beginning of this election, I said the progressive vote needed to unite. I honestly didn’t care at that time whether we united behind the Liberals or the NDP as long as we did not have to spend one more day after October 19 calling Stephen Harper “the prime minister.” Over the Thanksgiving weekend, record numbers of voters turned out to advance polls and there was a bit of a red surge.
I know Yorkton-Melville is lost, as is most of Saskatchewan, but I am very encouraged that the rest of the country seems to be trending toward one and not both of the alternatives.
I just hope beyond hope the trend continues and Canada paints the map red on Monday.
