Quebec's "values test" for immigrants now in effect

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Economy said:

In Quebec it's against the law for public sector workers to wear anything of a religious nature

 

I don't know if it could be refering to that

 

17 minutes ago, OBEY said:

For example, a judge, a police officer, a teacher, can't wear something religious while working (a cross, a kippa, a veil, a burqua, etc.). They have to remove it while at work. 

Thats what I though it is! I agree with everything on that list but this. Its insane to me when a government dictates clothing choice.

[DeanWinchester 41,390]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

The French resentment you can feel in Quebec about ppl not wanting to speak English to you or being rude, I never experienced that in Montreal, only in other areas of Quebec

Opposite for me. I never had Quebecois (or Parisians for that matter!) roll their eyes at me for attempting to speak French. I even got compliments. Montreal is where I got the most attitude

[Economy 52,932]

1 hour ago, Faysalaaa said:

 

Thats what I though it is! I agree with everything on that list but this. Its insane to me when a government dictates clothing choice.

Yeah... Canada's NDP Leader (3rd biggest party) Jagmeet Sing wears a turbant

 

If he lived in the Province of Quebec I assume this would be considered religious wear and he could not wear it

 

[LeoFameMonster 1,592]

I agree with it 100% it just basically makes sure you understand the rights of other people in a country/province that is pro human rights. 

It attempts to make sure  you aren't allowing your religious, homophobic, misogynistic, racist beliefs to prevent a pro human rights community. If you can't deal with 2 men getting married then hunty this province ain't for you. 

They should do it for all canada. You can believe in God and have your religious values but if you can't respect other people's rights then you shouldn't move to a country that does. 

[Economy 52,932]

1 hour ago, LeoFameMonster said:

I agree with it 100% it just basically makes sure you understand the rights of other people in a country/province that is pro human rights. 

It attempts to make sure  you aren't allowing your religious, homophobic, misogynistic, racist beliefs to prevent a pro human rights community. If you can't deal with 2 men getting married then hunty this province ain't for you. 

They should do it for all canada. You can believe in God and have your religious values but if you can't respect other people's rights then you shouldn't move to a country that does.

Agreed if the test is about that... Don't agree if ppl are not allowed to have their personal religious beliefs even if they are respectful to others

 

I'm not sure how far the test goes in that regard tho

[LeoFameMonster 1,592]

11 minutes ago, Economy said:

Agreed if the test is about that... Don't agree if ppl are not allowed to have their personal religious beliefs even if they are respectful to others

 

I'm not sure how far the test goes in that regard tho

I dont think the test prevents or denies people the right to religion. I think its geared more towards making sure people respect equality regardless of their own beliefs and values. 

I hope it's not an illusion to mask a more vile agenda . But based on the questions its doubtful. 

[RAMROD 117,368]

Mehhh, people can just fill in what expected to be the correct answer by Western standards. Doesn't mean they really believe in those values. So I do not see how this is effective to filter out the homophobes and  mysogynist?? Unless there are supervising even after getting citizenship that can be revoked anytime?  

[Melech 9,900]

9 hours ago, Economy said:

As long as people aren't hateful or problematic I believe ppl should have the right to have their own values and beliefs

 

Saying someone is not worthy of being in a society because of this or that to me is

They are not saying you are not worthy of a society though. But like in the test homosexuals are part of Canadian society, anyone who disagrees shouldn’t be able to move to Canada cause they are a potential threat.

[Melech 9,900]

7 hours ago, OBEY said:

For example, a judge, a police officer, a teacher, can't wear something religious while working (a cross, a kippa, a veil, a burqua, etc.). They have to remove it while at work. 

It’s like that in most european countries as well, I don’t see a problem with it 

[Economy 52,932]

2 minutes ago, Melech said:

They are not saying you are not worthy of a society though. But like in the test homosexuals are part of Canadian society, anyone who disagrees shouldn’t be able to move to Canada cause they are a potential threat.

There's lots of immigrants who disagree with the act or lifestyle but they have never been a threat because they by nature have always been more reserved in being vocal politically and socially

 

Conservative white Canadians were always more problematic with Gays and Trans than immigrants

 

I never ever see Immigrants get agressive about that stuff regardless of what they believe

[Economy 52,932]

2 minutes ago, Melech said:

It’s like that in most european countries as well, I don’t see a problem with it 

From their point of view it is a problem

 

I don't see why it has to matter. If a man wants to wear a turban or a woman a head cover who is that gonna affect?

 

I get safety stuff like daggers or burka where u cant see face... But most religious wear has no effect whatsoever

 

 

 

[Melech 9,900]

Just now, Economy said:

From their point of view it is a problem

 

I don't see why it has to matter. If a man wants to wear a turban or a woman a head cover who is that gonna affect?

 

I get safety stuff like daggers or burka where u cant see face... But most religious wear has no effect whatsoever

 

 

 

Because it doesn’t guarantee neutrality. 

 

3 minutes ago, Economy said:

There's lots of immigrants who disagree with the act or lifestyle but they have never been a threat

And that’s their problem and why only immigrants should be accepted who doesn’t share that mindset. Homophobia or Transphobia is already there and shouldn’t even grow more.

also being gay or trans ist not an act or lifestyle  

[TSUNAMI 21,297]

9 hours ago, Melech said:

Why is it controversial? Sounds like something every progressive country should do 

Not even that. I woukd suggest parenting tests, too.

[Economy 52,932]

14 minutes ago, Melech said:

Because it doesn’t guarantee neutrality. 

 

And that’s their problem and why only immigrants should be accepted who doesn’t share that mindset. Homophobia or Transphobia is already there and shouldn’t even grow more.

also being gay or trans ist not an act or lifestyle  

Sorry I wasn't trying to offend

 

Some ppl hate ppl just for being gay while others only have a problem if it's acted on. That's what I meant

 

Regardless tho I don't think this test will affect sh*t anyway

 

The clothings ban is what I really don't get

 

[ltlmnstr 2,771]

2 hours ago, RAMROD said:

Mehhh, people can just fill in what expected to be the correct answer by Western standards. Doesn't mean they really believe in those values. So I do not see how this is effective to filter out the homophobes and  mysogynist?? Unless there are supervising even after getting citizenship that can be revoked anytime?  

That’s what I’m thinking.

It’s super problematic and creepy to have the canadian version of the FBI monitor all immigrants in case of terrorism. That’s racial profiling. “Oh these brown immigrants might be terrorist. They’ll wake up and bomb us.”

People can hire immigration coaches. Help them memorize all the right answers, become a citizen, and then register with the racist party and vote how they truly feel.

This test “weeds out the problematics” is such echo chamber talks but these “problematics” will adapt until they can truly be themselves.

And I don’t care if this is “oh god this example again” but neo-nazis can appear like the friendliest next door neighbor and you would never know.

(And I speak from experience, someone in my neighborhood donated to Roy Moore’s campaign. Donations are public under the freedom of information act. $500. Because he believed in Fox News that Roy Moore wasn’t a pedo. I don’t even live in that state.)