No Canadian Should Feel Intimidated By Religious Bullies

Nowhere in the Koran does it state that women must be covered up. It's men who made this ridiculous "religious" law.


Yesterday’s Editorial: “Here’s Your Chance To Make A Difference In The Islamic War Against The West. Tuesday April 4, 2006” created a great deal of response. All of it, less one that was supportive.

The e-mail that was not supportive came from someone who blamed Ezra Levant of the Western Standard for bringing his problems upon himself by publishing something Levant knew would inflame Islamists.

Here’s a provocative statement: Nowhere in the Koran does it state that women must be covered up. It’s men who made this ridiculous “religious” law.

But then again, men made up all religious beliefs. But I digress.

Yet, it’s become absolutely acceptable amongst all societies that the Hijab, Burkah and all other Moslem means to render women second class should be treated as a respected tenet of Islam.

Therefore; to attack or humiliate the use of the Hijab is considered way off-base and out of bounds, even though the Hijab is a horrific obscenity perpetrated upon women by controlling men.

The Hijab is all about subservience to male domination.

There are no shortage of Moslem women who will argue that they wear the Hijab willingly for religious reasons, and/or to be modest and non sexually provocative.

Frankly, I like women who have the confidence and personal desire to dress to the hilt. Short skirts, tight slacks, short shorts, fitted tops, coiffed hair, great makeup, French manicures, pedicures and a zeal for life.

In my case, I’m writing about my beautiful wife, who at 55 years old is still gorgeous and makes every effort to look her best, even when she’s in the barn mucking out the horse stalls.

I can’t wait to see how she’s going to get all dolled-up when we go to supper tonight in Montreal.


Anne more or less single-handedly runs our national advertising agency.

She deals with our clients and our suppliers. She calculates and creates complicated media plans with ease. She organized and programed our private hospitality reservation system which serves over 600 radio stations across North America.

And she does all of this looking GREAT!

Neither Anne nor I will go to services (even weddings and Bar Mitzvahs) in Orthodox Synagogues which force men and women to sit separately, with women sitting behind a curtain of sorts, not being allowed to fully participate in the prayers and rituals.

Anne is equal to any man in any Synagogue, and superior to most. So why should she be treated as second class or persona non grata?

This is what the Hijab does. It makes a statement about the women who wear it.

It says at worst, that the covered women are the chattel of their male keepers. And at best, they believe that the only way they can participate in society is by covering up who they are.

This is indeed a horrible indictment upon the equality and freedom denied to women of Islam, just as it is to women in Orthodox Judaism and the Catholic and Orthodox Churches who are equally misogynist.

To write and speak about the misogyny of Judaism and Christianity is no big deal, as it is freely debated every day, even between those who are actively Orthodox and those who are secular such as myself.

Some religious people get bent out of joint from the debates. But more or less agree to disagree.

If this Editorial condemning the Hijab was to be published in a mainstream newspaper or magazine, it would be received with rancor within the practicing Moslem community as an attack on their religion.

The newspaper or magazine which would dare print this Editorial would come under intense attack and be coerced into apologizing as we’ve seen with the Danish Mohamed Cartoons.

But simply because the mainstream media knows what type of reception and backlash they’d receive for publishing this Editorial, they wouldn’t do it, even though they publish Editorials and articles that question Judaism or Christianity all the time.

Isn’t it fascinating how one of my readers can find fault with Ezra Levant for bringing this Islamic backlash upon himself, but not see how untouchable the “religion of peace” has become in our society that has been built upon the RIGHT and FREEDOM to question and criticize everything that is public?

All of what I just wrote is to say this:

We need more Ezra Levants and less apologists for religious bullies. In a FREE society like Canada, it must be “reasonable” open season on all religious icons and public figures.

The only icon we in Canada should hold dear and inviolable is our Charter of Rights which GUARANTEES our RIGHT to question, criticize and make our ideas and thoughts public without intimidation from the State or anyone else.

Anything less would make us like the fundamentalist Moslems who want to shut us up, and make our society look more like theirs. And in my world, that’s a non starter.

Recommended Non-Restrictive
Free Speech Social Media:
Share This Editorial

One Comment

  1. What Happened to the Malaysian Airliner?
    Above is an article by Paul Craig Roberts, a well-respected former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He discusses both of your topics (Malaysian Plane and Gaza) with much different views than yours. We can’t trust Obama, DC, and the world central bankers. They have their own agenda and it’s not to our benefit.

Comments are closed.