XPost: can.politics   
   From: none@present.com   
      
   "Chom Noamsky"  wrote in message news:l145rv$5nh$1@dont-email.me...   
      
   > On 9/14/2013 9:02 PM, Tom P wrote:   
   > > The employer has the right to impose a dress code. In this case its the   
   > > province telling their workers to keep their religion at home.   
   > >   
   > > Personally, I don't have a problem with that. If it is that important   
   > > that someone doesn't want to hide their religion at work then they   
   > > should look for other employment.   
   > >   
   > > I don't want my children to be taught by teacher wearing a Kirpan or a   
   > > male teacher wearing a dress and being openly Gay.   
   >   
   > I've never supported double standards for safety, like the right to wear a   
   > turban instead of a helmet, or allowing kirpans in places where knives are   
   > banned for secutiry reasons.  Otherwise, people should be permitted free   
   > expression of their beliefs and values, in the workplace and elsewhere.   
   > You have to think of what could be next, Tom, maybe a ban on Greenpeace   
   > logos on your clothing?   
      
   Perfectly reasonable ... could be evidence of being a Gaian.   
      
   What's next?   
      
   Beards may be banned: could be a sign of being Amish, a Sikh, a Muslim, or a   
   Jew (certain sects).   
      
   No shaved heads either: might be a sign of being a Hindu ascetic.   
      
   And no wigs for women: a work-around for the hijab or snood by Muslim or   
   Jewish women.   
      
   > Standing up for the rights of people you don't agree with is tough but   
   > it's something you should do. The day will come when the people you seek   
   > to oppress will feel completely righteous about curtailing your rights.   
      
   Of course, the PQ wouldn't be trying this shit if they hadn't been getting   
   away with it for years with the Anglos.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)