A law (Bill 21) proposed by Quebec Premier François Legault would restrict the wearing of religious symbols by public employees. Among the symbols to be prohibited is the hijab, which has predictably caused a fierce controversy about Bill 21.
The video below shows excerpts from a hearing in the Quebec legislature about Bill 21. It features retired Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette, who angered the Gutmenschen by linking the Islamic veil with female genital mutilation, forced marriage, and honor killing.
Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Video transcript:
| 00:00 | Thank you very much ladies and gentlemen for being here | |
| 00:04 | this morning. My first question | |
| 00:08 | is addressed to Madame Hervieux-Payette: we have always said and | |
| 00:12 | accepted in this debate that we have to show restraint. Do you think it | |
| 00:16 | “restrained’ to affirm that the headscarf is a “detail” and “after that | |
| 00:20 | it’s FGM”? “The headscarf is a detail, and after that it’s the FGM”? | |
| 00:25 | Do you REALLY think what you’re saying? — Listen, | |
| 00:29 | if I didn’t read and didn’t inform myself FOR YEARS, | |
| 00:33 | decades, this lady who lived through this tragedy with all those | |
| 00:37 | those classmates and so on, is living proof; | |
| 00:41 | she will come bring her testimony on that thing. And: the headscarf | |
| 00:45 | isn’t a simple veil, like [when] my grandmother put a hat on | |
| 00:50 | to go to Mass. The fact of NOT wearing the headscarf in most | |
| 00:54 | countries where it is strictly applied | |
| 00:58 | implies sanctions which go all the way up to death. So you shouldn’t think that it’s | |
| 01:02 | something trivial and of no consequence. | |
| 01:06 | Then in Canada, of course, we aren’t in this culture, but still | |
| 01:10 | we have the duty, the MPs have the duty to inform themselves | |
| 01:14 | on the origins and application of this measure | |
| 01:19 | in the countries which, fundamentally, are | |
| 01:23 | religious fundamentalists. —So in Quebec, what | |
| 01:27 | would be the meaning of wearing a headscarf? —You will have to ask. | |
| 01:31 | I’m only telling you that there’s an interpretation which was made, | |
| 01:35 | by someone who lives it, and that entire countries | |
| 01:39 | are under this domination. So forced marriage isn’t a joke; | |
| 01:43 | the FGM, the mutilation, isn’t a joke; | |
| 01:47 | and the violence that is inflicted and the absolute control. | |
| 01:52 | So if you call this equality, I don’t call it equality. | |
| 01:56 | One does have to answer the questions with | |
| 02:00 | the experience of those who lived this situation. —Thank you, madam MP, please — | |
| 02:04 | If I can listen simply what you are saying, senator Hervieux-Payette. | |
| 02:08 | The floor is for the deputy of [unintelligible]. Madame representative, it’s your floor. | |
| 02:12 | Barrister Latour, please. —My exchange was with Madame Hervieux-Payette. | |
| 02:16 | Those are, in fact, words of importance and here they have, | |
| 02:20 | at this moment, a huge importance: you make the link, | |
| 02:25 | really, between the headscarf, FGM, you make the link | |
| 02:29 | with forced marriage, and you say it’s in other countries, but that, precisely, | |
| 02:33 | is what is motivating you to come here to defend secularism. Therefore | |
| 02:37 | it’s obvious that you make the link between the headscarf, FGM — genital mutilation, | |
| 02:41 | forced marriage, here in Quebec. —Listen, | |
| 02:45 | you don’t have to be very naïve to know that even people | |
| 02:49 | who live here, send their children to some countries, | |
| 02:53 | where FGM is commonplace, in order to do it outside [of Canada], | |
| 02:58 | because it’s illegal, doctors have no right to do it, but it’s also being done by | |
| 03:02 | female neighbors and other people, so it’s obvious… —Be very careful | |
| 03:06 | not to get out of control here, please. Mme representative Marguerite-Bourgeoys, please. | |
| 03:10 | So the women who are here, who are teachers, who are nurses | |
| 03:14 | who are specialized doctors, are allegedly, all wearers of… are supporting | |
| 03:18 | by the mere fact wearing the headscarf — of all those practices you are talking about? | |
| 03:23 | No, I didn’t say that. I simply told you that I was unveiling [pun intended] | |
| 03:27 | the meaning where this directive on wearing the headscarf | |
| 03:31 | was coming from, by the, the… as a religious symbol. | |
| 03:35 | Quickly, Madame Latour. —Perhaps to situate the debate | |
| 03:39 | what the senator Hervieux-Payette is telling you, it’s that | |
| 03:43 | under the heading of “individual rights” you cannot make an abstraction | |
| 03:48 | of the geo-political scope of the religious fact. | |
| 03:52 | And the big debate to which they were invited with the law 21 project | |
| 03:56 | is as follows: it’s yes, there are religious aspirations, | |
| 04:00 | but there are conflicts between | |
| 04:04 | religious dogmas and rights and liberties that have been foreseen in the charters | |
| 04:08 | of rights. And [so] the State, in order to protect the equality | |
| 04:13 | of all citizens, cannot become vulnerable [to attacks eroding rights]. | |
| 04:17 | Because to have a teacher who is wearing a religious symbol… | |
| 04:21 | since, we… most religious dogmas forbid abortion, | |
| 04:25 | euthanasia, a number of subjects, but which, on the societal level, | |
| 04:29 | are rights and liberties that we allow. | |
| 04:33 | So it’s precisely this clarity that is necessary. —Thank you. | |
| 04:38 | Mme Latour, madam representative, please. —I’ll go back to the declarations of Mme Hervieux-Payette | |
| 04:42 | because it seems to me capital in the current debate and in | |
| 04:46 | what is being spread as the “image of women who wear the headscarf”. | |
| 04:50 | I repeat, you’re saying the headscarf is a detail; | |
| 04:54 | in other words, it’s only the beginning and behind it FGM, | |
| 04:58 | mutilation, forced marriage are hiding, and therefore | |
| 05:02 | in Quebec there are allegedly supporters of that, and you are sending the message that women | |
| 05:05 | who wear the headscarf, it’s only appearances, and behind that | |
| 05:11 | there is all the rest that could follow. —Madame senator. I would ask you | |
| 05:15 | for great prudence, the debate is going extremely well, prudence in your declarations, please. | |
| 05:19 | Thank you. —My only answer is to go and see the Shafia family case [1st honor killing in Canada, 2012] | |
| 05:23 | That’s the case we have in Canada, we have people who got life in prison: the father | |
| 05:27 | the mother and the son. So I think that we have a very, very concrete example. |