Seth Ackerman wrote:
>
> > I think this piece sidesteps a deeper question. By focusing the argument
> on whether Silmi's niqab does or does not signify her submission to men,
> it leaves open the possibility that court simply made an error of fact
> when it rejected her citizenship application. An underlying question
> left unresolved is: would it be legitimate for the court to deny
> citizenship to migrants whose patterns of gender relations really do
> signify submission in some patently outrageous way. Is that legitimate
> grounds for denying citizenship?
>
Open Borders. A left that quibbles over immigration criteria is no left.
Carrol