voting time

while canadian politics are nowhere near interesting or scandalous as the stuff south of the border that employs hundreds, if not thousands, of political pundits (and comic-satirists), one thing’s certain: it’s the canadian federal elections tomorrow, folks.

i spent most of the past few weeks at home with the family waiting for the strike at the law school to end. sometime late last week, i thought, hey, i should vote at the advance polls this weekend. there was no telling how long the strike would last, and i could have theoretically needed to make that (roughly) 400 km trip that very weekend, which would have made voting on election day terribly difficult.

so on saturday afternoon, my father drove me to the local library to cast my ballot. i was hoping there wouldn’t be any line-ups and my notdriver’s license id wouldn’t raise eyebrows. okay, so my license expired in march of this year and i haven’t replaced it because i don’t drive and i don’t have a car because i haven’t needed one and i also can’t afford a car. in place of the ubiquitous photo id, aka the driver’s license, i intended to produce my citizenship card or, worse yet, my passport. luckily, my passport photo is quite recent because i had it renewed in july, but i get all sorts of reactions to my citizenship photo…maybe because a) i’m not wearing a hijab in and b) i’m nine years old in it. a chinese lady at the post office complimented my pre-tweaked eyebrows a few months ago, making me blush a little. on this particular voting day, however, i didn’t have to show any of the usual photo id’s. luckily, i got away with just the health card and didn’t have to wait in a line.

as i got back in the car, i suddenly remembered the drama of pakistani elections. and oddly enough, parts of rohinton mistry’s a fine balance re the indian elections helped me recreate the stories of pakistan i was too young to experience first-hand. i felt content knowing that my father was beside me, in the driver’s seat, ready to confirm (or correct or reject) my words. in the village my father grew up in, buses would fill up the local residents, young and old, of voting age and drive them miles and miles away to the polling stations free of charge. once the buses were unloaded, the voters would be instructed on how to vote and which candidate to vote for. the lucky ones would return home in the same bus, but occasionally some voters would be abandoned after they’d been divested of their votes.

there was no guarantee of the secret ballot being secret. neither was their a guarantee that the ballots cast would be the same as the ones that would be rolled onto the counting table. and yet, the mood was always both tense and celebratory. the rallies were massive public parties, filled with chanting and dancing. and let’s not forget the the occasional effigy- and tire-burning. i still remember the catchy political slogans that we couldn’t help but sing aloud as kids while playing tag or ludo. or while eating dinner and watching tv. it all came down to this: we sure knew how to cheer for and curse our politicians, and we sure partied hard with mitthai (and other desserts) and freestyle bhangra when the favourite party won.

fast-forward to last week, two days before i voted. i found two identical letters in the mailbox and thought, oh great, another set of those paper-wasting political letters. vatewer happened to the hipness of paperless? one of the envelopes was addressed to me and the other to my father. i opened up the iffster addressed four-pager and began reading it.

i don’t expect you to read the whole thing, but here’s the gist of the letter: it’s an attack on the liberal candidate, rob oliphant, who has replaced the now retired john godfrey of the don valley west riding. the key reasons that the letter gives for why muslims should not vote for oliphant is because he’s gay, is married to a man, and is a gay activist. also, the letter calls on abdul ingar, the (former?) president of the islamic society of toronto, for endorsing a gay candidate without declaring that he’s endorsing a gay candidate.

the stuff about kathleen wynne (also a gay or at least a bisexual liberal candidate) kissing a hijabi woman during victory celebrations is irrelevant here, but is equally vitriolic.

okay, so here’s the thing. while political knowledge, engagement, and sense of empowerment is low among a number of voters – many of the muslim – in my riding who have trouble understanding canadian politics due to cultural and/or lingustic unfamiliarity, i think the presence of a gay candidate of a party that muslims in the area normally support raises questions about the role and function of mosques in a pluralistic society. even though these questions are not the exact or only questions one can raise, they’re unavoidable for those who are worried about the implication of a gay politician using a mosque as a platform to impart his or her message and gain votes.

my thought on the matter is that a mosque is a place for worship, but it is also analagous to a school and community centre. it can also be a place for social and political engagement. add in the post 9/11 reality of islamic places of worship and accessibility by newsmedia is also a desired quality in the contemporary mosque. mosques that close doors to nonmuslism come across as odd and sneaky. while mosques in the city vary greatly in their actual structure and organisation, there exists a paradigmatic mosque that mirrors the complexity and plurality of the lives of mulisms in toronto.

there’s some debate over whether voters should vote for the candidate or for the party, but i take the skeptical and pragmatic view by saying, i really don’t want to see the conservative party win again.

oliphant is a politician who happens to be gay and an activist. his being gay is neither necessary nor sufficient for his being a politician. there is no caual or correlating connection. his sexual orientation is irrelvant to his role as a politician and as a liberal party candidate.

if there’s anything on onliphant’s political record worth worrying about or investigating, it’s his being an advisor to michael ignatieff during the latter’s recent (unsuccessful) bid to become the liberal party leader.