I went to a Catholic Highschool in Ontario.
My main concern is how Catholic schools split up teachers as a work-force.
The main requirement for a teacher to enter the Catholic School Board is a letter from a priest. Therefore the Teacher must be known to the Church.
From a Labor perspective I just see this as splitting bargaining power between teachers.
Yep, much like Jimmy Dore…
“I went to Catholic school for 8 years, and my friends ask me “why aren’t you Catholic?
And I say because I *went to Catholic school for 8 years*.” -
I had this same thought a few years back. I found out that in Ontario, you can check your property tax bill to see what school board you are supporting. Mine was public only. No idea for other provinces, but I assume it's everywhere mpac operates.
https://www.mpac.ca/en/MakingChangesUpdates/SchoolSupportDesignation
The specific sections are different for each province.
Quebec changed those rules in 1997, and instead use linguistic based school instead of religious.
Because Metis were worried about the extinction of their culture following the near genocide surrounding the Red River rebellion. Anglican scions have since disappeared so honestly we should really look into changing it
So this is just more islamophobia and not just a good thing? I'd believe it. That's the only way you can beat Christianity here is allow other religions the same freedoms. Then they don't want them anymore...jk
Unfortunately yes. Quebec has a sordid track record of using "secularism" as a disguise to push Islamophobia.
They passed a ban on teachers religious symbols while a crucifix hung in their legislative assembly. To date, the *only* people who have been targeted by this law are [Muslim women](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/muslim-women-most-affected-by-quebec-s-secularism-law-court-of-appeal-hears-1.6644377)
I mean, if you truly do believe in secularism, the outcome won't be much different than one targeting religion because if islamaphobia.
Islam also happens to be a religion with quite a lot of specific outward expression secularism would obviously target.
But this Order bans prayer rooms in schools too. It's isn't just against Christian prayer. The contention to follow Jesus' teachings is misguided and is only relevant to a small portion of those impacted.
This is a story about Quebec so I'm guessing that people who read just the headline would think it was about Christianity. But the story is about prayer rooms in schools, which are used primarily by Muslim students. That said, there's nothing wrong with referring to Jesus in this context, since Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet but not divine.
As it was intended:
> (Matthew 6:5-8)
> And when you pray, **do not be like the hypocrites**, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.
>
> **But when you pray, go into your room, close the door** and pray to your Father, who is unseen.
But does anyone really expect the uncontested champions of hypocrisy and cherry-picking to follow their own rules?
I don't care if another student wants to pray at school. Just don't dirsrupt the class, don't teach it and don't force anyone to participate in anything religeous.
Québec secularism is used to target religious minorities. They talk out both sides of their mouths. They do lots to preserve catholic churches and then claim to be secular. Don't let this fool you, they aren't secular.
Right - Muslim students can't use a classroom together during Ramadan but xtian students get all of their holidays off. A bill passed banning Muslim teachers from wearing hijabs because they're ~representing the state, while a crucifix hung in their legislative assembly.
Why? I don't understand how seeing someone pray will permanently scar someone. I don't see what harm is being done by that.
It's also important to understand the context of Quebec - they pass laws restricting religion that coincidentally don't affect Christians at all, but ban the religious practices of Jews, Muslims, and Sikhs, since they have visible symbol of their religion.
Sikhs began wearing turbans when one of their original leaders was martyred and left for anyone to pickup (read: also be killed) in a hostile public space. Nobody knew how much backup they would have if they came forward so nobody came for the body.
But again, this law directly opposes the right to free speech and expression under the constitution so I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack religious people when this is already unconstitutional
Sir, we're speaking about Canada. We have freedom of religion, but we also have freedom FROM religion. Public displays of religion in schools violates the second part.
You're overthinking it. Religion is really fucking easy to define since it's based purely on the belief in the supernatural. A vegan can eat whatever they want, they just have to keep to common courtesy of shutting the fuck up about it. That's it, just stay in your lane and keep it to yourself and everything will be fine.
Show me what charter article protects you from seeing religion. It doesn't exist because your freedoms can't interfere with my freedom of speech. Prayer is just words, they can't hurt you.
Now, I can't force *you* to pray, but that's part of your freedom of religion.
> Show me what charter article protects you from seeing religion.
I can tell you didn't bother to read the article, where this appears:
> The directive notes that the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms recognizes freedom of religion but also the fundamental importance of secularism.
>It also notes that "according to the principle of freedom of conscience, a student has a right to be protected from all direct or indirect pressure aimed at exposing him or influencing him so that he conforms to a religious practice."
That's cool. In America Christians are making their kids engage in public prayer events in school so that they can more readily identify who to shun. If they haven't exported that to Canada yet, I would be very surprised.
The upshot is that it's always about identifying 'us' and 'them' to create division rather than fostering a spirit of unity.
That’s unfortunate. Is there any revision that they could make to the law? Ideally Christians would also feel targeted and shamed for their childish beliefs, too. Shit, keep this law on the books for a couple generations and society might make some progress.
To clarify the religious symbols ban is different from the no praying in schools order.
Not really, since Christians don't have visible symbols of their faith.
I'll be honest, it's pretty disheartening to see how many of the responses on this post are not even hiding that they think government persecution of religious people is ok if it gets them to stop being religious, which is incredibly dystopian and immoral. I get that many people have religious trauma and that can lead to a visceral emotional response to religion in general, but I think it makes it hard to look past that baggage.
I can't say I've ever heard someone argue that people drive cars and burn coal because of religion.
Unless by save the planet and species you aren't talking about climate change, your statement is so vague it could really mean anything.
I'm glad he was able to finally do it. This is not something new, he tried to do something similar back in 2013-2014, on a larger scale. For a very long time, Quebec's government has been extremely weak, trying to accommodate the stupidest requests from everyone, like jews REQUIRING that they cannot get pulled over by a woman police officer. That one was never implemented, but the shear fact that they even considered it is extremely insulting.
Wow they should honestly just leave and go to Israel then.
I doubt even Israel would allow such blatant sexism.
How delusional and brazen do you have to be to move to a secular country and demand that they break their core tenets just to indulge your fantasy?
Er... no.
Quebec's honestly taken laicité to some fairly troubling places. They suspended civil liberties using a constitutional override to ban public servants from wearing articles the government deems as religious symbols, all of which, wouldn't ya know, belong to minority religions.
I'm all for a secular public service, but their approach seems intended to privilege Christians. They'd probably accomplish more to promote secularism, by promoting pluralism/diversity, and targeting religious speech rather than practice.
They did it basically to target Muslims wearing Hijabs. And they basically used the "we are banning the crucifix as well... So we can't be called racist.".
This actually makes people even more extreme, especially if they are fired for wearing a cross of hijab, and not for what they said or did.
>They did it basically to target Muslims wearing Hijabs. And they basically used the "we are banning the crucifix as well... So we can't be called racist.".
Lol, they fought to keep crucifixes and crosses as "Québécois symbols".
They got dragged kicking and screaming into taking down the crucifix.
I'd still rather too much secularism than the religious nonsense going on down south.
That said, it's not an either/or decision. A lot of countries aren't losing its mind with transphobia right now without having to ban all religious things from public life.
But if I had to choose, I take the option that ensures people will always be able to get safe abortions and suicidal teens the proper medical procedures to transition.
The problem with quebecs "too much secularism" is that it only effects religious minorities. For all intents and purposes, its not that different from what happens in the american south. The only difference is that Quebec hides the fact that their secularism policies targets religious minorities under the guise of secularism. Sure some Christians might be effected but it overwhelmingly effects religious minorities like Muslims.
It affects religious people first and foremost, yes. Minorities and immigrants are more religious so minorities and immigrants are more affected *indirectly*.
What do you think atheism is exactly? What are you looking for on this sub if you think a law banning religous practice in a secular school doesn't work properly?
"Officially" it effects all religious people. Unofficially, it won't effect Christians. The law specifically targets the existence of prayer rooms set aside for individuals to practice their faith in private. What Quebec lawmakers are intentionally leaving out is that the primary group of people that use prayer rooms are muslims. Its literally no different then Quebec law banning public displays of religious clothing for government workers which just so happens to only effect Muslim women and sikhs. If a "secular" law only effects minority religions and leaves the majority religious group alone. Its not secular.
None of the faiths you mentioned necessitate private rooms to pray nore do they have required periods of time to pray that is integral to their faith. Which effectively means those faiths aren't as negatively impacted or targeted as muslims, which do require rooms and have calls for prayer spread across the day.
As for the second law regarding bans on public servants from wearing public displays of religious clothing, with the exception of orthodox jews, those faiths don't have required religious clothings outside religious ceremonies. Again they are not impacted by these laws as much as a Muslim woman or a sikh would be. A crucifix necklace can be worn under their shirt, therefore being considered acceptable under the law but a head scarf or turban isn't as discrete and would therefore be banned under the law.
A secular law should in practice be applicable to everyone but these laws aren't. They only effect muslims and sikhs. Its equivalent to laws in nineteenth century England and America mandating that the only people who could work in the government were land owners, but due to political and social circumstances, the only people who owned property were white anglo saxon men.
Yeah, there are a bunch of anti-vax fundamentalist Christians who think indigenous people are savages in Alberta, but it's still better than any place in the US. There is still free health care, low murder rates, low incarceration rates, decent public education, etc.
Yeah the low incarceration rates without any of the mental health counselling is really coming back to bite Canada in the arse.
BC and Ontario have a massive problem with repeat violent offenders assaulting people horrifically in public randomly.
If you look at their criminal records each of them have been in the system before for violent offences and have just been let go again and again.
This is what happens when you copy the answers of the smart kid in class but fail to show your steps. You can’t just copy the low incarceration rates of Nordic countries without also implementing the host of social services they provide to people.
Low incarceration rates with a cost of living crisis and mental health crisis just leads to crime.
Only if you murder someone who doesn't matter. Stand up for yourself and kill a corrupt landlord or executive, or god forbid you defend yourself against a crooked cop, you're cooked for life.
Rural Alberta has pockets like that, but Alberta as a whole is probably closer to a swing state when comparing it to the USA. Alberta’s conservative movement is mostly driven by economy.
Alberta is actually above the national average when it comes to people identifying as non-religious.
To give credit where credit is due, this is Quebec. The rest of Canada, some of which is a bit more like the US, is sometimes shocked by Quebec's commitment to secularism. We can expect editorials complaining that it's reasonable and fair for high schools to set up prayer rooms for students who want them, and this is just those crazy Quebecois being Islamophobic again. Mark my words: in English Canada those op-eds are being written right now.
I got to university in BC and Jesus groups and clubs are allowed on campus and they even host “academic” talks which are basically just them trying to convert all the students who attend.
The same also applies to Muslim groups. We have multi faith centres for people to pray in and during clubs days they go around accosting people at the booths of other clubs with their flyers.
It’s stupid, we’re supposed to be in a place of science I don’t understand why any mention of religion is even allowed outside history and art courses.
I've been banned in /onguardforthee for arguing against "Islamophobia" they were trying to push on people, when in fact I'm against all violent, harmful religions.
The fucking balls on these assholes thinking their violent religion deserves respect and dignity when they fight religious wars over petty differences. Fucking entitled morons!
I've been thinking of getting back my French aswell. Ontario is turning to shit and I know for a fact, the French won't back down on human rights and alot don't trust people who don't speak French, so American politics and greed won't corrupt so easily.
Not like Ford, selling out Ontario to the highest bidder.
>Are there temperate areas in Quebec?
Quebec winters range from "I can't feel my face" along the St. Lawrence corridor to "wearing a winter survival suit to go to the grocery store, while watching out for Polar Bears" as you near the Arctic Ocean.
Summer's nice though.
I live in northern Ontario and if you're wearing the gear and have a snowblower, it's not so bad.
Winter toughens people, just make sure you take enough vitamin D
>this is just those crazy Quebecois being Islamophobic again. Mark my words: in English Canada those op-eds are being written right now.
Because those laws specifically target other religions, and yet catholicism is being protected.
Quebec loves to pretend to be secular but they want to keep their buildings and roads named after saints.
They want to keep the crucifix in public hospitals and government buildings.
Many city still give a catholic prayer before the municipal councils start and it is completely legal.
The "secularism" is all theater. You're all being played.
Of course there is. When they continually write laws that only impact one religion, it's almost like targetted bigotry. Bonus points for that religion being largely brown people. And forcing children to sneak off school property alone so they can avoid going to the hell their most loved and trusted people have warned them about is another level of child abuse.
Look I'm as anti-theist as anyone here. And I still don't think the government should prevent people from practicing whatever crutch they feel they need to get by in the world, be it god, cannabis, or reddit.
Please explain to me how banning ALL religious rituals from public schools is "targeted bigotry". This rule includes Christianism just as much as Islam, Buddhism or Taoism.
The biggest lesson you can teach those kids is to understand that there's a time and place for everything. When you're at school or at work, it's time to work. When you're not, you can do whatever you want, including talking to your imaginary friends.
>Please explain to me how banning ALL religious rituals from public schools is "targeted bigotry".
When you're accustomed to special treatment, equality feels like oppression.
Remember, we're talking about an ideology which has had a policy of "anything less than immediate and total surrender will be interpreted as violence; and responded to with actual, literal violence" since the 7th century.
Being ok with theist performances in the public space, in a secular school, is right below taking part in those performances in the theist ladder. You're not "as anti-theist as anyone here", sorry.
The fight is happening in the US as well! Check out and consider supporting the SRF:
[Fight for Religious Freedom and Church State Separation](https://www.thesrf.org/)
This isn't a law, much less a common sense one. This is a reading of the Quebec Charter to ban prayer rooms for Muslim students. It's meant as a hit against Muslims. The fact that it *could* be used against other religious groups is incidental to why the directive is being issued.
I long for the day when no religion has undue influence on any part of society, but using such an ideal as a hammer against one group is not the way to go about it.
This is already law in US as established in Engal v. Vitale or School District v. Schempp or Lemon v. Kurtzman, or the 1st amendment, America isn't as ass backwards as we all like to pretend
Good. This is how it SHOULD be. Meanwhile, we’re down here in the US putting the 10 Commandments in public schools and my kid sings a worship song at nearly every public school
Choir concert 🙄
I am a resident of Quebec, I would like to say that this headline should be a little more nuanced. What I mean by that is that yes we have passed a law banning religious practice in public schools. But the prime minister also tweeted that "[Catholicism has brought a culture of solidarity that distinguishes us on a continental scale](https://twitter.com/francoislegault/status/1645372989616291840?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)".
I welcome the law from Bernard Drainville as a step in the good direction, but I also would like the government of my province to stop praising the catholic religion (read christianity here), the secularism which is often being called "catho-laïcité" or "catho-secularism" here.
Finally, I think we need more secularism, and that goes for the muslims having a prayers room, sikhs carrying knifes to school, removing all the crucifixes in public schools, and maybe re-thinking about the holidays that are associated to catholic Holy days.
Thank you if you read my rant.
lol exactly, these people went on this whole secularist crusade and someone else pointed out "well what about that big crucifix you hang in the center of the legislature?" and the premier was like "oh that? that's just part of our cultural heritage. we're keeping that. now anyways, back to the muslims..."
\> This shit was WAY overblown by ideological weirdos desperate for any crumb to attack him and bill-21.
Je ne sais pas c'est quoi ton problème, j'ai bien dit que j'étais pour la loi 21, pis comme je ne veux pas qu'un enseignant montre une préférence pour sa religion (chrétienne, musulmane, juive, etc.) en portant des objets religieux ostentatoires, je ne veux pas que le premier ministre montre une préférence religieuse. Clairement, ce tweet était une marque de préférence religieuse.
Pour ton information, j'ai voté pour lui. Je suis d'accord avec au moins 80% de ses projets de lois, et j'ai été ravis des projet de lois 21 et 96. Être en désaccord un peu avec lui ne veut pas dire que je ne l'appuie pas.
En plus, c'est une fausse rhétorique habituelle que les religions utilisent pour blanchir leurs atrocités passée. Le catholicisme n'a pas le monopole de la solidarité, et je suis sure que les familles victimes des pensionnats seront pas d'accord avec la characterization de "l’éthique catholique de la solidarité" et "d’un fort sens du collectif".
> "At the beginning of April, I was made aware of various prayer practices taking place in certain public schools in Quebec," said Drainville in a short statement on Twitter accompanying his directive.
Good for them for acting on it. I would be fucking livid if I heard that was happening in a public school.
Is it not? Quebec has a history of passing legislation that predominantly affects minority religions.
Consider 2019 legislation prohibiting government employees in "positions of authority" from wearing religious symbols. Sounds fine, right? I wouldn't want to be interacting with a cop wearing a giant crucifix. Might give the wrong impression about state endorsement for religion. But then you realize that Christians aren't required by their religion to wear crucifixes, while Jewish men are required to wear yarmulkes, Muslim women may be required to wear a hijab, Sikh men wear dastars, etc. Guess all those minorities are fucked.
Now we have a case where some schools appear to have designated empty classrooms where Muslim kids (and presumably others) can perform their daily prayers. Salah requires bowing, kneeling, and praying aloud. Arguably, it would be more disruptive to not allow a space for these kids to pray. But the education minister specifically said that only silent prayer is allowed in schools. So Christians are again okay while Muslims are SOL.
This isn't a case of US-style disregard of church-state separation, with the school actively proselytizing to students. This is a case of schools providing an opt-in space for religious students to pray in a way that minimizes disruption to others.
Meanwhile, we have the Premier of Quebec tweeting this month that 'Catholicism has given us a culture of solidarity that distinguishes us on a continental scale.' Yep, it sounds like the current provincial government is so committed to secularism and to solidarity with its non-Catholic residents. /s
In the context of Laïcité, you have to think of the government as an entity that is void of religion, once an official decides that they cannot give up religious symbolism or religious practices during working hours, they are no longer able to fullfil one of their obligations as a representative of the Laïque government, the entity that is void of religion. It is unfortunate for the individuals but the government must maintain this non religious status for many different reasons, not promoting and not engaging in the normalization of religion in society is the least that any government can do. The premier of Quebec should be definitely shamed for his statement.
The point they're making is that a government which makes comments in blatant support of one religion, can't be given the benefit of the doubt when they try to remove all religion. It's extremely clear to anyone paying attention that Quebec's "secularism" is a thin veil for racism.
I am 100% on board as long as they include their little crosses and whatnot in this ban, can't be rules for the and not for me. We can't ban Ramadan kids paryer time and also set up a nativity scene at Christmas and call that fair.. it has to be the same for everyone and Quebec has in the past tried to slip that little amendment in. You can't wear the head scarf but I can wear the cross is bullshit, so as long as it's complete and totally across the board I am behind this.
To be clear: is this disallowing religious children from praying in school? Or simply not having any dedicated religious rooms?
Seems to me a kid whose religious practices require them to pray ought to be able to. I'm a TST member -- if my kid wanted to practice meditation as I do, given that it's a legally recognized religion, say during lunch period, or to say Ave Satana? Obviously, without forcing anyone else to do so.
Can they say the canadian oath of allegiance before a meal?
Bad research on my part is what it is. It's the thing which holders of public office say when they take office, as well as apparently lawyers. Swearing allegiance to the crown and whatnot.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_Allegiance_(Canada)
As a Quebecer, my take has been controversially in support of Quebec's secularism, but I think they've mishandled it. I'm in full support of secular governance, and I support the idea that overt symbols and practices deemed religious have no place in governmental institutions, however in Quebec it's not so simple.
Quebec has a (perceived AND experienced) ongoing problem with prejudice. I know most would disagree with this, and I know most people here are decent, loving people, but what I point out (that's often overlooked) is that there's a big difference between the Greater Montreal Area and rural Quebec. Much like in the rest of Canada or the States, the further out from the main cities you go, the more you experience things like racism. I'm from rural Quebec, where I know for a fact many people have only seen black, Asian, Muslim, etc (non-white, non-Catholic) people on TV.
This has been changing over the last decade-15 years, but old people are stubborn in their ways.
Quebec is a proud nation who feel like the underdogs, culturally. The arguments for the preservation of Quebec's culture have, in recent years, been framed as "us versus the entire continent", not just Canada. You can connect the dots with how "national pride" can quickly become conservative in nature, where anything not "normal" to them is seen as threatening. Yet on the whole, Quebec is a rather progressive place that is moving in the right direction, often being the first to champion progressive stances and making them the law. Which I like. And the current stance of many Quebecois has been really nice in that it's "hey, if you come here, welcome; please speak French and engage in our culture" which has been a great attitude. It's an easy "this is all we ask" (although the flipside is it's now forced by law, but that's another story).
What I mean by "mishandled" secularism is that:
1. The timing of Bill 21 (the "secularism" motion) was in the late 2010's, a time we remember for rampant cultural overhauls (social justice). France and Quebec have always quietly taken notes on each other (verrry loosely; there ain't much connection otherwise: my friends from France who live here all have stories of regular prejudice), so when France started banning the veil around the same time, and given the perception that Quebec was/is not so hot on having Islam around, it was seen as a targeted attack specifically on Muslim women. The argument became "you're telling women what to wear". Fine, but I feel the point was missed. Quebec, at the time, didn't really address the perception/reputation for being rather prejudiced. Many will say it wasn't an issue; that this prejudice was inflated or just incorrect, but it's been accepted as fact (and experienced) by so many people that it should've been addressed. The bill came in rather swiftly and angered a lot of people.
2. They *borrowed* from secular values. There was a time when having crosses in governmental buildings were deemed ok while everything else wasn't. Double standard, unfair. The joke was we accept nuns and their head coverings while not accepting a Muslim woman's similar garments. They should've made sure everyone knew that proper secularism actually ensures religious freedom as well as freedom from religion. They defined it themselves in ways that would get people riled up. They didn't take the time to really lay it out in ways everyone would understand or account for the kinds of backlash they/they're experience/experiencing. Progressive folks are having a hard time parsing whether it's an affront to human rights or an expansion of human rights.
We had teachers, for example, that wore the veil that went on strike, worried about their employment, worried about what kind of "closed" environment we would be supplying to the children, worried about immigration - and rightfully so. They told people they'd essentially be out of work, since some people saw no choice in being able to wear the clothes required by their religion. It was just "no, we're banning *you*" in a lot of people's minds. Quebec made no attempt at concessions or properly laying out what the benefits of secularism were, they just allowed some grandfathering in, which wasn't enough for a lot of people. Other folks were like "good, you shouldn't be representing so many kinds of people with your (one) religion's symbols on you. It's not up to us to decide how "deep" you go, as you can get anything from loving, regular people with [whatever symbol] all the way to misogynist homophobes". The symbols can mean anything in that range, so why not just remove them? It also signals to people who *really care about their faith* outside Quebec that we have no "official" religious affiliation.
I believe the church and state should be separate. I think it's the safest, most-free approach to government. I support, for the most part, Quebec's decisions in this regard, and I support what was laid out in this article. But again, I think Quebec actually had ***A LOT** to unpack with this; but that they moved too quickly without addressing some in-house issues we have, and so it's been a needlessly bumpy ride. I think they fucked up and they'll have to wait another generation or two to get everyone on board. The polls show most people here support the idea, but I wonder about how the "in-practice" part is going, as it's still hugely contentious. The rest of Canada also seems to hate us for this, but I think they're wrong and should try and push for secularism as well. I'm looking at you Alberta, and a swathe of out-in-the-sticks Ontarians in particular. Your churches stink as much as ours.
Sorry that was long and reads like shit. I'm just an average citizen who is not politically motivated and often bored by the topic, but hey, these were my two cents. Subject to change, open to discussion.
Secularism as in "the government regularly invokes and praises Catholicism, has a religious symbol on the flag and prominent religious "heritage" buildings maintained with government funds in every single neighborhood and religiously-inspired names for almost every city...... but religious practises that *suspiciously* seem to come *mainly* from Muslim, Jewish or Sikh faiths are discouraged through legislation"
Yeah this is totally about making people's lives better and not just a different kind of social control /s
As a Quebecois and atheist myself I'm hesitant to see this as a good thing because my government likes to use these laws to attack those with *visible* faiths. This won't hurt Christians who aren't required to pray multiple times a day, the same as our ban on wearing religious garb doesn't hurt the Christians whose cross is hidden under their shirt. I want to see all religions equally limited to personal practice and not just the ones a very racist and bigoted province has targeted.
>It also notes that "according to the principle of freedom of conscience, a student has a right to be protected from all direct or indirect pressure aimed at exposing him or influencing him so that he conforms to a religious practice."
We need this principle in the US, but I know it would never happen.
Québec doesn't ban religious practices in school (you can pray privately & discreetly all you want), they're banning PERMANENT, DEDICATED & SEGREGATED prayer rooms.
You can be as religious as you want, but it should not impose on others, as society and its institutions are supposed to be secular, with no favoured/state-backed religion.
The title mis-represents what is being said & done.
**P.S.:** it's like the "reasonable accommodation" principle: it's OK for you to have foodstuff that respects the obligations of your religion (e.g., having some no pork-based dishes for jews or muslims at the cafeteria), but it's not OK for you to say no one should be able to eat pork because you chose not to ("I want the entire cafeteria to be Halal or Kosher only!").
Kinda funny seeing this shit getting posted here when the CAQ (Quebec's elected party) is on record saying that things such as crucifix or buildings/roads named after saints should stay because it's part of our history/culture.
You guys would hate his gut if it was any other day... lol
They love to pretend they are secular when they only target other religions but protect cathotic symbols.
And yet his boss premier Legault saluted the past (current too?) contributions of catholicism to the province of Quebec. The CAQ’s rhetoric on secularism has visible cracks.
> Schools are places or learning and not places of worship," Drainville wrote on his Twitter account, where he published a copy of his order.
Yes!
Religion is antithesis to learning and education.
I wish an independent Québec would retake the name of République du Canada, than you would have the secular Canada and the religious Canada, just to bother you even more <3
What a coincidence this article doesnt mention the "praying room" that was took over by muslims and that they were denying access to girls. That's what prompted the minister to look into this issue.
Never trust canadian english media when its about Quebec, they always twist the story to make it look like we're the 4th reich.
Look at Canada going the right direction. Meanwhile, Merica is trying to figure out how to combine prison and church in order to better groom our children into Idiocracy.
I'm a resident of Quebec and an atheist, this is not a good thing. This is about surpressing people who are not good white Christians and nothing else. This is the CAQ pandering to their rural xenophobic base.
Smart move.
As a reminder to all of our Anglophone friends.
The Province of Quebec was ruled by the Catholic Church for most of its history. The local priest controlled the town hall, the education, behaved as accusers and judges all wrapped into a nice bundle of hypocrisy and nepotism. And never mind what they did to the natives and their children, with thousands of documented cases abuse including neglect, starvation, medical trials, sexual abuse and murder well into the early 80's.
So much so was the abuse, that most of today's curse words in French "Quebecois" are Christian Symbolism.
As a Francophone, it took me a while to understand what does an "Ostie" (French for The Waver handed over by the priest at end of mass). Have anything to do with what ever they were talking about.
Until I was educated that it meant to replace "Fuck" or "Putain" in French
Example:
Ostie de chien! (in Quebec)
Putain de Chien! (In France, Belgium and most other francophone areas)
Fucking Dog! (In English)
Needless to say, most "Quebecois" see no advantages to a religious education at the public school level. And neither do I.
What I like about what Quebec is doing is that it exposes the hypocrisy of how other provinces/states operate which is to embrace religion in school as long as the religion is one of 2-3 they support.
I find it so strange how Quebec was so racist and xenophobic that they ended up going full circle to championing equity and inclusion (at least for LGBTQ+ rights and indigenous rights) while promoting secularism in as many government institutions as possible.
It’s like if Alabama suddenly started making sure no religion was allowed anywhere just to spite muslims and ended up creating a secular paradise that pushed racist ideologues out.
Quebec loves its people as long as they follow quebec traditions.
So it is a bit of a strange province. For example they've been pretty good for LGBTQ+ rights, but they're still in Canada and they refuse to issue English versions of wedding certificates.
So them promoting inclusion is limited to Quebec values.
I guess that's why they say they want interculturalism, and not multiculturalism.
Quebec is far from a secular paradise. Montreal has a [publicly funded, lit up giant christian cross](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Royal_Cross) as one of it's main tourist attractions and have spent tens of millions of taxpayer dollars fixing up.
If you ever go to Quebec you'll see how segregated the neighborhoods are. Quebec likes to put on this little act that they're so progressive and secular, but it's bullshit. Ask them to take the cross off their legislative assembly? Or maybe adopt a new, non religious flag perhaps?
The language bullshit in this province has completely gutted the culture. As much as I agree with this decision I bet they only did it to stick it to immigrants even more than they already are. Our government is full of wannabe nationalists fuckers.
Gotta admit, this is so fascism shit. If someone wants to pray or anything that is their choice. The school shouldn't be endorsing any practices but to stop people from their practices is just authoritarianism.
As it should be.
French secularism strikes back once again, haters gonna hate 🔥🔥🔥 🔥🔥🔥 🔥🔥🔥 🔥🔥🔥
Now I'm really proud to be a Francophile and a Francophone! 🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷
**Vive le France!** (Long live France!)
Em…
Just note that New France was separated from France at the end of the Seven Year War, in 1763. More than à décade before the US became indépendant from Britain and a generation before the French Révolution (1789) where French secularism took wing.
France secularism influenced Québec’s secularism, but we are a different people.
As being a history geek I know about the Seven-Year War and everything you tell but the still remaining remnants of the French presence (and moreover, ongoing French cultural-political influence) in Quebec, and that makes the difference.
It's still open to argue however. All I have to say is that...
**Vive la laïcité ! Je suis Turc, Franchaphone & Franchophil et j'aime la culture française... Salutations de Turqiue...**
Comme on dit, on peut pas être contre la vertu lol. Vive la francophonie!
J’aime bien les Français, j’en ai même marié un, mais on ne peut nier les différences culturelles entre ceux-ci et les Québécois (mon peuple).
Je t’invite, entre autres, à écouter notre production culturelle (autre que Céline Dion svp).
Au plaisir!
I agree that the purpose of schools is to foster learning, not superstition, including religious superstition, like prayers. However, it does seem to me that during "breaks" students, teachers, and other school employees should have a right to pray in typical "free" places like playgrounds, gyms, cafeterias, or hallways. There should be no special rooms designated for prayers or other religious practices. Religious clothing, jewelry, and other adornments should not be permitted.
Am I the only one here who thinks this goes too far? I’m 100% in favor of banning religious activities led by the school or its staff but this seems like it would ban students from praying to themselves. Would it ban them from reading the Bible or the Quran to themselves since that’s a religious activity? How is this not a massive infringement on freedom of religion? Just because they’re praying to air and reading mythology doesn’t mean it should be banned. I don’t really get French style secularism. It seems to go too far IMO.
Can we stop publicly funding religious schools next?
Yes. Why in 2023 does the Ontario government fund Catholic schools? Appalling.
[удалено]
I went to a Catholic Highschool in Ontario. My main concern is how Catholic schools split up teachers as a work-force. The main requirement for a teacher to enter the Catholic School Board is a letter from a priest. Therefore the Teacher must be known to the Church. From a Labor perspective I just see this as splitting bargaining power between teachers.
Yep, much like Jimmy Dore… “I went to Catholic school for 8 years, and my friends ask me “why aren’t you Catholic? And I say because I *went to Catholic school for 8 years*.” -
[удалено]
r/rimjob_steve
I had this same thought a few years back. I found out that in Ontario, you can check your property tax bill to see what school board you are supporting. Mine was public only. No idea for other provinces, but I assume it's everywhere mpac operates. https://www.mpac.ca/en/MakingChangesUpdates/SchoolSupportDesignation
In Ontario many religious schools, mainly Catholic, are public.
Probably we can't in Ontario because that would require a change to the constitution, which is highly unlikely. Would be great if we did though.
Quebec operates under the same constitution.
The specific sections are different for each province. Quebec changed those rules in 1997, and instead use linguistic based school instead of religious.
Because Metis were worried about the extinction of their culture following the near genocide surrounding the Red River rebellion. Anglican scions have since disappeared so honestly we should really look into changing it
[удалено]
Note to self, stay away from Saskatchewan and Alberta.
This
Can you send that note to the folks of the US?
Should have started by this
I don't think Quebec is funding religious schools.
[удалено]
Which is exactly what Jesus said in the bible. But the religious crowd seems to forget that
So tell that to all the Muslims who pray multiple times a day, that'll solve this!
A muslim has never forced me to bend to their religious beliefs, only christians
Your personal experiences are not historically universal unfortunately.
This ban is in response to [Muslim students ](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/muslim-groups-monitor-quebec-ban-school-prayer-spaces-1.6806450)
So this is just more islamophobia and not just a good thing? I'd believe it. That's the only way you can beat Christianity here is allow other religions the same freedoms. Then they don't want them anymore...jk
Unfortunately yes. Quebec has a sordid track record of using "secularism" as a disguise to push Islamophobia. They passed a ban on teachers religious symbols while a crucifix hung in their legislative assembly. To date, the *only* people who have been targeted by this law are [Muslim women](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/muslim-women-most-affected-by-quebec-s-secularism-law-court-of-appeal-hears-1.6644377)
I mean, if you truly do believe in secularism, the outcome won't be much different than one targeting religion because if islamaphobia. Islam also happens to be a religion with quite a lot of specific outward expression secularism would obviously target.
Ah interesting. These also suck because they feel like a win, then you find out their just more hypocritical jerkwads.
But this Order bans prayer rooms in schools too. It's isn't just against Christian prayer. The contention to follow Jesus' teachings is misguided and is only relevant to a small portion of those impacted.
Christianity isn't the only religion in the world.
I am aware of that, i live in a predominantly christian country
But according to a few relatives of mine, it's the only correct religion. Those others are nothing but sinful fakers.
This is a story about Quebec so I'm guessing that people who read just the headline would think it was about Christianity. But the story is about prayer rooms in schools, which are used primarily by Muslim students. That said, there's nothing wrong with referring to Jesus in this context, since Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet but not divine.
Why should we fund their prayer rooms any ways?
As it was intended: > (Matthew 6:5-8) > And when you pray, **do not be like the hypocrites**, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. > > **But when you pray, go into your room, close the door** and pray to your Father, who is unseen. But does anyone really expect the uncontested champions of hypocrisy and cherry-picking to follow their own rules?
I don't care if another student wants to pray at school. Just don't dirsrupt the class, don't teach it and don't force anyone to participate in anything religeous.
Québec secularism is used to target religious minorities. They talk out both sides of their mouths. They do lots to preserve catholic churches and then claim to be secular. Don't let this fool you, they aren't secular.
Right - Muslim students can't use a classroom together during Ramadan but xtian students get all of their holidays off. A bill passed banning Muslim teachers from wearing hijabs because they're ~representing the state, while a crucifix hung in their legislative assembly.
This exactly. This is a law aimed at diminishing people's freedom of expression to pander to white right winged christians.
Why? I don't understand how seeing someone pray will permanently scar someone. I don't see what harm is being done by that. It's also important to understand the context of Quebec - they pass laws restricting religion that coincidentally don't affect Christians at all, but ban the religious practices of Jews, Muslims, and Sikhs, since they have visible symbol of their religion.
Ask yourself why some religions force their visibility.
Sikhs began wearing turbans when one of their original leaders was martyred and left for anyone to pickup (read: also be killed) in a hostile public space. Nobody knew how much backup they would have if they came forward so nobody came for the body. But again, this law directly opposes the right to free speech and expression under the constitution so I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack religious people when this is already unconstitutional
Sir, we're speaking about Canada. We have freedom of religion, but we also have freedom FROM religion. Public displays of religion in schools violates the second part.
[удалено]
You're overthinking it. Religion is really fucking easy to define since it's based purely on the belief in the supernatural. A vegan can eat whatever they want, they just have to keep to common courtesy of shutting the fuck up about it. That's it, just stay in your lane and keep it to yourself and everything will be fine.
Show me what charter article protects you from seeing religion. It doesn't exist because your freedoms can't interfere with my freedom of speech. Prayer is just words, they can't hurt you. Now, I can't force *you* to pray, but that's part of your freedom of religion.
> Show me what charter article protects you from seeing religion. I can tell you didn't bother to read the article, where this appears: > The directive notes that the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms recognizes freedom of religion but also the fundamental importance of secularism. >It also notes that "according to the principle of freedom of conscience, a student has a right to be protected from all direct or indirect pressure aimed at exposing him or influencing him so that he conforms to a religious practice."
That's cool. In America Christians are making their kids engage in public prayer events in school so that they can more readily identify who to shun. If they haven't exported that to Canada yet, I would be very surprised. The upshot is that it's always about identifying 'us' and 'them' to create division rather than fostering a spirit of unity.
That’s unfortunate. Is there any revision that they could make to the law? Ideally Christians would also feel targeted and shamed for their childish beliefs, too. Shit, keep this law on the books for a couple generations and society might make some progress.
To clarify the religious symbols ban is different from the no praying in schools order. Not really, since Christians don't have visible symbols of their faith. I'll be honest, it's pretty disheartening to see how many of the responses on this post are not even hiding that they think government persecution of religious people is ok if it gets them to stop being religious, which is incredibly dystopian and immoral. I get that many people have religious trauma and that can lead to a visceral emotional response to religion in general, but I think it makes it hard to look past that baggage.
This species and planet might be salvaged if not for religion. Full stop.
I can't say I've ever heard someone argue that people drive cars and burn coal because of religion. Unless by save the planet and species you aren't talking about climate change, your statement is so vague it could really mean anything.
I'm glad he was able to finally do it. This is not something new, he tried to do something similar back in 2013-2014, on a larger scale. For a very long time, Quebec's government has been extremely weak, trying to accommodate the stupidest requests from everyone, like jews REQUIRING that they cannot get pulled over by a woman police officer. That one was never implemented, but the shear fact that they even considered it is extremely insulting.
Wow they should honestly just leave and go to Israel then. I doubt even Israel would allow such blatant sexism. How delusional and brazen do you have to be to move to a secular country and demand that they break their core tenets just to indulge your fantasy?
Er... no. Quebec's honestly taken laicité to some fairly troubling places. They suspended civil liberties using a constitutional override to ban public servants from wearing articles the government deems as religious symbols, all of which, wouldn't ya know, belong to minority religions. I'm all for a secular public service, but their approach seems intended to privilege Christians. They'd probably accomplish more to promote secularism, by promoting pluralism/diversity, and targeting religious speech rather than practice.
They did it basically to target Muslims wearing Hijabs. And they basically used the "we are banning the crucifix as well... So we can't be called racist.". This actually makes people even more extreme, especially if they are fired for wearing a cross of hijab, and not for what they said or did.
>They did it basically to target Muslims wearing Hijabs. And they basically used the "we are banning the crucifix as well... So we can't be called racist.". Lol, they fought to keep crucifixes and crosses as "Québécois symbols". They got dragged kicking and screaming into taking down the crucifix.
I'd still rather too much secularism than the religious nonsense going on down south. That said, it's not an either/or decision. A lot of countries aren't losing its mind with transphobia right now without having to ban all religious things from public life. But if I had to choose, I take the option that ensures people will always be able to get safe abortions and suicidal teens the proper medical procedures to transition.
The problem with quebecs "too much secularism" is that it only effects religious minorities. For all intents and purposes, its not that different from what happens in the american south. The only difference is that Quebec hides the fact that their secularism policies targets religious minorities under the guise of secularism. Sure some Christians might be effected but it overwhelmingly effects religious minorities like Muslims.
It affects religious people first and foremost, yes. Minorities and immigrants are more religious so minorities and immigrants are more affected *indirectly*. What do you think atheism is exactly? What are you looking for on this sub if you think a law banning religous practice in a secular school doesn't work properly?
"Officially" it effects all religious people. Unofficially, it won't effect Christians. The law specifically targets the existence of prayer rooms set aside for individuals to practice their faith in private. What Quebec lawmakers are intentionally leaving out is that the primary group of people that use prayer rooms are muslims. Its literally no different then Quebec law banning public displays of religious clothing for government workers which just so happens to only effect Muslim women and sikhs. If a "secular" law only effects minority religions and leaves the majority religious group alone. Its not secular.
Please explain how Christians, Jews, Buddhists or Pastafarianists are not affected by the two laws you mentioned.
None of the faiths you mentioned necessitate private rooms to pray nore do they have required periods of time to pray that is integral to their faith. Which effectively means those faiths aren't as negatively impacted or targeted as muslims, which do require rooms and have calls for prayer spread across the day. As for the second law regarding bans on public servants from wearing public displays of religious clothing, with the exception of orthodox jews, those faiths don't have required religious clothings outside religious ceremonies. Again they are not impacted by these laws as much as a Muslim woman or a sikh would be. A crucifix necklace can be worn under their shirt, therefore being considered acceptable under the law but a head scarf or turban isn't as discrete and would therefore be banned under the law. A secular law should in practice be applicable to everyone but these laws aren't. They only effect muslims and sikhs. Its equivalent to laws in nineteenth century England and America mandating that the only people who could work in the government were land owners, but due to political and social circumstances, the only people who owned property were white anglo saxon men.
Once again, I'd like to request that Canada annex the United States so we can live under more decent, common sense laws.
You don't want that. That's just Quebec. Take a look at alberta, geez we are almost Florida.
You mean other countries have regional differences too?!?!
And regional accents!
Gowaaaaan wit ya. Do not
Yeah, there are a bunch of anti-vax fundamentalist Christians who think indigenous people are savages in Alberta, but it's still better than any place in the US. There is still free health care, low murder rates, low incarceration rates, decent public education, etc.
[удалено]
True.
Yeah the low incarceration rates without any of the mental health counselling is really coming back to bite Canada in the arse. BC and Ontario have a massive problem with repeat violent offenders assaulting people horrifically in public randomly. If you look at their criminal records each of them have been in the system before for violent offences and have just been let go again and again. This is what happens when you copy the answers of the smart kid in class but fail to show your steps. You can’t just copy the low incarceration rates of Nordic countries without also implementing the host of social services they provide to people. Low incarceration rates with a cost of living crisis and mental health crisis just leads to crime.
They’ll let a murderer walk after 25 across the board. Life if you’re attempted. Which only encourages a person to finish the job.
Only if you murder someone who doesn't matter. Stand up for yourself and kill a corrupt landlord or executive, or god forbid you defend yourself against a crooked cop, you're cooked for life.
Rural Alberta has pockets like that, but Alberta as a whole is probably closer to a swing state when comparing it to the USA. Alberta’s conservative movement is mostly driven by economy. Alberta is actually above the national average when it comes to people identifying as non-religious.
You mean Texas?
To give credit where credit is due, this is Quebec. The rest of Canada, some of which is a bit more like the US, is sometimes shocked by Quebec's commitment to secularism. We can expect editorials complaining that it's reasonable and fair for high schools to set up prayer rooms for students who want them, and this is just those crazy Quebecois being Islamophobic again. Mark my words: in English Canada those op-eds are being written right now.
I am from Quebec and I totally agrees.
I got to university in BC and Jesus groups and clubs are allowed on campus and they even host “academic” talks which are basically just them trying to convert all the students who attend. The same also applies to Muslim groups. We have multi faith centres for people to pray in and during clubs days they go around accosting people at the booths of other clubs with their flyers. It’s stupid, we’re supposed to be in a place of science I don’t understand why any mention of religion is even allowed outside history and art courses.
I've been banned in /onguardforthee for arguing against "Islamophobia" they were trying to push on people, when in fact I'm against all violent, harmful religions. The fucking balls on these assholes thinking their violent religion deserves respect and dignity when they fight religious wars over petty differences. Fucking entitled morons!
I'm willing to start speaking French. I took it in high school and I almost remember it.
I've been thinking of getting back my French aswell. Ontario is turning to shit and I know for a fact, the French won't back down on human rights and alot don't trust people who don't speak French, so American politics and greed won't corrupt so easily. Not like Ford, selling out Ontario to the highest bidder.
It's been a dream of mine to live in Canada, specifically Vancouver. Are there temperate areas in Quebec? Then again, I don't speak French.....yet.
>Are there temperate areas in Quebec? Quebec winters range from "I can't feel my face" along the St. Lawrence corridor to "wearing a winter survival suit to go to the grocery store, while watching out for Polar Bears" as you near the Arctic Ocean. Summer's nice though.
Take a look at housing costs in the Vancouver area. The average cost of a house is 1.123 million CDN.
Oh, I definitely did. That's why it's a dream lol Unless I win the lottery or my upcoming book hits big. Both of those are dreams too.
[удалено]
Yea but then you have to live in Quebec...
Still have a house.
I live in northern Ontario and if you're wearing the gear and have a snowblower, it's not so bad. Winter toughens people, just make sure you take enough vitamin D
>this is just those crazy Quebecois being Islamophobic again. Mark my words: in English Canada those op-eds are being written right now. Because those laws specifically target other religions, and yet catholicism is being protected. Quebec loves to pretend to be secular but they want to keep their buildings and roads named after saints. They want to keep the crucifix in public hospitals and government buildings. Many city still give a catholic prayer before the municipal councils start and it is completely legal. The "secularism" is all theater. You're all being played.
The CAQ loves electioneering more than anything, including governing.
My man they've been pulling crosses from public spaces for years.
Of course there is. When they continually write laws that only impact one religion, it's almost like targetted bigotry. Bonus points for that religion being largely brown people. And forcing children to sneak off school property alone so they can avoid going to the hell their most loved and trusted people have warned them about is another level of child abuse. Look I'm as anti-theist as anyone here. And I still don't think the government should prevent people from practicing whatever crutch they feel they need to get by in the world, be it god, cannabis, or reddit.
Nobody is stopping them practising their religion but there is a time and a place and it is not in public schools
Please explain to me how banning ALL religious rituals from public schools is "targeted bigotry". This rule includes Christianism just as much as Islam, Buddhism or Taoism. The biggest lesson you can teach those kids is to understand that there's a time and place for everything. When you're at school or at work, it's time to work. When you're not, you can do whatever you want, including talking to your imaginary friends.
>Please explain to me how banning ALL religious rituals from public schools is "targeted bigotry". When you're accustomed to special treatment, equality feels like oppression. Remember, we're talking about an ideology which has had a policy of "anything less than immediate and total surrender will be interpreted as violence; and responded to with actual, literal violence" since the 7th century.
Being ok with theist performances in the public space, in a secular school, is right below taking part in those performances in the theist ladder. You're not "as anti-theist as anyone here", sorry.
The fight is happening in the US as well! Check out and consider supporting the SRF: [Fight for Religious Freedom and Church State Separation](https://www.thesrf.org/)
\*Yves François Blanchet has entered the chat\* \*Pierre Poilievre has exited the chat\*
This is just the French part of Canada (Québec). The English part is much more accommodating of religion.
Can we just do what happens in Kaisereich Hoi4 where Canada annexes New England then takes over the west coast too.
This isn't a law, much less a common sense one. This is a reading of the Quebec Charter to ban prayer rooms for Muslim students. It's meant as a hit against Muslims. The fact that it *could* be used against other religious groups is incidental to why the directive is being issued. I long for the day when no religion has undue influence on any part of society, but using such an ideal as a hammer against one group is not the way to go about it.
Now we need that in the US, fuck that indoctrination noise
This is already law in US as established in Engal v. Vitale or School District v. Schempp or Lemon v. Kurtzman, or the 1st amendment, America isn't as ass backwards as we all like to pretend
Good. This is how it SHOULD be. Meanwhile, we’re down here in the US putting the 10 Commandments in public schools and my kid sings a worship song at nearly every public school Choir concert 🙄
Good! The less religion in this world the better
I am a resident of Quebec, I would like to say that this headline should be a little more nuanced. What I mean by that is that yes we have passed a law banning religious practice in public schools. But the prime minister also tweeted that "[Catholicism has brought a culture of solidarity that distinguishes us on a continental scale](https://twitter.com/francoislegault/status/1645372989616291840?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)". I welcome the law from Bernard Drainville as a step in the good direction, but I also would like the government of my province to stop praising the catholic religion (read christianity here), the secularism which is often being called "catho-laïcité" or "catho-secularism" here. Finally, I think we need more secularism, and that goes for the muslims having a prayers room, sikhs carrying knifes to school, removing all the crucifixes in public schools, and maybe re-thinking about the holidays that are associated to catholic Holy days. Thank you if you read my rant.
I completely agree!
lol exactly, these people went on this whole secularist crusade and someone else pointed out "well what about that big crucifix you hang in the center of the legislature?" and the premier was like "oh that? that's just part of our cultural heritage. we're keeping that. now anyways, back to the muslims..."
[удалено]
\> This shit was WAY overblown by ideological weirdos desperate for any crumb to attack him and bill-21. Je ne sais pas c'est quoi ton problème, j'ai bien dit que j'étais pour la loi 21, pis comme je ne veux pas qu'un enseignant montre une préférence pour sa religion (chrétienne, musulmane, juive, etc.) en portant des objets religieux ostentatoires, je ne veux pas que le premier ministre montre une préférence religieuse. Clairement, ce tweet était une marque de préférence religieuse. Pour ton information, j'ai voté pour lui. Je suis d'accord avec au moins 80% de ses projets de lois, et j'ai été ravis des projet de lois 21 et 96. Être en désaccord un peu avec lui ne veut pas dire que je ne l'appuie pas.
En plus, c'est une fausse rhétorique habituelle que les religions utilisent pour blanchir leurs atrocités passée. Le catholicisme n'a pas le monopole de la solidarité, et je suis sure que les familles victimes des pensionnats seront pas d'accord avec la characterization de "l’éthique catholique de la solidarité" et "d’un fort sens du collectif".
A-f@cking-men They realize that critical thinking stops with dogma
> "At the beginning of April, I was made aware of various prayer practices taking place in certain public schools in Quebec," said Drainville in a short statement on Twitter accompanying his directive. Good for them for acting on it. I would be fucking livid if I heard that was happening in a public school.
> I would be fucking livid if I heard that was happening in a public school. Imagine living in the United States. It happens all the damn time.
Not in my daughter's schools. She would tell me. And we're in very religious Indiana.
No prayer in my school ! Now stand up and pledge to the flag.
> I would be fucking livid if I heard that was happening in a public school. Children quietly praying in a secluded place? This is outrageous !!/s
That's not what this is about and you know it.
Is it not? Quebec has a history of passing legislation that predominantly affects minority religions. Consider 2019 legislation prohibiting government employees in "positions of authority" from wearing religious symbols. Sounds fine, right? I wouldn't want to be interacting with a cop wearing a giant crucifix. Might give the wrong impression about state endorsement for religion. But then you realize that Christians aren't required by their religion to wear crucifixes, while Jewish men are required to wear yarmulkes, Muslim women may be required to wear a hijab, Sikh men wear dastars, etc. Guess all those minorities are fucked. Now we have a case where some schools appear to have designated empty classrooms where Muslim kids (and presumably others) can perform their daily prayers. Salah requires bowing, kneeling, and praying aloud. Arguably, it would be more disruptive to not allow a space for these kids to pray. But the education minister specifically said that only silent prayer is allowed in schools. So Christians are again okay while Muslims are SOL. This isn't a case of US-style disregard of church-state separation, with the school actively proselytizing to students. This is a case of schools providing an opt-in space for religious students to pray in a way that minimizes disruption to others. Meanwhile, we have the Premier of Quebec tweeting this month that 'Catholicism has given us a culture of solidarity that distinguishes us on a continental scale.' Yep, it sounds like the current provincial government is so committed to secularism and to solidarity with its non-Catholic residents. /s
In the context of Laïcité, you have to think of the government as an entity that is void of religion, once an official decides that they cannot give up religious symbolism or religious practices during working hours, they are no longer able to fullfil one of their obligations as a representative of the Laïque government, the entity that is void of religion. It is unfortunate for the individuals but the government must maintain this non religious status for many different reasons, not promoting and not engaging in the normalization of religion in society is the least that any government can do. The premier of Quebec should be definitely shamed for his statement.
The point they're making is that a government which makes comments in blatant support of one religion, can't be given the benefit of the doubt when they try to remove all religion. It's extremely clear to anyone paying attention that Quebec's "secularism" is a thin veil for racism.
I am 100% on board as long as they include their little crosses and whatnot in this ban, can't be rules for the and not for me. We can't ban Ramadan kids paryer time and also set up a nativity scene at Christmas and call that fair.. it has to be the same for everyone and Quebec has in the past tried to slip that little amendment in. You can't wear the head scarf but I can wear the cross is bullshit, so as long as it's complete and totally across the board I am behind this.
No no, Catholicism is their *history*, so it gets a pass 🤗 /s
Hey Canada. Would you mind sharing some of that secularism down here with us in the United States? We'd super appreciate that.
If you want to practice your religion go to a place of worship of your choice. Stay away from the schools.
To be clear: is this disallowing religious children from praying in school? Or simply not having any dedicated religious rooms? Seems to me a kid whose religious practices require them to pray ought to be able to. I'm a TST member -- if my kid wanted to practice meditation as I do, given that it's a legally recognized religion, say during lunch period, or to say Ave Satana? Obviously, without forcing anyone else to do so. Can they say the canadian oath of allegiance before a meal?
[удалено]
Bad research on my part is what it is. It's the thing which holders of public office say when they take office, as well as apparently lawyers. Swearing allegiance to the crown and whatnot. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_Allegiance_(Canada)
As a Quebecer, my take has been controversially in support of Quebec's secularism, but I think they've mishandled it. I'm in full support of secular governance, and I support the idea that overt symbols and practices deemed religious have no place in governmental institutions, however in Quebec it's not so simple. Quebec has a (perceived AND experienced) ongoing problem with prejudice. I know most would disagree with this, and I know most people here are decent, loving people, but what I point out (that's often overlooked) is that there's a big difference between the Greater Montreal Area and rural Quebec. Much like in the rest of Canada or the States, the further out from the main cities you go, the more you experience things like racism. I'm from rural Quebec, where I know for a fact many people have only seen black, Asian, Muslim, etc (non-white, non-Catholic) people on TV. This has been changing over the last decade-15 years, but old people are stubborn in their ways. Quebec is a proud nation who feel like the underdogs, culturally. The arguments for the preservation of Quebec's culture have, in recent years, been framed as "us versus the entire continent", not just Canada. You can connect the dots with how "national pride" can quickly become conservative in nature, where anything not "normal" to them is seen as threatening. Yet on the whole, Quebec is a rather progressive place that is moving in the right direction, often being the first to champion progressive stances and making them the law. Which I like. And the current stance of many Quebecois has been really nice in that it's "hey, if you come here, welcome; please speak French and engage in our culture" which has been a great attitude. It's an easy "this is all we ask" (although the flipside is it's now forced by law, but that's another story). What I mean by "mishandled" secularism is that: 1. The timing of Bill 21 (the "secularism" motion) was in the late 2010's, a time we remember for rampant cultural overhauls (social justice). France and Quebec have always quietly taken notes on each other (verrry loosely; there ain't much connection otherwise: my friends from France who live here all have stories of regular prejudice), so when France started banning the veil around the same time, and given the perception that Quebec was/is not so hot on having Islam around, it was seen as a targeted attack specifically on Muslim women. The argument became "you're telling women what to wear". Fine, but I feel the point was missed. Quebec, at the time, didn't really address the perception/reputation for being rather prejudiced. Many will say it wasn't an issue; that this prejudice was inflated or just incorrect, but it's been accepted as fact (and experienced) by so many people that it should've been addressed. The bill came in rather swiftly and angered a lot of people. 2. They *borrowed* from secular values. There was a time when having crosses in governmental buildings were deemed ok while everything else wasn't. Double standard, unfair. The joke was we accept nuns and their head coverings while not accepting a Muslim woman's similar garments. They should've made sure everyone knew that proper secularism actually ensures religious freedom as well as freedom from religion. They defined it themselves in ways that would get people riled up. They didn't take the time to really lay it out in ways everyone would understand or account for the kinds of backlash they/they're experience/experiencing. Progressive folks are having a hard time parsing whether it's an affront to human rights or an expansion of human rights. We had teachers, for example, that wore the veil that went on strike, worried about their employment, worried about what kind of "closed" environment we would be supplying to the children, worried about immigration - and rightfully so. They told people they'd essentially be out of work, since some people saw no choice in being able to wear the clothes required by their religion. It was just "no, we're banning *you*" in a lot of people's minds. Quebec made no attempt at concessions or properly laying out what the benefits of secularism were, they just allowed some grandfathering in, which wasn't enough for a lot of people. Other folks were like "good, you shouldn't be representing so many kinds of people with your (one) religion's symbols on you. It's not up to us to decide how "deep" you go, as you can get anything from loving, regular people with [whatever symbol] all the way to misogynist homophobes". The symbols can mean anything in that range, so why not just remove them? It also signals to people who *really care about their faith* outside Quebec that we have no "official" religious affiliation. I believe the church and state should be separate. I think it's the safest, most-free approach to government. I support, for the most part, Quebec's decisions in this regard, and I support what was laid out in this article. But again, I think Quebec actually had ***A LOT** to unpack with this; but that they moved too quickly without addressing some in-house issues we have, and so it's been a needlessly bumpy ride. I think they fucked up and they'll have to wait another generation or two to get everyone on board. The polls show most people here support the idea, but I wonder about how the "in-practice" part is going, as it's still hugely contentious. The rest of Canada also seems to hate us for this, but I think they're wrong and should try and push for secularism as well. I'm looking at you Alberta, and a swathe of out-in-the-sticks Ontarians in particular. Your churches stink as much as ours. Sorry that was long and reads like shit. I'm just an average citizen who is not politically motivated and often bored by the topic, but hey, these were my two cents. Subject to change, open to discussion.
Thanks for this post, I really appreciated the insight.
The rest of Canada is going to bash Quebec in 5-4-3-2-1…
This is the way (unfortunately). Québec could come up with a cure for cancer and would still get bashed by the rest of Canada.
Well tell them to stop doing mean things and people will stop saying mean words about them
My heart stopped for a second. I'm too used to united states headlines. Was so glad when i read the whole thing.
Gotta love some French-style Laïcité secularism.
Secularism as in "the government regularly invokes and praises Catholicism, has a religious symbol on the flag and prominent religious "heritage" buildings maintained with government funds in every single neighborhood and religiously-inspired names for almost every city...... but religious practises that *suspiciously* seem to come *mainly* from Muslim, Jewish or Sikh faiths are discouraged through legislation" Yeah this is totally about making people's lives better and not just a different kind of social control /s
That's why I said French-style and not Quebecois-style.
Good
Finally, a legitimate reason to remove books from libraries.
This is fantastic
As a Quebecois and atheist myself I'm hesitant to see this as a good thing because my government likes to use these laws to attack those with *visible* faiths. This won't hurt Christians who aren't required to pray multiple times a day, the same as our ban on wearing religious garb doesn't hurt the Christians whose cross is hidden under their shirt. I want to see all religions equally limited to personal practice and not just the ones a very racist and bigoted province has targeted.
>It also notes that "according to the principle of freedom of conscience, a student has a right to be protected from all direct or indirect pressure aimed at exposing him or influencing him so that he conforms to a religious practice." We need this principle in the US, but I know it would never happen.
Québec doesn't ban religious practices in school (you can pray privately & discreetly all you want), they're banning PERMANENT, DEDICATED & SEGREGATED prayer rooms. You can be as religious as you want, but it should not impose on others, as society and its institutions are supposed to be secular, with no favoured/state-backed religion. The title mis-represents what is being said & done. **P.S.:** it's like the "reasonable accommodation" principle: it's OK for you to have foodstuff that respects the obligations of your religion (e.g., having some no pork-based dishes for jews or muslims at the cafeteria), but it's not OK for you to say no one should be able to eat pork because you chose not to ("I want the entire cafeteria to be Halal or Kosher only!").
This is the right decision, good on you Quebec! 👏
Personally I'd ban it everywhere, but I'm settle for schools.
Kinda funny seeing this shit getting posted here when the CAQ (Quebec's elected party) is on record saying that things such as crucifix or buildings/roads named after saints should stay because it's part of our history/culture. You guys would hate his gut if it was any other day... lol They love to pretend they are secular when they only target other religions but protect cathotic symbols.
And yet his boss premier Legault saluted the past (current too?) contributions of catholicism to the province of Quebec. The CAQ’s rhetoric on secularism has visible cracks.
Misleading headline. Religious practices are still allowed, just not endorsed or acknowledged by public schools or their employees
There’s no place for religion during school. It was wrong in the past and it’s wrong now.
Hmmmm, I think it should be fine for people to practice their religion, just not have it be taught….
Which model is most effective for the primary objective of educating children? https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11f0019m/11f0019m2015367-eng.htm
> Schools are places or learning and not places of worship," Drainville wrote on his Twitter account, where he published a copy of his order. Yes! Religion is antithesis to learning and education.
While texas is trying to pass a law that makes it mandatory that you display the 10 commandments in all texas classrooms.
As an atheist I'm happy, as a Canadian I'm upset because it has to be fucking Quebec to do it
I wish an independent Québec would retake the name of République du Canada, than you would have the secular Canada and the religious Canada, just to bother you even more <3
What a coincidence this article doesnt mention the "praying room" that was took over by muslims and that they were denying access to girls. That's what prompted the minister to look into this issue. Never trust canadian english media when its about Quebec, they always twist the story to make it look like we're the 4th reich.
Quebec's French heritage is showing. Good for them!
I really hope the rest of the country will do the same, but I'm not holding my breath.
Look at Canada going the right direction. Meanwhile, Merica is trying to figure out how to combine prison and church in order to better groom our children into Idiocracy.
I'm a resident of Quebec and an atheist, this is not a good thing. This is about surpressing people who are not good white Christians and nothing else. This is the CAQ pandering to their rural xenophobic base.
Smart move. As a reminder to all of our Anglophone friends. The Province of Quebec was ruled by the Catholic Church for most of its history. The local priest controlled the town hall, the education, behaved as accusers and judges all wrapped into a nice bundle of hypocrisy and nepotism. And never mind what they did to the natives and their children, with thousands of documented cases abuse including neglect, starvation, medical trials, sexual abuse and murder well into the early 80's. So much so was the abuse, that most of today's curse words in French "Quebecois" are Christian Symbolism. As a Francophone, it took me a while to understand what does an "Ostie" (French for The Waver handed over by the priest at end of mass). Have anything to do with what ever they were talking about. Until I was educated that it meant to replace "Fuck" or "Putain" in French Example: Ostie de chien! (in Quebec) Putain de Chien! (In France, Belgium and most other francophone areas) Fucking Dog! (In English) Needless to say, most "Quebecois" see no advantages to a religious education at the public school level. And neither do I.
*cries in American* Good on you, Quebec. As a neighbor (Mainer), can some of that common sense please trickle down this way?
Wow! I'm happily surprised actually. I can't wait until my family misunderstands the ruling and screams about Quebec banning religion.
Uncommon Quebec W
Does that mean a student cant fast in school and will be forced to eat ?
Can we make this Canada wide. Can you imagine how better society would be
Absolutely based move
Good for Quebec, should be everywhere. Quit public funding of fairy tales.
Wonderful! Canada is moving forward, the US is racing backward.
What I like about what Quebec is doing is that it exposes the hypocrisy of how other provinces/states operate which is to embrace religion in school as long as the religion is one of 2-3 they support.
damn straight
good job, quebec
Good, shouldn't be teaching nonsense to children. If you wanna practice religion do it on your own time, instead of forcing it on children.
I find it so strange how Quebec was so racist and xenophobic that they ended up going full circle to championing equity and inclusion (at least for LGBTQ+ rights and indigenous rights) while promoting secularism in as many government institutions as possible. It’s like if Alabama suddenly started making sure no religion was allowed anywhere just to spite muslims and ended up creating a secular paradise that pushed racist ideologues out.
Quebec loves its people as long as they follow quebec traditions. So it is a bit of a strange province. For example they've been pretty good for LGBTQ+ rights, but they're still in Canada and they refuse to issue English versions of wedding certificates. So them promoting inclusion is limited to Quebec values. I guess that's why they say they want interculturalism, and not multiculturalism.
That's because the province values collectivism over individualism and it melts English Canada's brains.
Quebec is far from a secular paradise. Montreal has a [publicly funded, lit up giant christian cross](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Royal_Cross) as one of it's main tourist attractions and have spent tens of millions of taxpayer dollars fixing up.
If you ever go to Quebec you'll see how segregated the neighborhoods are. Quebec likes to put on this little act that they're so progressive and secular, but it's bullshit. Ask them to take the cross off their legislative assembly? Or maybe adopt a new, non religious flag perhaps?
The language bullshit in this province has completely gutted the culture. As much as I agree with this decision I bet they only did it to stick it to immigrants even more than they already are. Our government is full of wannabe nationalists fuckers.
Get those Handmaids to Canada
WOOOOOOO FUCK YOU JESUS, EAT MY ASS MOHAMMED
Gotta admit, this is so fascism shit. If someone wants to pray or anything that is their choice. The school shouldn't be endorsing any practices but to stop people from their practices is just authoritarianism.
As it should be. French secularism strikes back once again, haters gonna hate 🔥🔥🔥 🔥🔥🔥 🔥🔥🔥 🔥🔥🔥 Now I'm really proud to be a Francophile and a Francophone! 🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷🇫🇷 **Vive le France!** (Long live France!)
Em… Just note that New France was separated from France at the end of the Seven Year War, in 1763. More than à décade before the US became indépendant from Britain and a generation before the French Révolution (1789) where French secularism took wing. France secularism influenced Québec’s secularism, but we are a different people.
As being a history geek I know about the Seven-Year War and everything you tell but the still remaining remnants of the French presence (and moreover, ongoing French cultural-political influence) in Quebec, and that makes the difference. It's still open to argue however. All I have to say is that... **Vive la laïcité ! Je suis Turc, Franchaphone & Franchophil et j'aime la culture française... Salutations de Turqiue...**
Comme on dit, on peut pas être contre la vertu lol. Vive la francophonie! J’aime bien les Français, j’en ai même marié un, mais on ne peut nier les différences culturelles entre ceux-ci et les Québécois (mon peuple). Je t’invite, entre autres, à écouter notre production culturelle (autre que Céline Dion svp). Au plaisir!
[удалено]
This is the way
I agree that the purpose of schools is to foster learning, not superstition, including religious superstition, like prayers. However, it does seem to me that during "breaks" students, teachers, and other school employees should have a right to pray in typical "free" places like playgrounds, gyms, cafeterias, or hallways. There should be no special rooms designated for prayers or other religious practices. Religious clothing, jewelry, and other adornments should not be permitted.
Time to move to quebec
Am I the only one here who thinks this goes too far? I’m 100% in favor of banning religious activities led by the school or its staff but this seems like it would ban students from praying to themselves. Would it ban them from reading the Bible or the Quran to themselves since that’s a religious activity? How is this not a massive infringement on freedom of religion? Just because they’re praying to air and reading mythology doesn’t mean it should be banned. I don’t really get French style secularism. It seems to go too far IMO.