Quebec enacts legislation to prohibit government employees from wearing religious items at work. (attend, religion)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I happen to be in Quebec at the moment, spending a couple of weeks on a working vacation and I did this last summer as well. One thing I've picked up on at least in Quebec City is that some of this may well be an abreaction to the historically heavy-handed, overreaching influence of Roman Catholicism here. The locals seem to almost take joy in doing things like repurposing a church as a public library, and heavily advertise how the RC influence here is a mere whispery shadow of its former self that they have long since moved on from. The few people I've approached the subject with, seem to want to distance themselves from religion and reassure me that they're entirely secular. This is a very small sampling and I am seeing it from the curious perspective of a person used to all the religious bull**** in the US, so my perspective is more, rather than less, likely to be skewed or incomplete. But I offer it up for whatever it's worth. This law seems entirely consistent with my impression of Quebecois falling all over themselves to be non-religious.
I agree with others that the law is overreaching and will probably be negated at some point.
Exactly, see bold sentence. This is what happens when people take things to the extreme. The whole thing becomes a pseudo-religion with all kinds of silly restrictions.
I have also said that religion based on a deity is on its way out, more so in Canada and in Europe. The question is: Will the religion be replaced by a pseudo-religion that has inquisition type characteristics due to extreme views?
That is very much the impression I get about the feeling towards religion in the UK. If a church is turned into a wine -bar or apartments, we are mildly amused and not displeased. And nobody much regrets the disappearance of the religious or religion -inspired attempts at puritan censorship (longford -whitehouse/ the Life of Brian Boycott)- to be blunt about it.
As to how this measure turns out, I expect it to fail - for practical rather than ideal reasons. I am not persuaded by the protests that this is somehow selling democratic rule of law down the river. Or caving in to terrorism. Maybe it's my prejudices showing but I seem to hear the voices of Christians (cultural or actual) demanding that hijabs be stripped off at need but Cross- symbols be displayed whenever it is desired.
'Discriminatory? But Canada is a Christian country.'
See bold sentence: And what do the secular folks do? CENSORSHIP. Humans are so predictable (whether religious or atheists).
The wearing of crosses by public employees in positions of authority is not exempted from this law either.
As for displaying crosses all over the place, no new crosses or religious names have been bestowed upon anything "public" in Quebec in many decades.
Yes we have a large amount of "legacy" crosses and religious names as does most any western society. This is true of the rest of Canada as well. I mean crosses feature prominently on the coat of arms of Canada itself and the federal parliament.
And BTW, the cross that is above the speaker's chair in the Quebec national assembly *will* be removed as part of these measures, in keeping with the principle of church and state being kept separate.
Religion is dead. What is the point of going after old symbols of past ancient history? I am reminded of how they changed the name of Saint Petersburg to Leningrad. It is basically replacing one religion with another pseudo-religion that is not based on a deity.
Not everyone. Just the people who want to do certain specific jobs which exercise authority (in the name of the state) over their fellow citizens.
It is a slippery slope. The way people dress should not be regulated. MAO did this when he ordered that men and women dress in the exact same manner to avoid sexism.
A government which failed to consider all the possible ramifications of a potential law, would be unworthy of exercising power. A government which was aware that a potential law might trigger a violent reaction, and failed to prepare for that potential reaction, is unworthy of exercising power.
You describe a "Damn the consequences, we're gonna do whatever we like" government where the only virtue is toughness.
Oh, but the government did consider the potential impacts of the law, consult and hold hearings with interested parties and held committee debates on this bill. We're a functioning democracy up here, BTW. Rest assured that things are not run by a bunch of Inspector Clouseaus, if that's what you're thinking.
Methinks you're giving too much weight to (how many?) wackos who might lose it over something like this. As I said, that's never a sound basis for governmental decision-making.
And as I also noted, if ever someone/some people go(es) off the rails over this, it actually proves the point that perhaps a bit of a legislative "cold shower" when it comes to religious fervour might be a good thing, and not a bad one.
If you go and kill innocent people, or yourself, over this bill, is the fundamental problem really with this law, or is it with you?
Religion is dead. What is the point of going after old symbols of past ancient history? I am reminded of how they changed the name of Saint Petersburg to Leningrad. It is basically replacing one religion with another pseudo-religion that is not based on a deity.
First of all, it's not dead. In decline...yes. Dead...far from it.
Second, you're the one that constantly brought up religious history in your earlier posts. You have an awfully short memory.
It is a slippery slope. The way people dress should not be regulated. MAO did this when he ordered that men and women dress in the exact same manner to avoid sexism.
Thanks again for your opinion.
Do you live/vote in Quebec?
If you're American (educated guess) would you now like my opinion on gun control in your country? How about economic inequality between rich and poor?
If you're American (educated guess) would you now like my opinion on gun control in your country? How about economic inequality between rich and poor?
Acajack, this is a public forum. All participants are welcome to contribute to the discussion on every topic. You are more than welcome to discuss your view on gun control...just not in this thread.
Acajack, this is a public forum. All participants are welcome to contribute to the discussion on every topic. You are more than welcome to discuss your view on gun control...just not in this thread.
Are you a moderator?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
