Pour un Québec inclusif external
In brief, the Charter of Values would seek to ban government employees from wearing conspicuous religious symbols, in an attempt to guarantee the appearance of neutrality and impartiality of the State. However, the crucifix hanging above the Speaker’s chair in the National Assembly, the very chamber in which laws are passed, would remain.
That’s totally neutral, right?
From the outset, the proposed Charter of Values raises several issues which are, by their very nature, intractable ones. First, what constitutes a conspicuous symbol? Is the kirpan, a religious symbol that is invisible since worn under clothing, to be considered a conspicuous symbol? What about a crucifix worn under clothing? Is it permissible to wear a shirt with a cross printed on it? Will all scarves used to conceal hair be considered religious symbols? How long must a beard be in order to be considered a religious symbol? And who will establish the religious character of a piece of fabric?
Hmm, okay… But wait: “Minister Drainville incorrectly claims that there are no clear guidelines on dealing with religious accommodation" What? How does that even work?
…freedom of religion has been protected in a variety of ways in most democratic countries since the second half of the twentieth century. For instance, Quebec itself passed legislation on the subject even before the federal government did by adopting its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1975, seven years before the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was adopted. Moreover, the application of the Quebec Charter of Rights is broader than its federal counterpart, as it regulates the rapport between rights in the private sphere, which the Canadian Charter of Rights does not. This means that Quebec has historically chosen to give additional protection to vulnerable groups, including religious minorities.
The Quebec Charter of Rights is proof that Quebec hasn’t always been this bad. Why change now? Most of the immigrants I’ve met over the course of my lifetime told me they chose to come to this province because of how “open” people are here. Once again, why change now?
Banning religious symbols and namely, let’s face it, the veil worn by certain women in public violates a set of fundamental democratic principles linked to individual rights, the freedom of conscience and religion, and minority rights.
Exactly! What was said above couldn’t have been said any better. Where are our rights in all of this?
All this banning and hatred amongst others will only lead to one thing:
…the Charter of Values may result in a form of political xenophobia.