[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Barrister]

You're thinking too literally. I'm talking about freeing your mind from all that religious nonsense.

No, I think you're not thinking realistically.

When faced with a law that says you must choose between your faith and your job, a great many people will choose their faith over their job.

Or so I theorize.  I guess we'll see what happens.

[Admiral Yi]

It would be interesting to see how that law would treat, say, an Amish person.

[crazy canuck]

Actually, if you listen to it Wernick consistently says he only wants to explore what can be done legitimately.  My view of the former minister is significantly diminished by her act of recording that conversation.  If she was doing it with her AG hat on, there is a breach of ethics argument which could be made.

Turns out others thought the same. Though I share BBs surprise that Philpott was ousted also.

Too bad the Conservatives are going all out Trumpist on climate change.

[crazy canuck]

You're thinking too literally. I'm talking about freeing your mind from all that religious nonsense.

No, I think you're not thinking realistically.

When faced with a law that says you must choose between your faith and your job, a great many people will choose their faith over their job.

Or so I theorize.  I guess we'll see what happens.

In every case I have seen where the employer has successfully argued the requirement to remove a religious symbol is a BFOR the employee has remained a in their job.

[Malthus]

That's not what Grey Fox is saying. But I would argue that forbidding religious expression of any kind would be quite freeing to lots and lots of people.

Even assuming for the sake of argument that lack of choice could lead to more freedom, forbidding expression of religious symbolism that is also a badge of ethnic identity is likely, human nature being what it is, to make people adhere even more to their ancestral symbols.

[Zoupa]

That's probably true in some cases yeah. Religion is a straightjacket for the brain in most religious people worldwide. I yearn for a global scientocracy.

[Grey Fox]

That's not what Grey Fox is saying. But I would argue that forbidding religious expression of any kind would be quite freeing to lots and lots of people.

How so?

My feeling is that such a law would cause an awful lot of non-Christian people who hold religious views to quit their government jobs,

or dial back their religious views? The sensible thing to do in a secular liberal society.

[Malthus]

That's probably true in some cases yeah. Religion is a straightjacket for the brain in most religious people worldwide. I yearn for a global scientocracy.

To my mind, the issue is not religion per se, but the habit of mind that takes religion and makes of it an unquestioned badge of identity and the answer to all things--a "true belief".

This is not something religion alone does. In a global scientocracy, people would probably take other things - national identity, racial identity, adherence to some economic or social theory such as communism in the 20th century - and make of them a 'true belief', just as some people do with religion. I would say nationalism, ethnic supremacy and communism have done more harm than religion has over the past century, as they have had more power in the modern world.

On the other hand, not all religious people are 'true believers' in that sense. Some religions are more a matter of tribal identity, providing ethical guidance while allowing for the existence of other tribal identities - for example, the Sikhs. They do not generally attempt to claim that only Sikhism holds all the answers, or force everyone to become Sikh.   

[Malthus]

or dial back their religious views? The sensible thing to do in a secular liberal society.

The law does nothing to dial back religious views, though. Merely to prohibit persons in authority from expressing visible outward religious symbols.

Given that most people who actually express visible outward symbols are members of minority groups - specifically, Sikhs (turbans), certain sects of Jews (kippahs),  and Muslims (headscarves etc.), the law will have the effect of discouraging members of these minorities from undertaking those positions of authority.

[Grey Fox]

or dial back their religious views? The sensible thing to do in a secular liberal society.

The law does nothing to dial back religious views, though. Merely to prohibit persons in authority from expressing visible outward religious symbols.

Given that most people who actually express visible outward symbols are members of minority groups - specifically, Sikhs (turbans), certain sects of Jews (kippahs),  and Muslims (headscarves etc.), the law will have the effect of discouraging members of these minorities from undertaking those positions of authority.

In time, it will. 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants.

So be it. Altho, I am in agreement with Viper. The government is badly defining what positions to include/exclude. Cops are fine, Teachers are not.

[Monoriu]

I never felt the need to display any symbols, either in Canada or HK.

[Zoupa]

Interesting article in the National Post

National Post: Barbara Kay: What the anglo media misses about Quebec's religious law.
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-what-the-anglo-media-misses-about-quebecs-religious-law

[viper37]

It would be interesting to see how that law would treat, say, an Amish person.

Amish can't drive nor use bus, I believe.

[viper37]

The law does nothing to dial back religious views, though. Merely to prohibit persons in authority from expressing visible outward religious symbols.

technically, all religious symbols, visible or otherwise.
But since there is no strip search, you could easily hide a cross necklace under your shirt.  Or a star.  Or a crescent moon.  Or a kirpan under your fur coat for winter.

I am curious as to how this bill will evolve in the 2nd and 3rd reading.  Liberal Party and Québec Solidaire are both oppose to any kind of restrictions.  The PQ wants more than the CAQ is offering (notably, the removal from the cursus of the "Ethics and religion" class while the CAQ simply wants some of its content to change).

[viper37]

Too bad the Conservatives are going all out Trumpist on climate change.

I keep thinking they will finally see the ligth on this issue...

But it's not like Trudeau has any plan, or is doing anything more than the Harper government did.
Oh, yeah, that's right, the government is going to tax us, than give back the money.

A carbon tax in itself does not solve anything.  Quebec has had a "green fund" for a few years, a special tax on gaz and oil of 3 cents a liter.  I think it applies to propane gaz too, I'm not sure.

Anyway.  That was a waste of money.  We pay taxes to subsidize big corporations for projects that have nothing to do with reducing ghg emissions.  It will be the same with Trudeau's tax.