[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[dps]

\Religious zeal&fanatism needs to be curbed.  Otherwise, we end up like the US, with religion creeping into politics.  Just like the 50s here.

.

Yeah, it's a good thing religion never creeped into politics here before about 1980.  Why, if it had, we might have had Negro ministers pushing for civil rights in the 50s and 60s!  Outrageous!  We should never let religion affect our laws like that!

The separation of church and state is written in your goddamn constitution. Stop being stupid. Those black ministers weren't pushing for more religious influence on politics, they were pushing for civil rights.

Yes, but they certainly mobilized religious sentiment to push the civil rights agenda. 

[Zoupa]

It would have happened through community leaders with or without ministers.

[Razgovory]

It would have happened through community leaders with or without ministers.

Why would you think that?  Ministers were the most respected people in Black society and emphasizing a shared religion convinced many whites that they had much in common with African-Americans.  They made much more progress than more secular organizations like the NAACP.

[Valmy]

It would have happened through community leaders with or without ministers.

Why would you think that?  Ministers were the most respected people in Black society and emphasizing a shared religion convinced many whites that they had much in common with African-Americans.  They made much more progress than more secular organizations like the NAACP.

Ok look the ministers played a big role but labor leaders like ED Nixon and Bayard Rustin also played a huge role. This kind of bullshit pisses me off. You are lying and exaggerating and twisting history to score points against Zoupa. STFU. It is very disrespectful to the combined efforts of many who contributed to that effort.

[dps]

It would have happened through community leaders with or without ministers.

Why would you think that?  Ministers were the most respected people in Black society and emphasizing a shared religion convinced many whites that they had much in common with African-Americans.  They made much more progress than more secular organizations like the NAACP.

Ok look the ministers played a big role but labor leaders like ED Nixon and Bayard Rustin also played a huge role. This kind of bullshit pisses me off. You are lying and exaggerating and twisting history to score points against Zoupa. STFU. It is very disrespectful to the combined efforts of many who contributed to that effort.

Frankly, I find the stance Zoupa and GF take on freedom of religion to be vile, so I won't deny I want to score points against them, but I do honestly think that the civil rights movement was, at its core, a moral crusade.  Of course that doesn't mean that everyone involved was a minister or motivated by moral concerns, and obviously even ministers involved with the movement had practical as well as moral motivations.  But IMO a big part of the reason the civil rights movement has been able to accomplish as much as it has is because people like Dr. King convinced the majority of whites that segregation was morally wrong.

[Razgovory]

It would have happened through community leaders with or without ministers.

Why would you think that?  Ministers were the most respected people in Black society and emphasizing a shared religion convinced many whites that they had much in common with African-Americans.  They made much more progress than more secular organizations like the NAACP.

Ok look the ministers played a big role but labor leaders like ED Nixon and Bayard Rustin also played a huge role. This kind of bullshit pisses me off. You are lying and exaggerating and twisting history to score points against Zoupa. STFU. It is very disrespectful to the combined efforts of many who contributed to that effort.

  I'm not lying or exaggerating.  By emphasizing shared religion background civil rights leaders were able to reduce the "otherness" of Black Americans.  White Americans weren't helping blacks out of economic self-interest.  Black equal rights was detrimental to most whites (uh, by the way do you capitalize words for ethnicity?  I can't remember), white workers would have to compete more with black workers who were just as capable.  When balancing the scales one side goes up and the other down.  Reminding whites of the similarities they had with blacks makes that much easier.

[garbon]

I don't think that's a cultural position,

It is.

Alberta is fine with letting Sikh drive a motorcycle without a helmet, for cultural reasons.

In Quebec, it is still not ok, but there aren't that many Sikhs here.  Problems should be solved before they happen.

Freedom is constrained in many ways.  There is no true societal libertarian society out there.  Religious zeal&fanatism needs to be curbed.  Otherwise, we end up like the US, with religion creeping into politics.  Just like the 50s here.

Maybe Québec should focus on the problems it currently has before trying to create solutions for 'problems' that haven't occurred?

[Zoupa]

It would have happened through community leaders with or without ministers.

Why would you think that?  Ministers were the most respected people in Black society and emphasizing a shared religion convinced many whites that they had much in common with African-Americans.  They made much more progress than more secular organizations like the NAACP.

Ok look the ministers played a big role but labor leaders like ED Nixon and Bayard Rustin also played a huge role. This kind of bullshit pisses me off. You are lying and exaggerating and twisting history to score points against Zoupa. STFU. It is very disrespectful to the combined efforts of many who contributed to that effort.

Frankly, I find the stance Zoupa and GF take on freedom of religion to be vile, so I won't deny I want to score points against them, but I do honestly think that the civil rights movement was, at its core, a moral crusade.  Of course that doesn't mean that everyone involved was a minister or motivated by moral concerns, and obviously even ministers involved with the movement had practical as well as moral motivations.  But IMO a big part of the reason the civil rights movement has been able to accomplish as much as it has is because people like Dr. King convinced the majority of whites that segregation was morally wrong.

Vile? Yikes.

I'll give you the gist of the secular, France/francophone, 1789 revolution-inspired view. Religion is private. In France/Quebec, it never comes up in conversation compared to when I've been to the US like "what church do you go to?", "my dad was catholic but my mom's a Quaker. What about your folks?". Those kinds of questions are uncomfortable/rude to us. I have friends that are jewish and only found out years and years after knowing them when I visited their parents and they had family photos with a kippa on for some ceremony I don't remember the name of.

Personally, I find religion stupid, and people that take religion seriously stupid too. I'm "culturally" catholic, so when my mom drags us to church for christmas I don't bitch and moan and refuse to go. I'll just sit quietly and wait it out, but I won't take communion for example. I'd feel hypocritical, even though I'm baptized, did my 1st communion and confirmation.

It's just a private thing and I think most French/Qc folks feel the same way. Oex could probably write a better distillation than I can.

[viper37]

but I do honestly think that the civil rights movement was, at its core, a moral crusade. 

and moral absolutely means it has to be religious, because without religion, there is no moral?

I disagree with your stance.  I respect that you disagree with me and others on the issue, but I will not accept that argument that anything moral has to be religious at its core.

Now, the civil rights debate in the US isn't my forte, so I'll pass on the rest of this nice little chat.

Have a good day dps

[Barrister]

It's just a private thing and I think most French/Qc folks feel the same way. Oex could probably write a better distillation than I can.

But that's fine Zoups.  I understand exactly what you mean.

But what about the people (often immigrants) who don't feel that way?  To whom belonging to a religion is important?  Must they be forced to hide their religion just so the majority feels more comfortable?

[Zoupa]

It's just a private thing and I think most French/Qc folks feel the same way. Oex could probably write a better distillation than I can.

But that's fine Zoups.  I understand exactly what you mean.

But what about the people (often immigrants) who don't feel that way?  To whom belonging to a religion is important?  Must they be forced to hide their religion just so the majority feels more comfortable?

Yeah, in certain cases. But it's more than comfort, it's also that any state official should abstain from showing religious signs. It'd feel doubly weird to get stopped by a cop wearing a kippa or a judge wearing a cross. It doesn't belong there.

[dps]

If you're forcing people to hide their faith and only practice it in public, the next step is to root out the people who practice religion in secret.  You could call it, I don't know, the Inquisition.

[Admiral Yi]

I suppose building a rational for a law on the fact that an act makes others uncomfortable is not totally unreasonable.  Hate speech laws for example are similarly justified.

[dps]

I suppose building a rational for a law on the fact that an act makes others uncomfortable is not totally unreasonable.  Hate speech laws for example are similarly justified.

We have a constitutional right in the US to the free practice of religion, but no constitutional right to not being made uncomfortable in social situations.  That seems appropriate to me.  If they feel different in France and Quebec, that's their loss.

[Admiral Yi]

We have a constitutional right in the US to the free practice of religion, but no constitutional right to not being made uncomfortable in social situations.  That seems appropriate to me.  If they feel different in France and Quebec, that's their loss.

Sure, this law would not fly in the US.  But I'm wondering out loud if this law is reasonable in a place without a similar religious protection.