• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Quebec’s Bill 21, Now a Law, Foolishly Bans Religious Symbols for State Workers

Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
A Vestigial Mote said:
They are at least showing off to a God they think exists, unless, as I said, they wear it only for themselves. How can you deny this?
Click to expand...
Showing off isn't wearing a simple piece of garb. For them, its an act of piety and devotion, not hubris and vanity (and if you assume their religion isnt true then it's assumed they pretty much are really doing it for themselves anyways).
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Skwim said:
Last night, Quebec’s government passed Bill 21, which will stop certain government workers — including cops and teachers — from wearing religious symbols like hijabs and yarmulkes and turbans “in order to protect Quebec’s secular society.” The final vote was 73-35.

Bill 21 also says people who use certain government services can’t wear any religious symbols either, which essentially means Muslim women with face veils won’t be allowed to use buses.

"It’s a move that trounces on religious freedom in the name of religious neutrality and creates far more problems than it solves.

The law, which “grandfathers in” whatever people wear now while prohibiting new hires and people in new positions from wearing the same religious symbols, was championed by premier François Legault. Critics say it will effectively block Sikhs, Muslims, Jews, and other people who are required by their faith to wear certain symbols from advancing in their careers or taking on these government jobs.

The law also includes a clause that immunizes it from legal action… which is a thing they can do.

The notwithstanding clause, officially called Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, allows provincial or federal authorities to override certain sections of the charter for a period of five years.
…
“It’s not a small thing. It’s a big decision. But sometimes, in order to protect collective rights, we have to use it. I think we have to protect our collective identity,” Legault said, pointing out the clause has been invoked numerous times by different premiers.

“To separate religion and politics is important in Quebec.”​
source and more​
Click to expand...
What happens when there are no ironclad rights for the people.
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
a
Altfish said:
81DuGkhZ4rL._UX385_.jpg
Click to expand...
A ragged T shirt with a big zero on it.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
ChristineM said:
This has got me stumped... What religious symbols do atheists wear?
Click to expand...
I could see an atheist from Turkey wanting to wear a turbin, which has religious meaning for some. Or supose someone just likes the shape of a cross and put no religious meaning on it, it is still a religious symbol.
 
A Vestigial Mote

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Shadow Wolf said:
Showing off isn't wearing a simple piece of garb. For them, its an act of piety and devotion, not hubris and vanity (and if you assume their religion isnt true then it's assumed they pretty much are really doing it for themselves anyways).
Click to expand...

I don't see much of a difference. I'm not claiming it is vain or done with hubris... but I still insist that it is "showing off" to God that you have devoted yourself, or that you want Him to know you respect Him, or you are doing it to praise Him. It is flaunting it for the purposes of letting God know that you thought of Him.

It's the same reason people dress up when going out on a date, or dress up for a job interview. I know people label it under the heading "piety" or "devotion" or "respect", but it doesn't change the fundamental reasoning or reasons. You want God to "see" it - done. End of story. Desiring someone see something you're doing/wearing is "showing off" or flaunting. Again - I can't see any real difference just because it is religious in nature. People just have certain expectations about religious flaunting and ascribe it a sense of "sacredness" that I don't believe it can be argued warrants my being forbidden to point out that they are flaunting their worship to God or those around them.

And I understand completely that, as a non-believer, everyone would be doing all of these things "for themselves" (unless they were doing it for the attention of those around them)... but their mindset is what I am talking about... not my opinion.
 
Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
A Vestigial Mote said:
I don't see much of a difference. I'm not claiming it is vain or done with hubris... but I still insist that it is "showing off" to God that you have devoted yourself, or that you want Him to know you respect Him, or you are doing it to praise Him. It is flaunting it for the purposes of letting God know that you thought of Him.
Click to expand...
Often times its a mandate to wear certain garb. They aren't showing off anything but doing what they are instructed to. And its a very human thing to display signs of group identity.
 
A Vestigial Mote

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Shadow Wolf said:
Often times its a mandate to wear certain garb. They aren't showing off anything but doing what they are instructed to. And its a very human thing to display signs of group identity.
Click to expand...
Again, I already covered that ground. They are still attempting to make sure that God knows they are "keeping up" with His demands - still flaunting it so that He knows. And group identity is another form of flaunting. If you want to recognize people of your "kind" and you want them to recognize you... you flaunt what you are.

Again, I think you're just stuck thinking that certain things disqualify wearing or doing something with intent to be seen from being called "flaunting." That those things are profound, or sacred, or of some inherent "good" nature. I recognize no such distinctions. You wear it or do it so that someone you think is watching can see you? You're flaunting it.
 
Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
A Vestigial Mote said:
still flaunting it
Click to expand...
Here is what flaunt actually means:
flaunt
/flônt,flänt/
verb
display (something) ostentatiously, especially in order to provoke envy or admiration or to show defiance.
So, again, if you see a yarmulke and think "he's flaunting his religion," that's all on you because he's not flaunting it.
 
ChristineM

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
lostwanderingsoul said:
I could see an atheist from Turkey wanting to wear a turbin, which has religious meaning for some. Or supose someone just likes the shape of a cross and put no religious meaning on it, it is still a religious symbol.
Click to expand...

An atheist from Turkey in a turban.. now that would be a sight to see.

Actually a turban is not a religious symbol but a covering for a religious symbol.

And a cross is not necessarily a religious symbol anyway,
 
sun rise

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
US Government approved symbols on headstones - there is infinity and a humanist one:

073ffb86cab61a74c7bdd513bb725856.png
 
Evangelicalhumanist

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Skwim said:

“To separate religion and politics is important in Quebec.”​
Click to expand...
I think that one should look at that one quote from the OP, and then give a little thought to the history of Quebec.

Up until the 1960s, much of what happened in Quebec, especially in medicine and social programs, was the strict purview of the Catholic Church. As a result, Quebec often struggled to keep with the rest of Canada (aka TROC), economically, socially, in matters of education, and quite a bit more. Even much economic activity, especially around the province's natural resources, were developed and controlled by foreign investors.

This led to something that we now refer to as "The Quiet Revolution," or "La Révolution Tranquille" which has put the province on quite a resolute and increasingly popular path to complete secularization.

I'm not arguing for the bill, here, I'm merely trying to give some perspective on the political background of the province that has adopted the bill. Quebec, for that reason, would not be a particularly good place for Muslims, for example, to start pressing for Shariah Law. Snowballs have significantly more chance of survival in Hell than that would.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
ChristineM said:
An atheist from Turkey in a turban.. now that would be a sight to see.

Actually a turban is not a religious symbol but a covering for a religious symbol.

And a cross is not necessarily a religious symbol anyway,
Click to expand...
I bet if someone wore a cross they would be told to remove it.
 
The Hammer

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
No political figure should advertise their faith or lack thereof as a part of their campaign or while in public office. Does this only include outerwear (lapel pins, etc)? And not hidden jewelry?

I mean, good luck finding what I got pierced for the Gods.
 
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
The Hammer said:
No political figure should advertise their faith or lack thereof as a part of their campaign or while in public office. Does this only include outerwear (lapel pins, etc)? And not hidden jewelry?

I mean, good luck finding what I got pierced for the Gods.
Click to expand...
What about Mormons who have special underwear? Will they have to take it off?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top