Quebec’s “secularism” law set to ruin more lives as government announces proposed ban on public prayers

Quebec's secularism law has not only fuelled individual acts of hate but also energized white supremacist and anti-Muslim hate groups, who find validation in its anti-Muslim agenda. 

 
By Fareed Khan

In a disturbing escalation of its controversial secularism policies, the Quebec government, led by the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) under Premier François Legault, has announced plans to ban prayers in public spaces and extend Bill 21’s restrictions to public day cares. These measures build on the 2019 act, which prohibits public employees in positions of authority from wearing religious symbols, disproportionately targeting Muslims, Sikhs, and Jews who visibly express their faith. After six years of legal challenges in Quebec the law has finally reached the Supreme Court.

While Quebec defends these policies as promoting state neutrality, the manner in which the CAQ has implemented its interpretation of secularism, coupled with the anti-religious fervour apparent in the debate around the bill, demonstrates that the de facto state religion of Quebec is radical atheism, shrouded in the language of extremist secularism. Opponents of Bill 21 have no issue with the concept of the separation of church and state. But elevating atheistic principles to the level of state-sanctioned ideology in the guise of promoting secularism, and forcing public sector workers to be ambassadors of that government-sanctioned ideology contrary to their inherent beliefs, is no different than advocating an official state religion.

The actions of Legault’s government make it clear that not only is it against public sector workers showing visible expressions of their faith, but it is also in favour of those same workers presenting atheism as the official face of the Quebec government to the public as part of their jobs.

Quebec court’s refusal to grant injunction against “secularism” law during constitutional challenge shows systematic prejudice towards racialized religious minorities in Quebec’s justice system

By Fareed Khan

 
The refusal by a Quebec Superior Court judge to suspend application of certain sections of the Quebec government's "secularism" law (Bill 21), while a constitutional challenge works its way through the courts, shows how ingrained and pervasive the stereotypes at the heart of this issue truly are, and that the judge doesn’t accept the negative impact of the bill on those most affected.  It also shows how deeply rooted the biases against racialized religious minorities are not just in Quebec society broadly, but also within Quebec's justice system, which is supposed to protect the rights of minority communities.  What else would explain the decision to allow the continued enforcement of a law that violates the fundamental Charter guaranteed rights and civil liberties of Quebec's religious minorities, while there are legal challenges to the law underway?

 

 

A Superior Court judge in Montreal announced the decision to refuse the request for a stay of the law made by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) and the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) on July 18th.  In addition, the CCLA and NCCM had sought an injunction to freeze the two most controversial sections of the law, which included measures to ban the wearing of religious symbols and clothing by public school teachers and other public authority figures in the workplace.

It has been common practice, since the Charter of Rights became law, for laws that may be unconstitutional to be temporarily suspended as the legal challenges worked their way through the justice system and a final decision is rendered, usually by the Supreme Court.  Such actions are generally taken to prevent the application of a law that could be deemed unconstitutional from violating the rights of Canadians during the legal process.  The fact that the judge refused to impose the requested injunction, despite numerous legal precedents across Canada where such action has been taken in previous constitutional challenges, raises the question as to whether Quebec's legal system has been infected by the ideology of what can be termed “radical secularism”.

This refusal by the Quebec courts to impose the requested injunction sends a message that inequality, intolerance, exclusion, segregation and isolation of those who visibly practice their faith in Quebec are completely acceptable.  This is the sort of law that one expects to see under a fascist regime, because it is about targeting, isolating, demonizing and punishing visibly religious minority communities and stripping them of their rights.  The fact that this is happening in Canada is unbelievable.

There have been incidents in Quebec courts in the past where members of religious minorities have been told by judges to remove head coverings worn as an article of faith.  The most recent example involved Quebec court Judge Eliana Marengo who refused to allow a Muslim woman to appear in her court wearing a hijab.  Marengo's case is currently before Quebec's judicial council where a request has been made to remove her from the bench for her alleged misconduct.

While those opposed to Bill 21 may have lost this first skirmish the battle won't stop here, and an appeal of the Quebec court's decision is guaranteed, as is the fact that this will end up at the Supreme Court.  The diversity of Quebec communities that are opposed to this violation of fundamental rights by the Quebec government are determined in their conviction that this unjust law must be withdrawn.  Of course, the fly in the ointment is that while this law works its way up to the Supreme Court there are thousands of Quebecers whose rights will be violated and livelihoods threatened under this legislation.

The CCLA and NCCM are expected to lay out their next steps in response to the Quebec Superior Court's decision in the coming days and weeks before the Quebec Court of Appeal.  As rights activists wait for this there is growing moral support coming from provincial and municipal governments from outside Quebec, as well as from ordinary Canadians.  This is an indication about how much Canadians value defending the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the Quebec government stands alone in its bigoted attitude towards how Canadians practice their faith.

© 2019 The View From Here.  © 2019 Fareed Khan.  All rights reserved.

Passage of Quebec’s Bill 21 is a declaration of war by Francois Legault on people of faith, particularly Quebec’s racialized religious minorities

By Fareed Khan
 
Following a weekend of intense debate and voting in the Quebec National Assembly last week, Premier Francois Legault’s CAQ government passed its much criticized “secularism” bill (Bill 21), with Parti Quebecois members also supporting the legislation. Members of the National Assembly from the Liberal and Quebec Solidaire parties voted against the bill.

 

Passage of this bill is a dark day for Quebec. It is nothing short of a declaration of war on freedom of religion in the province, a blatant violation of the Charter rights of people of faith (particularly racialized, religious minorities), and an example of radical atheism shrouded in the language of extremist secularism.By passing this bill into law Legault has energized two groups of people in Quebec. He has energized bigots, racists, and those with a prejudice against the increasingly multicultural face of Quebec, who support this bill. But he has also energized anti-racism activists and those who support human rights and our charter rights to now carry the fight forward against what civil liberties and human rights lawyers have called an assault on fundamental freedoms.

Legault claims that this bill is about keeping Quebec society secular. However, this is not what this bill does. Secularism is the principle of the state refraining from declaring an official state religion. What this bill does is it enshrines in law the ideology that atheism is the state “religion”, and the government is going to impose it on anybody who decides to display their faith and work in the public sector.

Even more worrisome is a last minute government amendment to the bill that would create what the opposition Liberals likened to an anti-religious “secularism police force”, similar to the “religious police” found in countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran. The legislation itself is odious, but this amendment is inexcusable since it is the sort of thing that one finds in repressive authoritarian regimes which try to control the lives of their citizens.

Passage of the bill has elicited condemnation from various human rights and civil liberties groups, as well as from organizations representing the Muslim, Jewish and Sikh communities. In addition, a legal challenge to the law has already been filed in Quebec Superior Court by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) and the National Council of Canadian Muslims.

In the court filing the CCLA called the law “impermissibly vague, impossible to apply equally, and a blatant attack on religious freedom.” Both groups have also argued that the ban “violates religious freedoms and discriminates against a woman’s right to equal treatment in the workplace.”

The passage of Bill 21 is the latest sign of the rising tide of bigotry targeting religious minorities, and particularly Muslims, that has found deep roots in Quebec, including evidently among certain segments of the political class. This battle has been on-going since the appointment of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission on “reasonable accommodation” by Premier Jean Charest in 2007. However, until Legault and the CAQ came to power no government was willing to openly violate the fundamental religious freedoms of its minority faith communities, and override the rights guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by invoking the “notwithstanding” clause.

Premier Legault’s justification for this bill is that he has a mandate, and that the bill is supported by a majority of Quebecers. However, at one time a majority of people supported denying women the right to vote. At one time a majority supported denying rights to the LGBTQ community. There are many past examples of immoral and unjust laws that were once supported by the majority, but that didn’t make them right, and Bill 21 falls into the same category.

By declaring war on people of faith Premier Legault will find that he has bitten off more than he can chew, and will come to regret siding with the voices of prejudice and bigotry in Quebec rather than supporting those who call for upholding human rights and civil liberties.

© 2019 Fareed Khan.  © 2019 Fareed Khan.  All rights reserved.

The Bigots Are Coming Out of the Woodwork: "Charter of Values" Proposal Results in Racist Attacks

Updated September 18, 2013  1:55 PM

The first of what are expected to be many racist incidents have occurred in Chicoutimi and a suburb of Quebec City in the wake of last week's announcement by the Parti Quebecois of their intention to introduce a "Quebec Charter of Values".  The proposed charter would restrict the wearing of religious clothing or religious symbols by those working in publicly funded institutions.  The PQ says the proposed charter is to ensure that the government is remains completely secular in its delivery of services.  However, critics say that this initiative has nothing to do with secularism, is clearly directed at visible minority communities, and would be a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

These two incidents, which could be classified as hate crimes, are exactly what minority religious communities in Quebec feared and were predicted by their leaders when word of the values charter was first leaked.  There was an expectation that the introduction of the charter, the debate surrounding it, and support for the proposal by the PQ government, would embolden those who hold racist tendencies to act on them.

In the Chicoutimi incident on September 1st a mosque was vandalized and splattered with pig’s blood.  According to Saguenay police a letter was also left at the mosque, denouncing Islam and telling Muslims to "assimilate or go home. 

Related:

* Chicoutimi, Que., mosque vandalized
* Witness sought in Saguenay mosque vandalism

In the second incident which took place in early September in a shopping mall in the Quebec City suburb of Ste. Foy the Senouci family, a family of Algerian background, was accosted by a Francophone woman who demanded that Badia Senouci remove her headscarf (or hijab) and demanded that she change her religion.

"She told me, 'Madame, change your religion," Senouci said, according to CBC News. 

Senouci responded by saying that in Canada she had the freedom to practice her religion (as guaranteed by the Canadian Constitution).  The Francophone woman replied that soon the government would force her to remove her hijab.  The confrontation turned into an apparent assault when the Francophone woman spit in the face of Senouci's son as he stepped between the two women.  Her husband, Abdelmalek Mansouri has filed a complaint with the police and is waiting to see whether charges can be filed against the woman.
* * 

Related:
* Charter of values stirring up tensions in Quebec
* Woman says she was accosted in mall over her Islamic veil
* Debunking the PQ’s Charter of Myths 

These incidents prove a number of things.

The first is that those who predicted that incidents like these would occur if the PQ moved forward with its values charter proposal were correct.

The second is that those Quebecers with bigoted attitudes now feel justified in their bigotry and will more likely act on their prejudice using the values charter proposal to justify their actions.  As proof of the fact that bigots are coming out of the woodwork on this issue just look at the racist comments posted online in response to various news stories about the charter.  Sadly, this is just the tip of the iceberg and it is more than likely that postings of similar online comments will continue (and probably increase), and incidents like those described above will occur again as the debate on the PQ proposal continues.

Third, far from uniting Quebecers as Premier Pauline Marois laughably claims the debate on the values charter will deeply divide Quebec society and the scars from this will take a long time to heal.  Recent polls on public response to the PQ proposal show that Quebecers are splitting predominantly along English / French and urban / rural lines, and the debate is only in its early days.  As an example of how long it could take for Quebec to move beyond the divisions created by this debate and for wounds to heal, witness how long it has taken to get over the divisions that were created as a result of the last sovereignty referendum in 1995.

And lastly, even if the values charter doesn't get adopted the debate will send a message to Quebec's immigrant community that Quebec is not a welcoming province if you happen to be a visible or religious minority and will result in an exodus of people from that province to the detriment of the Quebec economy.  Furthermore, it would tell prospective immigrants (particularly visible and religious minorities) that settling in Quebec is a risky proposition.  This would cripple the Quebec government's immigration strategy which tries to target immigrants who originate from French speaking countries which tend to be predominantly Muslim.

It has become obvious in the short time since the values charter proposal was first leaked and then made public that Pauline Marois and the Parti Quebecois are willing to sink to new depths of negativity and opportunism to resurrect their political brand and win a majority government.  The people that the PQ are catering to with their charter proposal live predominantly in the Quebec hinterland, which is primarily Francophone, and clearly anti-immigrant, if the polls are to be believed.  Those who are opposed to the proposal live primarily in the Montreal region and Quebec's urbanized areas -- the places where most immigrants settle, which generate most of Quebec's economic output, and the places which would be most impacted if the proposal became law.  It seems that in an effort to achieve a majority government Marois and the PQ are willing to sacrifice social harmony and possible economic stability.

Common sense would dictate that to maintain Quebec's social harmony and for the sake of the province's economy it would be better for Marois to bury the charter of values proposal and try another strategy.  But it seems that she and the PQ have thrown common sense out the window and adopted an approach that would be perfectly acceptable in certain European countries where nationalist, xenophobic parties have achieved political success.  If this is the sort of political opportunism and social divisiveness that the PQ is willing to adopt then we have entered a new era of politics in this country -- one where Canada's successful yet imperfect  experiment in tolerance and acceptance is abandoned by politicians for the sake of political expediency, one where the rights of minorities can be sacrificed and the support of bigots is courted in order to get elected, one where the end justifies the means. 

This is not the country that most Canadians have seen evolve into an international role model of diversity and social harmony, the country that people from around the world have chosen to call home, the country that my parents chose to settle in, a country where there is no place for the perversity of the sort of politics being practiced in Quebec by Pauline Marois and the PQ. 

© The View From Here.  All Rights Reserved.

Racist Intent of PQ "Charter of Values" Becomes More Evident

If the racist intent of the PQs values charter wasn't evident before it becomes more evident with each passing day.

In response to an ad by an Ontario hospital directed at the minority health professionals who would be targetted by the values charter, the PQ put out its own ad.  The intent of the ad is clear. If you're a person of faith and your faith requires you to wear something as part of that faith then you're not wanted in Quebec's health care system (or any other publicly funded institution for that matter) 

Related: Quebec responds to Ontario doctor ad by advertising to racist doctors

Whoever crafted the PQ ad clearly wasn't firing on all cylinders.  Because if you read between the lines what the ad implies is that the PQ government doesn't care whether you have the proper qualifications to work in Quebec's health care system, what they care about is what you wear.  If I were a resident of Quebec and a user of their health care system I would be seriously worried about the quality of the health care professionals tending to my needs in the future under the values charter.

The true intent of  the PQ's political objectives were further revealed when it was reported that the lead PQ minister on the charter issue, Bernard Drainville, was pushing the private sector to adopt its proposed charter of values as well. 

© 2013 Pascal/Montreal Gazette.

As time passes the blatantly racist nature of the PQ's charter of values and the obscene, xenophobic and desperate political strategy behind it will become clearer to all Canadians.  It is my hope that Canadians of good conscience (whether Francophone or Anglophone) will respond forcefully to a political strategy that will only stoke the fires of racism and give a platform to the bigots within Quebec society to peddle their poison.

And as the debate on this issue continues to evolve, Quebecer's must keep the following question foremost in their mind, if the PQ are willing to take away the rights of one group of minorities now in their lust for power, then which minority will they go after next to achieve their political objectives?

© F. Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

Quebec's Proposed "Charter of Values" is Just Official Bigotry With a Fancy Title

Updated September 11, 2013  6:27 PM

© 2013 Pascal/Montreal Gazette.

August 28, 2013 -- The recent admission by the government of Quebec that they would introduce a "Charter of Values" which would ban the wearing of religious attire or symbols by employees of the provincial government and publicly funded institutions has, understandably, elicited a very emotional response.  The criticism of the proposal by groups representing various faiths has been very vocal.  Disturbingly, so has support of the proposal by a significant segment of the population in Quebec.

For people of various faiths whether to wear a visible symbol of their faith is (for the most part) a personal choice.  It is a choice that is protected under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms under the freedom of religion clause.  The proposal by the Parti Quebecois government would limit that right and thereby discriminate against people of any faith where the wearing of religious attire or symbols is an article of those faiths.

Orthodox Sikh men are mandated by their religion to wear certain articles as a practice of their faith, one of them being a turban.  For Orthodox Jews it is the same, they are mandated by their interpretation of their faith to wear certain visible articles of clothing.  The same is the case for conservative Jewish men who wear a kipa on their head.  For many Catholics and Christians of other denominations the wearing of a crucifix is a personal article of faith.  And with some Muslim women the wearing of the hijab to cover their hair is believed to be a religious obligation.  In none of these cases does the wearing of these articles of faith impose the faith of the individual wearing them on others.  But for some people seeing others wearing visible symbols of their faith is offensive or an affront and these people want these practices banned despite constitutional protections.

History is filled with instances where the dominant faith within a society took exception to the religious practices of the minorities living among them because they felt offended by or feared in some way the religious practices of the minorities, or just because the religious minorities were different. These perceived offences and fears led to atrocities committed in the name of the dominant faiths in societies throughout history, and people of all faiths have been guilty of committing atrocities against people of minority faiths.  The most recent atrocities occurred in the 1990s during the Yugoslav War which saw the break-up of the former Yugoslavia.  The conflict resulted in genocide and atrocities not seen in Europe on this scale since World War II.

One would think that in a politically developed and well-educated country like Canada attempting to suppress the religious practices of a minority would be a relic of history.  But it seems that bigotry and fear of "the other" still pervades certain segments of the population, and particularly so in Quebec which has a documented history of xenophobia.  The Parti Quebecois proposal to introduce a Charter of Values is an effort by that party (which is in a minority government situation) to use fear of "the other" to cater to a bigoted minority in order to gain their votes at the next Quebec election in the hope of winning a majority.

Under the Canadian Constitution governments are supposed to be neutral when it comes to religion.  What that means is that there is to be no state mandated religion, that governments cannot officially advocate a particular faith, and governments cannot prevent citizens from practicing their faith.  By extension, it also means that governments cannot impose their view of neutrality of faith on an individual in their personal religious practices, even if those practices require the wearing of religious attire or symbols that a broad segment of the public may find offensive (for whatever reason).

In the 19th and first half of the 20th century discrimination against Catholics was seen as acceptable in Protestant Canada.  From Confederation well into the 20th century racism against the Chinese (who came to work on the building of our railways) was seen as acceptable.  In another time Canadian public opinion and apathy accepted institutional and societal racism against Blacks, Jews and Canada's First Nations people.  Within our lifetime it was public opinion and apathy which permitted institutional and societal discrimination against gays and lesbians.  But in all these instances Canada became less intolerant and more accepting of people's differences over time, and realized the immorality of the bigoted and racist attitudes of the past.  We became a more inclusive and freer society with most people believing that we are the better for it.  This has made Canada a country to which many around the world want to immigrate.  If the Quebec government's proposal is implemented, that image will be severely tarnished and Canada will be seen as a less tolerant and less welcoming society.

There is a famous poem attributed to German pastor and theologian Martin Niemöller about the apathy of the German people following the Nazis' rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.  He did not speak out when the purges began, but when Hitler insisted on the supremacy of the state over religion, Niemöller became disillusioned and became the leader of a group opposed to Hitler.  For this offence he was arrested and interred in a concentration camp until the end of World War II.

There are various iterations of the poem but they all follow a similar pattern.  Here is one version of that poem:

First they came for the communists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the Jews,

and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,

and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,

and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me,

and by that time there was no one left to speak up.

It has been proven time and again that people fail to learn from history.  And if the PQ proposal goes forward this will be another occasion where the lessons of the history of discrimination and bigotry against minorities, and the pain and suffering it caused, will be forgotten.

The people who support the PQ proposal are obviously not students of history.  What they don't understand is that if the Quebec government implements its Charter of Values as it has been proposed it will be the first step on a slippery slope and will turn the clock back on the progress that has been made with Canadian society's acceptance of differences and diversity.  If it is accepted it will take us back to a dark place in our history where institutional intolerance against minorities was acceptable.  If the proposal is implemented it will beg the question, if this government is willing to violate the rights and freedoms of religious minorities now, then which minority rights will they target next?

© F. Khan.  All Rights Reserved.