Religious accommodation or ‘accessory to sexism’? York student’s case stirs debate – The Globe and Mail

The request by a male student at York University in Toronto to be accommodated in his wish to not be in a study group where he would have to interact with female students has understandably attracted much controversy.

Accommodation is not an automatic right but has to be balanced against the rights of others and the broader interests of society, which include the overall mandate of universities to encourage learning, discussion and knowledge, irrespective of gender, race, sexual orientation etc. Professor Grayson made the right call in rejecting the request; unfortunately the Dean did not and too accommodating.

Seems to have ended up with the student accepting the Professor’s position, but still worrisome that Dr. Grayson was not backed up by the university administration:

The dean’s office told the student if he wished to drop the course, the fee would be refunded. But less than a week later, the student told Dr. Grayson he would “respect the final decision” to deny the request, was pleased with the way it had been handled, and has since met with his learning group. Even so, York has not changed its stand.

“What concerns me is that there’s an apparatus there that says this kind of thing’s okay, and you could have other students making similar requests,” Dr. Grayson said. “… There is room here for decision-making, and as far as I’m concerned, York has made the wrong decision.”

Religious accommodation or ‘accessory to sexism’? York student’s case stirs debate – The Globe and Mail.

And in Britain some similar debates about accommodation in UK university campuses for Muslim speakers who insist on separate seating for men and women (see Campus segregation: ‘religious freedom’ cannot be allowed to trump equality – Telegraph).

Agree that such accommodation in public universities is not reasonable as it undermines integration and equality:

All the more reason, then, that a fearless debate is encouraged to protect the fundamental values of a secular society. Teachings and practices in some faith schools that undermine women’s freedoms also ill prepare boys for the challenges of a modern mixed workplace. Issues such as forced arranged marriages, and domestic violence condoned by the extended family, have to be confronted, not because they are exclusive to any particular religious group, but because they are out of step with our civic life.

Segregation:our secular values need to be protected | Observer editorial | Comment is free | The Observer.

Anti-Semitism Should Not Be Criminalized « Commentary Magazine

Commentary magazine on the dangers of criminalizing hate-speech and antisemitism. It was always interesting to listen to the US delegation at the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance explain the US First Amendment, to general scepticism of the other countries, largely European but that like Canada, had hate speech laws or equivalent.

But in general, agree that antisemitism and other forms of racism and discrimination need to be defeated by society, and what is considered acceptable discourse, to have more widespread impact:

But those ideas–when they remain ideas, and not battlefield cries–should be defeated by a society, not outlawed by the government. Jailing anti-Semites for their opinions won’t reduce anti-Semitism. Incarceration can deter action, but it’s unlikely to alleviate grievance, and anyway it is an unjust method of changing minds. The same goes for the government banning “comedians” whose act offends basic notions of decency.

It’s also worth reminding the Jews of Europe that their religious beliefs contain ideas that the modern secular left consider offensive as well. They may find that a heavyhanded government enforcing a standard of righteous thought is on their side this time. If they think it will stay that way, then they, too, have unlearned the lessons of the past.

Anti-Semitism Should Not Be Criminalized « Commentary Magazine.

Religious freedom chief says he aids diplomats in supporting human rights abroad – The Globe and Mail

A few articles on the Office of Religious Freedom, under the direction of Ambassador, Andrew Bennett. The focus on religious freedom is understandable given the rise of religious intolerance and fundamentalism. Not surprisingly, given evidence of increased persecution as well as the Government’s political interests, is the emphasis on persecution of Christians.

Religious freedom ambassador not worried about ‘push back’ from abroad.

Religious freedom chief says he aids diplomats in supporting human rights abroad – The Globe and Mail.

Tiger Mom’s claim that cultures blessed with ‘triple package’ get ahead in America sparks uproar | National Post

Tiger Mom’s latest attempt to generate publicity and controversy, without a more sophisticated discussion of the factors that influence success. Clever packaging of  what she calls “the triple package” – superiority, insecurity and impulse control.

While it is no secret that different groups have overall different levels of economic success (see Table 5: Ethnic Community Specific Challenges and Table 6: Religious Group Specific Challenges), the explanations are more complex than a simple formula:

Asked about the controversy on Monday, sociologists and anthropologists said that despite its merits, the discussion of cultural difference inevitably becomes a minefield of assumptions, stereotypes and political correctness, especially when considered in the Western context.

“It should be possible to discuss cultural differences without evoking charges of racism,” said Morton Weinfeld, who holds the Chair in Canadian Ethnic Studies at McGill University.

“In my view, cultures are important and cultures can differ — otherwise, why are we discussing multiculturalism and reasonable accommodation?”

And yet that discussion quickly becomes “controversial” when groups as a whole are touted as successful, the way Ms. Chua and Mr. Rubenfeld present cultural groups in The Triple Package.

“The implication,” he said, “is that others aren’t.”

Kind of interesting that white Americans didn’t make the cut.

Tiger Mom’s claim that cultures blessed with ‘triple package’ get ahead in America sparks uproar | National Post.

What Islam-bashers Can Learn From ‘The West Wing’s Aaron Sorkin | Mehdi Hasan

A funny by pertinent piece by Mehdi Hasan, citing Baroness Warsi’s use of the West Wing in response to UK Independence Party former leader Lord Pearson citing some of more extreme verses from the Quran:

In the show, President Jed Bartlet takes on a Christian evangelical radio presenter who had called homosexuality an “abomination”. “I don’t say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr President. The Bible does,” she replies, citing Leviticus 18:22. To which Bartlet responds:

“I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I had you here. I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7… What would a good price for her be? My chief of staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or is it OK to call the police? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you?”

Makes the point that the issue is about fundamentalists and literalists, not religions per se.

What Islam-bashers Can Learn From ‘The West Wing’s Aaron Sorkin | Mehdi Hasan.

Why the world’s best and brightest struggle to find jobs in Canada – Business, Future of Jobs – Macleans.ca

Good overview of some of the reasons for the poor outcomes of recent immigrants, and the justification for the “expression of interest” system inspired by the Australian and New Zealand system. Like all major policy and program changes, will take a number of years following implementation before the results are known:

Critics contend that placing the short-term needs of employers at the heart of the skilled immigration system isn’t a cure-all, since the skills employers need today might not be the ones they’ll need in five or 10 years. But others warn the current system is far worse. “It’s an important discussion because we have a policy specifically designed to pick the immigrants that are most likely to succeed in the labour market,” says Oreopoulos, “and yet we’re completely failing them.”

More importantly, says Somerville, ensuring future generations of immigrants don’t end up underemployed and living in poverty will require a complete overhaul of what it means to immigrate to Canada. “It really means changing the mentality that Canada is entirely a land of opportunity,” she says. For Canadians and immigrants alike, that message will be hard to face.

Why the world’s best and brightest struggle to find jobs in Canada – Business, Future of Jobs – Macleans.ca.

Immigrants don’t turn ‘blue’ the moment they arrive – The Globe and Mail

A useful counterpoint to the thesis of John Ibbitson and Darrell Bricker in The Big Shift, by Michael Adams and Robin Brown, nuancing the Ibbitson-Bricker argument that Canadian immigrants and new Canadians are inherently more conservative politically:

But the story is more complicated.

The idea that migrant attitudes are defined by a focus on economic mobility is outdated. These days, middle-class Chinese and Indians who are solely focused on material gain are better off staying in their home countries. Today’s migrants are often people who voluntarily accept a decline in status and even income to move to Canada. Young professional immigrants who choose Canada are often seeking gains in quality of life more than standard of living. Focus group participants have told us they want to raise their children outside the hierarchies and pressures of their home countries. South Asian immigrants, in particular, are attracted to Canada’s multicultural society, believing they and their children are enriched through exposure to diverse cultures. Many of the Chinese immigrants we speak to are tired of “striving” and are trading off more opportunity in China for less stress in Canada.

One of the success stories of Canada’s model of immigration, citizenship and multiculturalism is that all parties engage ethnic communities. Minister Kenney is the best illustration of this approach, given his extensive and energetic outreach.

Unlike in Europe or the US, there is no xenophobic political party. Immigration-related debates are over policy and program approaches, not the fundamental view of Canada as a diverse, multicultural society.

Immigrants don’t turn ‘blue’ the moment they arrive – The Globe and Mail.

The reply by Bricker and Ibbitson based upon a wider survey and the election results, showing gains for the Conservatives in ridings with a large proportion of ethnic voters:

 You have to figure immigrants out to win elections 

The counterpart to both articles is of course Susan Delacourt’s Shopping for Votes, which downplays macro trends given that parties, and the Conservatives have done that particularly well, are micro-targeting in terms of policies and programs, treating voters more as consumers than with fixed party preferences.

Meet Joe/Jose/Youssef Canada

A good overview of Canada from the National Voluntary Survey. While not as accurate as the Census cancelled by the current government (higher cost for poorer quality data, less comparability with previous data), at the national and provincial levels captures the major trends.

Meet Joe/Jose/Youssef Canada.

When Tim’s is more popular than the Queen, how to tell Canada’s story? – The Globe and Mail

Jack Jedwab of the Association of Canadian Studies on recent polling data on elements of the national narrative. Not surprisingly, the Charter still holds first place, probably to the chagrin of the government which has downplayed the Charter and given greater prominence to the Monarchy. In Delacourt’s Shopping for Votes, there is a good section on how Tim Horton advertising captures citizenship better than the government (here).

But the broader challenge remains:

In a regionally diverse and demographically pluralist country like Canada it is no simple task to establish an official or common narrative. It is essential to promote ongoing discussion and debate about the Canadian story that highlights its historic achievements and past failings. That many of us arrive at different conclusions about the meaning of our shared past is the sign of a healthy democracy far more so than a problem for societal cohesion. As we approach the 150th anniversary of Canada we should seize the opportunity to embark upon a national conversation about the nation’s past so as to enhance collective knowledge about ourselves.

When Tim’s is more popular than the Queen, how to tell Canada’s story? – The Globe and Mail.

Freedom of conscience and the Charter of Quebec Values » Institute for Research on Public Policy

Good piece by Jocelyn Maclure of Université de Laval on the Charter and freedom of conscience:

The analogy with political symbols does not succeed in justifying restrictions on freedom of religion or equal access to job opportunities in the public and parapublic sectors. Our civil and political rights safeguard our basic political interests, while freedom of conscience and religion protects the religious and secular convictions and commitments that endow human life with meaning. We can rightly be proud that our democratic institutions properly uphold both these rights and freedoms.

Freedom of conscience and the Charter of Quebec Values » Institute for Research on Public Policy.