Charte des valeurs québécoises – Round-up

On the morning the draft Charte will be revealed, the usual round-up of articles. While it appears the main direction has not changed – banning religious signs in all government-funded workplaces, implementation periods and renewal derogations will be allowed. Another layer of bureaucracy, another way to keep the politique identitaire a public issue, and another way for Quebec to avoid coming to terms with diversity, interculturalisme, and expressions of faith. And sad that the government is not going back to the more nuanced and moderate laïcité ouverte of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission.

However, delaying implementation of a bad law does not make it good.

Charte des valeurs québécoises – À peine connue, déjà contestée | Le Devoir.

Le mieux et le bien

Parti Québécois to unveil secular charter Tuesday

And a naive article on the implications for Charter challenges:

Vers des exceptions à la Charte des valeurs

And divisions among the membership of one of the teacher’s unions, the Fédération autonome de l’enseignement (FAE), not surprising but illustrative of Québec public opinion:

Laïcité – La position de la FAE décriée

An opinion piece by Lucia Ferretti, largely favourable to the proposed approach, and noting how embedded religion is in society, whether the schooling system in Québec (government-financed faith-based schools unlike Ontario, NGOs). He neglects the human rights element of freedom of religion, which includes, of course, Catholics in Québec, whether secularized or traditional, whether progressive or traditional (like other religions):

Charte des valeurs québécoises – Séparation oui, neutralité, non

And a good piece by Bruce Anderson on how motives, and how they are perceived, can help a policy initiative sink or swim:

 Bruce Anderson: For Marois’s charter, voters will judge the motives 

And some good profiles in the Globe from a range of Québécois:

Five Quebeckers weigh in on the proposed secular charter

Sheema Khan reinforces her ongoing message:

Institutions should reflect local best practices, where discourse, debate and inclusion of stakeholders set the tone. Currently, most Muslim institutions are replicas of their foreign counterparts, with a top-down approach in which the voices of women and youth are often absent.

We need intelligent, dispassionate discussions of how Western principles, such as gender equality, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression and critical inquiry, meld with overarching Islamic principles.

Civic engagement will also be paramount for future integration, as Muslims participate in wider policy issues, such as the environment, energy security, aboriginal self-assertion and, yes, Quebec identity.

In classical Islamic thought, the overriding principle of the faith was understood to be mercy. It was manifest by the intent to do good to others, to bring benefit to the wider society and to prevent harm. It is a principle worth resurrecting as Muslims establish roots here.

Reconciling Muslim practices with Western principles

Feds take aim at violence against Muslim women | Toronto Sun

While I am not a great fan of changing vocabulary – sometimes it is better to use existing words like “honour killings” that are used in the community and force a discussion about why such “honour” is not honourable than finding a technically neutral term like femicide. However, the organization involved, The Canadian Council of Muslim Women, has a good track record in such initiatives, and work in this area is warranted.

Feds take aim at violence against Muslim women | Canada | News | Toronto Sun.

Why it’s been a good year for religion – The Globe and Mail

An opinion piece by Yoni Goldstein in the Globe on some of the developments towards more inclusive faith-based approaches in Judaism, Christianity, and, while evidence is mixed, Islam. Change is slow and gradual, but some of the examples within Judaism, and the comments of the new Pope, are worth noting. All religions have a range of opinions and approaches, and it is good to see these examples highlighted, as they reinforce our common humanity.

Why it’s been a good year for religion – The Globe and Mail.

Islamic conference cancelled by Montreal convention centre

While I find many of the comments of the speakers as reported repulsive and bordering on hate speech, I do not favour banning such speech, whether from Islamic or other fundamentalists, or extremists on the other side of the debate (e.g., the Ann Coulters and Pamela Gellers of the world). Better to have the ideas out there, debated, denounced, criticized, demonstrated against. Our democracy is strong and vibrant enough.

While I agree with Imam Salam Elmanayi on letting people speak, stronger language than distasteful would be more appropriate for a leader in the community.

Islamic conference cancelled by Montreal convention centre – Montreal – CBC News.

Hijab is elephant in the room | Opinion | Toronto Sun

Tarek Fatah on the hijab and civil marriage ceremonies. I tend to think he is right here, for civil ceremonies, the official is performing an official function with legal functions, so Bouchard-Taylor approach of neutrality of the state should be applied.

Where Tarek goes to far, is conflating the hijab and the niqab, and assuming that every woman who wears the hijab is in servitude and a victim of misogyny . The reality is more complex, and the key issue is whether women wearing the hijab are participating in broader society – and many are – and which are not. And to make things more complex, some women wear hijabs with style almost a fashion accessory, some with basic black to signify perhaps more deeply their faith.

And treating the hijab as dramatically different that other religious signs does not make sense, as all religions have gradations of believers, practices and ways of doing things, ranging from more to less integration. And it is in the practical integration into wider society that is important.

On the niqab, no patience, at it does symbolize rejection of wider society in a way that the hijab does not.

Hijab is elephant in the room | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun.

Islamic scholars experience diversity of Muslim practices at U of T summer program | Toronto Star

Interesting account of  the El-Tawhid Juma Circle Mosque, a LGBTQ-friendly mosque, where women can lead prayers and men and women can sit together. An illustration of the diversity of Islam, although such centres are very much the minority (and not surprising, easier to start in countries like Canada).

Will be interesting to see over time whether the Muslim Canadian population follows the trend of other major religions with more faith centres open to more inclusive policies or not.

Islamic scholars experience diversity of Muslim practices at U of T summer program | Toronto Star.

The freedom to discriminate

An interesting and thoughtful piece, questioning the general principle that taxpayer funds should not support organizations that discriminate in their hiring practices.

The challenge with allowing such discrimination is that while the author and others may be comfortable with their particular charity and religion, would they be comfortable with other charities and religions imposing their beliefs on their staff while using taxpayer funds (e.g., not allowing gays, unequal treatment for women, only hiring within your own community)?

The secular, human rights-based approach, is more appropriate for government funding of services; it does not mean that faith-baith organizations cannot contribute, as many do, but that they do so in a context of an open, non-discriminatory society.

But a useful raising of a different perspective.

The freedom to discriminate.

Charte des valeurs québécoises: Articles

Another series of articles on the proposed Charte des valeurs québécoises.

First, confirmation that the government plans to go ahead, and leak is likely more than trial balloon:

Charte des valeurs québécoises: Drainville dit unir les Québécois | Paul Journet | Politique québécoise.

Quatre conditions pour un accommodement raisonnable

Secondly, a piece by Jocelyn Maclure, quoted in a CBC interview earlier, speaks strongly of the risks and dangers of such a rigid, exclusionary approach, and notes the false assumption that the Canadian and Quebec charters of rights allow every form of accommodation, where the reality is different:

Charte des valeurs québécoises – Le jeu dangereux du Parti québécois

And from the English media, Farzana Hassan, former president of the secular Muslim Canadian Congress, a harsh critique, particularly interesting how consistently strong the MCC has been on secularism:

More xenophobia from PQ’s Marois

And a few pieces on some of the broader ethical and rights issues involved from professors of religion and ethics: Ian Henderson and Margaret Somerville:

 The state cannot decide what is a religious symbol

Op-Ed: Quebec bans religion from the public square (I do disagree with her definition of ‘freedom from religion’; religious freedom applies to all, whether they are believers or non-believers, the issue is whether or not the government allows people this freedom.

On the federal political level, interesting to see how this plays out. One leader has been clear and categorical against it (Trudeau, the same week as his marijuana revelations), the Prime Minister has ducked the issue but the real Minister for multiculturalism, Jason Kenney, issued a strong tweet, and the NDP and official opposition leader has also ducked, saying he will await the actual bill before commenting. Not inspiring leadership that.