Friday, March 29, 2019

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: QUEBEC'S PROPOSED LEGISLATION PREVENTING ANYONE WORKING AT GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING SCHOOLS, FROM WEARING CLOTHING OR SYMBOLS ASSOCIATED WITH A RELIGION WHILE AT WORK - PETTY AUTHORITARIANISM IN THE GUISE OF SECULARISM - AND FLIRTING WITH ISLAMOPHOBIA

John Chuckman


COMMENTS POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY JONATHAN MONTPETIT IN CBC NEWS



“Fourth time's the charm for secularism in Quebec? Not likely

“Why Premier François Legault might be overly optimistic in hoping he can settle decades-long debate”



Charm?

When you insist on doing something fundamentally wrong? I don't think so.

The issue here only involves secularism in a very superficial way.

What it does involve in a major way is the state's telling citizens how they must dress.

And it involves poking at a very sore wound that is not allowed to properly heal over. I'm referring to Islamophobia with its associated hatred and violence. And Quebec has seen a terrible example of that. I really fear there is a bit of flirting with prejudice here.

Pierre Trudeau rightly said the state had no business in the nation's bedrooms.

But the state equally has no business in bedroom closets either. It has no business setting rules for dress, with the exception of safety matters.

This will make a lot of good people feel very unwelcome, completely unnecessarily. It is never a good thing when government does that.

_____________________

Response to another comment:

I see a good many Muslim women with their hijabs, as at check-outs in stores. They are polite and modest. What more does anyone demand?

This legislation is flirting with Islamophobia.

Under a very thin guise of secularism.

My goodness, we long ago permitted things like Sikhs in the RCMP to wear their turbans. I don't think that has hurt anyone. They look fine. But refusing does hurt people.

This image tells an important story:

http://chuckmangrotesques.blogspot.com/2010/04/hijab-montage-to-explain-why-i-laugh-at.html

_______________________

Response to another comment which said the bill is about the separation of state and religions:

No, you miss important but subtle truths here.

This is about the state telling people what they must do, and in a very sensitive area of personal belief.

It's wrong, and it is dangerous, arousing ill will and bad feelings in many.

_____________________

Response to another comment:

Keeping the state and church truly separate includes the state not telling people from the church how to dress.

This is a minor form of authoritarianism, and it is unacceptable.