Protests in Quebec

[Tio_Narratore]

The Parti Quebecois minority government has tabled legislation banning most religious symbols in the public service and public buildings - no hijabs, yarmulkes, or turbans if you want to work for the government of our sort-of-secular state. There's been much in the way of protest, but we do have some of our own ways of expressing opposition...

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/topless-protest-causes-uproar-inside-quebec-legislature-185444409.html

 

[StrangeLife]

The Parti Quebecois minority government has tabled legislation banning most religious symbols in the public service and public buildings - no hijabs, yarmulkes, or turbans if you want to work for the government of our sort-of-secular state.

I'm not Canadian, but I don't really see the problem.

When you're entering public service you represent the state and not whatever associations and allegiances you might entertain in your private life. So asking people to leave their various insignia at the door is not an unreasonable request.

And it's not just religious symbols. I worked with a guy once who was a member of Hells Angels but still wore suit and tie at work.

 

[emap]

Strange the problem isn't they are wanting to limit religious items at a state building. They are limiting all items except crosses. According to the link they are trying to ban everything but the crosses because they are part of Quebec.

Goes on to talk about how one cross is not something most want to remember. Which means the government there is going we are Christian and fuck the rest of you guys.

 

[DeYaKen]

The Parti Quebecois minority government has tabled legislation banning most religious symbols in the public service and public buildings - no hijabs, yarmulkes, or turbans if you want to work for the government of our sort-of-secular state. There's been much in the way of protest, but we do have some of our own ways of expressing opposition...

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/topless-protest-causes-uproar-inside-quebec-legislature-185444409.html

There is a general category on this board. In my opinion that is where this post belongs. Unless, of course, you are urging us to write erotic stories about religious freedom.

 

[Handley_Page]

There is a general category on this board. In my opinion that is where this post belongs. Unless, of course, you are urging us to write erotic stories about religious freedom.

Of course, it could be associated with research FOR a plot.

 

[patientlee]

Oh, dear god we're doing current events at school today. Please don't let my French classes see the word topless.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

There is a general category on this board. In my opinion that is where this post belongs. Unless, of course, you are urging us to write erotic stories about religious freedom.

Yes and no, DeYaKen. We do engage in much political discussion in the AH, and this is where I hang out. If I were posting it for politics, though, I would have put it up two months ago, when the trial balloon was first floated. And if I were posting it as story inspiration, I would have opened a thread in the "Story Ideas" forum, not here.

This is a forum for authors to discuss writing and issues of expression, particularly in the context of nudity and eroticism. Did you notice the surreptitious way the Femen women smuggled protest signs into the National Assembly? Stripping as an expression of protest has a long history in Canada. The Doukhobor pacifist religious sect from Russia established itself in western Canada in the 19th Century, and protested, right up until the 1980s, any attempt to subjugate them to the power of the state by stripping in court when they were being tried. In Ontario, a group of women went topless in public a few years ago to protest the inequality of the public decency act. Their court case, by the way, has resulted in that discriminatory act being declared unconstitutional.

In the situation I've posted here, the stripping exposed the words of protest in a medium that drew attention to itself and the words. Not a bad accomplishment for any writer, I venture, even if we do include the Japanese tradition of writing poetry on one's lover's naked flesh. And it was combined with auditory composition, words very carefully chosen to have the greatest impact for the authors' purpose in that context.

No, my fine Scotsman, I didn't post it for politics, though I expected there would be some discussion of that aspect; nor did I post it for inspiration, though it surely could give birth to a warren of plot bunnies. I posted it for the technique of expression demonstrated by Femen to get their ideas across to the public. And that, I believe, is something of interest to authors.

 

[StrangeLife]

Strange the problem isn't they are wanting to limit religious items at a state building. They are limiting all items except crosses. According to the link they are trying to ban everything but the crosses because they are part of Quebec...

But isn't that true for most countries?

If a religion has played an integral part in the development of a society for a long time there's bound to be remnants of it all over the place. It has become part of the national style - a fashion in a sense - even if most people may no longer feel anything religious about it. How many people from Denmark, Sweden and Finland realise that they are in fact displaying a banner with a Christian cross when they wave their flag for instance?

I don't see why Qebec should be forced to purge part of it's culture because a few people from other cultures don't like it.

There is a general category on this board. In my opinion that is where this post belongs. Unless, of course, you are urging us to write erotic stories about religious freedom.

You're probably right, though there was a woman taking off her shirt inside the parliament as part of the protest. I find women without shirts highly inspirational...

 

[sr71plt]

I'm not Canadian, but I don't really see the problem.

When you're entering public service you represent the state and not whatever associations and allegiances you might entertain in your private life. So asking people to leave their various insignia at the door is not an unreasonable request.

And it's not just religious symbols. I worked with a guy once who was a member of Hells Angels but still wore suit and tie at work.

I also don't see the problem, but I don't see it in a different way than you do. If a person whose religious preferences require him/her to dress a certain way (as long as they dress and as long as there is no safety issue) is accorded citizenship, they should have equal access to government jobs without such a requirement, IMO.

 

[StrangeLife]

If a person whose religious preferences require him/her to dress a certain way (as long as they dress and as long as there is no safety issue) is accorded citizenship, they should have equal access to government jobs without such a requirement, IMO.

But by using the term "preference" you're implying that religion is a choice. This is perfectly in tune with a secular society where your religious practices are seen more as a hobby.

I don't see the problem in the fact that the person who choses a hobby that spills over in his or her professional life must accept certain limitations as far as job prospect goes. If you're a Starwars cosplayer for instance you can't expect a bank to accept that you show up to work dressed like a Jedi Knight.

 

[sr71plt]

The more important word I used was "citizenship." If a person is accorded citizenship and pays their share, by denying them equal access on the basis of their religion, you are imposing your own values on them and denying them the equal rights of their citizenship.

Your view seems couched in the comfort of the prejudices of a majority, I think.

A religion isn't a hobby. There too you reveal your prejudices. I'm not really interested in dealing with someone else's prejudice such as this and am not Canadian, so bye--I'll get back to writing erotica.

 

[emap]

You still don't get it strange, they are wanting to ban everything except crosses. If you happened to be Jewish and working for the government would you be happy that you had to lose your star of david necklace while the jackass down the row can have a cross pin on his jacket?

This isn't about keeping heritage, because the crosses they plan on keeping are rather recent additions, this is about discrimination based on religious preferences. This is a huge shit storm. Granted the motion is tabled for now but it's still there and so the femen are saying hey what the fuck.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

The more important word I used was "citizenship." If a person is accorded citizenship and pays their share, by denying them equal access on the basis of their religion, you are imposing your own values on them and denying them the equal rights of their citizenship.

Your view seems couched in the comfort of the prejudices of a majority, I think.

A religion isn't a hobby. There too you reveal your prejudices. I'm not really interested in dealing with someone else's prejudice such as this and am not Canadian, so bye--I'll get back to writing erotica.

So police officers shall no longer wear uniforms, but whatever the hell hey feel like? Yeah, that'll work.

 

[StrangeLife]

You still don't get it strange, they are wanting to ban everything except crosses. If you happened to be Jewish and working for the government would you be happy that you had to lose your star of david necklace while the jackass down the row can have a cross pin on his jacket?

I would accept it, just as I would accept not being able to wear a crescent moon necklace if I worked in a government office in Tel Aviv.

I'm all for equal opportunity - you can't help your gender, your sexual orientation, your age, your disability or your ethnicity. No employer should be allowed to discriminate based on something the applicant can't help. But "dressing up" in your religion is a choice and if you choose to involve the rest of the world in your faith in that way, you have to accept the possibility that part of it will reject you or judge you based on it.

This is a huge shit storm.

I can imagine...

 

[drteetho]

What irks me most about this issue is the nakedly crass partisanship displayed by the Parti Quebecois in tabling this legislation. If you look at this in the context of this PQ government's historical record, in my opinion it seems clear that the stated desire to reflect a secular state is secondary to their primary goal; to pander to their hardline nationalist/separatist base. So, even if no progress is being made on the actual sovereignty front, the premier Pauline Marois can point to this legislation and say "See, we're making our nation more "pur laine".

So yeah, this motivation, which they are not exactly shy about admitting to, by the way, does not sit well with me at all.

 

[colddiesel]

The Parti Quebecois minority government has tabled legislation banning most religious symbols in the public service and public buildings - no hijabs, yarmulkes, or turbans if you want to work for the government of our sort-of-secular state. There's been much in the way of protest, but we do have some of our own ways of expressing opposition...

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/topless-protest-causes-uproar-inside-quebec-legislature-185444409.html

Tio, how is this likely to be affected by both the provincial and federal constitutions?

I suspect Parti Quebecois always likes a stoush, particularly with English speaking Canada to distract from their own incompetence. But am I wrong?

 

[Tio_Narratore]

Tio, how is this likely to be affected by both the provincial and federal constitutions?

I suspect Parti Quebecois always likes a stoush, particularly with English speaking Canada to distract from their own incompetence. But am I wrong?

I expect the PQ see it as a win-win situation; they either get it passed or get a fight with the "federals" and the "federalists." And either way, they consolidate support among the un-admittedly right-wing base. Parizeau, who once declared "the ethnics" to be partly responsible for losing the last referendum, is coming out with a denunciation of the proposed "Carter of Values." We'll have to see what devolves from that.

The proposed legislation is clearly unconstitutional from the Federal perspective: the Canadian Charter of Rights guarantees such religious freedom. It is also contrary to the Quebec Charter of Rights, and the PQ recognize that. So the charter of Values is to become part of the Charter of Rights, and supercede any other rights in the Charter.

I was interested also, though, in the AH response to Femen's protest. What do we think of their choice of words and their modes of expression?