Tarek Fatah's article on Quebec

[2xx1xy1JD]

http://www.torontosun.com/2013/08/27/hi ... n-the-room

I'm usually a fan of Tarek Fatah - but not with this article.

As a bit of background: the separatist provincial government in Quebec wants to prevent anyone who is a public servant or draws an income from the public purse from wearing religious symbols, including kippas, turbans, or hijab.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013 ... rward.html

It's a xenophobic proposal, period, and would be in complete violation of the Canadian Constitution's Charter of Rights. Perhaps that's the point - Quebec never approved of the Charter and the separatists have gone out of their way to show that Quebec is different. This is also completely different from concerns about mixing church and state that come up when talking about the Bible Belt. The majority in Quebec is made up of pretty secular French-Canadians, but the Montreal area is very multicultural. In the past, separatists politicians have specifically blamed minorities for voting against independence and suggested that they are not real Quebecers. [There's a reason that so many of the Montreal Jews that I know packed up and moved to Toronto. So yeah, Quebec taxpayers can support my grandmother without getting taxes from my family in Toronto, because my kippah-wearing husband apparently wouldn't be welcome to work in a Quebec hospital. Have fun with any doctor shortage.]

Fatah and the Quebec government don't seem to acknowledge that someone can wear something because of their own religious requirements, and that doesn't mean that they are imposing their religion on others. So, the officiant in this story wore a hijab. Big fucking deal. She wasn't preaching, or requiring anyone to recite a religious statement as part of the marriage ceremony, or invoking God, or imposing her own religious requirements on the couple.

Fatah may see the hijab as a political rather than a religious symbol. Fine, he can have that view. It doesn't change the fact that many of those who do wear hijab honestly believe that it is a religious requirement. I don't really want Fatah or any government official to be responsible for determining what is and is not a religious obligation - that's for individuals to determine with their religious leaders.

I will agree with him when he says that the political Islamist agenda is the real issue here. I agree that's the fear that is likely driving this. But guess what? Banning hijab or any other clothing won't address that. Someone's political views aren't going to change just because of whatever they have on their head. A ban will just undermine any message you want to send about respecting individual freedom and beliefs. It would also cause the most harm to women in the Muslim community, since men with the same beliefs would be able to work.

[Someonetocall]

Many of the choices coming out of Quebec, particularly the PQ, fill me with rage. Why does so much have to be so divisive?

I especially enjoy that "the cross" is a neutral symbol and a symbol of the past. :pull-hair: The prairie anglophone in me thinks it's a bit rich that "the cross" is a symbol to be preserved but the loss of France to England is "je me souviens" in a "Look! Look! We're being oppressed!" (my interpretation) while having protected language laws and causing many in the rest of Canada (a potential exaggeration, I don't have numbers to back me up) to feel put upon by demands and requests for acknowledgement of Speshul Snowflake status.

Wow, is Quebec ever complicated emotionally (and legally and historically).

[2xx1xy1JD]

Update on the Quebec law:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e14183805/

So now, they are planning to allow 5 year exemption periods for some institutions, like hospitals. The proposed law is still racist as hell, still destined to be struck down as unconstitutional, but someone in the government figures that this loophole will prevent the hospitals in Montreal from instantly shutting down.

[canbritam]

I despise Tarek Fateh with the power of a thousand suns. The fact that he supportayhia doesn't surprise me in the least. As a Muslim woman I find his opinions to be nauseating to say the least. Every Muslim woma. I know agrees with me. The fact that he regularly goes on about how Muslim women should not be allowed to wear the face OR head covering infuriates most of us in my group of friends. I cannot listen to his radio program for fear of ripping my radio out of my car and throwing it out of the window while driving. IMVHO Tarek Fateh is exactly the same as all the Christian Fundamentalist preachers just on the opposite end of the spectrum.

As for the Quebec charter of so-called values, it is so totally unCanadian. However, it's not surprising. Past premier Bernard Landry issued a statement two weeks ago saying that Canada would "regret" not being like Quebec and would also regret allowing the country to become multicultural. But what they're doing flies totally in the face of the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms that if the federal government doesn't launch a charter challenge on court like they said they would that there need to be a push back from the Canadian population.

What actually pisses me off the most is that the union that is suppose to be PROTECTING the members othe public service workers is siding with the government on this one and will not be protection it's Muslim, Jewish, Sikh, Mennonite or Orthodox Christian (as some women wear headscarves) members. I am a dues paying member of a major union in Ontario and if it were me in that union I'd be raising hell.

There was one Bloq Quebecois who stood up against this bill yesterday. She was kicked out of caucus.

All I can think is that the Quebec government is full of a bunch of bigots.