Parti québécois on the wearing of religious symbols

Having lived in France for several years, I'm quite familiar with bans and proposed bans on the wearing of religious symbols in a country where religious freedom is guaranteed by a neutral state. This week the Parti québécois in Canada is stirring things up with a controversial proposal. Martin Ouellet's article on the subject immediately attracted my attention. You can read it online here in today's Le Devoir.

 My translation is below.

--
TRANSLATION of Martin Ouellet's article appearing in the online edition of Le Devoir, 21 August 2013, under the title: 

"L'interdiction des symboles religieux serait une erreur, selon Charles Taylor."

Philosopher Charles Taylor maintains that it would be a serious mistake for the Parti québécois to ban the wearing of religious symbols in public institutions. He drew a parallel between the proposal and the errors committed by Vladimir Putin's government in Russia.

During an interview Tuesday with La Presse canadienne, the co-president of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission on reasonable accommodations didn’t mince words in his denouncement of the measures mentioned Tuesday by the Journal de Québec. He said he feared the exclusion of entire communities from the public sector’s job market, because of their religious convictions.

“Let’s spare ourselves that!” decried Taylor, convinced that such measures designed to insure “state neutrality” would wield a “real blow” to Quebec’s reputation around the globe.

Taylor suggested we look at Russia for an example of such systematic “exclusion":

“A similar kind of exclusion exists in Russia, although it’s a criminal offense there and thus far more serious. For example, not only is homosexuality forbidden in Russia, in itself serious, but advocating for homosexuality is also forbidden.”

“The legislation proposed here is less extreme in that it doesn’t involve the criminal code. But it does say that if you have certain beliefs, [...] you are a second class citizen, since those who have such beliefs cannot apply for jobs in public service. This is something quite serious. I don’t believe people realize to what extent.”

While it is reasonable to demand that a teacher’s face be uncovered during class, it is however very serious to forbid a woman wearing a hijab to seek work in civil service, asserts Taylor. He is convinced that if the government of the Parti québecois continues in this direction, it will isolate Quebec from the Western world.

“I challenge you to find another country in the Western Hemisphere where this kind of exclusion exists. There are countries much more diverse than ours, like Brazil, who will be appalled. They’re going to say: ‘What are those Quebecois thinking?'”

According to information obtained from “reliable sources” by the Journal of Québec, the “charter of Quebecois values” to be presented this fall by Minister Bernard Drainville, in charge of “Institutions démocratiques,” will cast a much wider net than the Bouchard-Taylor Commission's recommendations.

The hijab, the burqa, the Jewish kippa, the Sikh turban and the Christian cross – if “conspicuous,” that is, “visible” – would be forbidden in ministries, state-owned companies and tribunals, as well as in public child-care centers, schools and hospitals. In its 2008 report, the Bouchard-Taylor Commission recommended freedom of choice for government employees, teachers and health-care workers.

Opposition parties are walking on eggshells in the explosive file; they reacted across the board with uneasiness to Tuesday's report.

Leader of the Quebec Liberal Party Philippe Couillard believes that the State does not have to impose so many bans and restrictions to affirm its neutrality: “We have religious freedom here. The State is neutral when it comes to religion; such bans are unnecessary. Suppose we take it a step further and require that hospitals such as Hôtel-Dieu, Enfant-Jésus, St. Mary’s or the Hôpital général juif change their names? The government would quickly find itself in a quagmire of serious contradictions,” predicted Couillard.

A supporter of “open secularism,” the liberal leader doubts that the Parti québecois’ proposal will go over well with the Quebecois and Canadian charters of rights and freedoms. And so he is pressing Justice Minister Bertrand St-Arnaud to rapidly clarify the intentions of his colleague Drainville.

Meanwhile the leader of the Coalition Avenir Québec party (CAQ), François Legault, reproaches the government of Pauline Marois for wanting to lead the Quebecois people in “an extreme direction that should be avoided.”

“We must defend Quebecois values; we must defend equality between men and women. We won't be as radical as the Parti Québécois, but we will go much farther than the Liberal Party, who doesn’t want to do a thing to protect their Allophone and Anglophone constituents in Montreal,” said Legault during an interview with a Saguenay radio station.

Caquistes and liberals haven’t yet put their cards on the table as to the subject of secularism. Their proposals are still on the drawing board.

Françoise David, spokesperson of Québec solidaire opposes the ban on the wearing of religious symbols by state employees in public service – as long as the face is not covered. She is especially concerned with the potential exclusion of women from the job market.

“Imagine two teachers in a school. Both are Muslim. He wears a beard; she wears a veil, but one that does not cover her face. She will no longer be able to teach, yet he will. Some people have quite visible tattoos with religious connotations. What do we tell them? You can’t work anywhere in public service anymore?”

Minister Drainville refused to grant any interviews on Tuesday.
--
Article written by Martin Ouellet and appearing in Le Devoir Wednesday August 21, 2013.