Will Toronto benefit from the Quebec Charter of values fisaco?

[OttoSchloss]

Toronto was ascendant anyways. The stock exchange had been larger for decades before the PQ. What bill101 did was hasten everything along. Toronto was just a better place for business.

The bill in principle seems like an enlightened secular path but the truth is, it's an attempt at social engineering and those always fail. It might work in certain European jurisdictions (it won't) where immigrants are definitely second class citizens but it doesn't really wash in a country that is essentially made up of successive immigrant populations (despite how long your people might have been here -excluding its original inhabitants). But in the end it's probably just a chess move by Pauline to shore up support in an us (Quebecois) versus them (ROC) way. Manipulative politicking at its worst.

 

[James]

There definitely won't be a mass exodus from Quebec to Ontario but the overall sentiment in Quebec is not getting better. I left Quebec many, many years ago and most people I grew up with have also left Quebec, many of who live in Ontario now. The mass exodus, if you wish to call it that, has already happened. In the 70's and in the 90's. What's occurring in Quebec now is not helping their cause but it won't create intra-provincial migration as much as the Levesque years of Bill 101 and the '95 Referendum did.

 

[doady]

Ever wonder why 3 of 4 school shootings in Canada in the past 30 years occurred in Quebec? Or why all three of those shootings were perpetrated by immigrants or sons of immigrants? Alienation and discrimination has its price, whether economically or otherwise.

 

[Tewder]

Ever wonder why 3 of 4 school shootings in Canada in the past 30 years occurred in Quebec? Or why all three of those shootings were perpetrated by immigrants or sons of immigrants? Alienation and discrimination has its price, whether economically or otherwise.

WRT the Quebec Charter of Values, help me understand how something can be perceived as causing 'alienation and discrimination' when it is equally applied? Are Christians going to open fire at school now too?

It may be my own bias but I'm sort of in favour of 'shoring up' secularism in Canada, promoting it in any way possible. To my knowledge this ban on religious symbols is only within the context of tax-funded government institutions, and this is ok with me. There has to be compromise in a country like Canada, and this seems like a reasonable one.

 

[CN Tower]

I agree. If there is an exodus from Quebec this will not be like the 1970's when a large segment of the influential Anglo population fled to Toronto bringing business headquarters and jobs with them. If there is an exodus from Quebec it will be by members of the strict Islamic communities where women are forced to wear niqabs and burkas. Many if not most in these communities came to Canada as refugees. If there is a massive exodus of these people from Quebec to Ontario I don't see any benefit for Toronto - just the opposite. Toronto is already straining under the burden of providing free social services to various refugee groups that settle in Toronto by the 10,000's each year!

I disagree. A burst of migration from Quebec will boost Toronto's economic output and strengthen it's social fabric. Islamic, Anglo, Asian, Avatars, makes no difference- bring the warm bodies & minds to our city and we will all prosper.

btw, your subverted insinuation is that Muslims are inferior to Anglos. I find that offensive.

And no one is forced to wear anything in Canada. These women do it by choice. Respect their freedom of choice.

 

[Silence&Motion]

WRT the Quebec Charter of Values, help me understand how something can be perceived as causing 'alienation and discrimination' when it is equally applied? Are Christians going to open fire at school now too?

It may be my own bias but I'm sort of in favour of 'shoring up' secularism in Canada, promoting it in any way possible. To my knowledge this ban on religious symbols is only within the context of tax-funded government institutions, and this is ok with me. There has to be compromise in a country like Canada, and this seems like a reasonable one.

Don't tell me you believe this BS about the law being "equally applied"? Did you see the list of acceptable vs. unacceptable religious wear?

One of the three things listed as acceptable and four of the five things listed as unacceptable are things that people actually wear (unless you count Ozzy Osbourne or Madonna in the 80s, then it's all five). If you eliminate all of the phony religious wear that were invented for the purposes of this poster, guess which religion ends up being on the "acceptable" side, and which religions end up on the "unacceptable" side. I'll give you a hint. The religion that ends up being on the acceptable side is the same religion which has its symbol hung in Quebec's national assembly.

 

[Silence&Motion]

if there is an exodus from quebec it will be by members of the strict islamic communities where women are forced to wear niqabs and burkas. Many if not most in these communities came to canada as refugees. ...toronto is already straining under the burden of providing free social services to various refugee groups that settle in toronto by the 10,000's each year!

[citation needed]

 

[doady]

You can glance at any map of Quebec and see all sorts of religious (Christian) references too. There's other no place in Canada where religion (Christianity) is so entrenched and institutionalized and visible in the public sphere than in Quebec.

 

[Adjei]

Quebec is a backwards place.

 

[Johnny Au]

Take a look at the flag of Quebec. There is a purpose for those two white perpendicular lines in the centre.

Secularization goes a long way. There should be an atheist flag of Quebec and rename all of the settlements that begin with "Saint" or "Sainte."

I am neutral about Quebec's Charter of Values.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Ever wonder why 3 of 4 school shootings in Canada in the past 30 years occurred in Quebec? Or why all three of those shootings were perpetrated by immigrants or sons of immigrants? Alienation and discrimination has its price, whether economically or otherwise.

Interesting stat.

 

[Transportfan]

You can glance at any map of Quebec and see all sorts of religious (Christian) references too. There's other no place in Canada where religion (Christianity) is so entrenched and institutionalized and visible in the public sphere than in Quebec.

It's mostly cultural Catholic symbolism though. Quebec is hardly an overwhelmingly Christian place.

 

[Hipster Duck]

While I think that the Quebec law is a blunt, insensitive response that deliberately skirts Christian forms of religious expression, I think we have to realize that we can either be a secular liberal society or we can be a multicultural society with freedom of religious expression, but we can't do both. Doing one unravels the other.

For example, if you value women's rights and the equality of LGBT people, you cannot simultaneously defend the religious freedom of groups that openly and actively deny women and gays those same rights. You would be contradicting your own values. On the flipside, being a secular liberal means accepting a certain level of tolerance for other groups, but you have to be intolerant and unaccepting of groups that threaten liberal, secular society, so it's difficult to avoid hypocrisy there too.

It's a bit of a rock and a hard place, but we have to choose between multiculturalism and liberal, secular humanism, both with their apparent contradictions. I choose liberal humanism. Even though I'm a visible minority, liberal humanism has served me better and is more a part of my identity than multiculturalism ever was.

 

[Peepers]

While I think that the Quebec law is a blunt, insensitive response that deliberately skirts Christian forms of religious expression, I think we have to realize that we can either be a secular liberal society or we can be a multicultural society with freedom of religious expression, but we can't do both. Doing one unravels the other.

For example, if you value women's rights and the equality of LGBT people, you cannot simultaneously defend the religious freedom of groups that openly and actively deny women and gays those same rights. You would be contradicting your own values. On the flipside, being a secular liberal means accepting a certain level of tolerance for other groups, but you have to be intolerant and unaccepting of groups that threaten liberal, secular society, so it's difficult to avoid hypocrisy there too.

It's a bit of a rock and a hard place, but we have to choose between multiculturalism and liberal, secular humanism, both with their apparent contradictions. I choose liberal humanism. Even though I'm a visible minority, liberal humanism has served me better and is more a part of my identity than multiculturalism ever was.

Well said

While Quebec may have gone a bit too far with a clumsily written law at least they are trying to establish a strict separation between church and state. Compare this to Ontario where Premier Wynne fully supports clerics coming into public schools to preach in make-shift "multi-faith" prayer spaces during the school day. The prayer sessions involve gender separation with girls forced to sit at the back of the room and they are taught from a holy book that can only be described as a hate manual (for example it calls for the execution of gays).

While there has been a lot of debate in Ontario about what is going in Quebec there has been NO debate in Ontario about what is happening here!

No one is asking Kathleen Wynne why she supports turning our public schools into Madrassa's. I'm sure if asked she would say its all in the name of and "diversity" and "inclusiveness".

To me being tolerant does not mean tolerating the intolerant but that is what we are being asked to do in Ontario.

And the insanity is not just limited to Ontario. Just today I read that in Saskatchewan $35,000 in public funds were spent to install foot washing stations inside the University of Regina to accommodate a certain religious ritual! Where is the national debate on this?

http://metronews.ca/news/regina/798...ties-help-muslim-students-prepare-for-prayer/

Canadians outside of Quebec need to take a good look at what is happening in their own province before they start criticizing Quebec!

 

[Silence&Motion]

While I think that the Quebec law is a blunt, insensitive response that deliberately skirts Christian forms of religious expression, I think we have to realize that we can either be a secular liberal society or we can be a multicultural society with freedom of religious expression, but we can't do both. Doing one unravels the other.

For example, if you value women's rights and the equality of LGBT people, you cannot simultaneously defend the religious freedom of groups that openly and actively deny women and gays those same rights. You would be contradicting your own values. On the flipside, being a secular liberal means accepting a certain level of tolerance for other groups, but you have to be intolerant and unaccepting of groups that threaten liberal, secular society, so it's difficult to avoid hypocrisy there too.

It's a bit of a rock and a hard place, but we have to choose between multiculturalism and liberal, secular humanism, both with their apparent contradictions. I choose liberal humanism. Even though I'm a visible minority, liberal humanism has served me better and is more a part of my identity than multiculturalism ever was.

Of course you can have both. Canada has been dealing with issues like these for decades (and arguably since we were founded as a liberal democracy and a union of multiple cultural/religious groups). There are well established social and legal procedures for dealing with conflicts over where one person's freedom begins to infringe upon another person's freedom. This is definitely not unique to religion.

And it's really BS that people (mostly white men) break out the feminism to blast minorities for the way they choose to dress or the seating plans of their churches/mosques, when actually women in Canada have far greater problems to worry about. Who gives a damn where women sit in a mosque. I'm more interested in why so few women are seated in parliament and in corporate boardrooms, and why they get paid so much less for doing the exact same work as men. What exactly is banning headscarves going to do to solve this problem? Most likely it will actually exacerbate it by removing a sizable group of Muslim women from the workforce.