It is without a doubt that Canada is considered one of the most welcoming and peaceful countries in the entire world. Individuals fleeing conflicts from different continents, on opposites sides of the planet, view Canada as a safe haven, a place to thrive, succeed, and safely live life to its fullest potential. Excellent healthcare, education, and proper gun control are just some of the many priviledges freely given to those who are lucky enough to call Canada their home. The Rights and Freedoms of Canadians are incomparable to those of individuals living in other countries, and with freedom of religion being one of them, it becomes crucial that we respect and show acceptance of different religions. However, it is saddening to see that in …show more content…
The legislation aspires to prohibit public-sector employees from wearing “objects such as headgear, clothing, jewelry or other religious affiliation”. These objects include items such as kippahs, turbans, hijabs, and large crucifixes. This ban would be intended to apply to all civil servants, including individuals such as teachers, doctors, nurses and police offiercers (Jake Flanagin, The Atlantic). At a hearing for Bill 60, Michelle Blanc, who is a transgender woman, spoke in support of the Bill, appealing to Quebecers' pro-LGBT feelings. “When I see a veil, the mental image I have is all of the gays who were hung high and low in the public square... in certain Arab countries”, Blanc had stated. Although same-sex relationships and the importance of being accepting of all religions have been two of the most controversial and highly debated topics, it is definitely not the right step to attack the Muslim religion and specific Arab countries in an attempt to defend Bill 60. Much like it is innapropriate to accuse the LGBT community of being anti-religion, it is equally innapropriate to accuse an entire religion for the horrible act of the hanging of gays in certain Arab countries. Not all gays are …show more content…
If the Charter claims that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and expressions, then why is the discussion of prohibiting public employees from wearing clothing with religious symbolism even brought up? Why are the majority – 60 percent – of Quebecers in favour of the Charter's ban on religious symbols? Perhaps it is difficult to understand the importance of such religious symbols when someone is not practicing any religion and are not required to wear anything to show their faith. However, imagine having something that you find greatly important and highly value being taken away from you. It does not have to be a cross or a hijab, maybe it is a favourite piece literature, or a piece of jewelry passed down from an important family member, whatever it may be, it holds high sentimental value. Taking away an object of high value would offend and upset anyone, no matter what that object may be. When it comes to taking away someone's right to wear whatever they wish, and on top of that halting their right to properly practice their religion is a definite infringement of the Rights and Freedoms possessed by any person living in Canada, which is just
In the article, Chesler uses several persuasive appeals in an attempt to convince readers to support France’s ban on head coverings. While some may argue that banning religious clothing infringes on Islamic law, Chesler points out that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” In an appeal to logos, Chesler uses facts, gathered from educated Muslim women and Islamic scholars, to show that this argument is illogical because the burqa is not required. Chesler continues logos appeals by citing the Sheikh of al-Azhat University as saying “The niqab is tradition. It has no connection to religion.” This passage demonstrates ethos as well, but carries on the idea that burqas and niqabs are not required by Islamic law, making the ban perfectly logical. The idea is that, since these garments are not mandatory in the Koran’s broad requisite of “modest dress,” the ban does not infringe on religious rights, making the ban a logical choice. Chesler takes the argument one step further by insisting that the burqa is not only optional, it is detrimental to wearers. The argument that “it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard and is a form of torture” to women who wear burqa exhibits both logos and pathos. By pointing out that burqas are a possible “health hazard,” Chesler uses unappealing syntax to make readers believe that burqas are unhealthy and i...
Some Canadians even agree with President Trumps Refugee ban. Canadians are scared of what the Sunni Muslims are associated with. That association is between the Sunni Muslims and ISIS, as some members of ISIS are radical Sunni Muslims. According to a 2015 statistic (Donnelly, 2015) 54% of Canadians are moderately to strongly against the government's plan to letting 25 000 Syrian refugees into Canada. According to another (Kanji, 2016) an online petition to stop resettling Syrian refugees in Canada had around 50 000 signatures, most people that signed it were under the impression that the Syrians were terrorists. These events that have happened in the past show us how some Canadians may be thinking right now in the present.
Benjamin, S. (2013, 09 10). Quebec Seeks Ban On Religious Symbols In Public Work Places. Retrieved 12 10, 2013, from huffingtonpost.com: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/09/quebec-religious-symbols-_n_4072327.html
Canada is known for their diversity and multiculturalism where they ensure that all citizens are able to keep their identities and take pride in their ancestral roots regardless of where they are from and which religion they affiliate with. They encourage racial and ethnic harmony and cross-cultural understanding . Since multiculturalism is such an important part of the Canadian identity, people cannot be stripped of their rights to freely practice their religion, especially if they claim to value the individual identity. However, even though the above is what Canada strives to stand for, it isn’t achieved in reality. For example, if everyone were free to practice their religion however they wanted to in public, conflict would arise in society since everyone may believe that their religion is superior to others. So in order to ensure there is peace amongst us, the government must regulate how people practice their religion, at least in the public
Muslims, Sikhs, and many other religious affiliations have often been targeted for hate crimes, racial slurs, and misfortunate events. We are all different in our own ways some are good and some are bad yet one event changes everything for everyone affiliated with the group. The book The Politics of the Veil by Joan Scott a renowned pioneer in gender studies gives a detailed and analytical book of about the French views towards the Muslim females in France during 2004. The author talks about why the French governments official embargo of wearing conspicuous signs is mainly towards the headscarves for Muslim girls under the age of eighteen in public schools. The main themes of book are gender inequality, sexism, and cultural inequality historical schools used in the book are history of below, woman’s history, cultural history, and political history. In this essay, I will talk about why Joan Scotts argument on why the French government’s ban on wearing conspicuous signs was
Since 1914, Canadian Human Rights laws have had a positive impact on helping to shape Canadian identity as one that is welcoming to various minority groups. Being a Canadian citizen provides you with the freedoms to travel, and settle in Canada at your own will and desire. Also, the freedom to express your sexual orientation is welcomed and well supported in many communities. Modern discrimination against categorizing human beings is very slim and everyone of all ethnic or cultural backgrounds are welcome with respect and good intentions. Canada is an extremely welcoming and protective place, in which nearly everything is done to promote equality, and a safe country.
Do you know that despite Canada being called multicultural and accepting, Canada’s history reveals many secrets that contradicts this statement? Such an example are Canadian aboriginals, who have faced many struggles by Canadian society; losing their rights, freedoms and almost, their culture. However, Native people still made many contributions to Canadian society. Despite the efforts being made to recognize aboriginals in the present day; the attitudes of European Canadians, acts of discrimination from the government, and the effects caused by the past still seen today have proven that Canadians should not be proud of Canada’s history with respect to human rights since 1914.
“Perhaps the most commonly heard opposition to the niqab is that women cover up at the command of domineering men, that the veil is a sign of Muslim women’s oppression, as well as a general indicator of the “backwardness” of Islamic culture” (Natasha Bakht, p.10). These stereotypes of Muslim men dominating women confuse Islam with cultural practices and fail to recognize that Islam has empowered women throughout its history. Former Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper stated that such a garment is “rooted in a culture that is anti-women,” but never once took initiative to ask the niqab-wearing women if that is in fact the
Canada is internationally renowned for its commitment to multiculturalism. In fact, Canada was the first nation to officially adopt a multicultural policy. However, while the Canadian government has developed a broad-based multicultural mandate that includes a national human rights code and increased penalties for hate-motivated crimes, and most Canadians oppose overt forms of discrimination and hate, racism continues to exist in Canadian society, albeit in a subtle fashion.
... presence of religious diversity amongst the multiculturalist scene, multiculturalism and its relationships to ethnocultureal minorities, Quebec’s reasonable accommodation as well as the overlap of Aboriginal and multiculturalism issues, require research and development. This speak volumes about Banting and Kymlicka, as it places their work on a larger spectrum that will one day be surrounded by other impressive works that may compliment or challenge their findings. Canadian multiculturalism is completely different than what takes place in different countries. It goes without saying that not every picture can be painted with the same type of brush because the world is not full of the same picture that has a white washed idealized understanding. With that being said, the problems in other countries are not inherent to the multiculturalism picture in other countries.
According to Statistics Canada’s 2011 National Household Survey in 2011 “Canada had a foreign-born population of approximately 6,775,800 people, representing 20.6% of the total population—the highest proportion among G8 countries. In addition to English and French, more than 200 languages were reported as the mother tongue.” Moreover, “the proportion of the population who reported religious affiliations other than Christian—including Muslim, Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist—continues to grow. In 2011, about 2,373,700 people or 7.2% of Canada’s population reported affiliation with one of these religions, up from 4.9% a decade earlier. More than 1,400,000 people reported an Aboriginal identity, representing 4.3% of the total Canadian population, which
One issue that has presented itself is when cultural relativists and the adversaries of universalism fail to recognize the contingency that Nussbaum writes about. Although universalists place all humans in one category with equal rights, they recognize the difference between the upbringings of individuals. It is helpful to look at certain practices through a cultural lens in an attempt to understand that practice, but it is also crucial to step back and view that same practice in order to discern whether it is morally right and just. Universalists do not aim to restrict cultural practices or activities unless those activities violate informed consent and the harm principle set forth by John Stuart Mill. Mill believes that an individual should have the liberty to do as he pleases, except when that act intentionally harms someone outside the scope of consenting practitioners. Another issue with universalism is when countries and individuals alike misconstrue it to mean conformity and sameness as opposed to what it truly is - equal rights and concern for all humans. In The Politics of the Veil, Joan Wallach Scott argues against the French’s decision to outlaw the veil. This decision may have been surrounded by less controversy if the French government provided a right of exit for those who feel oppressed by the veil and fear the consequences from the men of their family and community, as opposed to outlawing the practice as a whole. As mentioned above, the veil has provided a zone of comfort for many women for a long time. Although the original undertone of requiring women to wear the veil was the intent of demonstrating male domination, it has recently simply become a piece of clothing and a part of some women’s identity. In outlawing the veil, the French were appealing to their own ethnocentrism, and goals of assimilation and
Religion is one of the many things that shape a country and has changed culture. During this time, many discriminate against anything that was different to what Canadian had grown up in.Multiculturalism is a big part of Canada today, it is a main component to Canadian culture, this was not the case during this era.Most common religions during this time was Christianity. To what many people forecast during this time, religion has remained as vibrant and vital a part of American culture as in generations past. New issues and interests have emerged, but religion's role in many American's lives remains
The hijab is a very important and powerful Muslim symbol that is worn by billions of Muslim women all over the world. Many wear the hijab as a symbol of faith, while others wear it to protect themselves from society’s expectations of women. Some people think that banning the use of the hijab in public is a violation of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. However, others think the banning of the hijab is a necessary precaution. The wearing of the Muslim hijab should be banned in public because it is impractical, Muslims use it to separate themselves from society, and it is a security risk.
Bill 60: Charter Affirming the Values of State Secularism and Religious Neutrality and of Equality Between Women and Men, and Providing a Framework for Accommodation Requests. 1st Reading, Fortieth Legislature, First session (Quebec). Quebec Official Publisher 2013. Web.