What bothers me about this perspective is the implicit assumption that everyone who thinks that public displays of religion should be banned is actually motivated by racism, rather than recognising that somebody can be against this for non-racist reasons.
That’s my issue as well with the bill. Just look at the crucifix at the Assembly. They didn’t remove it, they just moved it outside the room. If the intent of the law was really to remove religion from the public space, it wouldn’t have been a debate about keeping the crucifix in the Assembly.
I don’t really see how that’s related. Even if it were motivated by racism, that’d be equally authoritarian to any other motive, since authoritarianism is about ceding rights from individuals to the government and it doesn’t matter what the motivation for that is.
The context made it so that people conflates the two.
Medias and public debates pretty much always framed the issue of religion in public as a racist thing (in order to get more views) instead of only talking how the CAQ government targetted non-christian religions with their bill.
It’s not racism with more steps. You don’t even know it has not been enforced improperly. It’s a lot easier to enforce enforcement than it is to stop people ruining the world
So, you and I both know that public praying isn’t just people being in public standing around praying without anyone knowing they’re praying.
If a person went to a restaurant and started vocally praising Satan for this meal for an hour prior to eating it… yeah I bet they would make a lot of people uncomfortable. Not to mention the restaurant would refuse them service.
What you want to do is justify bothering people in public spaces with your beliefs. If you can stand around in public thinking about your god without letting anyone else know you’re doing it, then no one would be uncomfortable.
If you aren’t able to see how a comparison between two things does not create a combination of those two things, then you aren’t intelligent enough to converse in a polite manor. I’ve provided more details in my other comments, you can read those without interacting with me.
I love it. Public prayer shouldn’t happen at all.
The problem is not if it should or shouldn’t happen
The problem is that it will not be enforced equally between religious communities and Christian poser asshole
It’s racism with more steps
What bothers me about this perspective is the implicit assumption that everyone who thinks that public displays of religion should be banned is actually motivated by racism, rather than recognising that somebody can be against this for non-racist reasons.
That is not push on a non-racism way in Quebec. Like I said they don’t want to use the law equally, they want to use it specifically against Muslim.
And so far, from my perspective (that is a confirmation biais), no one debate the idea without a racist undertone
That’s my issue as well with the bill. Just look at the crucifix at the Assembly. They didn’t remove it, they just moved it outside the room. If the intent of the law was really to remove religion from the public space, it wouldn’t have been a debate about keeping the crucifix in the Assembly.
It just so happens that it always boils down to policing what Muslims do. Just one big coincidence.
That’s very fair yes. But how can you tell those who are anti-religion for racist reasons from those who are for not?
There are two hazards in our discussion:
I prioritize hazard 1 as having a lower consequence than hazard 2.
In other words, I care much more about eradicating systemic racism than the hurt feelings of someone whose motives are misunderstood.
OK that’s a good argument. It’s perhaps a flaw of the word “racist” that it can include systemic racism, when it connotes individual racism.
Sure, you can be against it for authoritarian reasons as well. Disturbing.
I don’t really see how that’s related. Even if it were motivated by racism, that’d be equally authoritarian to any other motive, since authoritarianism is about ceding rights from individuals to the government and it doesn’t matter what the motivation for that is.
Fair enough: regardless of whether racism is involved or not, there is an authoritarian bent to this law. In my opinion.
Religion has been used time and time again to justify committing atrocities and still used as such today.
There is a legitimate debate to be had about the religion’s place in a society.
The context made it so that people conflates the two.
Medias and public debates pretty much always framed the issue of religion in public as a racist thing (in order to get more views) instead of only talking how the CAQ government targetted non-christian religions with their bill.
It’s not racism with more steps. You don’t even know it has not been enforced improperly. It’s a lot easier to enforce enforcement than it is to stop people ruining the world
Only we do know exactly the results of the CAQ’s “laïcité” laws:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bill-21-impact-religious-minorities-survey-1.6541241
Bury your head in the sand all you like but the systemic racism that is embedded in the social outcomes of these laws is undeniable and palpable.
Praying doesn’t ruin the world. Just like having a party, or a poetry slam, or Shakespeare in the park.
It’s behaviors that cause health or safety issues that are the problem.
Praying in PUBLIC is like having sex in public. Don’t.
So someone praying before a meal is an equivalent obscenity?
So, you and I both know that public praying isn’t just people being in public standing around praying without anyone knowing they’re praying.
If a person went to a restaurant and started vocally praising Satan for this meal for an hour prior to eating it… yeah I bet they would make a lot of people uncomfortable. Not to mention the restaurant would refuse them service.
What you want to do is justify bothering people in public spaces with your beliefs. If you can stand around in public thinking about your god without letting anyone else know you’re doing it, then no one would be uncomfortable.
Then that’s not prayer, it’s being a public nuisance, a disturber of the peace. That’s a different crime / tort that I’m sure is already on the books.
The prayer part is irrelevant.
There’s a precedent like this in the US: enhancement laws
They ruin lives, and don’t stop crime.
So what is an example of something you think this topic is referring to? It’s not referring to a family doing a quick prayer before a public meal.
Sorry, can you expand on the ways prayer is like sex? Are people praying with their dicks out in your vicinity?
It’s personal and private and children shouldn’t be exposed to it. It’s not wrong, and you can do it, but keep it away from me and mine.
Have you considered being less nosy? Minding your business?
I’m no lover of religion but I love this culture policing even less.
If you aren’t able to see how a comparison between two things does not create a combination of those two things, then you aren’t intelligent enough to converse in a polite manor. I’ve provided more details in my other comments, you can read those without interacting with me.
*manner
STT
What a weirdo comparison to make.