Quebec’s new Secularism Bill

[Doctorfever]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montr...bill-9.6993278

The proposed changes include:

Banning subsidized daycare and private school workers from wearing religious symbols, such as a hijab or kippa (with a clause exempting those already in their position).

Prohibiting public institutions, such as hospitals, from only offering food based on a religious tradition, such as halal or kosher meals. Roberge said other meals would need to be offered as well.

Phasing out public subsidies for religious private schools that select students or staff based on religious affiliation, or that teach religious content. This would be done over a period of three years.

Banning prayer spaces in public institutions including universities, as well as group prayers in public spaces such as parks without municipal authorization. Universities are "not a temple or a church," Roberge said.

Expanding the requirement to have an uncovered face at all times to anyone present in a public education setting.

The legislation is the latest tabled by Legault's Coalition Avenir Québec government, which has been slumping in opinion polls ahead of next year's provincial election.

In October, the government adopted a law banning religious symbols worn by any school employee who interacts with a student.

That law was itself an expansion of a 2019 law, known as Bill 21, that banned religious symbols worn by public employees deemed to be in positions of authority, including teachers, judges and police officers.

The government also passed a bill earlier this year requiring immigrants to embrace the common culture of the province.

Bill 9 was criticized by religious groups and civil liberties advocates even before it was tabled as an attack on minorities for political gain.

Stephen Brown, president of the National Council of Canadian Muslims, said it amounts to “political opportunism” and serves as a distraction from other pressing issues, including a conflict with the province’s doctors and a shortage of affordable housing.

"Unfortunately, once again, it’s the same group of minorities that are serving as the foil,” he said.

In a statement, the Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Quebec said the proposed bill would be a "radical infringement on the rights and freedoms of the Quebec population" and that "the government has not demonstrated the need for such legislation."

[TheIronMaiden]

Anytime you start to think that Alberta has the lead on being the most bigoted, Quebec comes in an reminds people that they in fact have always held the crown.

[getbak]

Prohibiting public institutions, such as hospitals, from only offering food based on a religious tradition, such as halal or kosher meals. Roberge said other meals would need to be offered as well.

Is that ever a thing that happens?

[blankall]

Is Quebec going to apply the same rules to Christians, including Catholics, or is this just for the non-desirables? Are they really going to go around and stop public employees from wearing crosses?

[Reggie Dunlop]

I'm generally in favour of the secularization of public institutions. The tricky bit is respecting individual rights.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by blankall

Is Quebec going to apply the same rules to Christians, including Catholics, or is this just for the non-desirables? Are they really going to go around and stop public employees from wearing crosses?

The statement from the Catholic bishops seems to indicate it will apply to everyone. In practice though, things like crosses are easy to conceal. At the street level, I see way fewer obvious expressions of Christian symbols in public than other religions. Like I could walk outside, go to public building, and immediately identify a Sikh or Muslim based on religious apparel. Some religions are just less discreet. Identifying a Christian would be harder in most cases.

But there definitely is a slippery slope. Symbols like the Celtic cross or the yin yang have become stylish in secular settings and many people don’t think of them as religious. Or how many people think about the Christian symbols on the Union Jack, which is still on some provincial flags. Even the flour-de-lis on the Quebec flag is originally a religious symbol. I doubt they will ban it from public spaces though.

[Acey]

No matter what side of this you're on, I'm surprised this isn't bigger news. Province-wide legislation like this in Canada in 2025 is wild.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Sounds like people in government with a traditional type of upbringing and too much pride around it trying to eradicate things they don't understand because they think it somehow think its existence threatens their own lifestyle.

A lot of grumpy old hags like that in Quebec.

Love my french family, but the indirect admissions of bigotry at the dinner table weren't that subtle.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Sounds like people in government with a traditional type of upbringing and too much pride around it trying to eradicate things they don't understand because they think it somehow think its existence threatens their own lifestyle.

A lot of grumpy old hags like that in Quebec.

Love my french family, but the indirect admissions of bigotry at the dinner table weren't that subtle.

Yes one of my best mates is from Montreal, I've known him for almost 40 years, I guess the situation in Gaza allowed him to release his inner anti semite all of a sudden, I was shocked at his old school level of hatred frankly

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Sounds like people in government with a traditional type of upbringing and too much pride around it trying to eradicate things they don't understand because they think it somehow think its existence threatens their own lifestyle.

A lot of grumpy old hags like that in Quebec.

Love my french family, but the indirect admissions of bigotry at the dinner table weren't that subtle.

Could it also be the non-religious are seeing how it is being wielded as a weapon against citizens in the States(and other Theocracies), and are trying to head that off by minimizing influence of these religions in the public square?


It's possible they are just bigots, though. I don't really know a lot about Quebec religious culture, and what is really behind these moves.

[You Need a Thneed]

Haivng people not be forced to participate in religion is one thing.

Saying that people can't participate, even in situations where it does not efect others, is absurd.

Banning halal/ kosher options? that's just plan cruel.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Banning halal/ kosher options? that's just plan cruel.

They're not doing that.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

They're not doing that.

Ahh, I misread.

It says offer ONLY food in those traditions. Yes, that is different.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

The statement from the Catholic bishops seems to indicate it will apply to everyone. In practice though, things like crosses are easy to conceal. At the street level, I see way fewer obvious expressions of Christian symbols in public than other religions. Like I could walk outside, go to public building, and immediately identify a Sikh or Muslim based on religious apparel. Some religions are just less discreet. Identifying a Christian would be harder in most cases.

But there definitely is a slippery slope. Symbols like the Celtic cross or the yin yang have become stylish in secular settings and many people don’t think of them as religious. Or how many people think about the Christian symbols on the Union Jack, which is still on some provincial flags. Even the flour-de-lis on the Quebec flag is originally a religious symbol. I doubt they will ban it from public spaces though.

It sounds like they are drawing a line between "Tradition" and religion. The article states, under the new laws, its okay to have a Christmas party, but you can't, for example, mention baby Jesus. I'm not entirely sure how that is supposed to work in practice. For example, could you light candles on a Menorah but just not talk about why you are doing it or say a prayer? Obviously, these rules only apply to public spaces, so you can do whatever you want in your home.

The major issue is that the province of Quebec was formed in a time when Christianity dominated and "tolerance" wasn't a practiced concept. So a lot these "traditions" are just Christianity.

[Fuzz]

The nice thing about Halal and Kosher is that all you have to do is remove(or ignore) the label to make it "food".

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The nice thing about Halal and Kosher is that all you have to do is remove(or ignore) the label to make it "food".

Yeah, I don't see why people would have issue with eating Kosher or Halal food - provided that they meet general food standards.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

It sounds like they are drawing a line between "Tradition" and religion. The article states, under the new laws, its okay to have a Christmas party, but you can't, for example, mention baby Jesus. I'm not entirely sure how that is supposed to work in practice. For example, could you light candles on a Menorah but just not talk about why you are doing it or say a prayer? Obviously, these rules only apply to public spaces, so you can do whatever you want in your home.

The major issue is that the province of Quebec was formed in a time when Christianity dominated and "tolerance" wasn't a practiced concept. So a lot these "traditions" are just Christianity.

And a lot of "Christian" traditions are just taken from other cultures, ceremonies and practices. I don't see anything in the bible about decorating a Christmas tree.


If you are lighting candles on a Menorah you are displaying a religious symbol, so I assume even if you didn't discuss why, it still won't be permitted.


And to link the two thoughts, I light a Menorah every year, but for me it's a tradition, not a religious item at all. So it could be argued that really almost any object can be presented as tradition, not a religious object, depending on the individual and how they experience it. Which makes it tough to write a law banning. Which I guess is what the NWC is in play.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Yeah, I don't see why people would have issue with eating Kosher or Halal food - provided that they meet general food standards.

Because their own religions often require the rejection. Food has been blessed and processed in religious ceremonies. Those of other religions that you may view as blasphemous. Eating that food wood be uncomfortable, and possibly not permitted(I dunno all the rules of all the religions). So you can see where if someone believes very strongly in their book being the correct one, it may be an issue.


But for me, food is food, magic food spells have no effect. Nice to not have that kinda thing hanging over me.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The nice thing about Halal and Kosher is that all you have to do is remove(or ignore) the label to make it "food".

Yeah, it's pretty dumb. I have heard that some hardcore Christians assume that eating halal food is somehow sacrilegious. Most obviously don't care, but some think it's bad for some reason. I recall when I was in Bosnia, in mixed religion towns, most things were halal just by default because it was good for business. Some things were labeled as "not halal" instead, usually an indication it contained pork. Personally, I buy halal chicken any time it's available and budget isn't a concern. The quality just seems a little better.

It can be a little pricier though, so I could see why some places wouldn't want to have it. Banning it is dumb though. Like if it's a public daycare that has food, there should be a halal option, just make them pay the difference. I mean, they should do that with all dietary restrictions. Your kid needs gluten-free stuff? Fine, but you should pay the difference.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Yeah, it's pretty dumb. I have heard that some hardcore Christians assume that eating halal food is somehow sacrilegious. Most obviously don't care, but some think it's bad for some reason. I recall when I was in Bosnia, in mixed religion towns, most things were halal just by default because it was good for business. Some things were labeled as "not halal" instead, usually an indication it contained pork. Personally, I buy halal chicken any time it's available and budget isn't a concern. The quality just seems a little better.

It can be a little pricier though, so I could see why some places wouldn't want to have it. Banning it is dumb though. Like if it's a public daycare that has food, there should be a halal option, just make them pay the difference. I mean, they should do that with all dietary restrictions. Your kid needs gluten-free stuff? Fine, but you should pay the difference.

Banning makes sense if you think the practice is so silly it shouldn't even be acknowledged in public spaces. Not saying that is their reasoning.


But now you got me reved up! Celiac is a medical condition and should be accommodated in the same way any other disability is. It sure as #### ain't the same as "requiring" halal or kosher. Nobody is getting sick or worse if they don't get blessed meat.