The Quebec government says it will ban religious symbols in the province’s daycare centres.

Secularism Minister Jean-François Roberge says there is a “broad consensus” that Quebecers want secularism to be strengthened.

The announcement follows a recommendation made this summer by a committee tasked with advising the province on how to enhance secularism. The committee had called for the ban to be extended to daycares.

Quebec has already banned public sector workers in positions of authority, such as teachers and judges, from wearing religious symbols on the job.

    • Chloé 🥕@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      lmao catholic private schools receive public funds in quebec too

      why do actual secularism when you could just attack Muslim people 🙃

    • mrdown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      1 day ago

      What next remove religious names or part of people name like the word st aka saint?

      • Credibly_Human@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m not sure I follow your attempt to paint this as a slippery slope given that one thing is a person’s personal name, a part of their person, and the other is the state brandishing elements of religion.

        • mrdown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          22
          ·
          1 day ago

          I am showing how ridiculous this law is. It serve no benefits just hate and more division

          • Credibly_Human@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Seperation of church and state is so obviously different than the state infringing on your personhood.

            Its a wildly incongruent comparison.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            The argument for it is to remove hate and division. The purpose of them is to act as a shibboleth, to identify yourself as part of an in-group. That necessarily requires division. If you make it harder for people to show their affiliation with exclusive groups then it makes it more inclusive.

            This doesn’t make them not allowed to follow a religion. It just makes them not allowed to share identifiers of that religion to children. Children are easily influenced, and having authority figures identities with religion lends that authority and authenticity to that religion, influencing the children.

            • mrdown@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              The argument for it is to remove hate and division.

              Canada has religious harmony for long time there were little to no division. Those restrictions of the right to wear a sign that mean someone to a person but is not used to convert other to a religion will only cause more hate since those people will feel discriminated. Being able to display a sign with no one telling you that you shouldn’t wear it is a show of tolerance The idea that a kid will be influenced by a hijab or a cross is also total bullshit .

              The real issues that should be addressed in extremist messages in places of cult like a imam who would support terrorism or a synagogues that sell occupied land in the west bank

              https://www.laconverse.com/en/articles/les-coulisses-dun-salon-de-limmobilier-offrant-des-biens-en-terre-palestinienne

              Those stupid laws remind me of the law to protect French by telling businesses that they can’t use an english name as if this is the reason that french usage decline. All those millions could have been used to boost French cultural projects budgets

              • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                The idea that a kid will be influenced by a hijab or a cross is also total bullshit .

                Do you think no kid has really liked a teacher and done things to get them to like them? I promise you, there are children who got into a religion, a hobby, etc. because a teacher they wanted to impress was into it.

                The real issues that should be addressed in extremist messages in places of cult like a imam who would support terrorism or a synagogues that sell occupied land in the west bank

                I mostly disagree with this. Which definition of terrorism are we using? The problem is the state gets to define whatever they want as terrorism, so they can target dissidents. Why does the state get a monopoly on terrorism/violence? (As proof of the term being bullshit to target people, why did use use an Imam for your example? Biased?)

                People should be allowed to do and say what they want in private. If they’re a public official, they shouldn’t use that platform to lend credibility to other organizations/faiths. That’s not the place for it.

                • mrdown@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Do you think no kid has really liked a teacher and done things to get them to like them?

                  Kids like nice teachers and no they do not copy the teachers faith . You are using the same rhetoric that conservatives use like claiming that trans people would influence kids badly