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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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