Never been in a Catholic school I take it? Here in Alberta we have publicly funded religious schools all over the place and access to Catholic schools are a constitutional requirement. Even in fully secular public schools, good luck taking any kind of music or performing arts without having to sing some creed’s hymns or performing a play with religious themes. I’m actually really thrilled when a school has some religious diversity and isn’t afraid to include some Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, or Indigenous representation in the day-to-day, because it gets so monotonous to have so much Christian representation and nothing else.
I don’t know about Quebec, but I’d rather my kids get used to the idea that no one of any creed is particularly terrible (or has a monopoly on virtue). As for head scarves, I have no more objection to Islamic women wearing them than I object to Hutterite or Mennonite women wearing them. They’re wearing a hat, not reading scriptures.The whole “religious symbols” thing seems like a lot of pearl-clutching over nothing.
I have been to a private school that was softly catholic, but I didn’t include it in my list because it’s private. Private schools aren’t affected by this law.
At least when I was in high school we had ethics and religion class, where among other things we learned about all the religions, notably, the teacher wasn’t even allowed to tell us which one they subscribed to.
The reasoning for the law is that it wouldn’t be legal for a teacher to wear a head covering if it weren’t religious, so they shouldn’t be able to even if it is.
The whole “religious symbols” thing seems like a lot of pearl-clutching over nothing.
I see your point but up to relatively recently Quebec was completely dominated by religion to a scary extent. So now people here are really afraid of religion regaining a place of power in society and seeing Muslim people arriving and being much more visibly religious than other groups is reminding people of that.
Until very recently we’ve all been under some pretty scary religious leadership of one denomination or another. Some of us still are (as many of us in Alberta will happily admit). That said, I think it’s a bridge to far to associate all religion with its worst, extremist elements, regardless of which faith it happens to be.
As far as the “private” school thing, at least here Catholic schools aren’t even technically private. They’re public, provincially funded schools with semi-autonomous regional school boards, with religious oversight from the local Diocese. It’s referred to as the “seperate” school system, which is entirely different than the “private” (aka pay-to-play) school system, which is different still from the “charter” school system which most other religious schools fall under (Lutheran, Pentecostal, Jewish, etc.).
I admit to not being as familiar with how Quebec handles their Catholic schools. Is it not run the same there?
As I understand in Quebec all private schools receive some funding (per student) from the government, regardless of religion. As I understand the only requirement for funding is teaching Quebec history. There isn’t a two-tier system.
(Quebec was granted an exemption from section 93 in 1998)
Of the 163 private schools receiving funding, there are 50 religious schools. There are 27 roman catholic, 14 Jewish, 4 Muslim and 5 that teach another denomination of Christianity. However, the same bill that banned hijabs also will gradually end funding for those religious schools. Note that they are mostly christian.
Kind of an over-explanation but it was interesting to research, since I realized I didn’t exactly know what the situation was.
So yeah the system is pretty different from Alberta’s.
Otherwise the general logic behind the law is that teachers and some other public sector workers should not reveal what religion they’re a part of since they represent the government, and the government is non-religious. Also, they argue the hijab (because let’s be real, the law is about the hijab) is inherently a way for a much more conservative view of women’s place in society to advertise itself.
It also should be understood in the wider context of the francophone vision of laicity, which is something perhaps more resembling “state atheism”, where organized religion is excluded from the public sphere. I think this mainly manifests in that anglo canada is generally more accepting of religious “reasonable accommodation” than Quebec.
This isn’t to say that I even support the law, I just wish the situation in Quebec would be less mischaracterized.
I have to say, I’m a bit shocked that we have to accomodate publicly funded Catholic schools as a charter obligation “out of respect for francophone culture” when you don’t even consider it a part of your culture.
Never been in a Catholic school I take it? Here in Alberta we have publicly funded religious schools all over the place and access to Catholic schools are a constitutional requirement. Even in fully secular public schools, good luck taking any kind of music or performing arts without having to sing some creed’s hymns or performing a play with religious themes. I’m actually really thrilled when a school has some religious diversity and isn’t afraid to include some Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, or Indigenous representation in the day-to-day, because it gets so monotonous to have so much Christian representation and nothing else.
I don’t know about Quebec, but I’d rather my kids get used to the idea that no one of any creed is particularly terrible (or has a monopoly on virtue). As for head scarves, I have no more objection to Islamic women wearing them than I object to Hutterite or Mennonite women wearing them. They’re wearing a hat, not reading scriptures.The whole “religious symbols” thing seems like a lot of pearl-clutching over nothing.
I have been to a private school that was softly catholic, but I didn’t include it in my list because it’s private. Private schools aren’t affected by this law.
At least when I was in high school we had ethics and religion class, where among other things we learned about all the religions, notably, the teacher wasn’t even allowed to tell us which one they subscribed to.
The reasoning for the law is that it wouldn’t be legal for a teacher to wear a head covering if it weren’t religious, so they shouldn’t be able to even if it is.
I see your point but up to relatively recently Quebec was completely dominated by religion to a scary extent. So now people here are really afraid of religion regaining a place of power in society and seeing Muslim people arriving and being much more visibly religious than other groups is reminding people of that.
Until very recently we’ve all been under some pretty scary religious leadership of one denomination or another. Some of us still are (as many of us in Alberta will happily admit). That said, I think it’s a bridge to far to associate all religion with its worst, extremist elements, regardless of which faith it happens to be.
As far as the “private” school thing, at least here Catholic schools aren’t even technically private. They’re public, provincially funded schools with semi-autonomous regional school boards, with religious oversight from the local Diocese. It’s referred to as the “seperate” school system, which is entirely different than the “private” (aka pay-to-play) school system, which is different still from the “charter” school system which most other religious schools fall under (Lutheran, Pentecostal, Jewish, etc.).
I admit to not being as familiar with how Quebec handles their Catholic schools. Is it not run the same there?
As I understand in Quebec all private schools receive some funding (per student) from the government, regardless of religion. As I understand the only requirement for funding is teaching Quebec history. There isn’t a two-tier system.
(Quebec was granted an exemption from section 93 in 1998)
Of the 163 private schools receiving funding, there are 50 religious schools. There are 27 roman catholic, 14 Jewish, 4 Muslim and 5 that teach another denomination of Christianity. However, the same bill that banned hijabs also will gradually end funding for those religious schools. Note that they are mostly christian.
Kind of an over-explanation but it was interesting to research, since I realized I didn’t exactly know what the situation was.
So yeah the system is pretty different from Alberta’s.
Otherwise the general logic behind the law is that teachers and some other public sector workers should not reveal what religion they’re a part of since they represent the government, and the government is non-religious. Also, they argue the hijab (because let’s be real, the law is about the hijab) is inherently a way for a much more conservative view of women’s place in society to advertise itself.
It also should be understood in the wider context of the francophone vision of laicity, which is something perhaps more resembling “state atheism”, where organized religion is excluded from the public sphere. I think this mainly manifests in that anglo canada is generally more accepting of religious “reasonable accommodation” than Quebec.
This isn’t to say that I even support the law, I just wish the situation in Quebec would be less mischaracterized.
I have to say, I’m a bit shocked that we have to accomodate publicly funded Catholic schools as a charter obligation “out of respect for francophone culture” when you don’t even consider it a part of your culture.
Oh I 100% agree, we don’t even follow that law lmao. Take it up with the federal government I guess.
Although the minority french canadians in other provinces might view it differently, idk