Leaders of the FTQ and CSN told the Bouchard-Taylor commission that workers in Quebec should be forbidden from wearing anything that indicates what religion they are.
So I guess that means no more crucifix necklaces.
The article (I’m guessing it’s more their position) is a bit confusing, later going on about how they just don’t want employers to have to change any rules about safety or uniform codes in order to accomodate religious minorities.
It’s odd to hear about a trade union arguing for restricting workers’ rights, but then again these hearings are creating a lot of crazy ideas.
So when does the witchhunt begin for determining what constitutes a religious symbol? Does a black top hat make you Jewish? Does wearing a loose-fitting dress make you Muslim? Does a spaghetti-strap top make you a Pastafarian?
If we’re going to secularize the public service by removing all religious symbols, we’d better be prepared to remove the crucifix from the National Assembly, change the names of dozens of schools and force Laval to stop its city council from reciting the Lord’s Prayer before every session. Forcing a teacher to remove his kippa or her hijab is absurd when they’re teaching in a school named École Coeur-Immaculé-de-Marie.
Apparently, Quebec’s unions are not interested in workers’ rights, just the rights of some workers.
Yes and the religious try to equate atheism as a religious belief (as in we believe in a no-god) so will they start objecting to being made to look like atheists? O_O
What if I have a tattoo of the Pink Unicorn?
What is obvious, but mostly unstated, is that as long as the religion practiced is Catholic, or a secular form of it, then it is acceptable. No one, apparently, is objecting to an illuminated cross on the top of Mount Royal? Or, indeed, “Saint”-Catherine, “Saint”-Denis, “Saint”-Eustace, and so many others, are they? In the provincial legislative assembly, in Quebec City, a large crucifix is set atop the Speaker’s chair: Any objections? Crosses are adorned throughout the formerly officially Catholic schools. Dawson College’s library has crosses (part of the convent that used to occupy the building). Or, how about the Christmas trees on government property? The lighting of which is attended upon by the government? So don’t be misled, the tyranny of the majority that exists in Quebec is certainly comfortable with religious symbols; as long as it is their religious symbols. Quebec’s tyrannical majority claims to be secular, but it is secularism dressed in Catholic garb, this baggage has never been discarded. What we are seeing in Quebec is an attack on religious minorities plain and simple. Why isn’t anyone outraged by the hypocrisy?
Quebec’s tyrannical majority
Holy Crap! Tyrannical? Really?
ty·rant Listen to the pronunciation of tyrant
Middle English tyraunt, from Anglo-French tyran, tyrant, from Latin tyrannus, from Greek tyrannos
1 a: an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution b: a usurper of sovereignty2 a: a ruler who exercises absolute power oppressively or brutally b: one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power
Wow, I must have been blinded by my oppressors. Maybe I’m buying into the bullshit? Maybe I’m a tyrant and I don’t know it.
When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Jews, I remained silent; I wasn’t a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.
Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller, (1892-1984)
“A witty saying proves nothing” – Voltaire
Quoting stuff to me sounds ridiculous like religious bible thumper quoting scripture when confronted with arguments. You just lose credibility. Quotes are interesting if accompanied with a good argument, they reinforce the argument. A quote alone, shows only you can use a search engine.
Lance. What has our Government come for? Show me, I’ll listen.
Why should either the Catholic-religion or the French-language be forced upon anyone? As someone born in Quebec, I have no interest in either; both are foreign and unnatuaral to me. And in any case, the whole “language thing” in Quebec is artificial and invented. It serves two purposes. First, the Canadian state has an interest in the preservation of the “French Canadian,” (that, together with the Catholic church, it invented), since it helps differentiate “Canada” from the United States. Second, there are those in Quebec, some of whom do not speak English–and thus are thereby victimized to remain in an objectively unpleasant place–whose social and economic standing are closely tied to keeping out any competition. This latter purpose is really the source of the ugly French-supremicism now existing in Quebec-province. It has nothing to do with language, are what is laughably referred to as a “culture,” but to keeping immigrants and others from jobs and resources that are reserved for what I have justifiably referred to previously as the tyrranical majority.