As of November this year, the Quebec provincial government has been attempting to pass a new bill, which has taken on the colloquial name of the “secularism charter.” Bill 60 was tabled on November 7th, and its intention is to ban state employees and public servants from wearing or displaying any symbols that would overtly affiliate them with a particular religion. This charter is the source of much controversy. Many people believe that religion has become too entangled in the affairs and interests of our politicians and social leaders; these people tend to support the charter. On the other hand, many Quebecois are enraged and protest the bill, claiming that it infringes on the rights and freedoms that should be offered.
What is very interesting about this case is that rather than identifying religion in the public sphere, so to speak, it acknowledges religion as constantly present in the public sphere. An effect of globalization is that there is great religious diversity within ecological religions. There is now a great sensitivity about public servants associating themselves with religion because of how it could bias them, and further, how overt religious affiliation could bias others. Though Quebec may still have dominantly Christian values, there isn’t an agreement on the “right” religion like there used to, and many people would like to believe it is time to secularize our political affairs. It seems that in the modern world, collective consciousness, as Durkheim wrote about, is no longer to be generated by religious experience because it relied on the people sharing something in common (which they no longer do, at least in their ecological niches). While it should be important to divorce church and state in our day and age, and while wearing religious symbols is advertising in a sort of way, I do believe (to throw a personal opinion in) that citizens should be free to display their religion. As long as religion is not forced on others, I see no issue with people publicly displaying something which they feel factors in the composition of their personal identity. Religion as social oppression—the opiate of society—seems irrelevant today; with the diversity of religions (at least in Canada) we no know it is near impossible for one to become powerful enough to either control people (macroscopically of course, interpersonal social control is still relevant however) or to induce complacency. While I believe a more secular political world is needed, this bill seems to be a fair bit overboard and quite controlling.
by
S.G.
Religion in the Public Sphere (RLG200) 