A Christian (and human) Reflection on Secularism

I fall back on my faith to answer this question. As a Christian, I must put myself in the other person’s shoes to ensure that I treat him or her with empathy and a real concern for his or her well-being. I am inspired by the fundamental commandment for life in society that my religion gives me as a guideline: “Do unto others what you would like them to do for you.”² It is this principle that must guide my approach to others, especially those who do not resemble me.³ And I must demand that our province also act with empathy, not because it is a Christian principle, but because it is human.

One Québec for all?

No, I have no problem with the religious symbols of my fellow citizens, because I realize that these symbols are very profound marks of cultural association. In addition, many people who wear religious symbols are newcomers to the province. They are not only experiencing culture shock as a result of being a “visible minority”, but are also facing a difficult period of adaptation in a country and culture whose values are often very different from those from which they came.

Should we impose on these vulnerable people not only the obligation to conform to the values of their host country, which is legitimate, but also to deny what identifies their culture of origin?

You could say to me, “This is an argument from one religious person to another. This does not concern the majority of Quebecers” or “You use your faith to defend multiculturalism. ” It is true that my faith inspires empathy and mercy towards those who suffer, but it is not just a Christian argument. We are talking about humanity and values reflected both in the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and in the values of Québec society (although these values are sadly absent from many of our political discourses and social interactions).

Identity and Heritage

Let me look at this issue from an even more personal perspective. I am not the only one concerned by my position. I am also responsible for three young boys who attend public school in our borough. How would I feel, as a Christian father, if my 5-year-old son were placed in a kindergarten class taught by a Muslim woman wearing the hijab? Would I accept that she teaches my son while wearing an ostentatious symbol of her faith? After all, I want to teach my own values to my children.

My answer remains yes. I want my children to grow up with personal convictions they adopted in full knowledge of other philosophies that exist and are openly practiced by the people around them⁴ In addition, I do not want them to be ashamed of their values, whether or not these values are accepted by the majority of the population. I do not have to be afraid of my neighbours’ religious beliefs as long as they are not imposed on me. I do not want my children, my neighbours’ children or anyone to have to grow up in a society that forbids them to express who they are or what they believe in both the private and public sphere.

The only ideological threat that is being imposed in schools at the moment is that of secularism. If adults are not allowed to openly express their beliefs through their clothing, do we honestly believe that this in itself does not communicate a message to our children?

We know that much of our communication happens without words. If a person in a position of authority is denied the right to follow his or her own religious beliefs, children who adhere to religions where the wearing of a religious symbol is required face a difficult choice: either choose to fully belong to Québec society, enjoying all the opportunities for advancement that this entails, or choose to be marginalized. The secular nature of Québec, as interpreted by Law 21, marginalizes anyone who does not adhere to this philosophy, prohibiting them from becoming civil servants unless they deny their religious beliefs. Secularism is not a neutral position. The blatant hypocrisy of our leaders on this point would be laughable, if it were not so fatal.

Do we sincerely believe that this will lead these people towards social cohesion, or even to love and pride Québec’s culture as we treat them this way? Do we want to be a unified people around a philosophy of exclusion and discrimination? Have we given enough thought to the implications of secularism?

Evolution or stupidity?

How do we see Québec in the years to come? Do we want a fearful society where compliance is imposed by a propaganda government that promotes an exclusive and discriminatory cultural ideal? Or do we want to be a society brave enough to be a welcoming land for people who not only don’t look like us, but don’t necessarily believe the same things we do? Do we have enough confidence in our beliefs (whether secular or religious) that we can tolerate the beliefs of others without seeing these differences as a threat to our identity?

Private beliefs influence our actions in public life. It is precisely for this reason that the current government wants to impose a “wall” between the private lives of those who do not share their ideals and the public sphere. Let us face it: this is a social project of “ghettoisation”. We cannot allow our province to become a place where we classify people according to higher and lower castes under the pretext of state neutrality.

The people of Québec must assume their moral responsibility for their social projects. Are we evolving towards greater humanity or are we undermining our collective consciousness with the walls we are building amongst ourselves? Let us stop the moral and human decline of our social structures. Let us have faith in the future of Québec, a Québec that is inclusive, generous and full of empathy where all citizens are encouraged to live according to the strength of their convictions.