131
Quebec to ban public prayer in sweeping new secularism law (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/canada@lemmy.ca
61 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 11 months ago (39 children)

I love it. Public prayer shouldn’t happen at all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 39 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 11 months ago (26 children)

    The problem is not if it should or shouldn’t happen

    The problem is that it will not be enforced equally between religious communities and Christian poser asshole

    It’s racism with more steps

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (11 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    It just so happens that it always boils down to policing what Muslims do. Just one big coincidence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    That's very fair yes. But how can you tell those who are anti-religion for racist reasons from those who are for not?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    There are two hazards in our discussion:

    1. someone being called racist
    2. someone suffering from systemic racism

    I prioritize hazard 1 as having a lower consequence than hazard 2.

    In other words, I care much more about eradicating systemic racism than the hurt feelings of someone whose motives are misunderstood.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    That's my issue as well with the bill. Just look at the crucifix at the Assembly. They didn't remove it, they just moved it outside the room. If the intent of the law was really to remove religion from the public space, it wouldn't have been a debate about keeping the crucifix in the Assembly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

    Sure, you can be against it for authoritarian reasons as well. Disturbing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -4 points 11 months ago (13 children)

    It’s not racism with more steps. You don’t even know it has not been enforced improperly. It’s a lot easier to enforce enforcement than it is to stop people ruining the world

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (11 children)

    Praying doesn't ruin the world. Just like having a party, or a poetry slam, or Shakespeare in the park.

    It's behaviors that cause health or safety issues that are the problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    Praying in PUBLIC is like having sex in public. Don’t.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    So someone praying before a meal is an equivalent obscenity?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    So, you and I both know that public praying isn’t just people being in public standing around praying without anyone knowing they’re praying.

    If a person went to a restaurant and started vocally praising Satan for this meal for an hour prior to eating it… yeah I bet they would make a lot of people uncomfortable. Not to mention the restaurant would refuse them service.

    What you want to do is justify bothering people in public spaces with your beliefs. If you can stand around in public thinking about your god without letting anyone else know you’re doing it, then no one would be uncomfortable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Then that's not prayer, it's being a public nuisance, a disturber of the peace. That's a different crime / tort that I'm sure is already on the books.

    The prayer part is irrelevant.

    There's a precedent like this in the US: enhancement laws

    They ruin lives, and don't stop crime.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Sorry, can you expand on the ways prayer is like sex? Are people praying with their dicks out in your vicinity?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    If you aren’t able to see how a comparison between two things does not create a combination of those two things, then you aren’t intelligent enough to converse in a polite manor. I’ve provided more details in my other comments, you can read those without interacting with me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 7 points 11 months ago* (12 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 11 months ago (11 children)

    Religion is like sex. You can do it in your home and maybe even designated enclosed places in groups, but you should never do it out in public—and under no circumstances should you ever involve children.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [+] 14 points 11 months ago (11 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    Do you believe that people should be able to have sex out in public for everyone to see? And, why Do you feel the way you do?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [+] 3 points 11 months ago* (10 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    I would say about the same number of people are offended by profanity in public as they are religious acts in public. Moreover, I would estimate the number who are offended by sex acts in public is much higher than either of these. So, for the sake of other people's sensibilities, shall we ban public profanity?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

    I believe that public display of religion makes enough people feel uncomfortable that it was banned in Quebec.

    Let me ask you this, why do you feel that you should be able to practice your religion in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable? And a follow up question, don’t you think that you should be going to the designated spot for this?

    I certainly don’t think we should ban religion in general. That’s crazy talk. I just don’t think we should be forcing things onto other people. Do you?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Do you feel that you should be able to hold hands with a same sex partner in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?

    Do you feel that you should be able to be trans in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?

    Maybe people being uncomfortable is not a good yardstick for determining what people can do in public.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago

    Do you feel that you should be able to hold hands with a same sex partner in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?

    Yes, you can hold hands and you can hold your bible. You can also be a believer in god while also walking in public. You can even wear a rainbow or a crucifix to identify your own kind. But, keep your void damned pants on and don’t scream out praising your god.

    Do you feel that you should be able to be trans in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?

    Yes trans is a person being who they are. Religion is a choice.

    Maybe people being uncomfortable is not a good yardstick for determining what people can do in public.

    I don’t disagree that “uncomfortable” is a slippery slope word. And while I completely agree with banning prayer in public—I probably wouldn’t vote for it. Unlike religious people, I dislike forcing my views on people, even if their entire existence is doing that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Your opinion makes me uncomfortable and I think we should ban expressing things like this in public :(

    /end sarcasm

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Good thing this isn’t public.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    You have fundamentally misunderstood the internet if you do not think this is public.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    There’s a real difference between doing something on an open internet forum and doing it out in public, physically. Online, people have to choose to click on something, follow a link, or open a post. If they don’t want to see it, they can just scroll past or block it. In the real world, you can’t avoid someone the same way—you can’t block a person walking toward you on the sidewalk, and you can’t just scroll away from something happening right in front of you.

    Plus, online spaces usually come with filters, warnings, and moderation tools that don’t exist in physical public spaces. Everything online is also separated by screens and distance, so the impact isn’t the same as doing something right in front of people who have no way to opt out.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)