Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There are no hypocritical double standards in Bill 21 and its application

If a government introduces a secularism bill and then tries to retain a crucifix in the body of government by using the excuse that it's a 'heritage object' and not a religious one then that's hypocrisy. Muslim women are overwhelmingly impacted more than any other group by Bill 21 no matter what anyone here will try to claim. It's legislated discrimination that you're supporting under false pretenses.

Calling other users idiots doesn't do anything to support your argument other than make you look petty and controlling.

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by Architype

Actually, I can see points on both sides, not to worry. I think Canada is already a very secular country.

And Quebec is taking steps to make sure it stays that way.

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by JHikka

If a government introduces a secularism bill and then tries to retain a crucifix in the body of government by using the excuse that it's a 'heritage object' and not a religious one then that's hypocrisy. Muslim women are overwhelmingly impacted more than any other group by Bill 21 no matter what anyone here will try to claim. It's legislated discrimination that you're supporting under false pretenses.

Calling other users idiots doesn't do anything to support your argument other than make you look petty and controlling.

The crucifix was taken down. Muslim women are also beaten and killed for not wearing the hijab. You completely refuse to acknowledge that.

You have called posters trolls and made false accusations. You are no better.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Calling other users idiots doesn't do anything to support your argument other than make you look petty and controlling.

When did I call people idiots?

Don't put words in my mouth.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

If a government introduces a secularism bill and then tries to retain a crucifix in the body of government by using the excuse that it's a 'heritage object' and not a religious one then that's hypocrisy. Muslim women are overwhelmingly impacted more than any other group by Bill 21 no matter what anyone here will try to claim. It's legislated discrimination that you're supporting under false pretenses.

The cross in the National Assembly is most definitely a heritage object as it was there for almost a century.

An obvious example of hypocritical double standards would have been to pass Bill 21 and then make an exception to add a cross to the assembly, or to add religious symbols or names to public spaces. None of which has been done at all in Quebec for decades.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Luisito

The crucifix was taken down. Muslim women are also beaten and killed for not wearing the hijab. You completely refuse to acknowledge that.

You have called posters trolls and made false accusations. You are no better.

+1.

Il n'est pire aveugle que celui qui ne veut pas voir, as we say in French.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Thinking of this duality, every member of the assembly swearing an oath to the British monarch in 2022 would be like opening a brand new public school in 2023 and having it named "École du Sacré-Coeur de Jésus".

Removing the cross from the chamber (as was done), on the other hand, is more akin to changing the name of "Rue Ste-Catherine" to "Rue Catherine" or forcing everyone named Lévesque or Saint-Pierre to change their surnames to something that does not evoke Christianity.

People who can't see the difference between the two are probably being deliberately obtuse.

The non-exaggerated modern equivalent would be to be building a brand new public school in 2023 with conspicuous crosses as part of the brickwork or in the granite, and having it named "École du Sacré-Coeur de Jésus".

Or to be adding a brand new wing to the Quebec City Parliament in 2023 and having it decorated with British Monarchy motifs.

Leaving history alone rather than trying hard to erase it, while adapting the present and the future to current values, is such logical behavior that only someone with an agenda (deliberately obtuse or trolling) would be opposed.

Similarly, if the ayatollahs made grandiose and interesting Islam-themed architectural modifications in the 1980s to the buildings that are the seat of government, my ideal version of Iran in 2023 is one where those aren’t getting destroyed just to make a point, while Tehran women are back to being free to dress like in those pics from the 1970s.

Iran endured decades of that regime; if it’s left permanent marks, that’s only normal. It’s just history, doesn’t prevent anyone from doing anything in the present or future.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by JHikka

If a government introduces a secularism bill and then tries to retain a crucifix in the body of government by using the excuse that it's a 'heritage object' and not a religious one then that's hypocrisy. Muslim women are overwhelmingly impacted more than any other group by Bill 21 no matter what anyone here will try to claim. It's legislated discrimination that you're supporting under false pretenses.

It is an heritage object — put there by one of the most major and prominent heads of government we’ve ever had, and no one currently alive can have any memory of being in that room as an adult without that thing being there (let alone having been a legislator in that room while it wasn’t there).

And it was harmless — just as harmless as the Quebec City Parliament’s British Royalty Lions are in 2022.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Muslim women are overwhelmingly impacted more than any other group by Bill 21 no matter what anyone here will try to claim. It's legislated discrimination that you're supporting under false pretenses.

That’s the most idiotic argument I’ve ever seen.

Anti-murder laws overwhelmingly impact males much more than the other group (females).

Anti-speeding laws overwhelmingly impact young people much more than all other age groups;

Etc etc etc.

That’s not discrimination. That’s “everyone’s equal in front of a perfectly equitable and neutral law”, a law that, sure, everyone admits excited young men happen to be 10000x more likely to break than nonagenarian grandmas in a wheelchair, but that’s so completely irrelevant to the creation and application of such an universal, logical law.

[lio45]

Canada’s drug laws are discriminatory: they overwhelmingly impact drug dealers more than any other group

I’m not even exaggerating JHikka’s point here …

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

Canada’s drug laws are discriminatory: they overwhelmingly impact drug dealers more than any other group

I’m not even exaggerating JHikka’s point here …

Francophones also statistically are more likely to be smokers than anglophones, so anti-smoking laws and policies discriminate against us too.

My bet is that we also drive a bit faster too so speeding laws are also part of a devious plan to "get us".

And let's not even talk about fromage au lait cru...

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by lio45

That’s the most idiotic argument I’ve ever seen.

It's just not something you agree with.

Originally Posted by lio45

Canada’s drug laws are discriminatory: they overwhelmingly impact drug dealers more than any other group

Drug dealers aren't an ethnic or religious minority protected under the Charter. Try again.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by lio45

That’s the most idiotic argument I’ve ever seen.

Anti-murder laws overwhelmingly impact males much more than the other group (females).

Anti-speeding laws overwhelmingly impact young people much more than all other age groups;

Etc etc etc.

That’s not discrimination. That’s “everyone’s equal in front of a perfectly equitable and neutral law”, a law that, sure, everyone admits excited young men happen to be 10000x more likely to break than nonagenarian grandmas in a wheelchair, but that’s so completely irrelevant to the creation and application of such an universal, logical law.

Iinm, it’s one of the arguments that the courts are still considering.

[lio45]

Completely irrelevant. Road safety laws about maximum window tint have a disproportionate impact on blacks, who are a protected ethnic minority, yet the point is that being a protected minority doesn’t extend all the way to giving you the right to violate universal, equitable laws.

It’s so clear, it’s impossible that you couldn’t understand it.

[Luisito]

The same people crying about bill 21 probably support bill c16, government mandated use of gender pronouns, including fake recently made up ones....and the punishment of failing to use them can be considered as a hate crime. This is pretty much delusion and facism veiled as compassion.

The irony in this is some of the most vocal people against bill c16 are Muslims and other "ethnic and religious minorities".

[lio45]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Iinm, it’s one of the arguments that the courts are still considering.

Yeah, but that’s not saying much. Bad arguments are routinely “considered”. Pretty sure I’ve heard the (identical) argument made that gun laws are racist… and this one too, if sanity prevails, won’t go anywhere.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Drug dealers aren't an ethnic or religious minority protected under the Charter. Try again.

Okay, how about a slightly different version then:

“Canada’s drug laws are discriminatory: they disproportionately impact blacks more than any other group”

?

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by lio45

Okay, how about a slightly different version then:

“Canada’s drug laws are discriminatory: they disproportionately impact blacks more than any other group”

?

Yeah, they should probably be updated too. One being true does not make the other untrue. Things aren't a binary zero-sum.

[lio45]

Anyway, age and gender are both among the list of characteristics officially protected against discrimination, so my point that under JHikka’s logic, laws prohibiting murder and speeding are “discrimination”, is still intact.

[Acajack]

Opponents of Bill 21 trying hard to find every single possible argument against it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSyoH933vw8