Quebec bans religious teaching in publicly subsidized daycares

[giblets]

If the state refuses to fund a religious activity, how is that "suppressing religion"? I think that would qualify as "not promoting any particular religion". I thought this only applied to daycares in Quebec that were receiving public money.

[Elok]

Hey, I'm religious, and I think mixing church and state in any way is bad for both. I wouldn't mind a little of my money being used to teach kids Orthodoxy, but I wouldn't want it used to teach them to be Mormons or Jains or atheists, so it's only fair to cut it out across the board. The only really objectionable thing I've read here is the bit about Catholics being required to pay for Catholic schools regardless of their children's attendance.

[notyoueither]

If the state refuses to fund a religious activity, how is that "suppressing religion"? I think that would qualify as "not promoting any particular religion". I thought this only applied to daycares in Quebec that were receiving public money.

Jewish or Muslim parents banding together and setting up a daycare for their children where the state will pay part of the costs is not the state promoting a religion either, even if a rabbi or an imam will offer instruction on the sabbath or other holy day.

Attempts to ban religion from schools, daycares, and all other public places or functions is supressing religion.

[notyoueither]

BTW, I note that this issue in Quebec came about due to Jewish and Muslim instruction in daycares. Quebec is largely an RC culture. Christianity does not need any boost or protection.

I see this as possibly being about supressing minority cultures, which is something that is not unheard of in that province.

[Elok]

Attempts to ban religion from schools, daycares, and all other public places or functions is supressing religion.

The issue is that public money is being used to pay for said instruction. I assume that if they wanted to hold a religious ceremony of some sort in the building on hours when they aren't on payroll, nobody would really care. Well, there might be some hemming and hawing about utility bills, just as a matter of principle. But if they wanted to do that, or put up a sign on the bulletin board saying "Mass to be held X place, X time, all are welcome," I don't think it'd be an issue.

[notyoueither]

I see no inherent problem with government funding following citizens who choose to buy a service from an organisation with or without a religious foundation.

I see a problem with busy-bodies trying to control the choices of other people through the legal and economic power of government.

[Elok]

Most people agree with the famous, possibly apocryphal TJ quote, "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." Now, this isn't a huge deal IMO, but it's a bigger deal than the silliness about In God We Trust on coins.

[notyoueither]

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."

Did it occur to you that this could apply to a lot of things?

[notyoueither]

It's also a bit of a red herring.

The government isn't paying holy men and women to visit daycares and indoctrinate the young-un's.

Parents are consenting to allow an unpaid member of the clergy to teach their children about their faith in a place that it is convenient to do so.

[notyoueither]

The problem here, as alluded to in the OP quote near the end, is that them damn minorities are keeping their culture.

[Wezil]

It's also a bit of a red herring.

Parents are consenting to allow an unpaid member of the clergy to teach their children about their faith in a place that it is convenient to do so.

Damn! If only they had a building specifically intended for that purpose.

[notyoueither]

Canadian society has a day where a majority of people do not have to work that conveniently coincides with the day for Christian mass.

Most Jewish and Muslim parents are working on their significant day during the week. I can't for the life of me figure out why they would have rabbis and imams visit daycares.

[Elok]

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."

Did it occur to you that this could apply to a lot of things?

Yes, but it applies mostly to religion, a subject given to much difference of opinion on matters that, for the most part, cannot be verified. I believe it should also apply to politics--schools should not be telling kids that the Prime Minister is a doofus, for example. Other matters of significant and meaningful controversy should be reported fairly and evenly, with mention of what experts on any given subject think, and the dominant arguments on either side as time allows.

[Elok]

Parents are consenting to allow an unpaid member of the clergy to teach their children about their faith in a place that it is convenient to do so.

Is this during hours of operation paid for by the state?

[bc1871]

Canada is and always has been a GOD FEARING NATION, and be damned if a bunch of anti-religious liberals will change it. Furthermore Canada is an ANGLICAN nation, and we will forever have the Sovereign of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as our head of state.