Quebec bans religious teaching in publicly subsidized daycares

[Lorizael]

Not a chance, and with good reason.

Because, as we all know, we need our presidents to be like police officers and jurors, who are good at making random decisions based on incomplete and inaccurate information.

[Kidlicious]

Because, as we all know, we need our presidents to be like police officers and jurors, who are good at making random decisions based on incomplete and inaccurate information.

No, because you're all ammoral at best silly.

[Asher]

I'm not sure how banning religious teaching is different from banning teaching atheism. And I say this as an atheist who fully believes religion is nothing but superstition.

Who even brought this up?

Who teaches atheism in school?

[Asher]

Atheism as some push it is faith-like.

Secularism does not entail a complete absense of religion from public life, except as promoted by extremists such as rabid atheists.

You apparently are not familiar what secularism means.

Secularism means separate from religion, which would indicate a complete absence of. And are you talking about "public life" as in a family choosing to celebrate Christianity by caroling in the street? This is of course perfectly legal.

Are you referring to "Public life" as in, government organizations? That is secular. That is, it is separate from religion.

There is a difference between the state not promoting any particular religion and the state supressing religion.

Thank you for agreeing. Simply not teaching religion with public tax dollars does not mean it's being suppressed, merely not promoted.

[Asher]

I also note, nye, that you've glazed over the point of availability. As any parent with daycare-age children will tell you, finding a close/convenient daycare with available spaces is extremely difficult, if not impossible.

Making specific public daycares for different faiths makes this even more difficult and for no apparent reason. What the **** does religion have to do with glorified babysitting?

Turn down the histrionics about authoritarianism and put on a thinking cap.

[Kidlicious]

A lot of non-religious parents put their children in religious schools, for similar reasons as we don't elect atheists to office.
... just sayin'.

[N35t0r]

Not a chance, and with good reason.

Yeah. And even better if he's also male and white, right? Oh wait!

I don't see any problem with people standing in the hall like that.

Good luck to your kids then.

[Al B. Sure!]

No, because you're all ammoral at best silly.

Kid, have you ever had premarital sex?

[N35t0r]

A lot of non-religious parents put their children in religious schools, for similar reasons as we don't elect atheists to office.
... just sayin'.

Yeah, sorry but no.

[notyoueither]

If they're working after sunset then they're bad Jews anyway.

Not to mention the fact that "Friday after sundown" takes up only a few percent of the daycare week, even during the winter.

I wouldn't presume to know what makes one a good or bad member of a culture or religion that I am not that familiar with. I would imagine that similar to other faiths and cultures there are a lot of individual judgements about observance, especially when reconciling the demands of daily life with those of being a member of a minority culture.

And you've also been relatively dishonest about the scale of government funding; the government ponies up something like 85% of the total cost.

I don't think I've been dishonest. I've addressed the argument of state sponsorship of religion directly. There are no priests or other clergy on the government payroll. Private organisations are offering services that taxpayers are taking up with the state paying on a per head basis for those services. From time to time clergy who are not paid by the state may be invited to talk to members of their congregation and lead them in activities that are prescribed by their religion.

What is the harm?

I've got an idea: pay to take care of your own ****ing kids. I have no idea why anybody thinks I should pay for them to have children. I especially don't know why I should pay for a Sunday school in disguise.

You shouldn't pay for roads you never use, schools you don't have children attending, hospitals when you're never sick, or postage stamps for politicians you don't vote for either, I suppose.

[giblets]

Not a chance, and with good reason.

No, because you're all ammoral at best silly.

A lot of non-religious parents put their children in religious schools, for similar reasons as we don't elect atheists to office.
... just sayin'.

I don't think non-religious parents put their children in religious schools because of bigotry.

[giblets]

I don't see any problem with people standing in the hall like that. Even though I myself am not sure whether religious education is a good thing for kids.

Holy crap. You don't have a problem with people feeling humiliated because they don't believe in everyone else's god?

[notyoueither]

So what is the Christian excuse? Are they working on Sunday or can they just not be bothered with saving their souls on their day off? Never mind, the answer to that is in the other thread. Do you want to buy a church?

I'd wager heavily that priests, nuns, or other clergy visited daycares before it became an issue when Muslim and Jewish families had their own centres with imams and rabbis offering instruction.

My friend in public school was obligated to stand in the hall while we sang the national anthem and recited the lords prayer as these routines were offensive to his faith. That is where your "tolerance" leads us. Been there and saw how crappy it is to have faith in public institutions. Thankfully we have moved forward as a society.

I recall your friend is a Quaker. That sounds like a strong reaction to other peoples' expressions in a public environment.

I had to deal with something similar yet different. I was not Christian and the Lord's Prayer was not uncommon in several settings I was in when I was growing up. It did not hurt to remain silent. I do rise when others pray out of respect for them, like at funerals.

I'd say needing to leave the room is a pretty intolerant demand placed on your friend by his co-religionists, or intolerant of him for demanding it of himself.

[notyoueither]

I also note, nye, that you've glazed over the point of availability. As any parent with daycare-age children will tell you, finding a close/convenient daycare with available spaces is extremely difficult, if not impossible.

Making specific public daycares for different faiths makes this even more difficult and for no apparent reason. What the **** does religion have to do with glorified babysitting?

Turn down the histrionics about authoritarianism and put on a thinking cap.

Dude, you are the person on the side of government proscription of the harmless activities of its minority citizens. You lecturing about authoritarianianianism is rich in this thread.

As for thinking, you might want to think that it is the role the market and individuals acting in the market to solve any shortages the way the GoQ has set things up. Nowhere has it been stated, that I have read, that a shortage of spaces motivated this decision. OTOH, I have read that integration of minorities is a factor. So, thinking caps all around might be in order, or maybe they shoud get right to it and bring in the residential schools for children of minorities.

Authoritarian, indeed. Yuk, yuk, yuk.

[Meticulous Man]

Quebec sans religious teaching in publicly subsidized daycares