Laïcité. Et si les Anglo-Canadiens étaient favorables...

Dans le titre de son éditorial du 29 mars (tgam.ca/2G1fMqL), le quotidien «national» du Canada anglais, le Globe and Mail de Toronto, a fait preuve de mauvais goût, voire de mauvaise foi en appelant le projet de loi québécois sur la laïcité «Quebec's hijab ban». Si l'équipe éditoriale espérait un appui massif de ses lecteurs et lectrices pour sa dénonciation du gouvernement Legault, elle a dû se gratter la tête en lisant les commentaires publiés sur le site Web du Globe...

Je n'ai pas fait de décompte, mais le nombre d'interventions favorables à la loi sur la laïcité me semblait égal ou supérieur à celles en faveur de ses adversaires, et le ton de ces derniers ne versait pas dans l'hystérie et le délire des déclarations du maire de Hampstead, de Charles Taylor ou de nombreux manifestants soi-disant antiracistes à Montréal.

J'offre ici à titre d'exemples certains commentaires inclus à la suite de l'éditorial, sur les pages Web du Globe and Mail. Je ne serais pas surpris qu'ils soient tout aussi représentatifs de la société anglo-canadienne que ceux des multiculturels-tous-azimuts qui aiment bien nous traiter de racistes et de xénophobes. Un sondage pan-canadien sur la question réserverait peut-être des surprises...

Opinions de lecteurs et de lectrices du Globe, publiées dans les heures et les jours qui ont suivi la parution de l'éditorial opposant Quebec's hijab ban...

1. It's not unreasonable for the state to require public servants to keep their religious affiliation to themselves when they are on the job. Why is this different from banning public servants from advertising their political views when carrying out their public duties? E.g. we accept that Post Office employees can't wear an NDP badge on the job or a Che Guevara t-shirt. Likewise, as the Canadian Judicial Council ruled not long ago, it is not permissible for judges to enter their courtroom wearing a Make America Great Again cap.

Public servants are free to affirm their religious or political convictions on their own time, but not when they're on the job.

(c'est signé Stephen)

2. It's not a Charter violation any more than a dress code is.

(Ambrose)

3. What part of the separation of church (Synagogue, mosque, temple......) and state do people not understand?

(Bernie)

4. Religion is a private matter; keep it to yourself. I do not want to be served by someone wearing White Supremacist symbols, or by anyone pushing any other mythology in my face.
My beliefs are no-one else's business; I don't want to know about yours.

(RSH)

5. Canada is a democratic multicultural society where people are totally free to practice their religion. Freedom of religion, however, also means that individuals ought to be free from religion when dealing with government officials. There is no moral, ethical or Charter issue here - it is simple separation of “church and state” and is fundamental to supporting a true democracy.

(Eric)

6. Let's pose a simpler question: Should your 4 year-old child's kindergarten teacher be allowed to wear a niqab? That would be quite a drop-off on the first day of school.

Whether the Quebec government hasn't gotten it right (do government clerks have to be included?), I couldn't tell you, but it is a debate worth having.

(Rocky)

7. I believe every country has a right to manage secularism and religion within its own borders. In Canada's case this means Quebec has that right. Secondly, what Quebec is proposing is normal in many European countries, including Germany. Angela Merkel endorsed Germany's burka ban and other restriction on religious symbols in schools and other govt institutions. Finally, it's the public service, not a religious service.

(Richard)

8. I don't think that at this time, the G&M should add to its Quebec-bashing spree all the more so since the great majority of Quebeckers are in favour of the legislation and my feeling is that in a secret ballot, most real Canadians would agree as well.

(Dunrob)

9. I thought the charter ensured that men and women are equal? When I see a woman in the burqas it is a symbol of oppression by men..... like a flag or logo symbols.....

Equality of men and women in Canada takes priority over religion.....

(Jill and Terry)