Protecting Quebec Values

"We know that the separatist government in Quebec would love to pick fights with Ottawa. But that's not our business. Our business is the economy. Our business is job creation for Canadians -- all Canadians, including Quebecers.
"And our job is social inclusion. Our job is making all groups who come to this country whatever their background, whatever their race, whatever their ethnicity, whatever their religion, feel at home in this country and be Canadians. That's our job.
"You know -- there are all kinds of competing rights; rights of religion, rights of gender equality. We will withhold our comment until we see what exactly is in the proposal. And we will assure ourselves, when we look at that proposal, that the fundamental rights of Canadians are protected."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper

The very foundational principles of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms are being challenged by the Parti Quebecois in their intention to pass legislation that would effectively place restrictions on the hiring of public service workers through screening out those whose apparel betray their religious convictions. People living in Quebec respecting their choice of apparel and symbols relating to their religion.

Not simply a choice, but an imperative relating to the very essence of their religion and the cultural-religious attributes defining aspects of that religion. Some people think how quaint it is when they see a religious Jew wearing outlandish clothing; long, black garb and dangling hairpieces over the ears to distinguish men of Orthodox Jewish sects from others, while the women wear wigs and modest clothing.

Their Muslim religious counterparts tend to go them one better with the restrictively over-modest garb of women veiled and voluminously clad. Others find it offensive, inappropriate to a modern society, and deliberately separatist, eschewing homogeneity, embracing social partition. Here is the separatist-yearning government of Quebec, taking umbrage over what they feel are separatist tendencies of minorities/

Sikh headwear covering unbarbered hair and the paraphernalia of largely ornamental knives signifying religious devotion, a skullcap, a headscarf, a crucifix are admittedly less visually intrusive, still identifiable, and presenting little handicap in merging with and accepting the greater social contract within Canada. They represent both moderate and on the other hand, more fundamental symbols of differences between people. Because of their provenance and symbolism, forbidden in the public service.

But they are, for whatever they are worth to the bystander, all protected by laws guaranteeing equality of gender, religion, ideology, ethnicity, culture, heritage and sexual orientation in Canada. Crucifixes,  kippas, hijabs and turbans are all symbols of devotion to faith, of cultural inheritance. Varying geographic sources representing migrations from parts of the world far removed from North America have contributed to the pluralist society that Canada has become, and indeed always has been.

There is some truth to what former Quebec premier Bernard Landry contends, in expanding on the PQ intention: "The rule is, when you change country, you change country. They can't expect to find everything here that they had in their country of origin. Integration is a powerful signal that they need to adjust to a new nation." He speaks, however, in absolutes. And there is nothing whatever simple about human relations, interactions, heritage, custom and religious inheritance.

One of the hallmarks of Canadian values is the general atmosphere of willingness to accept people at the most basic level; we are all human, all have the same basic needs, all share very similar values and emotions, and all humans wish to be accepted. The hard truth is that human nature shrinks from those who present as different than we are. The soft reality is that it is incumbent upon us as decent people to accept those differences that do not impact deleteriously on what we ourselves value.

The PQ's planned proposal to legislatively create two levels of citizenship within the province, to express an outright alienation toward those whose religious customs may offend the secular-oriented values that Quebec largely propounds, will create a democratic social deficit. There are some standards of acceptance that would go well beyond what should be required; a fully burqua-clad teacher in the public school system goes a step too far creating a divisive message by its very unambiguous presence.

Disallowing the appearance of far slighter indications of religious and cultural variations also goes a giant-footprint too far. Canada is a multicultural landscape, even if the concept of official multiculturalism itself has become a social-mediating clunker. If Canadians are truly accepting and as tolerant as they believe themselves to be, the kind of 'accommodation' that it takes to become accustomed to trivial visual variations in personal presentation should not be a shore too far to breach.