Quebec philosopher changes mind on religious symbols after mosque shooting

[rug]

Published Tuesday, February 14, 2017 3:38PM EST

MONTREAL -- After Quebec's mosque shooting, an internationally acclaimed philosopher who heavily influenced the province's debate on secularism said Tuesday he no longer thinks it's a good idea to ban people from wearing hijabs on the job.

Charles Taylor, the award-winning McGill University professor emeritus, wrote a letter in Montreal La Presse stating the province shouldn't take any more steps that could further "stigmatize minorities."

"The time when the majority in our society can act without regard for marginalized minorities is over," he wrote.

Taylor's voice looms large in the province's secularism debate.

The 2008 report he co-authored with historian Gerard Bouchard on the accommodation of religious minorities was a precursor to the contentious secularism charter introduced by the Parti Quebecois in 2013.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/quebec-philosopher-changes-mind-on-religious-symbols-after-mosque-shooting-1.3285355

[guillaumeb]

1. Who could imagine that an intolerant law might be seen as.......intolerant?

MONTREAL -- After Quebec's mosque shooting, an internationally acclaimed philosopher who heavily influenced the province's debate on secularism said Tuesday he no longer thinks it's a good idea to ban people from wearing hijabs on the job.

Laïcité , je vous présente tolerance. (Secularism, meet tolerance.)

[rug]

2. He didn't think through how the law targets people.

[guillaumeb]

3. Aways better to think before legislating.

But the PQ has a history not only of separatism, but of the same type of hyper-secular stance as can be seen in France. A stance not supported by the French Constitution or the Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, which is actual law in Québec.

[hrmjustin]

4. People need to just leave people be.

[Jim__]

5. Id like to see exactly how Taylor's reasoning changed.

In 2008, he and Bouchard said that state employees in coercive government positions should not wear conspicuous religious symbols on the job. I’m not sure what implications the mosque shooting has for that statement. I read the article, but it doesn’t get into the specifics of his reasoning and the 2008 report doesn’t appear to be available to the public.

[rug]

6. Yeah, that's important. Simply reacting to a horror is not very philosophical.

[Jim__]

7. Well, Charles Taylor is certainly a very philosophical fellow.

I was able to get a google translate of his letter ( https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://plus.lapresse.ca/screens/36c5c72e-28b9-49df-ba29-514fc56d647a%257CpUtyV30bPPsb.html&prev=search ) in La Presse. That does clarify his reasoning on this issue.

An excerpt:

I see that these days we are talking about adopting one of the recommendations in the Bouchard-Taylor report, which prohibits the use of religious symbols by those who exercise the so-called "coercive" functions of the state, including judges And the police.

I have signed the report in which this recommendation appears; But nine years later, I do not endorse it anymore.

In fact, this proposition can be supported by two distinct arguments:

(A) the restrictions imposed on these functions are a necessary implication of secularism, or
(B) without being essential, these restrictions are appropriate in a given context.

I never accepted the first argument; I supported the measure because I believed that in the atmosphere following the debate on reasonable accommodation, not imposing these restrictions would shock public opinion to the point of jeopardizing our proposal for open secularism. But things have changed a great deal since then, and that is no longer my opinion.

...

[rug]

9. Thanks for finding that.

[Bretton Garcia]

8. When I lived in Turkey, I liked the Ataturk solution

A secular state. That allowed veils, turbans, etc.. But not in state or government buildings.

Erdogon eroded that. Shortly thereafter, bombings started.

I wouldn't allow sacred daggers or spears, either. Or sacred religious assassinations, of course.

[rug]

10. I wasn't aware of that. Thank you.