The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms should be inspired by Bill 21, the Act respecting the…

Both the opposers and the defenders of Bill 21, the Act respecting the laicity of the State, adhere to the fundamental principle of freedom of conscience. In fact, all citizens except religious fundamentalists adhere to this principle by which everyone is free to think and believe what they want. So, in theory, everyone in the civilized world is in agreement, but in practice it is a whole different story.

As the old saying goes, one person’s freedom ends where another’s begins. We now live in a motley country where several distinct religious communities coexist. However, not only do religious practices conflict with one another but also with other fundamental rights that are protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

For example, the Charter grants freedom of religion (section 2), outlaws discrimination based on sex or religion (section 15) and guarantees equal rights for both sexes (section 28). Unfortunately, the Charter does not clearly specify that non-discrimination based on sex takes precedence over freedom of religion. What happens when a Muslim man refuses to be examined by a female doctor? Judges facing such dilemmas would find their decision-making facilitated if the various rights and freedoms within the Charter were clearly prioritized.

Not only does the Charter not prioritize the various contradictory rights it guarantees, but in addition, the law sometimes accommodates the violation of rights that are important to the population. For example, section 319 (3) (b) of the Canadian Criminal Code allows religious people to evade the application of the law against hate propaganda. This privilege is unjustified and unjustifiable. A homosexual who criticizes the homophobic position of Islam will be accused of Islamophobia while the Montreal imam Sulaiman Al-Hayiti was able to declare with complete impunity in 2008, “The punishment for homosexuals guilty of sodomy is to cut off the heads of both parties involved.”

History teaches us that religion is first and foremost a powerful political tool that enables political leaders to exploit the spiritual needs of the people in order to maintain their power. The great dictators have used it extensively. We have lost count of the number of atrocities committed in the name of God through the centuries and even today. As Voltaire said, “Those who can make you believe in absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” If there is only one lesson to be learned, it is to separate the state from religion, which is one of the fundamental principles of laicity. Moreover, this primordial separation of State and Church is also the only way to truly guarantee freedom of conscience, another fundamental principle of laicity.

Separating Church from State does not mean that the State representatives must be atheists. Every government employee has the right to freedom of conscience as an individual. However, his beliefs must not interfere with the performance of his duties. In addition, the representatives must present a neutral image when interacting with the public and therefore must prohibit any ostentatious sign that could identify with any religion. This is an essential condition for every citizen to feel equal in the eyes of the law, another fundamental principle of laicity.

Bill 21 brilliantly defends the three main principles of laicity. Instead of using the Canadian Charter to invalidate Bill 21, our elected officials should make the Charter evolve in line with Bill 21. In order to guarantee fair justice, the Charter must be based on objective foundations such as the law or science but certainly not faith. However, our Charter begins badly with the following sentence: “Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God…” This phrase should be replaced by: “Whereas Canada is a secular country and is based on principles which recognize the rule of law and science.”

The definition of God is too arbitrary and variable from citizen to citizen to serve as a basis for any judgment. Canada must evolve and “profess its faith” to laicity, like Quebec and France, which are ahead of the curve regarding this subject. Human civilization is evolving just as our country should. Let’s not take our freedom for granted; Laicity remains our best firewall against a downhill slope towards fundamentalism, as seen notably in Iran.

The state should treat believers as smokers; that is to say, give them the freedom to smoke while warning them of the dangers that this poses to their health (mental in this case) and prevent them from bothering other citizens with their second-hand smoke (read: proselytizing). And yet, it’s been a long time since civil servants have smoked in our faces; nor should they show off their turban or hijab either.