In Boris Proulx’s article last Tuesday, I learned that in the wake of the reassignment of the teacher from an English school in Chelsea who wears the hijab, Justin Trudeau said that “a lot of Quebecers are concerned about the fact that in a society that claims to be free and open, someone can lose their job because of their religion ”. In this statement, Mr. Trudeau is wrong on three points. First, the use of the superlative “enormously” to designate the number of Quebecers who are outraged by Bill 21 seems disproportionate to me, because in reality, 80% of Francophones in Quebec are in favor of the Secularism Act of the state. Then, it is not because of her religion that the teacher in question could lose her job, but rather because of the wearing of a religious symbol during her work performance. The nuance is significant.
Finally, Mr. Trudeau draws the parallel between the freedom to wear the Islamic veil and a society that calls itself free. I therefore refer it to the Iranian theocracy, where the wearing of the veil among women is compulsory. We have the example of Vida Movahédi, Iranian from Tehran who had to serve a year in prison for opposing the Islamic veil. There are plenty of injustices in this world of which it seems relevant to me to be indignant, but to be indignant at Bill 21 as do with one voice the Liberal MP André Fortin, the solidarity MP Manon Massé as well that Justin Trudeau… I am astonished and dubious in front of this speech in chorus which is opposed to the principle democratically accepted in Quebec which is the separation of the Church and the State.
To borrow the words of the philosopher Henri Pena-Ruiz, with whom I completely agree on this question, secularism “provides men of very diverse origins with a common universal framework, freed from retrograde traditions. Thus it unites them all by combining respect for differences and the emancipation of each one ”.
Watch video