>>>
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2010/03/24/quebec-reasonable-accommodation-law.html>>
>>And what is your position on that topic?
>
>I have a VERY hard time with this. Unless I misunderstood, to me, this is the opposite of religious freedom and neutrality but in fact, enforcing no religious practices and views. It is anti-religion to me which is just as bad as enforcing religion.
I've got to say I'm with you on this. I understand the impulse that makes people want to have these kinds of policies, but requiring people to eat pork would also have a result as to who would feel comfortable living someplace based on religious belief and it would be pretty hard to advocate that. I completely support making practices like clitorectomy anathema and illegal, but that is because it involves imposing on another person, but wearing a headscarf - or a veil - should not be any of the government's business.
And we would do well to remember a government that can forbid a veil can forbid a yarmulke or a crucifix ... or an "Obama" or "McCain" button.
And a society that will go after Ann Coulter with torches and pitchforks will but mobilizing those mobs to prevent someone else from speaking next year.
Charles Hankey
Though a good deal is too strange to be believed, nothing is too strange to have happened.
- Thomas Hardy
Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don't mean to do harm-- but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.
-- T. S. Eliot
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
- Ben Franklin
Pardon him, Theodotus. He is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature.