Quebec passes law banning street prayers, prayer rooms in universities

To me, the wording of the law was prohibiting exclusive prayer rooms or sponsored prayer rooms for organizations or groups. They are free to practice religion, any one can, but there cannot be sorts of exclusivity amongst areas that are already university property.

This is reasonable. It's not something that can be targeted without pissing off one group or another. So they're banning it outright.

God damn that was a good one.

Let's name said groups, shall we?

Seems like this should fall under existing hate speech

> Quebec is trying to stop people from ***weaponizing prayer*** in public. Anyone scoffing at that highlighted portion; please to point to a single nation with a Muslim majority that recognizes anything akin to “religious freedom” in that country.

listnook full of hypocrite and double standards right? This the best and sane listnook comment i've ever seen a while.

The Canadian federal government are passing a law that will remove the religion exception to hate speech. It's in the senate right now.

Exactly. Since the Quiet Revolution, the expectation in Québec is that you can have whatever religion, or none, but you keep it to yourself. If you want to practice it, you do it at home or in your place of worship. You don't shove it down the throat of other people, it's your own personal choice. We didn't need such laws about street prayers before, because it was already part of the commonly agreed upon social contract. And when immigration was done in a sensible manner, newcomers would be immersed in our society and adapt to those social norms. However, with the mass immigration policies imposed by Ottawa in the last decade, we ended up with too many people coming from the same place at the same time, which allowed them to form communities that have the critical mass necessary to pressure each other in maintaining the social norms of their place of origin. And then a few individuals in those communities with ambition will persuade their group to stand their ground and impose themselves, which is not acceptable. But, thanks to Canada's very permissive freedom of religion, they are normally shielded from consequences (or at least feel like they are exempt from some pre-existing laws on the pretext of religious expression). And that's why such laws are now necessary, to be explicit that, no, the fact that you are praying doesn't mean you can occupy the street or disrupt the peace. If you want to organize a group activity in a public place, you need to file for a permit (and the city won't give a permit to harass other people).

Well said

‘The decision was maintained by the supreme court’ Im pretty sure that province knew it would lose any challenge, so they invoked the ‘notwithstanding…’ clause. Correct me if I’m wrong. [For those outside Canada, there is a Charter of Rights and Freedoms protecting the individual rights of residents of Canada. If a province wants to pass legislation that would infringe upon those rights, they need to invoke the notwithstanding clause, which temporarily tramples on Charter Rights, and has time limit or ‘sunset clause’. Quebec has used the clause to put limits on language freedoms, like banning giant English-only signs, etc. Other provinces have invoked it for less defensible reasons.]

That's the difference between a parliamentary political system and a bi-party first past the post system.

 *prix fixe (french for fixed price)

Those damn radical centrists! (Shakes fist in air)

But I need to know what box to put them in! How am I supposed to know how to FEEL

I hate these filthy Neutrals, Kif. With enemies you know where they stand but with Neutrals, who knows? It sickens me.

I think the anglosphere just has trouble imagining a political axis that isn't aligned with theirs. While it is changing, the Quebec political landscape since the 60s is aligned on federalism/separatism/statu quo instead of a classic right/left. All main parties except QS and PCQ are firmly on the centre, and even the PCQ is probably leftier than the PCC. I'd say that what distinguises both systems is mostly their relationship to the common good.

Devout Catholics also won't like this if it's enforced against processions

There are dozens!

My two cents. [Secularity in Quebec](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_Revolution) isn't an excuse to target minority. It's an ongoing process that is much broader than this article depict, and was aimed at Catholicism more than anything. [Crucifix have been removed](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/crucifix-quebec-city-council-chamber-secularism-9.6998770) from public places. [Catholic prayer](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/supreme-court-rules-against-prayer-at-city-council-meetings-1.3033595) was also ruled out at city council. And pretty much everything related to Bible was banned from public school, leaving only a few private one (which aren't catholic typically). Heck, Carney was criticized a few weeks ago for quoting the bible... There is still people with hateful intent that ride those waves, but they usually come from a different side of political spectrum that take most of their new on social media. Like everywhere. But all things said, Quebec still is voting alongside BC, on the left of the political spectrum on most social issue.

They are banning every religion, no religion is allowed to ask for prayer rooms.

It bans public prayer of all religions. It just happens that Catholics don’t pray in public because we’ve already stripped them of all their influence 60 years ago… but they are still banned from doing public prayers like anyone else. Also, the law bans spontaneous public prayers. Not planned religious events. That’s literally antitheism. Antitheism isn’t conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Yes, Quebec is very anti-religious for good reason.

Quebec doesn’t care about following the model of liberalism without deviation. They have heavy foundations based off it of course, but it’s always been about preserving *their* culture.

Au contraire, suppressing public display of religion is known as laïcité in the French speaking world and is a liberal concept.

I am very far left and I don't think religion should be practiced outside your own home or religious buildings. It has no place in school.

Especially considering that the Catholic church also funded large amounts of development in the arts and various scientific disciplines. Yes they were known for suppressing certain ideas that were bad for their image until they had reconciled the narrative, but they were also one of the first institutions to fund open-ended research sciences *at all*.

Hey ChatGPT, refute this guy!

Praying in public and shouting your prayers at people with a microphone arent the same thing

I'm not standing for either argument, but thats a terrible analogy. Your reasons for not doing something are your own and your own alone. Making it explict and public why you don't do a b c for religious reasons is a personal choice you take, nobody is forcing it out of you. Plenty of non-religious people don't eat pork, fast during the day, don't drink, don't gamble, and refrain from adultery. Following any of these is not a public declaration of faith-related worldview, as opposed to praying in a public square or wearing religious symbols as a public servant. You're correct in that secularism takes many forms, but the French/Quebec model literally is about that exact removal. Neither France nor Quebec are asking their citizens to abandon their moral codes, laïcité is about neutrality of the public/civic space. Just as religious judges cannot leave their faith at the door, neither can a politically active judge leave their politics at the door, yet we expect them to not declare to us their political leanings or wear iconography of their party.

A lot of it comes from the Revolution too. At the end of the 18th century the catholic church owned something like 10% of all land in France. The "second estate" to the nobility's first and everyone else's third. A ton of powerful church leaders ultimately tried to side with the ancien regime (to preserve their own power) which turned revolutionary sentiment against the whole institution. Plus a ton of French peasants were starving and wanted to feed themselves using all that land they couldn't access, especially what the church controlled. The rift created by that aspect of the conflict was, in my opinion, an enormous contributor to France's journey from a medieval bastion of catholicisn to the modern secular state it is today.

Or just in your head quietly while literally anything happens around you

I've perused prayer rooms in multiple airports, universities, and hospitals in Quebec over the years. 99% of the time they are labeled as multi-purpose/interfaith "quiet spaces" or "meditation rooms". People come in, pray or read whatever they want in silence, and leave after a few minutes. How does this impact anyone else?

True, you make a solid point.

Someone else posted the full text of the bill here but I'm just reposting my top-level comment that nobody will see here for clarity, since I actually went and read the bill (and the Act it amends) to understand what was meant by "banning prayer rooms". > 10.1. All religious practice is prohibited in a place, such as an immovable or a room, under the authority of an institution or body referred to in section 3. This is a long list of government-funded bodies that includes universities. However, > 10.2. Despite section 10.1, religious practice is permitted in a place, such as an immovable or a room, under the authority of a body referred to in paragraph 5 of Schedule I, the Société du Centre des congrès de Québec, the Société du Palais des congrès de Montréal or the Société de développement et de mise en valeur du Parc olympique where the following conditions are met: > (1) the body or the Société does not, directly or indirectly, finance the religious practice; > (2) the body or the Société treats every natural or legal person equitably as regards the leasing and use of the immovable or room; and > (3) the immovable is not used predominantly for the religious practice. Various educational institutions are granted this exception, including universities. So, while the University can no longer designate a specific religious prayer room, they can do something like have group rooms available to reserve, and as long as they're open to everyone on an equal basis, someone could reserve a room and host prayer sessions there as long as they're not university-funded. Just in case anyone else was wondering.

Relevant text of Bill 9: “10.1. All religious practice is prohibited in a place, such as an immovable or a room, under the authority of an institution or body referred to in section 3. The prohibition set out in the first paragraph does not apply (1) to a centre operated by a Santé Québec institution or a body referred to in paragraph 8 or 13 of Schedule I, to the extent that the religious practice does not compromise the provision or quality of care, the proper operation of the centre or body or the well-being of users; (2) to a school service centre referred to in paragraph 7 of Schedule I or a body referred to in paragraph 12 of that schedule; (3) to a correctional facility governed by the Act respecting the Québec correctional system (chapter S-40.1); (4) to a place that constitutes a private residence, as regards the religious practice of its occupants; (5) to a First Nations or Inuit cultural practice carried out in a place under the authority of a parliamentary institution or of a body listed in Schedule I; or (6) in any other place specified by government regulation, according to the conditions determined in the regulation. Any action, except the wearing of a religious symbol, that may reasonably constitute, in fact or in appearance, the manifestation of a religious conviction or belief, is a religious practice within the meaning of this section and section 10.2. Subparagraph 6 of the second paragraph does not apply to a place under the authority of a body referred to in paragraph 7 or 12.1 of Schedule I. “10.2. Despite section 10.1, religious practice is permitted in a place, such as an immovable or a room, under the authority of a body referred to in paragraph 5 of Schedule I, the Société du Centre des congrès de Québec, the Société du Palais des congrès de Montréal or the Société de développement et de mise en valeur du Parc olympique where the following conditions are met: (1) the body or the Société does not, directly or indirectly, finance the religious practice; (2) the body or the Société treats every natural or legal person equitably as regards the leasing and use of the immovable or room; and (3) the immovable is not used predominantly for the religious practice. Likewise, religious practice is permitted in a performance hall, or in any other place leased according to the conditions determined by government regulation, under the authority of a body referred to in paragraph 7 or 12.1 of Schedule I, except a school service centre, where the conditions of subparagraphs 1 to 3 of the first paragraph are met. In the case of an immovable that was acquired by any body or institution referred to in section 3 while it was being used predominantly for religious practice purposes, religious practice is permitted if the conditions of subparagraphs 1 to 3 of the first paragraph are met and if the vendor has imposed no constraint limiting the use the institution or body may make of the immovable. “10.3. All religious practice, such as overt prayers or other similar practices, is prohibited in a place, such as an immovable or a room, under the authority of a body referred to in paragraph 12 of Schedule I during the hours devoted to the educational services prescribed in the basic school regulation. However, religious practice intended for students attending the body and organized by the body as part of optional activities outside the hours devoted to the educational services prescribed in the basic school regulation is permitted. Despite section 6, wearing a religious symbol is permitted during such activities. This section does not apply to a place that constitutes a private residence, as regards the religious practice of its occupants.

Except, QC has explicitly put a carve out for specific chapels at unis. If the rationale was full separation of government from religion, it’s directly antithetical to said rationale to permit such a carve out.

It’s normal everywhere else in Canada, too.

Maybe there's a difference between using a common room to pray and having a prayer room? If the room can be used by everyone for anything they want (relaxation, pause etc.), including praying, I don't see the issue obviously.

Dedicated prayer rooms are ridiculous. Just have a designated multipurpose privacy room for anxiety attacks, prayer, newborns, etc.

Of course not. /u/KeySheMoeToe is only here for the whataboutism.

The law allows police to disperse and ticket contrevenants.

If you dont think that law will stop them, why bother with this one?

The bill prohibits prayer spaces. You can freely read up on Bill 9 if you want rather than asking me. Explain it away now.

Read the law. What you describe in the first paragraph is exactly whats being banned. Universities are now legally forbidden from providing rooms for prayer.