Religion is like sex. You can do it in your home and maybe even designated enclosed places in groups, but you should never do it out in public—and under no circumstances should you ever involve children.
Ah, yes, [thing] is like [completely different thing]. You can believe that as much as you want, but you haven’t explained why your beliefs should be enforced on others via state violence.
No, because it’s people are almost universally made uncomfortable by it. It’s not like there’s a segment of society whose values and beliefs entail having sex in public. That still doesn’t support your point. I could make the exact same argument for Iranian hijab laws.
I would say about the same number of people are offended by profanity in public as they are religious acts in public. Moreover, I would estimate the number who are offended by sex acts in public is much higher than either of these. So, for the sake of other people’s sensibilities, shall we ban public profanity?
I believe that public display of religion makes enough people feel uncomfortable that it was banned in Quebec.
Let me ask you this, why do you feel that you should be able to practice your religion in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable? And a follow up question, don’t you think that you should be going to the designated spot for this?
I certainly don’t think we should ban religion in general. That’s crazy talk. I just don’t think we should be forcing things onto other people. Do you?
Do you feel that you should be able to hold hands with a same sex partner in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?
Yes, you can hold hands and you can hold your bible. You can also be a believer in god while also walking in public. You can even wear a rainbow or a crucifix to identify your own kind. But, keep your void damned pants on and don’t scream out praising your god.
Do you feel that you should be able to be trans in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?
Yes trans is a person being who they are. Religion is a choice.
Maybe people being uncomfortable is not a good yardstick for determining what people can do in public.
I don’t disagree that “uncomfortable” is a slippery slope word. And while I completely agree with banning prayer in public—I probably wouldn’t vote for it. Unlike religious people, I dislike forcing my views on people, even if their entire existence is doing that.
What bothers me about this perspective is the implicit assumption that everyone who thinks that public displays of religion should be banned is actually motivated by racism, rather than recognising that somebody can be against this for non-racist reasons.
I don’t really see how that’s related. Even if it were motivated by racism, that’d be equally authoritarian to any other motive, since authoritarianism is about ceding rights from individuals to the government and it doesn’t matter what the motivation for that is.
That’s my issue as well with the bill. Just look at the crucifix at the Assembly. They didn’t remove it, they just moved it outside the room. If the intent of the law was really to remove religion from the public space, it wouldn’t have been a debate about keeping the crucifix in the Assembly.
It’s not racism with more steps. You don’t even know it has not been enforced improperly. It’s a lot easier to enforce enforcement than it is to stop people ruining the world
So, you and I both know that public praying isn’t just people being in public standing around praying without anyone knowing they’re praying.
If a person went to a restaurant and started vocally praising Satan for this meal for an hour prior to eating it… yeah I bet they would make a lot of people uncomfortable. Not to mention the restaurant would refuse them service.
What you want to do is justify bothering people in public spaces with your beliefs. If you can stand around in public thinking about your god without letting anyone else know you’re doing it, then no one would be uncomfortable.
If you aren’t able to see how a comparison between two things does not create a combination of those two things, then you aren’t intelligent enough to converse in a polite manor. I’ve provided more details in my other comments, you can read those without interacting with me.
I love it. Public prayer shouldn’t happen at all.
Why…? This isn’t much better than, say, Iran’s morality police.
Religion is like sex. You can do it in your home and maybe even designated enclosed places in groups, but you should never do it out in public—and under no circumstances should you ever involve children.
Ah, yes, [thing] is like [completely different thing]. You can believe that as much as you want, but you haven’t explained why your beliefs should be enforced on others via state violence.
Do you believe that people should be able to have sex out in public for everyone to see? And, why Do you feel the way you do?
No, because it’s people are almost universally made uncomfortable by it. It’s not like there’s a segment of society whose values and beliefs entail having sex in public. That still doesn’t support your point. I could make the exact same argument for Iranian hijab laws.
People are uncomfortable with it explicitly because religion made it so.
Monkeys will fuck right in front of us and not give a shit.
I would say about the same number of people are offended by profanity in public as they are religious acts in public. Moreover, I would estimate the number who are offended by sex acts in public is much higher than either of these. So, for the sake of other people’s sensibilities, shall we ban public profanity?
I believe that public display of religion makes enough people feel uncomfortable that it was banned in Quebec.
Let me ask you this, why do you feel that you should be able to practice your religion in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable? And a follow up question, don’t you think that you should be going to the designated spot for this?
I certainly don’t think we should ban religion in general. That’s crazy talk. I just don’t think we should be forcing things onto other people. Do you?
Do you feel that you should be able to hold hands with a same sex partner in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?
Do you feel that you should be able to be trans in plain view of everyone else when you make them uncomfortable?
Maybe people being uncomfortable is not a good yardstick for determining what people can do in public.
Yes, you can hold hands and you can hold your bible. You can also be a believer in god while also walking in public. You can even wear a rainbow or a crucifix to identify your own kind. But, keep your void damned pants on and don’t scream out praising your god.
Yes trans is a person being who they are. Religion is a choice.
I don’t disagree that “uncomfortable” is a slippery slope word. And while I completely agree with banning prayer in public—I probably wouldn’t vote for it. Unlike religious people, I dislike forcing my views on people, even if their entire existence is doing that.
Your opinion makes me uncomfortable and I think we should ban expressing things like this in public :(
/end sarcasm
Good thing this isn’t public.
The problem is not if it should or shouldn’t happen
The problem is that it will not be enforced equally between religious communities and Christian poser asshole
It’s racism with more steps
What bothers me about this perspective is the implicit assumption that everyone who thinks that public displays of religion should be banned is actually motivated by racism, rather than recognising that somebody can be against this for non-racist reasons.
It just so happens that it always boils down to policing what Muslims do. Just one big coincidence.
That’s very fair yes. But how can you tell those who are anti-religion for racist reasons from those who are for not?
There are two hazards in our discussion:
I prioritize hazard 1 as having a lower consequence than hazard 2.
In other words, I care much more about eradicating systemic racism than the hurt feelings of someone whose motives are misunderstood.
Sure, you can be against for authoritarian reasons as well. Disturbing.
Religion has been used time and time again to justify committing atrocities and still used as such today.
There is a legitimate debate to be had about the religion’s place in a society.
I don’t really see how that’s related. Even if it were motivated by racism, that’d be equally authoritarian to any other motive, since authoritarianism is about ceding rights from individuals to the government and it doesn’t matter what the motivation for that is.
Fair enough: regardless of whether racism is involved or not, there is an authoritarian bent to this law. In my opinion.
That is not push on a non-racism way in Quebec. Like I said they don’t want to use the law equally, they want to use it specifically against Muslim.
And so far, from my perspective (that is a confirmation biais), no one debate the idea without a racist undertone
That’s my issue as well with the bill. Just look at the crucifix at the Assembly. They didn’t remove it, they just moved it outside the room. If the intent of the law was really to remove religion from the public space, it wouldn’t have been a debate about keeping the crucifix in the Assembly.
It’s not racism with more steps. You don’t even know it has not been enforced improperly. It’s a lot easier to enforce enforcement than it is to stop people ruining the world
Only we do know exactly the results of the CAQ’s “laïcité” laws:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bill-21-impact-religious-minorities-survey-1.6541241
Bury your head in the sand all you like but the systemic racism that is embedded in the social outcomes of these laws is undeniable and palpable.
Praying doesn’t ruin the world. Just like having a party, or a poetry slam, or Shakespeare in the park.
It’s behaviors that cause health or safety issues that are the problem.
Praying in PUBLIC is like having sex in public. Don’t.
What a weirdo comparison to make.
So someone praying before a meal is an equivalent obscenity?
So, you and I both know that public praying isn’t just people being in public standing around praying without anyone knowing they’re praying.
If a person went to a restaurant and started vocally praising Satan for this meal for an hour prior to eating it… yeah I bet they would make a lot of people uncomfortable. Not to mention the restaurant would refuse them service.
What you want to do is justify bothering people in public spaces with your beliefs. If you can stand around in public thinking about your god without letting anyone else know you’re doing it, then no one would be uncomfortable.
Then that’s not prayer, it’s being a public nuisance, a disturber of the peace. That’s a different crime / tort that I’m sure is already on the books.
The prayer part is relevant.
There’s a precedent like this in the US: enhancement laws
They ruin lives, and don’t stop crime.
Sorry, can you expand on the ways prayer is like sex? Are people praying with their dicks out in your vicinity?
If you aren’t able to see how a comparison between two things does not create a combination of those two things, then you aren’t intelligent enough to converse in a polite manor. I’ve provided more details in my other comments, you can read those without interacting with me.
It’s personal and private and children shouldn’t be exposed to it. It’s not wrong, and you can do it, but keep it away from me and mine.
Have you considered being less nosy? Minding your business?
I’m no lover of religion but I love this culture policing even less.