this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
125 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10933 readers
1002 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Caliss que l’on est gourverné par des envies de chier

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] UnrefinedChihuahua@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago (8 children)

I'm conflicted on this one. It seems to be framed as hateful against Middle-eastsrn religions in particular, but doesn't it restrict ALL religious symbols? I'm all for less religion in public places, regardless of the religion.

[–] Montreal_Metro@lemmy.ca 25 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The giant cross on the top of Mount Royal is a religious symbol too so they should remove it asap.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's not a daycare though. Neither is the oratory.

There’s a bunch of cross on school outer wall troughs out Quebec. The CAQ didn’t see it important to rip them out because « they’re patrimoine »

Hypocritical fuckers

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 17 points 3 months ago

The moment the satanic church notices their under-reresentation and fixes it, you'll see everyone on-board for purely secular daycares.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

This image released in September 2013 by a minority PQ government shows a proposal for types of religious clothing allowed and not allowed for public workers under Quebec's proposed 'charter of values.' (The Associated Press/Quebec government)

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If you have additional information that contradicts it, I'd happy to see it. I don't live in Quebec, and only know what I know.

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't, and i don't live in canada, nor i care about the politics too much, that's why i'm here to see what's up, and i find taking an 2013 image from the government proposal at the time and without context is a bit disingenuous.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I took it from a news article from last week, which suggests pretty strongly that that proposal is exactly what was implemented, and they never produced an updated graphic.

But again, I'd welcome a genuine correction.

[–] k_rol@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago

Just underneath that picture it says it was not implemented.

In 2013, a minority PQ government proposed the notorious "charter of Quebec values," aiming to ban religious symbols for public servants, but it went nowhere after the PQ lost the 2014 election.

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Again, i don't really care, i'm providing context you purposely left out.

[–] Mugmoor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

More like annoying_attitude. ValueSub deserves better.

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago

Provide immediate context is bad. Got it.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 months ago

Yes but i have to scroll waaaaay down to the picture only to find it is a picture from waaaay back. I'm not saying you are, but i often find people who have the intention to mislead tend to post it this way.

[–] Icytrees@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The bill is still being debated in the supreme court. A timeline with more details and updates can be found here: https://ccla.org/major-cases-and-reports/bill-21/

That said, the Quebec government has been pretty fucking hostile to people who wear religious symbols. The original article frames it as residual tensions from the French Catholic chuch but a big part of it is definitely xenophobia and racism. Montreal and Quebec City are progressive havens in a land of very small, very white, very religious towns.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 2 points 3 months ago

Thank you - this is what I'm here for.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How's this going to fly for indigenous symbols?

[–] Mugmoor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Their cultural symbols and practices are protected under Federal Law.

[–] DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 months ago

Right up until the not withstanding clause is invoked....

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 months ago

Freedom of expression is also protected under federal law.

[–] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Is a Christmas decoration a religious symbol? Or is Christmas now entirely commercial.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

🌏🧑‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀

[–] Tigeroovy@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago

I’m sure the seed of it was stolen from a different set of beliefs originally anyways.

[–] twopi@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

No, Christmas is a archeological festival from before religions existed /s

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

I couldn't care less about any organized religion and IMO they all do more harm than good; however, being Quebec, this is 100% a poke to flame hatred towards Muslims.... entirely hypocritical

[–] 007ace@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It is very interesting to see the pendulum swing. I do find the title misleading as the article appears to only apply to wearing religious symbols and it only applying to new employees as already employed are exempt.

It also doesn't seem to differentiate between public, private or subsidized daycares. Lots of open air in this article.

[–] DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Can I ask what pendulum? Because Quebec has been doing this for decades.

Quebec Soccer Federation rever... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-soccer-federation-reverses-turban-ban-1.1319350

[–] 007ace@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 months ago

I think every Canadian sees Quebec marching to the beat of their own drum. I've never seen them vote for any party but Bloc Québécois as long as I've been watching.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Religion is social cancer, and religiously indoctrinating children should count as abuse

It should be illegal for children to practice religion, let them grow into adults, and then they can make their own decisions.

[–] TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Invisibilising women will only create more hatred and discension. This is not how what you want will work.

And nobodies is practicing religion into a CPE it goes against law already

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Cool, then if it isn't allowed to be practiced in schools, then there's no problem with this, it's just a continuation of existing policy.

There is no world where children being religiously indoctrinated creates LESS hatred and division.

[–] TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The problem is not practicing, the problem is some faith ask their people to clothe in a certain way.

Invisibilising this people will not bring what the government search

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›