1

The secular state and The secular state and religious pluralismreligious pluralism

METROPOLIS / Ottawa / September 23, 2009

Micheline Milot, Ph.D.

milot.micheline@uqam.ca

2

OUTLINEOUTLINE

Secular governance General characteristics

Canadian characteristics

Religion in the public sphere Current religious diversity issues Topics of debate

Public policy: recognition issues

3

1. Secular governance1. Secular governance Frequent associations

French model

Religion confined to private life

Individuals must be secular like institutions

4

Four principles of secularismFour principles of secularism

Two principles of law Freedom of conscience and religion

Equality/non-discrimination

Two ways of applying them Neutral state

Separation of church and state

5

Historical goalsHistorical goals

Social peace

End of systemic discrimination

No second-class citizens

Being different without being ostracized

6

Freedom of conscience and religionFreedom of conscience and religion

Right to believe what one wants to believe

Right to express one’s beliefs or non-belief

Right to change religions or not belong to any

…without fear of impediment or reprisal

7

Consequences of freedom of Consequences of freedom of conscienceconscience

Recognition that there are different ideas of what constitutes a good life in a society that accepts pluralism

Prevention from being discriminated against on the basis of beliefs

In a free and democratic society, people do not believe the way others want them to believe.

8

EqualityEquality

Between people – believers and non-believers alike

Between religious traditions

Between men and women

Political rights independent of religious affiliation or non-affiliation

Does not mean uniformity Treating everyone the same can be unfair

9

Neutral state: Two dimensionsNeutral state: Two dimensions

The state respects all ideas of what constitutes a good life (believers and non-believers) Linked to the person’s moral dignity

The state does not decide which beliefs are “normal” or “acceptable” The state has no theological jurisdiction

Limits: Actual breach of the rights of others or attack on security, public order or physical integrity

10

To what does neutrality apply?To what does neutrality apply?

The establishment of policies and statutes

Institutional regulations

Respect for others and their differences

Respect for guaranteed rights and freedoms

Impartiality of decisions made or services provided by government employees

11

Separation of church and stateSeparation of church and state

Need to ensure neutrality

Independence of the state from faiths and of faiths from the state

Political order is free to develop collective standards in the general interest of the population

Religion, like any other form of association, is part of common law

12

Canada Importance of freedom of conscience and equality

Neutrality of the state is paramount

No state religion in Canada

Preamble to the Constitution (“supremacy of God”): no meaningful scope

= implicit secularism

13

2. Religion in the public arena2. Religion in the public arena

“New” visibility

Integrated into common institutions (not separate institutions)

Different perspectives: private life vs. public life

Perspectives on culture sometimes based more on community than on individuals

14

Reasonable accommodationReasonable accommodation

Compatible with the neutrality of the state

Not aimed at changing the general workings of institutions

To eliminate indirect discrimination

Or to not impede freedom of conscience and freedom of religion

15

Public expression of religious affiliation: Public expression of religious affiliation: DebateDebate

Fear of communitarianism, which would be detrimental to integration

Supposed refusal to share common values

Risk of regression and imposition of archaic values (equality of men and women)

Consequences of prohibiting the expression of religious affiliation

16

Threat to Threat to integration?integration?

Process of generalizing believers to a community presumed to be closed

Presumption that individuals are driven entirely by the standards of the group with which they identify

17

Opposing argumentOpposing argument

Accepting public expression of religious affiliation can

prevent withdrawal into a closed community that

becomes radical in reaction to the lack of recognition

18

Religion = common values?Religion = common values?

Religion is presumed to have an all-encompassing hold on believers, but…

Believers prioritize religious values differently than the secular majority

Believers do not reject “modern” values (apart from some rare exceptions)

Identity has many dimensions and draws on a range of values

19

Democratic and legal rights: Dangers?Democratic and legal rights: Dangers?

By and large, religious expression is lived on modern terms Selecting or distancing oneself from certain standards

Diversity within each tradition

Personal direction, not a political desire to impose the same standards on all members of society

20

Religious signs in government Religious signs in government employeesemployees

Aim: to not exclude common institutions

Do not have to choose between religious affiliation and a job

Presumption of impartiality

21

Limiting factorsLimiting factors

Do not compromise the effectiveness, security and rights of others

These three factors = evaluation of undue constraint on reasonable accommodation

22

Equality of men and women at risk?Equality of men and women at risk?

The law prohibits unequal treatment based on sex

Equality of men and women is not necessarily compromised by individual expression of religious affiliation

Religious patriarchy exists; the state must not attempt to step in and take its place

Strengthen awareness of rights

23

Real equalityReal equality

Equality of political and legal status for women

Equality of resources to live one’s life

Equality of opportunity (employment, education, justice, health care, housing)

24

3. Factors to be considered3. Factors to be considered

Distinguish between the fundamental principles of equality and elements that are incidental

Interconnection of different forms of inequality (economic, stigmatized groups, etc.)

Evaluate the risk of a sense of rejection

Initiatives that do not cause harm to others

25

Prohibition of the expression of Prohibition of the expression of religious affiliationreligious affiliation

Done through social exclusion

Form of discrimination, racism

Not all religions have rules on what followers can and cannot eat or wear

Forces individuals to renounce (their faith or their social integration)

Homogeneousness is an unrealistic measure of unity

26

TargetsTargets

Aim for integration rather than uniformity

Remain vigilant in order to prevent discrimination

The need for mechanisms to eliminate discrimination is more pressing where there is diversity

Be aware of the impact of the customs of the majority and of their adverse effects