Weeding religious expression out of the civic garden

The cultural and language divide in Canada has resulted in two entirely different definitions of state neutrality. In April, Quebec passed Bill 9, legislation that expands on existing restrictions on religious symbols, prayer rooms and religion-specific foods in government-subsidized workplaces like daycares and post-secondary institutions. The stated goal of Bill 9 is to ensure state neutrality. But some groups in Canada see the bill as counter to its own mission.

“Bill 9’s conception of laïcité promotes the exact opposite of neutrality, a public square which is largely closed, not neutral, toward religion – and by extension, toward openly religious people,” said Derek Ross, executive director of the Christian Legal Fellowship / Alliance des chrétiens en droit (CLF) in a public statement. CLF is a national charitable organization of over 750 lawyers, law students and law professors across Canada. Its headquarters is in London, Ontario, with members and local chapters in Quebec.

“This is not religious neutrality, but religious exclusion,” Ross says. “Neutrality, properly understood, accommodates religious diversity, and protects religious expression and activities on an equal basis with non-religious expression and activities.”

Bill 9 is an “expansion of laïcité” and an extension of Bill 21: An Act respecting laicity of the state. The CLF intervened before the Supreme Court of Canada in a constitutional challenge to Bill 21, the groundwork for Bill 9, earlier this year. CLF has expressed constitutional concerns about Bill 9, in the name of freedom of expression, religion and peaceful assembly. 

Culture clash 

Though Canada is officially bilingual, only about 22 percent of the Canadian population speaks French as their main language with another eight percent able to carry a conversation in French. Of the Canadians who primarily speak French, 84 percent were reported at the last census to live in Quebec, leaving most of Canada in a primarily Anglo-American cultural environment.

This demographic inequality is exacerbated by other differences. Historically, French communities in Canada often have ties to the Catholic Church, while English-dominant provinces often have Protestant roots. In early modern Europe, the Catholic Church was often a significant player in state politics. Inheritors of this history have reason to be wary of church power and the influence or even control it can have on state action. This religious duality runs deep within Canadian political structures and contributes to a complex cultural climate with underlying political tensions.

The controversy surrounding Quebec’s Bill 9 is, arguably, a perfect example of how the demographic and religious divide between French and English Canadians translates into the world of law. 

In Canadian politics, laïcité is often translated as “secularism” but also carries a deeper meaning. Advocates of laïcité promote government neutrality for the sake of a better, more peaceful society. They believe that a government biased towards any one religion is a threat to the multiculturalism and inclusivity of our diverse country. Quebec’s historical French culture and worldview means that they interpret laïcité differently from other provinces. 

Different gardens 

Jean-Christoph Jasmin, Quebec director of Cardus, describes the differences between the two political cultures using the metaphor of an English garden and a French garden.

In the English garden, many Canadians emphasize individual rights and define freedom of conscience in a distinctly independent way. Their “garden” is a collection of individually growing, thriving and uniquely beautiful blossoms. In this sense, religion itself may not pose any threat to the garden, because the garden is already made up of individual flowers with their own needs and necessities of survival. In the French garden, however, flowers are grown more collectively to form a unified picture. Religion may not necessarily ruin or kill the garden, but it does have a higher risk of enforcing its own power or authority. 

In an interview with Christian Courier, Jasmin explained the motivation of certain Bill 9 supporters in Quebec. While, like in any province, there remain political extremes on both sides, he pointed out that there are also communities in Quebec who are motivated to promote laïcité not in pursuit of secular humanism but rather, to protect a healthy church-state separation and civil inclusivity. Those outside of Quebec should be aware of the cultural nuances that lay beneath the surface of anti-religious rhetoric.

Jasmin also pointed out how, for both sides, there are different groups of people with different political interpretations and motivations. 

Quebec is a francophone “nation within a nation” constitutionally bound to a country dominated by anglophones, which poses a unique challenge. The political application of laïcité is always going to be more challenging for Quebec.

Who is neutral?

Bill 9 has targeted institutions like daycares, subsidized private schools and universities in an attempt to maintain state laïcité, but this leaves concerned Canadians wondering just how associated these institutions are with state authority. Must every institution funded or supported by the state be religiously neutral? Does the religious association of an organizational or educational institution disqualify it from state resources? The lines remain blurry, and have left many Canadians with more questions and concerns about how far state laïcité will go.

“In Québec and Canada, students and citizens are not required to be religiously neutral. The government is,” stated the CLF’s brief on Bill 9 to the National Assembly.

It may be fair to wonder if the real debate on Bill 9 is about where state authority ends, and individual freedom begins; not on the value of neutrality itself. The legal action being taken against the bills may highlight an underlying national bias towards historically Anglo-American values. The legal challenge is important, however, because a level of clarity is needed. When we pursue “secularism” in a multicultural and pluralistic society like Canada, whose terminology are we using? What do we mean when we discuss the state’s responsibility to remain neutral?  

The very nature of Canadian politics calls for a balance of the French and English gardens; a harmony of pluralism, religious freedom and laïcité. Most of all, it calls for an understanding of the line between state neutrality and individual rights. Canada’s complex political climate is both its beauty and its weakness, but with carefully-cut legal definitions and a true equality of anglophone and francophone voices, Canada might just have what it takes to be a kaleidoscope of culture.