The PQ and the new Quebec

Re: “Marois’s secular charter domin- ates election talk” (Gazette, Aug. 17).

Pauline Marois says government needs to present a neutral face to the public — so no hijabs, turbans, Stars of David or kirpans for public servants. But a crucifix is okay because it’s part of Quebec’s “patrimoine.”

What’s really going on here is the discomfort and insecurity of a party that represents people desperate to hold on to a society that long ago ceased to exist. They look around and see “foreign” faces, hear “foreign” tongues and feel threatened. Legislation like this is a vain attempt to hold back the tide.

Reality check: “Patrimoine” changes over time. And those faces, voices and religious symbols are now part of the patrimoine. Instead of the government trying to legislate against this in the name of “neutrality,” the population should learn to apply neutrality in response to the new face of Quebec. Matthew Cope Westmount

Pauline Marois and Jean Charest gree that the giant crucifix in the National Assembly should stay because Christianity has played a significant role in the history of Quebec.

Uh, so has English. Mark Gross Montreal

I rolled my eyes when I first read the Parti Québécois slogan “À nous de choisir.” Yes, Pauline Marois, we the people will choose our government. How clever. Here is another meaningless slogan along the lines of “Yes We Can,” which Christopher Hitchens once wrote is “the sort of thing parents might chant encouragingly to a child slow on the pottytraining uptake.”

Fast forward to this week as the PQ announced that, if elected, it will prohibit the wearing of religious garb in the civil service, impose new language laws, and bar most students from choosing their preferred CEGEP.

These are not pro-choice positions. That is, the “nous” in the slogan are not the voters who would throw out a Liberal government, as I originally assumed. Instead, the “nous” are the PQ leaders themselves who will decide for all of us what we can wear, how we can greet people in stores, and what schools we can attend.

»

Whether by accident or by design, the PQ has issued its promise/warning to Quebecers: it, not we, will decide how we live our lives.

Darryl Levine Dollard des Ormeaux

So the PQ will ban all religious symbols from government institutions except Catholic symbols because, as even the Liberals agree, the crucifix in the National Assembly is “an important part of our history” and has played an important role in Quebec society. While many thousands of Quebecers have abandoned the Catholic Church, it’s understandable that they maintain some essential religious traditions. Otherwise, the only way to curse in French would be to do it in English. Rich Hammond Hudson

Pauline Marois’s ravings during this election campaign are nothing new. Xenophobia has been at the core of the PQ since its inception. In the past, anglophones were solely the target, but over the last few decades with immigration coming from the Middle East and Asia, this intolerant party has found new targets. Marois’s recent attacks on anglos can only serve to incite hatred and intolerance.

This is an old game plan that is indicative of a party with no real vision. The PQ’s only reason for existence is the archaic fantasy of separation. No mention either of minority rights or guarantees, but then one could hardly expect any real rights from such an inward and narrowminded party. Robert Anstee Montreal

Does Pauline Marois’s plan to remove religious symbols include the cross on Mount Royal? Jean Davies N.D.G.

I think extending Bill 101 to CEGEPs is an excellent idea. As an English-as-asecond-language instructor working in the corporate sphere for the last 18 years, I believe this move would guarantee me plenty of work for the indefinite future.

Allez, Pauline!

Michael Hind Point St. Charles

Pauline Marois’s strange plan for Quebec secularism illustrates the brain vacuum that is created when expressions of faith are banned from public debate.

It is cold comfort to Christians that Marois’s proposed ban on religious symbols excludes the cross — but only because Marois sees it as a “secular” symbol of Quebec’s identity.

Quebec’s flag is full of Christian symbolism — the cross, the fleur-de-lis symbol of the virginity of the mother of God, and the blue and white Marian colours. Quebec’s legislature is painted blue for the same reason. The original French version of the Canadian national anthem is explicitly religious too, although perhaps Marois never learned Canada’s anthem.

The PQ’s anti-religious bigotry is unwelcome and destructive, to be sure. Yet its implications are more serious still. Whenever the state starts limiting nonviolent public expressions of faith, the first victim is honesty, while the second victim is understanding.

The third and ultimate victim is freedom in general, but perhaps that is Ms. Marois’s goal.

Rev. Geoffrey Korz, Chair of the Canadian Council for Religious Freedom

Hamilton, Ont.