Above the law

Re: Bill 62 demands response. Andrew Coyne, Oct. 31

It’s disappointing to read that Andrew Coyne is so alarmed by Bill 62’s misperceived threat to religious freedom that he is willing to sanction the most extreme government intervention — invoking the notwithstanding clause. Resorting to this extreme measure shows the special unwarranted status of religion and the undervalued human condition of what it means to be a woman in Canada.

Contrary to Coyne’s reasoning the Bill strives to be religiously neutral. Actually, the fact that it tolerates the crucifix and not face covering proves that the Bill isn’t out to remove religious expression in public. Instead it wants to legally stop the clearly misogynistic superstition that women should be ashamed to show themselves in public.

Reasonable people are right to conclude from Coyne’s arguments that the separation of church and state essentially means that religious practices are above the law. Such was the case when the rights of women were violated by Winston Blackmore’s polygamy but the state delayed prosecution for 20 years out of religious considerations. Eventually it intervened but by then much harm had been done to women and children. Stopping this singular sacrifice, typically borne only by women when it comes to the practice of religion, is the spirit of the law behind Bill 62.

It’s incredible to read Coyne — who usually argues for a measured, rational response — proposing such extraordinary legal efforts to protect the rule of religion all while abandoning women to hide themselves in public. But it’s to be expected when the rule of law is shaped by religious thinking. Tony D’Andrea, Toronto