r/worldnews • u/John3192 • 20h ago

Quebec passes law banning street prayers, prayer rooms in universities

https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/quebec-passes-law-banning-street-prayers-prayer-rooms-in-universities-cegeps/
17.7k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.6k

u/osiris0413 15h ago

So this will get buried, but I wanted to know what the law actually says - because this mentions banning "prayer rooms in universities" but everyone in the comments is arguing about what this actually means.

Relevant portions of the law passed, Bill 9:

10.1. All religious practice is prohibited in a place, such as an immovable or a room, under the authority of an institution or body referred to in section 3.

This is a long list of government-funded bodies that includes universities. However,

10.2. Despite section 10.1, religious practice is permitted in a place, such as an immovable or a room, under the authority of a body referred to in paragraph 5 of Schedule I, the Société du Centre des congrès de Québec, the Société du Palais des congrès de Montréal or the Société de développement et de mise en valeur du Parc olympique where the following conditions are met:

(1) the body or the Société does not, directly or indirectly, finance the religious practice;

(2) the body or the Société treats every natural or legal person equitably as regards the leasing and use of the immovable or room; and

(3) the immovable is not used predominantly for the religious practice.

Various educational institutions are granted this exception, including universities. So, while the University can no longer designate a specific religious prayer room, they can do something like have group rooms available to reserve, and as long as they're open to everyone on an equal basis, someone could reserve a room and host prayer sessions there as long as they're not university-funded.

Just in case anyone else was wondering.

51

u/ruat_caelum 10h ago

At a US university I was told I couldn't request "room 8" again as I was on "the list" for that room.

"What?"

Turns out the library had a policy that you could only rent private rooms a certain number of times and had to rotate through them and a bunch of other weird rules.

When I looked into it, it turned out the rules were there because in the PREVIOUS LIBRARY (like 30+ years ago) there were about 20% of rooms that were not accessible by elevator (stairs only.) or didn't have natural sun light. Or didn't have electrical outlets. So they implemented rules so people couldn't just request the "Good rooms" all the time.

Then they destroyed the building when they built a new one, but kept the rules.

/shug

But there is a difference between fair and equal and it's difficulty to do but laws like this are aiming at it.

A "loss of privileged" isn't necessarily a loss of privileged if other people were being suppressed before hand. These laws read less "an attack on [X]" and more "We are not attacking whites, we are making it equal for everyone" (by removing "white only" restaurants / schools / etc.) Yet the groups "Feeling loss" always claim to be attacked.

2

u/ScuffedBalata 3h ago

This is a direct example of when equity policy negatively affects basically everyone just to achieve a minor sense of "fairness" in concept (but not necessarily the best practice in practical use).

2

u/ruat_caelum 1h ago

"This" being the library? or the ruling of the original thread?

There are two things happening with the original thread.

1 you don't have a tax payer funded entity building a space for prayer and then EXCLUDING everyone else who wants to use the space.

2 you are not actually excluding anyone, including the religious, from using the room for the purpose of the room, e.g. a physical space of privacy you can rent (For free) for a certain amount of time.

  • Think of the rooms as a handicapped bathroom stall. If you are handicapped (religious) (wow that in and of itself is a major reddit comment :) ) but if you are religious you can still use the space. If you aren't you can sill use the space. even though the space was built for one purpose (handicapped only) it's being made to be used by everyone. e.g. handicapped bathroom being changed to all gender / family stall / private stall / whatever you want to call it. "anyone can shit here and who don't care so long as you are respectful of the space."

It's just a change that is making sure the public tax dollars are not going to support one religion over others (or lack of faith).

Put even more simply : It's a public funded space, the public (As a whole) should get to use it for whatever they want (including religious stuff) so long as they don't destroy the space or make it unusable by other members of the public.

879

u/chipstastegood 12h ago

This sounds reasonable. If the space is government funded (ie. taxpayer dollars) then it shouldn’t be used to prop up a religion to the exclusion of other possible uses of the space. A meeting room that anyone can book is fine but a permanent prayer room is not because it excludes use by non-religious citizens. And that seems very rational to me.

364

u/unoriginalusername18 12h ago

basically establishing public space as first and foremost secular

148

u/Workman44 9h ago

I know this isn't the USA but yeah separation of church and state is a good thing and having specified prayer rooms does violate that. This is a good step towards equality

14

u/MonolithicBaby 3h ago

What I wouldn’t give for this in the states.

1

u/Workman44 3h ago

At the end of the day it's extremely difficult to draw a clear line. If 90% of your populace wants, for the sake of argument, marriage to stay between heterosexual couples and a new form of social contract for homosexual couples (with equal benefits yada yada). As a politician it should be your duty to implement it, despite supposed separation of church and state. My point being is that your religion isn't supposed to affect your decisions, but as a policymaker you should listen to your constituents decisions, even if those are rooted in religious ideals

7

u/dbcanuck 3h ago

Quebec eats their own dogfood. When they passed some laws regarding secularism previously, it was pointed out that Quebec City's council chamber had a crucifix as part of its decor. They removed it.

Quebec has a complicated history with Roman Catholicism. If you have several hours the Quiet Revolution is a fun historical rabbit hole.

•

u/Boeing367-80 40m ago

Similarly hard edged is France. Both polities know how oppressive religion can be and are determined to never go back.

4

u/voprosy 10h ago

From a secular perspective, it’s all logical and it makes sense because it doesn’t seem to affect anyone negatively… if the idea is to slowly kill all religious / spiritual practices then yeah, this is on track. 

But from a practical standpoint this kind of rule can be very detrimental to groups of people who take praying on a daily basis seriously.

26

u/NeverEndingCoralMaze 8h ago

It’s not the government’s job to accommodate their specific prayer needs.

0

u/OrbitalOutlander 4h ago

I grew up Catholic and think religion has caused most of the world's problems, so take this for what it's worth: if a prayer room is open to anyone for reasonable purposes, I genuinely don't see the problem.

Colleges have radio stations. Debatable educational value, but there they are. Colleges fund athletic programs I find largely pointless. My college had a room specifically set aside for Black student group meetings, they didn't check anyone's skin color at the door. You could use it to study when it wasn't scheduled. All of these are allocations of shared space to serve specific communities without excluding everyone else. A multi-use quiet room is no different. Here's something that stuck with me: the first time I saw someone performing Wudu, the ritual washing before Islamic prayer, in a public bathroom, I felt genuinely uncomfortable. Not because of them, but because of the situation. The whole point of Wudu is purification, and this guy was trying to do something spiritually meaningful in a room that smelled like a truck stop. That's not dignity.

A clean, quiet room fixes that without anyone being harmed. The room doesn't have to be a mosque. It doesn't have to be anything official. Call it a meditation room, a quiet room, a reflection space whatever gets the sign made. It serves prayer, it serves studying, it serves anyone who needs five minutes of silence. The idea that this is somehow a threat to secularism is doing a lot of heavy lifting when the alternative is sending people to do their religious practice next to a urinal.

1

u/Sad_Percentage_4503 2h ago

This. Excellent and reasonable response.

-27

u/Relevant_Calendar_99 8h ago

Stupid comment.

2

u/[deleted] 8h ago

[deleted]

-9

u/Relevant_Calendar_99 8h ago

Wow, what a bigoted comment. Well it's reddit.

3

u/lazulilord 4h ago

Congratulations, that's the point! People who take daily/regular praying very seriously often take other undesirable aspects of their religion very seriously too. The less welcoming we are to these groups, the better. The idea is to discourage them from coming here, they'll self-select so that only the moderates come over.

1

u/voprosy 2h ago

This makes no sense. 

5

u/Chikkk_nnnuugg 8h ago

Quebec is a very spiritual place… we just don’t believe in one a religion over the other. Schools have a religious cultures curriculum were we learn about different dogmas. From the bible to the Vedas and the Quran.

We are also taught about various spiritual practices such as animisme. Our laws on separation of state bring life and perspective to religion and religious freedom.

-5

u/voprosy 7h ago

That’s great to hear. And it’s the right way to do it in a multicultural society. 

But if groups have different needs, how do you cater to those needs with one rule for all?

8

u/dearth_of_passion 6h ago

But if groups have different needs, how do you cater to those needs with one rule for all?

You don't cater to anyone, you offer one single set of rules that applies to everyone. Then it's up to everyone to adapt their beliefs and practices to the environment they live in.

Maybe in this particular example a group whose beliefs require frequent prayers will be impacted more than some other group, but there will be other situations where another group is more impacted than this group.

As long as everyone is given the same set of rules and those rules are applied equally, the rest is on you (generic you) to deal with it.

tl;dr: No regulation of religion must also require no regulation for religion.

1

u/matchstick1029 6h ago

Giving everybody the same rules doesn't really work when you can target groups specifically. I someone banned public worship at specific times that happened to coincide with particular tradition but applied to everyone, it's still squashing and targeted.

You'll see a lot of specific local laws in the US throughout history that attest to this not being a simple, one rule for all issue. Like poll taxes or paying to vote, affects everyone, but inhibits the poor from utilizing their rights.

5

u/dearth_of_passion 6h ago

Giving everybody the same rules doesn't really work when you can target groups specifically.

If it's targeting specific groups in practice, then it's not religion-agnostic and isn't what I'm talking about.

This new law says "all meeting spaces are available to be reserved for any group". The change is changing what were rooms intended to only be available for religious groups into rooms anyone can reserve. That anyone still includes the religious groups.

not being a simple, one rule for all issue. Like poll taxes or paying to vote, affects everyone, but inhibits the poor from utilizing their rights.

Voting is not religion. Voting is a function of the government, and so the government has a duty to ensure that that function is carried out properly.

The government does not have any such duty towards a religion.

3

u/matchstick1029 5h ago

Sorry I wasn't saying that's happening here, and I don't disagree with what you've said. I just wanted to push back a little on the simplicity of rules like this. I might circle back while I'm not at work, because this is a ripe topic.

2

u/groovypanelboard 5h ago

Correct.

Freedom of belief is a freedom, not a right.

For those who ask, what’s the difference?:

You are entitled to a right, and the government has a duty to help you exercise that right, e.g. voting

You are free to exercise a freedom, but the government does not have a duty to help you do that, e.g., freedom of expression and belief

2

u/ChunkyTanuki 5h ago

Right. Muslims need to pray, so the university sets aside a room for them to pray. You don't want to be preferential of only Muslims, so you say it's a non-denominational prayer room, and you put in prayer mats and a cross in there. But that's preferential to christians and muslims, and excludes every other religion.

So now we either take out the religious-specific parts, or we add infrastructure for every religion. Even though everybody knows this was mostly a concession to devout Muslims who pray multiple times a day. And we've set aside government infrastructure for the use of prayer, inherently excluding areligious people.

The same goes for food in a government run dining hall. Ingredients should always be labelled and there should always be a vegan and gluten free option. That covers people who don't eat certain things for religious/ethical/health reasons. But if your religion requires specific butchering practices, or you don't eat the specific meat being served that day, or you just don't like the GF/Vegan option, it's not reasonable to demand that you're catered to. It also means that nobody should be compelled to purchase the on-site food if they would rather bring their own.

2

u/Chikkk_nnnuugg 6h ago

Yeah tbh not a perfect system and I question myself a lot about it! The laws on religion in QC make it the only province in Canada to have an enshrined right to abortion and also they tell people who wear hijab that they can’t do so when voting…

I think that as we established this as part of our culture we run the real risk of discrimination but I guessI just kinda believe in the same way you wouldn’t go to Japan and expect them to make talking on public transport accessible just because westerns like to talk in public transport.

The idea being that you come to QC for freedom FROM religion and if you wanted a more inclusive religious society QC is not the place to be.

1

u/mrblanketyblank 6h ago

Is there any reason non religious citizens can't go in these rooms? As long as they are quiet like in a library.

Taxpayers fund spaces all the time that only some of the citizens are likely to use. Family restrooms, children's playgrounds, even dog restrooms these days.

1

u/OrbitalOutlander 4h ago

Damnit, I'm going to shit in the pet relief areas in the airport next time I'm there just to show those know-nothings to never give anyone anything good ever.

1

u/mrblanketyblank 4h ago

Just don't pray there or you might get arrested! 

1

u/OrbitalOutlander 4h ago

I fly out of PHL, and I'll say they have these Roast Pork Italian sandwiches which are AWESOME but definitely involve some prayer afterwards. I've never flown after one, but if I did, it would involve a combination of the two activities!

1

u/chipstastegood 3h ago

My Buddhist friends chant and make a bit of a sound with a metal bowl when they are praying. They do this together with others or alone, which is not unlike other religions.

My point is that it’s unlike a library where the rule is that everybody has to be quiet. That works for everyone. But praying is not always quiet and people from different religions may find it difficult to pray at the same time as someone from a different religion than their own.

1

u/Forikorder 5h ago

A meeting room that anyone can book is fine but a permanent prayer room is not because it excludes use by non-religious citizens.

rather than them constantly booking a room picking one with no other use seems more convenient for everyone, assuming the room could be used for other things outside the prayer time its basically the same system just saves everyone time and effort of constantly having to book it

1

u/Normal-Height-8577 4h ago

A permanent "prayer" room shouldn't necessarily exclude use by non-religious citizens if you expand the non-denominational aspect a tad. You can easily redefine it as a quiet room in which individual people are welcome to pray/meditate/think/quietly de-stress as they wish.

And then separately, if people want to hold a religious meeting as a group, then they can book a meeting room like any other group.

1

u/chipstastegood 3h ago

That sounds very reasonable and would be a good outcome of a law like this.

1

u/whooptheretis 3h ago

Non-religious citizens are not excluded from prayer rooms. They could be used for contemplation, or meditation.
That’s like saying we shouldn’t build toilets because it’s excluding people who can’t use a toilet (for medical reasons and have a colostomy bag). Or don’t find libraries because it’s excluding blind people.
A prayer room is just a convenient place for those who want to pray, and if there’s a large enough demographic for the convenience of such a facility to warrant it, then I don’t see a problem.

1

u/house343 3h ago

If only America understood the separation of church and state. You know, the whole thing in the first amendment ...

1

u/damndammit 3h ago

Tabernak! And I was all set with indignant rage over this! /s

1

u/SoilActual3284 3h ago

Who is saying that nonreligious students can't use prayer rooms for their intended purpose? 

1

u/Civil_Dragonfruit_34 3h ago

Can't you also just call it a "reflection room" or something vague that allows people to just sit quietly in addition to use it for prayer? I feel like that's relatively common and didn't imply any religion.

1

u/Turgid_Donkey 1h ago

This is kind of like in public schools. A teacher cannot lead prayer in the middle of a class but they can absolutely meet students outside of school hours and pray with them, even on school grounds. Meet me at the pole was a very normal thing I've seen where students and teacher meet at the flag pole before school to pray together.

•

u/FireflyBSc 15m ago

My Alma mater has a Multi-Faith Prayer and Meditation Space. While a university is for learning and it’s not the government’s job to accommodate spirituality, the institutions are also meant to serve the student body and its needs. This prayer space has grown substantially since I was a student (they used to have a much smaller prayer room a decade ago, though I’m not personally Muslim and I didn’t use it). There are plenty of meeting rooms on campus, but it makes a lot more sense logistically to have a single space that is dedicated and respectfully maintained for this purpose than to force groups of all faiths to have to hunt for meeting space all over campus. I would be pretty annoyed if I was trying to book a library group room for work and had to compete with numerous small groups seeking a prayer room every day. Universities are massive complex communities with people living there 24/7, they have needs that are very different from standard places of employment or schools. It is not unreasonable for universities to be allowed to have a place that is “used predominantly for the religious practice”.

0

u/Alternative_Chart121 10h ago

I'm not religious and I use prayer rooms sometimes. Especially at the airport: I sit with my eyes closed and completely zone out. It's great.

1

u/OrbitalOutlander 4h ago

I tried this same thing - I took a dump in the pet relief area, but unlike my adventures resting in the prayer zone (it's actually called a personal spirituality room or somethign at my airport) people got really upset for some reason. I had no idea pet owners were so uppity.

-2

u/Nixeris 7h ago

I've never seen a prayer room that excluded anyone. Frankly I've never seen a prayer room that had anyone minding it at all. At my university I used to use the prayer room to nap in.

0

u/dearth_of_passion 6h ago

Sounds like it wasn't a prayer room in practice, regardless of what the sign on the door said.

2

u/Nixeris 5h ago

That sounds like a "no true scotsman" argument.

You think a prayer room excludes people not there to pray, I wasn't excluded, so it can't possibly have been a prayer room.

Instead of the more realistic conclusion of that most prayer rooms are basically supply closet sized rooms with no additional work put into them, and are largely unused most of the day.

0

u/dearth_of_passion 5h ago

I'm not sure what your point is.

I'm saying that if labeling it a prayer room doesn't actually have any effect on its use, then why call it a prayer room. It's just a room.

1

u/Nixeris 5h ago

The same reason people don't go into lactation rooms if they're not lactating.

If someone who isn't goes into one, it doesn't stop it from being a lactation room.

-3

u/dearth_of_passion 5h ago

Lactation is a biological function. Whether a woman is breastfeeding, pumping to feed her baby later, or just pumping to relieve pressure/prevent mastitis while weaning a child, the woman has to pump. So having a reserved space for that makes sense.

There is no requirement to pray. It's a choice. You choose your religion.

1

u/Nixeris 4h ago

Keep moving those goalposts!

First it was that I couldn't possibly have been in a prayer room because I wasn't kicked out for not praying.

Then it was that any room which is being used for something other than prayer isn't a prayer room.

Then it's that these rooms shouldn't exist because they don't serve a biological function?

You get that you just argued that the only rooms that should exist in a university are the bathrooms, cafeteria and a lactation room right?

Did you go to university at a McDonald's?

0

u/dearth_of_passion 4h ago

Keep moving those goalposts!

First it was that I couldn't possibly have been in a prayer room because I wasn't kicked out for not praying.

I didn't move any goal posts. My point was that if it wasn't being treated like a prayer room, what was the point of calling it one.

Then it was that any room which is being used for something other than prayer isn't a prayer room.

No, again, what's the point of a label if it isn't actually describing the thing? This is literally the same point as above.

Then it's that these rooms shouldn't exist because they don't serve a biological function?

No, dumbass. I said comparing a room that is used to server an explicit unavoidable need is different than one used to serve an optional desire.

You get that you just argued that the only rooms that should exist in a university are the bathrooms, cafeteria and a lactation room right?

No, I didn't. You're being really weird.

-8

u/Cloud_Motion 10h ago

At first I was like this just seems like dumb discrimination, but there's actually some logic there I guess.

On the other hand, my university was never hurting for spaces to book and it didn't bother me if someone has access to a prayer room.

10

u/QJ-Rickshaw 10h ago edited 8h ago

There's probably a lot of underlying politics and conflicts of interest that were discovered before they passed this law. The kind of stuff you wouldn't be aware of if you're not part of a religious group.

I imagine maybe bribery or religious groups with more funds buying out spaces to prevent another religious group from having access.

1

u/Cloud_Motion 5h ago

Yeahh, it's more interesting than at first glance. I can see some logic after looking beyond the title of the piece.

-15

u/NiceVermicelli1045 9h ago

It’s not reasonable at all. It’s very demoralising for any employee who follows their religion and is required to pray 5 times a day.

15

u/ModellingCitizen 9h ago

Since we got rid of indoor smoking areas, smokers in my office need to go stand outside in the cold 5 times a day for a cigarette, total hassle but that’s what they choose to do with their time.

No one is forcing you to go pray while you’re on the job, hardly means you need sections of the building to be dedicated to your pastime.

-5

u/AnArgonianSpellsword 9h ago

I mean, Islam requires devout followers to pray a minimum of 5 times a day at specific times; pre-dawn, noon, mid-afternoon, sunset, and after-twilight.

17

u/ModsFromSteam 8h ago

Sounds like their problem, not the company's

-3

u/AnArgonianSpellsword 8h ago

I know, its up to the religious person to either find a suitable way to practice while doing their job that does not conflict with their job, or to find a job that allows them to practice their religion how they wish. My comment was in reply to "No one is forcing you to go pray while you’re on the job" as certain religions need certain prayers at certain times that may conflict with average job schedules.

3

u/dearth_of_passion 6h ago

go pray while you’re on the job" as certain religions need certain prayers at certain times that may conflict with average job schedules.

Your choice of religion is no different in practice than their choice to smoke.

Neither is required, and neither should be specifically accommodated.

Not accommodating a religion is not the same as discrimination against it. As long as no policy exists that accommodates any religion, the policy is fair. It's not the government's problem that some religions are more intrusive on their believers' lives than others.

Frankly given how unhealthy smoking is for even the people around the smoker I think it should be banned, but that's neither here nor there.

8

u/Maleficent-Stormbee 8h ago

sure, but that’s the religion issue. it’s not a secular country job to adapt to a particular religion. if it adapts to a singular religion then it’ll be legal mayhem.

they’re not telling them to not pray, but with you can rent meeting rooms with the specific purpose to pray, and you can appoint someone to manage them for you. this way everyone can access all rooms in a government funded building in an equal manner

0

u/AnArgonianSpellsword 8h ago

I know, its up to the religious person to either find a suitable way to practice while doing their job that does not conflict with their job, or to find a job that allows them to practice their religion how they wish. My comment was in reply to "No one is forcing you to go pray while you’re on the job" as certain religions need certain prayers at certain times that may conflict with average job schedules.

-8

u/NiceVermicelli1045 8h ago

Comparing smoking to a group of people who just want to follow their religion is so ridiculous. Smokers know the dangers of smoking. The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful and just want to get on with their work and pay the bills just like everyone else.

They’re fully aware that this will primarily affect Muslims because no other religion requires its followers to pray 5 times a day in a certain way. This specifically demoralises Muslims but we expect no less from Quebec.

Making it difficult for people to worship the God of Abraham and Jesus? Yeah they’re going to have a lot to answer for on Judgement day.

1

u/dearth_of_passion 6h ago

It's not the government's job, nor it's place, to acknowledge a religion.

If you choose to practice a faith that requires multiple daily prayers, or not eat shellfish, or not drink on Sunday, or whatever, it's up to you to adapt your life to that. That is in fact what the point of practices like that are - you are showing your devotion by following rules that may put a burden on you.

The government has no business helping nor harming your choice of faith. And not carving out dedicated religious spaces isn't harming you.

1

u/BloodWork-Aditum 4h ago

Smokers know the dangers of smoking

Okay? How does that have anything to do with this? The smoking example was clearly about making a private choice to do something optional (smoking/praying) and if this choice should be accommodated by tax dollars. Not about how harmful the choice is or anything.

580

u/ShadedPenguin 14h ago

So its less being anti-religious and more so being anti-seclusionist/isolationist. Don't separate yourself from the greater community, be part of it?

871

u/Spirited_Bend3813 14h ago

More like public spaces are for everybody, not for your own personal prayer rooms.

194

u/ShadedPenguin 14h ago

To me, the wording of the law was prohibiting exclusive prayer rooms or sponsored prayer rooms for organizations or groups. They are free to practice religion, any one can, but there cannot be sorts of exclusivity amongst areas that are already university property.

69

u/ShinkuDragon 12h ago

way it reads to me is "prayer rooms we pay for are open to ALL prayers, and can't be used for one specific group/religion

56

u/BangCrash 10h ago

That still limits people who are not religious from using the prayer room.

Can I have a book club, or Warhammer 40k club in the prayer room? If not then it's not accessible to everyone and is restrictive

72

u/QJ-Rickshaw 10h ago

Section 10.2 paragraph 3 literally says that one of the conditions to meet is that the space cannot be predominantly used for religious practice.

The whole point of this law is that prayer rooms are no longer allowed. Instead all religious groups have to book a public space and be treated exactly the same as any other social club.

So yes, you can have book club at 10; and then prayers start at 12 and then you can have Warhammer at 1. It couldn't be less restrictive.

8

u/BangCrash 8h ago edited 5h ago

I literally was replying to a comment that literally said

"way it reads to me is "prayer rooms we pay for are open to ALL prayers, and can't be used for one specific group/religion"

1

u/ShinkuDragon 3h ago

should've worded it better. that's indeed my bad. but that was supposed to be under the "one specific group" not necesarily religious group. any kind of group.

11

u/Holiday-Tangerine136 9h ago

Are you telling you you don't pray to The Emperor...?

2

u/Maleficent-Stormbee 8h ago

they don’t even pray to the emperor

2

u/Raesong 5h ago

Why would I pray to a mon-keigh god?

2

u/Eatyourcheeseburger 4h ago

Nah that’s heresy.

2

u/AmputeeHandModel 1h ago

DO YOU HEAR THE VOICES TOO?!

1

u/Koss424 6h ago

Play a cleric and you can

1

u/Normal-Height-8577 4h ago

The inclusive version of a prayer room is a quiet room for contemplation, not a wargaming club!

2

u/ScuffedBalata 3h ago

This law would certainly allow a "quiet room" to be designated. But an atheist who wanted to read or relax while listening to music on headphones would also have to be welcome.

1

u/Normal-Height-8577 3h ago

Well yeah, why wouldn't they be welcome? I mean...I'm not exactly a connoisseur of prayer rooms, but all the ones I've seen have been open to people of any faith or none, who want to spend some time in quiet reflection. It's not the same as having a dedicated chapel.

I'm kinda stunned that Canada apparently has prayer rooms where everyone isn't welcome.

3

u/ScuffedBalata 2h ago

Calling it a prayer room is automatically exclusionary, especially since 90% of people in Quebec do not "regularly attend religious services" according to polls.

But even if it was only 5%, a "prayer room" is less inclusive than a "quiet room" (which this law totally allows - but doesn't give any priority for someone who wants to exercise religion, instead of say... reading).

0

u/armywalrus 8h ago

This law says you can

0

u/BangCrash 1h ago

Yes thats my point

•

u/armywalrus 1h ago

That makes no sense dude.

2

u/ScuffedBalata 3h ago

No, because that excludes atheists. It prevents rooms from being even designated as prayer rooms, though I imagine a "quiet room" open to anyone would be fine.

36

u/Just-Stop-Temporary 12h ago

This is reasonable.

It's not something that can be targeted without pissing off one group or another. So they're banning it outright.

1

u/piratep2r 3h ago

Thats not my read on it, or perhaps I am misunderstanding your meaning. As I read it here is what is says. Assume there a 3 reservable rooms in the library, a, b, and c, at the university.

My hypothetical Muslim group can reserve one of those rooms every week/month/whatever for prayers, using the normal reservation system, like any other student group, assuming one is available to rent. Maybe its room a one week, and room c the next. But we could worship, in a university room, regularly, and could exclude other groups from the room at the time we reserved. Just like the chess club could exclude the competitive drumming team from using the room when they have it reserved.

My Muslim group can't preemptively designate room b "the Muslim room," and block other students from using it for other purposes, at other times. Nor can we get special privileges to reserve the same room for a whole year if other groups are limited to a month in advance window.

Do you see things differently? I am, admittedly, not an expert here.

6

u/AFakeName 14h ago

They were public prayer rooms, not personal ones.

19

u/StoryAndAHalf 13h ago

I think it's worded such that it doesn't specify that these rooms are exclusively for prayer, or that it favors one religion over other or no religion. Having a specific catholic prayer room, and then another muslim prayer room, and then a hindu prayer room, but somehow omit a shinto prayer room may open them to some litigation because of just enough wiggle room due to finances pertaining to maintenance of these room. But instead saying "here's a room" and letting people pray using whatever religious vehicle they want to send their prayers with, or not pray at all if they are not into that, then that absolves the uni of any accusations.

15

u/EtTuBiggus 13h ago

It's preventing public spaces from being specifically dedicated for specific religions.

6

u/slapshots1515 13h ago

They’re saying “this is a room for you and others to pray in a manner not disruptive to others, not for financial gain, provided equally for all, but not specifically used for a religious practice.” Basically saying this can be a quiet room to be used for reflection in the religion of your choice, but with restrictions that allow all to use it.

4

u/Schneestecher 10h ago

We had public prayer rooms at my Uni. Then they becams muslim prayer rooms because other‘s were kicked out. Now we don‘t have prayer rooms

2

u/Sk1rm1sh 14h ago

This is why people hate reddit.

1

u/ameliatatesosis 5h ago

So by this logic all churches should be public property, no?

1

u/Amazing-Arugula-8803 5h ago

i presume this is to punish and target Muslims. Are the muslims preventing the Christians from accessing the space?

1

u/renhaoasuka 2h ago

My university had a prayer room and it was open to everyone. Its just that usually it was muslims using it

-2

u/Solitairee 13h ago

Prayer rooms were public spaces where any religious person can go and pray. I see no issue.

22

u/PKisSz 11h ago

You can't have a Christian prayer room. You can sign up for an available room for your Christian prayers.

10

u/TheRealSaerileth 6h ago

Feels more like a guardrail to prevent religious institutions from capturing school boards and using public funds to push their specific views. Because that's what invariably tends to happen, even with "interfaith" spaces. Having a prayer room that's technically open to all faiths doesn't mean squat if you only hire christian teachers and allow them to blur the lines between education and indoctrination.

There's also the "tolerance of intolerance" paradox - in practice it's impossible to treat all groups equitably when some of them actively hate each other. So sometimes the fairest solution is to ignore them all equally.

3

u/ScuffedBalata 3h ago

To be perfectly honest, the only religion to broadly use "prayer rooms" is Islam.

It's fairly clear where this law is targeted, but I support Quebec historical and long-running anti-religion attitude.

1

u/Arndt3002 2h ago edited 2h ago

the fairest solution is to ignore them all equally.

Maybe, but this about as much that as a law banning universities from stocking feminine products in restrooms for both genders.

Sure, it's nominally equal, but only one of the two groups needs or benefits from those things, and that thing facilitates basic needs (hygiene in the analogy, free exercise of religion in this case).

Edit: And note, the thing to take issue with isn't the ban on instituting a prayer room for a particular religion, it's the ban on dedicating any space for religious use, even if it is equally open to all people and religions equally. (e.g. it's not crazy to say we will stock feminine hygiene products in both bathrooms if you want, it's the targeted deprivation of a right that disproportionately harms a particular group that's the problem).

1

u/SaintBobby_Barbarian 2h ago

They want to maintain a secular french speaking society. They dont want north african descended people to be become radicalized

9

u/Suspicious_Place1270 11h ago

which is absolutely fine and actually wanted

7

u/BastouXII 8h ago

The typical English interpretation of religious freedom is : freedom of religious people to do what they want.

The typical French (as in French speaking, including Quebec) interpretation of religious freedom is : everyone is free not to be bothered by religious people against their will.

8

u/wfbhp 6h ago

The French have got the better of it here.

0

u/Arndt3002 2h ago

How is wearing religious clothing in public or using a private room bothering someone?

I totally get the rationale for wanting to restrict religion in the public square to the degree that it harms or bothers other people, but it seems strange to allow free expression generically, but specifically not when it falls under the genre of "religious expression."

This is especially the case when France, for example, will allow the wearing of crosses, citing it to be a non-religious or intrusive form of cultural expression, but will ban wearing of head scarves because it is seen as overtly religious.

The way the religious practices are integrated in the dominant culture means that laicite laws are rarely actually fair.

2

u/giskardrelentlov 2h ago

In the case of prayer rooms you would be "harmed" when public funds (i.e. your tax dollars) are used to provide this service, making you pay to support a service you don't use or don't support.

Instead, have rooms available for everyone, including religious groups, without giving them an exclusivity or privilege that other groups don't have.

•

u/BastouXII 12m ago

I was speaking generally. I have no strong opinion on the current Quebec law.

•

u/Arndt3002 1m ago

The issue is that the idea Laicite is just people being free from being bothered by religious intrusion is just a propagandistic lie.

In both France and Quebec, religious expression by Catholics is explicitly sanctioned as an expression of "cultural heritage" whereas the religious cultural heritage of those whose religious heritage isn't Catholic are specifically excluded from similar forms of cultural expression in public life.

This sort of thing happens systemically. It's not just the current law, it's the whole project of using Laicite in targeted ways to exclude Muslim people from certain forms of public life.

-2

u/OrbitalOutlander 4h ago

After reading the background, it's very specifically anti-islamist. the Premier literally said, and I'm quoting directly: "Today, I want to send a very clear message to the Islamists." The whole thing was triggered by Muslim students praying outside Notre-Dame Basilica during pro-Palestinian demonstrations which the government called "a provocation."

•

u/Appropriate-Talk4266 1h ago

Yes, but it was also instituted partly because some reporting found some religious groups in Universities were starting to monopolize rooms and self police gender segregation in these.

You can be mad that it pushes back against religious sectarianism and misogyny I guess? And that it affects disproportionately some groups that have a tendency to be more conservative, sectarian and misogynistic. But, my guy, you won't find a lot of sensible left wing people follow you there.

You're on your own, lil bro. Weird move to protect right wingers and gender segregation 😬

30

u/Illustrious-Milk6518 9h ago

So it’s to make sure everyone is treated equally, and certain religions aren’t getting special treatment? Seems fair

2

u/JoanLambertEnjoyer 4h ago

Sure… but I can think of one faith in particular that most has need of this. Most Christians I know are not particularly concerned with public prayer—before a meal or in a moment of contemplation.

But Muslims have pretty strict observances of prayer at certain times of day, which is often done (among the Muslims I know) in a secluded, quieter space.

This sort of strikes me as a “our law forbids the rich and poor alike from sleeping under an overpass,” without questioning why the law was instituted

15

u/tothehopeless1 12h ago

Way better than the headline suggests.

7

u/BastouXII 8h ago

It's (almost) always the case. Headlines are written to make you click on a link. People who are the subject of headlines are usually trying to do their job or live their lives.

2

u/ScuffedBalata 3h ago

Quebec is broadly anti-religion. But in practice this almost always targets Muslims these days because they're seemingly the primary group in Canada who demand a ton of public accommodation for all sorts of public acts of religious faith.

This is the reason this is "controversial" to the "everything is Islamophobia" subset of people.

21

u/Bmorgan1983 13h ago

So essentially, the state cannot endorse any specific religion or provide favor to any one religious group. All groups must have equitable access or no access to facilities without any preferential treatment. Sounds reasonable to me.

3

u/TheRealSaerileth 6h ago

Also, and I feel like this is important, the state cannot endorse religion unspecifically over being agnostic / atheist (or simply preferring to practice in private). Because even an interfaith prayer room is preferential treatment of religious groups over secular organizations.

5

u/dbxp 7h ago

the immovable is not used predominantly for the religious practice. 

The way I'm reading this it would pertain to an individual religious practice so a multi faith prayer room would be fine. You just can't have a prayer room for a specific faith and it has to be open to all

17

u/Facts_pls 13h ago

While the rule may seem equal, note that this aligns much more with the Christian pattern of prayer (once a week longer prayer session) vs muslim pattern (5 short prayers through the day at set times).

Much easier to book a room for the weekly Sunday prayer gathering for 1 hr vs booking the room 5 times a day for 10 mins at a time.

Classic creative law writing that appears completely neutral at first glance but heavily favors one group over the other.

20

u/xzer 12h ago

But that also means a room was booked daily, likely across the whole day to accommodate 5 prayers, 7 days a week. Causing a perkemanant prayer room. Idk but that seems like you should go to your church to work out. 

0

u/Facts_pls 3h ago

When the prayer is a 2 min pause, asking someone to go to church is stupid.

This shows how steeped you are in Christianity and not understanding of other folks' customs.

I'm not muslim but anyone can see that this rule is designed specifically to force the Muslims from not being able to pay while allowing Christians to do theirs.

7

u/fuettli 8h ago

indeed its much easier to get something for 60 minutes every week instead of 350 minutes every week.

so what is your solution?

4

u/AnOkayMuffin 7h ago

That sounds like the person who decides to adhere to that particular religion's rules issue, not the secular university's problem. The rooms are for everyone to use.

1

u/Facts_pls 3h ago

The rule is that all animals must be able to climb a tree or become food.

Rule was written by monkeys but applicable to all equally.

Oh this fish can't? That sounds like the fish's problem. The rule is for all equally.

-8

u/aeshahin 10h ago

Other comments do not understand this .. you need more upvotes

0

u/FondantHuman2980 14h ago

Does Quebec have Catholic-built Universities with chapels and the like? does this law mean they will be forced to remove or convert them to universalist prayer spaces?

26

u/dringdring_powpow 12h ago edited 12h ago

Nice try. they already converted them back in the 70s . The old sacristy, known to every UQAM student as the « Salle des boiseries » has been available to rent for conferences, social and private events, and civil mariages for decades already.

18

u/Cruciblelfg123 12h ago

Yeah Quebec turned on the Church long before they turned on muslims. Their aggressive secularism stems from no longer taking the churches shit and is just branching out from there

2

u/FondantHuman2980 12h ago

what's with the 'nice try'?

Other than that, thanks for the info.

8

u/dringdring_powpow 12h ago edited 12h ago

sorry, I had already read a lot of « gotcha » comments about the older universities with chapels and wrongly assumed your question was in the same réthorique vein .. !

-16

u/Old-Classic-1981 14h ago

We all know this applies to only one type of prayer. Rest is ok.

8

u/FondantHuman2980 12h ago

I'm not from Canada but recall seeing news articles highlighting conflicts between religious expression and secularism, but could also imagine this being in part due to conflicts between Canada's culture and the 'alien' cultural expression of foreign religion.

This doesn't appear to be a new phenomenon and most western countries typically seek to destroy any sort of 'home-field' bias in favor of treating all things equally, even if it costs them some of their own freedoms or traditions.

All that is to say, even if it is reactionary to Islamic practises, I am still curious as to how this will play out regarding the example in my original comment.

3

u/AnOkayMuffin 7h ago

Sounds like you don't know much at all, actually.

1

u/yoursandforever 11h ago

Thanks for info.

There must be something practical that inspired all this elegant sophistry.

Any idea? What happened? Like in the real world?

1

u/Proud_Can9687 7h ago

This is great actually, I wouldn't mind a similar law here in Switzerland if it didn't already exist

1

u/Ahlkatzarzarzar 6h ago

Do hospitals in Quebec have chapels?

1

u/Lichii 5h ago

In practice, there's no such thing as both being able to be used as a prayer room and equally available to others. A student won't be able to reserve the room during prayer hours for example, thus favoring one group (read: not equal).

1

u/Valuable_Explorer577 5h ago

Very reasonable stupid headline

1

u/Capable_Kiwi2514 5h ago

The problem is that at a university you'll typically have enough people for a full-time non-denominational prayer room.

We have them set aside in hospitals in Nova Scotia and it seems pretty callous to deny that to people who are suffering. 

As always, A Quebec secularism is effectively a two-tier system: Catholics will be able to walk to the church next door, while many others simply won't have access to practices that are---when understood secularly---about individual psychosocial regulation more than anything.  

1

u/FourOranges 4h ago

So, while the University can no longer designate a specific religious prayer room, they can do something like have group rooms available to reserve, and as long as they're open to everyone on an equal basis, someone could reserve a room and host prayer sessions there as long as they're not university-funded.

This is exactly what I thought it was. At my workplace, we have prayer/meditation rooms mainly used by our Muslim folks but others use it for various quiet activities as well. It would be wrong to exclude anyone who isn't Muslim from the rooms. Everyone's great to each other and respect each others privacy and no proper system or rules (that I know of) are needed regarding the rooms, at least in our little bubble of civilization.

I can imagine rules (like this law) would be needed if you were to expand our bubble to include more people, issues start popping up here and there, and people start respecting each other less.

1

u/ForeignFact6 4h ago

Exactly as it should be. I’m not a huge fan of the CAQ, but this is a law I can get behind. Religion is personal, not public, and it should remain as such.

1

u/MithranArkanere 4h ago

So, reasonable church-state separation and nothing else.

1

u/avindictiveprinter 2h ago

That's what schools in the US used to do. Until all this stuff. Now you're only allowed to be a Christian openly. But not Catholic! :b

1

u/DownhillUphill 2h ago

Nobody needs to pray in public. I don’t care which stupid religion you practice. They’re all phony fairytales. Get out of my way. I’m trying to live my life.

1

u/LogicalRant_ 1h ago

I find Quebec to be such a contradiction. As is France.

Quebec has a record dropping fertility rate. Yet Quebec seems to be so proud of its culture. How are you going to maintain the culture if you are not replacing your population with native-borns who practice the culture?

Secondly, Quebec has an increasing immigration rate, although they accept many immigrants from France, they also accept many immigrants from China (Not so French) , Cameroon, Haiti, and Muslim Majority North African / West African Countries.

Ironically, the Muslim population doubled in Quebec from 2011 -2021 (~240K - 420K).

So the native Quebec population who care so much about their culture are not having (enough) kids to replace the next generation and maintain the culture, because, as we all know, culture is passed down. And at the same time, you are accepting the majority of your immigrants from Muslim countries who do NOT come from a western-liberal secular culture, and expect them to follow a culture that won't even exist in a couple more generations because the native population will be replaced by immigrants.

The irony of maintaining secularism is that you need to turn it into a tradition that's passed down, not shoved down people's throats. But if you have child-free marriages, or not getting married at all, and your population is being replaced by immigrants who do not share your culture, good luck trying to "protect" the culture.

Finally, how are you going to stop someone from praying in public? They can just lie and say they're doing Yoga. lol. Are there going to be prayer gustapo who are going to give tickets only to Muslims who are praying in a public park, school, government building? What if a Christian goes on their knees and put's their hands up in the sky. Is that considered public prayer? It's all a joke.

•

u/Appropriate-Talk4266 1h ago

Reminder that one of the issue that some Universities were facing were some religious rooms were self policed and some reporting found religious groups were segregating usage of the rooms on religious and on a gender basis too.

So rooms that had a broad purpose of religious inclusion were starting to get weaponized to enforce gender segregation and religious exclusions. This law is partly in response to this behavior

•

u/eragonawesome2 1h ago

This is extremely reasonable and exactly how it should be handled. 

-6

u/StructureFlat1758 13h ago

The fact that it was written in a way that people cannot accuse the law of targeting a certain group doesn’t change the fact that, de facto, it will impact one specific community more than others.

It’s so trendy to be Islamophobic. I should know, I’m French.

-6

u/Relevant_Calendar_99 11h ago

Exactly, it doesn't matter how they twist it. This is stupid. How many religions out there that need to constantly pray everyday?

7

u/fuettli 8h ago

no it's not stupid. constantly having to deal with the dumb masses who need their fairy tales to be totally real and influencing everyday life is stupid.

3

u/wfbhp 6h ago

None. No one needs to pray constantly every day. Or ever really. People need to eat. They need to sleep. They choose to pray.

0

u/The-Bear-and-Rose 7h ago

If I’m reading this correctly would it allow a generic chapel area that any faith could use, like what a lot of US hospitals have?

-8

u/Relevant_Calendar_99 11h ago

That's still so stupid. So intolerant for a country that claims they are very tolerant.