Sept. 12, 2007
Once again, a seemingly trivial ruling by a government agency reveals the strange influence religions have on Canada’s governmental systems.
Canada’s elections are run by Elections Canada, a government agency responsible for ensuring that all our elections are fair and democratic. This group of dedicated civil servants is responsible for a system that is envied throughout the democratic world. Even former President Jimmy Carter remarked that the US should look to “[its] northern neighbor as an example of how to run an election.”In spite of this reputation, Elections Canada seems influenced by the mere possibility of pressure from religious groups.
Recently it decided that Muslim women who veil their faces for religious reasons do not have to remove their veils during the identification process required for voting. Instead they just have to produce two pieces of photo identification. How does that work?
Several problems for our electoral system arise from this ruling. First, if one must be clearly identified, then surely comparing one’s face to an established photo I.D. is the simplest and most effective way to do it. That requires a clear view of one’s face, as well as a clear view of the photograph. This also begs the question, “If the person is comfortable in having a bare face for a photograph, why is the same person not comfortable showing that same face to an election official?”
Second, I am in agreement with Prime Minister Stephen Harper (a rare occurrence), and the leaders of the other major parties when they point out that Elections Canada is going against the wishes of the Canadian Parliament as expressed in its passing of Bill 31 last spring.
That bill’s specific purpose is to clarify the legalities of identifying oneself to the Government of Canada. It is the law of the land, and other than The Supreme Court of Canada interpreting legislation to guarantee the protection of the courts for Canadians, no government agency should be able to contradict the will of Parliament.
Third, and as a Humanist I find this to be the most disturbing of the three, is the way Elections Canada was prompted to make this ruling.
My first reaction when I heard of the ruling was to assume that it was the direct result of complaints from elements of the Muslim community. However, that does not seem to be the case. Some Muslim leaders have pointed out that women who chose to keep their faces covered would have no objection to showing their face to a female election official. Indeed, one spokeswoman has pointed out that these women regularly remove their veils at banks and airports where visual identification is required. Where then, is the impetus for such a ruling?
This would seem to be yet another ruling that could only happen in the Never Never Land called Canada. In other countries, bureaucrats must be beseeched and even overthrown for minority groups to attain any recognition or even tolerance. In Canada, it seems our bureaucrats seek out ways to recognize minorities and accommodate needs that even the minorities do not deem necessary.
I suppose that would be fine, other than the odd eccentric ruling and some surprised looks on the faces of members of minorities, but for the fact that the practice is not even-handed. One requirement seems to be that the minority be a religious minority. Non-believers struggle to get the attention of our government in order to establish our right of freedom from religion. Does the government refrain from singing the theist national anthem? Has it even considered removing the theist statement on our coins?
The Canadian state, as I have pointed out in other articles is “infected” with Theism. Religions have had so much influence in governmental affairs over the centuries that government bureaucrats automatically and reflexively build rulings that are conciliatory to religious groups. Non-believers who question this are accused of being petty and “nit picking.”
Most of the influences over those centuries of British, and then Canadian government, have been Christian. Recently, with the increased number of non-Christian religious followers in Canada, our governments seem to be trying to avoid any conflict with other religions and has adopted regulations similar to the one issued by Elections Canada regarding veils. The Lord’s Day Act has been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, not because it was a clear fusion of state and religion, but because it might offend members of religions whose Sabbath is not Sunday. Any benefit to non-believers is purely incidental. Prayers in public school opening exercises have been replaced by moments of silent meditation to avoid offending whatever religion the standard prayer ignores, not to respect the rights of non-believers.
The bureaucrats have once again attempted to assuage any concerns, real or assumed, that might come from a religious group, rather than simply realizing a simple, practical fact that governments should not be influenced by religions. If we are to have a state that is truly separate from religion, we must insist that all people are treated equally by it.
Overreacting to potential but imaginary problems from religious minorities does not protect anyone’s rights least of all those of non-believers. Elections Canada must follow the law of the land, the will of Parliament – so say all the parties represented in the House of Commons and so say we.
prev story