This kind of thing happens all the time in the U.S., but I didn’t think it was a problem in Canada. One of our regular readers and posters, Veronica Abbass from Ontario, Canada—one of the writers of the Canadian Atheist website—is featured in the local papers (see here and here), for she’s suing the city of Peterborough for incursion of religion into local government. Apparently meetings of the city council and government committees begin with a recitation of the Lord’s Prayer. The Peterborough Examiner notes:
In an affidavit filed with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Veronica Abbass argues that reciting the Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of council and committee meetings is unconstitutional and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“My distress from the feelings of discrimination, exclusion and rejection have reduced my ability to enjoy living and participating in a democratic country and in municipal affairs,” she states in the affidavit. “As a non-religious person, the Christian prayer practice of my local council makes me feel like an outsider in my city.
Abbass is seeking a court order stopping the reciting of the Lord’s Prayer or the use of any other religious ceremony at the city’s council and committee meetings. She also asks for $5,000 for breaching her Charter rights and money to cover her legal costs.
. . . . . In an Ontario Court of Appeal decision in 1999, Madam Justice Kathryn Feldman ruled that Penetanguishene’s use of the Lord’s Prayer at meetings was unconstitutional and infringed on Henry Freitag’s Charter right to freedom of religion.
The city’s defense will be familiar to Americans who know about such cases:
Peterborough’s not breaking the law, Acting Mayor Henry Clarke said.
“No one is forced to take part. They are invited if they choose…. We have added the silent reflection for anyone who wishes to, whichever deity or thought process they follow,” Clarke said. “We are abiding by the law and being respectful of all.”
. . . Mayor Daryl Bennett made a similar comment in an email to Abbass on Oct. 24.
“I always make a point of inviting rather than directing those who wish to recite the prayer to do so. It has been my experience that some attendees at the meeting do recite the prayer and others do not,” he states in the email.
That’s such a lame defense. Nobody has to take part! Nope, it’s just ducky if the nonbelievers sit there in silence, sticking out like a sore thumb while everyone else prays.
I wish Veronica the best of luck. The case will be decided toward the end of the year and I’ll report back.
It remains that religious belief should not be represented by the government as the norm.
Best of luck Veronica.
Indeed!
Yes! You have my deep respect for standing up, Veronica.
Good luck, Veronica! I hope the Canadian xians are less vicious than the ‘good’ xians of Cranston RI.
Or OK, or TX, or FL, or….. you get the point.
I assume Veronica asked nicely before filing the lawsuit?
I always wish people like the mayor could just, for a brief moment, take a small step outside their tiny, privileged, narrow little world, and look at this kind of thing from a different perspective. The usual example is asking how they would feel if they opened by kneeling to Mecca. Of course, the non-muslims wouldn’t have to participate, they are welcome to do whatever they want, silently, of course.
Yup, no privilege there, no sirree.
Maybe Veronica should start reciting the Secular Humanist manifesto during the prayer, no one else has to participate.
I think Veronica should start chanting “Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn”, and declare that only true believers will be eaten first.
+1
This kind of case is not uncommon in the UK. Canada too may be a little tricky because they do not have strict separation of church and state.
Feeeling that you are sticking out like a “sore thumb” shows a lack of confidence in your position – if you are making a point you need to stand out and you will find others who will join you and in turn make the rest of the Council and others present think about what they are doing, and why…..
Yes, I’d do my best to be conspicuously silent.
On the other hand, Clarke’s blather about “invitation” notwithstanding, these sorts of rituals are really meant to delineate camps – establish “the other.” Perhaps not with complete conscious intent, but discriminatory nonetheless. It’s like that silly old hymn: “Who is on the Lord’s side?”
I guess I should finish my thought:
…which means that remaining silent, even confidently so, probably won’t be interpreted by the faithheads as a principled stand, but rather as a scarlet A. “There’s a filthy atheist! Why don’t you toe our wholesome line?! Why do you hate Amurica?!!!1!
(or Canada)
Its illegal for the government to promote religion in this way. Veronica is asking that the council obey the law, nothing more. She should not have to get a group of people together and ‘stand out,’ day after day, until the council changes their mind (if they ever would), just to get them to obey the law.
If they opened the meeting with, “There is no God but allah, and Muhammed is his prophet.” Would Mayor Bennett still say, “No one is forced to take part. They are invited if they choose…” How about, “All hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster.”
Good luck with that Veronica. Perhaps you could create a secular verse that tactfully denounces deities and demand to recite it during meetings as well. Please keep us posted
Nice doublespeak. Evidently ‘silent reflection’ now consists of government representatives vocally praying out loud while onlookers choose to vocally pray the same prayer out loud or else stay silent while others do so.
A real ‘period of silent reflection’ would probably be okay. But that would mean nobody in the room prays out loud.
Very nice, Veronica. I’m behind you.
No, Mayor Bennett.
You and your ilk can be the ones who sit quietly and pray to your dumbass god.
Way to go, Veronica!
How about in every other meeting that the mayor attends, everyone is invited to bow down towards Mecca for 5 minutes and intone Mohammad’s creed. The mayor will not be force to take part, he can remain standing in silence.
I think the mayor gave a perfectly logical argument. In the interest of equal time at the next city council meeting we should have a short one minute reading from Chistopher Hitchen’s book ‘God Is Not Great.’ If you choose to not participate you may lower your head in silent meditation to whatever idiocy you choose.
The county government in my area (central Maryland) instituted an opening prayer about 18 months ago. To prevent troublemakers (like me) from offering prayers to FSM, et. al., the only people who are eligble to lead the prayer are clergy who lead a local congregation.
I did point out that Jesus would not have qualified.
I’m pretty sure (actually,I’m certain, and there’s plenty of legal precedent to back me up) that’s unconstitutional. You should ask your local ACLU to write them a nice letter. 🙂
Time for your local freethinkers to congregate. Though saying ‘clergy only’ seems a pretty clear establishment and test of office.
Black-only drinking fountains aren’t discrimination. You don’t have to use them.
Sitting in the back of the bus isn’t discrimination. You don’t have to ride.
Straight-only marriage isn’t discrimination. You don’t have to get married.
It’s the argument that keeps on giving!
What do you expect in a country governed by fundalmentalists. Neither the Prime Minister or Minister of State for science believe in evolution.
“No one is forced to take part. They are invited if they choose..”
I wonder what the mayor would say if some people wanted to start the council meeting with a wild sex orgy on the meeting table. I mean, no one would be forced to take part. They would just be invited if they choose…
you’re assuming the mayor wouldn’t want to participate in that.
The UK National Secular Society recently won a court case preventing prayers being included as part of council business. As the law now stands, the council can hold prayers before official business begins but cannot pray as part of the agenda. The problem was that atheists and believers of non-Christian religions were being forced to sit through prayers to a god that they didn’t believe in. Under the new ruling, the Christians can still hold their prayers but cannot force anyone to attend if they don’t wish to.
All of this seems perfectly fair and reasonable to any sane person but of course there was a hysterical kickback and lots of lying for Jesus in the aftermath.
What happened next was a pleasant surprise. It would appear that many local councils were really fed up with having prayers as part of their agenda and were just begging for an excuse to dump them. Councils are now just queueing up to have prayers removed from official business.
Canada has never had a doctrine of separation of Church and State. When I was in (public ) elementary school we opened every day with the Lord’s Prayer and a Bible passage; creches were on display at City Hall
Not that I think this was a good thing- I had to stand out in the hall in Grade 7 after I refused to say the prayer.
Veronica, best wishes and much admiration!!!
Canada does not have a specific separation of church and state so in the big cities religion has only a small presence and little in government but out in the small cities and country there still a lot of religion.
Our Prime Minister (Harper) has much in common with our Republican neighbours to the south and would dearly love to make Canada theocratic but he knows that would be the best way to get booted from office. He has politicans in his party who keep putting forward anti-gay marriage and anti-choice legeslation and Harper keep quietly squashing it. He loves being in power more than he loves his God.
In Canada, secularization continues but religion isn’t dead here.