this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
28 points (100.0% liked)

British Columbia

23 readers
7 users here now

News, highlights and more relating to this great province!

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/19670880

“The 2015 decision by the Supreme Court in Saguenay, (QC), prohibits municipal councils from including prayer in their meetings and in the last two inaugural meetings, in 2018 and 2022, Parksville has included prayers, overtly religious prayers, in their inaugural meetings and that’s a violation of the constitution,” said Teale Phelps Bondaroff, the research coordinator with the BC Humanist Association.

https://www.bchumanist.ca/donate

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ulrich_the_Old@lemmy.ca 8 points 10 months ago

Even if you prove there is a god does not mean I want to be governed by them. Keep your religion in your church or your own home or your own head.

[–] hydration9806@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

If you watch municipal or provincial news conferences it’s fairly common to hear a First Nation blessing at its start, like a recent one in front of Nanaimo Regional General Hospital on Tuesday.

“The increase in Indigenous content is a good sign. It shows that municipalities are stepping up and, at least symbolically, embracing reconciliation and this is also a category of action that falls outside the Supreme Court ruling in Saguenay,” said Phelps Bondaroff.

Honest question: isn't having the First Nation blessing violating the same constitution that the prayer is? Obviously the prayer is an obvious violation, but replacing it doesn't seem to be the answer as far as I can tell.

[–] villasv 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

First Nations blessing is a bit of a gray area because they are not necessarily performed as a religious practice. Instead of a prayer, it’s interpreted (by those present) more like a First Nations representative formally acknowledging that the decisions about to be made are made with their participation.

It’s a cultural complexity that elders are often also seen as religious leaders and they’ll often speak in religious terms, but their blessing is foremost under the guise of a representative - not a cleric.

As for a regular Christian prayer… its sole purpose is a ritual for those in that religion.

[–] hydration9806@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago

Ah thanks, this makes a lot more sense!

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

I would say it's because our white-man* laws came after, and the typical indigenous pretext at meetings is acknowledging that we are gathered on the unceded territory. So really they are letting us have a meeting with their blessing/permission.

Also they say unceded as a nice way; instead of juat saying stolen with acts of genocide.

*or woman ~ Monty Python

[–] Hootz@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

It's because it's not religion, it's spiritually and culture. Shit bro most of them doing the things are Christians or Catholic

[–] uzi@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

They are butt hurt. This is nothing more than crying over individuals expressing a belief that there is something more important than themself, greater than themself.

It actually is possible to reject someone's belief while allowing them to pray in a public space. If it's not in a dedicated reigious building, they are not harming anyone by saying words.

[–] ehxor@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You’re right, it is possible to reject someone’s belief while letting them pray in a public space.

However, when you tangle the prayer into governance you send a signal that the religious practice will, on some level, inform how the people are governed. And that’s not okay in our society.

[–] uzi@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No, there must be no establishment of religion, abd no restrictions there of. Members of government are free to pratice their faith in office.

If there is restriction on every and all forms of religion while in upblic office, there must restrictions on those who are against religion, they will be denied speech to comment on religion and be denied the ability to express any objection to religion.

[–] pbjamm 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Are they free to force others to participate in their religious practice? Because that is what happens with prayer in public activities like this.

[–] uzi@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Holding public prayer does not equate to participating in whatever faith. Allowing something is not endorsement of it.

[–] pbjamm 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I am not participating in their faith, but I am participating in the ceremony whether I like it or not. This is an official city meeting and should not be turned, even temporarily, into a church service.

[–] uzi@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh you're Christian, if religion makes you think churches, you are Christian. Every actively religious person I know has never said the word "church" in our conversations unless it's specific to those Christian people.

[–] pbjamm 1 points 10 months ago

I have no idea what you are talking about but had you watched the video in the article you would see it was clearly a christian prayer being discussed. For the record I am not affiliated with any religion as I find the whole concept of gods ridiculous.

[–] LimpRimble@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago