Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Earlier debate

Panel debates religion and politics

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 8:58 AM EDT 13/05/08

Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. L'actualite Conservative from Scarborough, Canada writes: State and faith do not and should not be combined. One is of mans law and the the other is of spiritual law. They are separate and should both be respected as such.
  2. W ho from Canada writes: The Lord's Prayer symbolizes Christian chauvinism. It's not Government's role to chant to Invisible Supernatural Beings from Outer Space.
  3. Albin Forone from Canada writes: I put this squarely alongside McGuinty's decisions a while ago to summarily reject the proposal to introduce legal recognition of Sharia divorce settlements (and, with less publicity, to eliminate an equivalent Orthodox Jewish process) and also to oppose the Tory idea of government funding of more kinds of religious schools. (The thorny constitutional entrenchment of Catholic education is a tougher nut to crack, but it's day will come.) I credit him with consistently standing up for secular government, defending free religious choice outside of government institutions. This is the surprisingly tough McGuinty Ontarians gratefully re-elected.
  4. Troy Beatty from Canada writes: This country was built on christian fundamentals. This whole continent was. Our governments may not be perfect, but we have a stable system, as compared to other countries under whatever faiths, are in constant chaos. Is it so wrong to honor those stable roots from which we came? Its kind of like respecting another mans house. If he invites you over for a meal, you don't criticize his wife or kick his dog. Mainly though, i feel people need to stop wasting time crying about how the politicians start their day, and more about what they do during the day. Don't waste our governments time, they do enough of that themselves.
  5. Katherine R from Canada writes: I had no idea the Lord's Prayer was an issue in 2008! In a country that supports the separation of church and state, I can't believe there is anything to discuss. Obviously religious material of any kind has no place in any government context, particularly in a 'multicultural' country.

    I bristle at how some Canadians legitimize Christian content in government contexts as 'tradition'. If we want to look back into Canada's past, why not perform some native rituals? Why not prevent women from joining government? These are also 'traditions' associated with Canada. By associating Christianity with the Canadian nation, we are selectively sifting through history to legitimize our present agenda. Christian rituals in government may serve a Christian agenda, but does not help us advance our national goal of 'multiculturalism' and 'the separation of church and state'.

    Recommended reading for Lord's Prayer advocates:
    -to understand how nations are social constructs Benedict Anderson's 'Imagined Communities'
    -to understand how tradition is invented to serve particular agendas see Eric Hobsbawm's 'The Invention of Tradition'
  6. Tom Wiedemann from Toronto, Canada writes: One of our fundamental rights is the freedom of conscience and religion. This is a secular state / province with elected members of parliament who represent all of Ontario citizens. This includes any religion as well as Atheists, Agnostics, Humanists...
    Why should a democratically elected body lean towards one faith, or religion in general, when it is supposed to be neutral in order to represent all of its citizens?
    Especially in a country as diverse as Canada, the state should remain strictly impartial and no denomination should dominate.
  7. Steve McCullough from Orangeville, Canada writes: Concerning the Lord's prayer, I am not surprised in the least with Dalton McGuinty's plan. It seems politicians can't wait to put God on the shelf in the name of cultural diversity. The public are just as stupid as they continually accept just what they are told.
  8. Mike Veracity from GTA, Canada writes: It is ironic that the Lord's prayer, according to the Bible, came about when some followers asked Jesu how to pray. He said not to pray by rote (memorized prayers) but to talk to God like a friend. He then gave the Lord's prayer as an example. So Christians memorized it and say it by rote.

    Very strange indeed but where would the churches be if people followed another of Jesu's instructions and went into their closets to pray privately instead of praying in public like the Pharisees.

    I didn't like McGuinty at first but now I think he is becoming more of a statesman all the time. May God bless him and may his mother cut him some slack.
  9. Ken Knutson from Canada writes: I believe that in a democracy there should be complete separation between the Church and State. If a voter wants to cast a vote on the basis of his religious belief that should remain private. I do not think that a minister, priest, rabbi or imam or any religious official should talk publicly about his or her political views. If they want to run for public office they should resign from their ecclesiastical duties.
    It is true that the Bible does exhort Christians to pray for their public officials but this should be done privately.
    I think that the most egregious invasion by the Church into State affairs is/was the display of the crucifix in the Quebec Legislature.
  10. Wulfher SkullSplitter from Canada writes: A long overdue and much needed change.
  11. Geriatric Personage from St. Stephen, Canada writes: You can pontificate and puff and bluster all you want but in the end religion is a private affair and YOUR religion has no place in nor should it expect to infringe in any way on MY space. In brief no religious ceremony or event should be imposed on or in a public venue.
  12. Gord Lewis from Canada writes: Fine, drop it - is anyone listening anyway? The sooner we disabuse ourselves of the notion that a country or province can be 'Christian' (or any other faith), the better. I shouldn't think that any serious religion would want their name associated with the devastation wreaked on this continent by European whites, arriving with priests in tow. HOWEVER, our premier has a bigger and very aggressive agenda: the marginalization in society of all faiths, while staking a claim for monopolistic control of all of all public spheres, including educational curricula, by a self-declared secular state. This is an endeavour that is religious in nature, as much so as any recognized religion. McGuinty is one of the chief zealots to this end. To accomplish this, he relies on the wide ignorance and bigotry of the general population -- his playing of the 'religion' card to fight the issue of funding of faith-based schools (a neglected human right; the UN has reminded us of this) in the last election was shameful. And let's be honest: Catholic schools exist for political and historical reasons, not because we actually have freedom of religion in Canada. (No one even refers to Catholic schools as 'faith-based', so perhaps serious Catholics should ask themselves if the strings attached to funding are worth it.)
  13. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: The simple fact is that there are dozens of religions in Ontario so picking and choosing is silly, insulting and frankly contravenes the charter. Even if we included a prayer for every religion we'd still be marginalizing groups like agnostics and atheists.

    Our riding representatives work for everyone in their region, not just the religious and not just those who voted for them. As such, prayer in the legislature is simply not appropriate.

    You have a right to your religion. You do not have a right to lord it over others.
  14. Jacques Shellac from Montreal, Canada writes: I like the Tory leaders comment that 'this is part of Ontario's history'. Okay, so now's your chance to make it history.

    If you want to pray to your god, do it in church.

    ps. There is no god.
  15. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Justin Trottier says: '...To mark the significance of the occasion, how about a civic pledge, in the form of a mission statement? This daily reminder of duty could be interpreted individually and anonymously as either a religious oath before god or a secular affirmation, like the choice at the ballot box.

    A pledge to the electorate, who truly vest our MPPs with their power and responsibility, would make more sense....'

    I whole heartedly agree with this most sensible suggestion. It's the only right thing to do here and even the most hardcore religious individual must surely know it even if they don't want to admit it.

    I understand it's hard to give up a position you've held for time immemorial, but it's the right thing to do.
  16. Ron White from Calgary, Canada writes: What a load of hewy. People have flocked to Canada for generations because of the Judao/Christian ethics and traditions that are continually expressed in the freedoms and economy we enjoy. Once we get rid of what is good, what replaces it is not. This is not a country made up of a bunch or religions but based on long held traditions and beliefs. I will not tell you what to believe, but you better believe I am not prepared to remove the traditions and beliefs that have made us great. Those who want to water down our traditions to virtually nothing will turn this country into virtually nothing.
  17. Ron White from Calgary, Canada writes: Come on people, read your history books. There is no separation of church and crown (state) in Canada. Never has been. In fact our constitution spells that out clearly. For those of you that want that separation, move.

    It was put into the US constitution as a reaction to the controls they felt were being placed on them by the Crown and because many of the colonists left Great Britain due to prosecution due to their religion.

    But in Canada, we are a confederation, part of a commonwealth with a supreme power (the crown) who is at the same time the head of a church. Can't change that folks. What has changed is the power has shifted from the crown to the elected PM...not always a good thing is it???
  18. Buenaventura Durruti from Canada writes: If individual politicians want to pray to which ever god to start their day, they are perfectly free to do it on their own time. I on the other hand don't want my tax dollars used to chant to imaginary friends. Maybe the solution here is to exempt non judeo-christians from a certain amount of taxes in proportion to the amount of time spent on prayer in the legislature in relation to the MPPs salary. Sure it wont stop superstitious nonsense, but at least it wont be on my dime.
  19. Ken Knutson from Canada writes: Ron White Says: But in Canada, we are a confederation, part of a commonwealth with a supreme power (the crown) who is at the same time the head of a church. Can't change that folks.

    What do you mean that we cannont change the fact that the Queen is Head of State and Head of a Church? France and the United States found it quite easy to change their form of government. Many former members of the Commonwealth have rejected the Monarchy.
    Canada could do the same. I am not necessarily advocating that but I seriously believe that Elizabeth 2nd may be the last Monarch of the British Commonwealth.
    Also I believe that the Queen is Head of the Church of England and not the head of any other church in Canada.
    From some of the comments made here I see that Atheists and Agnostics are just as scornful of believers as believers are of them.
    How can we be a united country with those attitudes? Respect for each individual is what is required.
    Eliminating religion from the political sphere is a way of showing that respect. Believers can still worship as they please and unbelievers can still enjoy their freedom not to be associated with religion.
  20. Cliff Pallette from Kearney, Canada writes: Lorna Dueck writes 'The greatest commands of Christianity are to love God and love our neighbour, and that is what compels a Christian into the political process.'

    Until the church is able to do what government has already done - accept homosexuals as equals rather than deviants, religion should be excluded from all parliaments and legislatures.
  21. Jody Greening from Burlington, Canada writes: Get rid of it for good...
  22. Calgary Angelica from Calgary, Canada writes: Ron White says 'but you better believe I am not prepared to remove the traditions and beliefs that have made us great.'

    This country and the Western world became great INSPITE of the those traditions and beliefs that you hold so dear. There was a very long and arduous struggle starting with the renaissance over 500 years ago to slowly transform the West from an extremely backward and intolerant priest ridden society to the pluralistic and extremely successful society that we now live in today.

    Every step of the way religious authorities opposed ideas that advanced technology, improved our understanding of the world and made us more free. We are still fighting this battle today, just look at the Religious Right's bigotry toward gays and lesbians. I am all for removing the Lord's Prayer from our places of government. Having spirituality is a wonderful thing, but it should not be paraded around for all to see nor should one faith be held above any other. Ones faith is personal and it should be kept that way.
  23. Sydney R from Canada writes: The problem with some Canadian traditions is that they do overlap into religious areas because of our founding history. Does the religious aspect invalidate the significance of the tradition. For example a provincial flag may incorporate the cross of St.George or St. Andrew in whatever province. So do we destroy the flag? Just how far do we go with this? Wasn't religion a legitimate part of our past history? By the same thinking would we seriously expect other countries to remove their religious symbols in deference to us?
  24. John Smith from Canada writes: Ron White, can you refer me to the sections of Bible that 'are continually expressed in the freedoms and economy we enjoy'. For example, I never have found a reference to democracy. And quite honestly, I have found the Bible less about freedom and more about telling us what we should do and think. Illuminate us please.
  25. Sean L. from Toronto Center, Canada writes: 'Ron White from Calgary, Canada writes: What a load of hewy. People have flocked to Canada for generations because of the Judao/Christian ethics' Wrong, they flock here because of the individual rights and freedoms guaranteed them by a nation founded on the principles first espoused in Britain's groundbreaking charter of rights & freedoms: the Magna Carta. Back in 1215 when countries were ruled either by hereditary dictators, or smug religious thugs, Britains people were establishing limits on government's powers and the foundations of constitutional democracy and modern human rights. These rights continued to grow and flourish until today. Now however they are under threat from the nanny state and it's desire to put the genie back in the bottle and tell everyone what to say think and do. (reference the actions of HRC of you want an example). Meanwhile organized religions, which have always had a political element of controlling individual thought, have risen to say 'we refuse to have our powers eroded - we want the state to push our dogma' Sorry Ron, we the people are saying no - feel free to worship the tooth fairy or what have you, just do it in your private places of worship or home, and keep it out of our collective public institutions which are supposed to serve all the people, regardless of their individual religious beliefs or lack thereoff. If you disagree with this then maybe Canada is not the right place for you, perhaps you would be happier in a theocracy - but take caution, we all can see how fun the remaining ones in the middle east are.
  26. edward prior from Montreal, Canada writes: The point is that freedom of religion means that people are free to BELIEVE what they want. It does NOT mean that they are free to express that belief in any manner whatsoever in a manner similar to the conclusion that freedom of speech does not extend to crying FIRE in a crowded theatre. Freedom of religion does not extend to practising it without restraint
  27. Kevin Smith from Toronto, Canada writes: I am a second generation proud Ontarian and part of the fastest growing segment of the population - the non-religious and atheists. Just because some say we have a 'tradition' of saying the Lords Prayer in the Legislature does not make it correct in this century. I am not represented fairly when a prayer to a figure I do not believe exists is repeated every morning. The best solution is to have a moment of silence where MPPs can use it as they see fit.
  28. John Janis from Toronto, Canada writes: I have no quarrel with those who wish to practice their faiths; may their gods go with them. I just do not think the Ontario Legislature is an appropriate venue for any faith-based ritual. If politicians must follow some sort of introductory protocol, then they should use silence; or, perhaps, a pledge to be honest, to resist doing favours for friends or those who have made campaign contributions, to work for the benefit of voters and to resist abusing positions of power for personal gain. It is not a non-believers 'win' to extend neutrality to the Ontario Legislature; it is simply the establishment of a level, non-confrontational playing field for all; a forum where, from the outset, all present will know that only the tools of reason and dispassionate weighing of evidence and argument will be applied.
  29. Donald White from Hong Kong, Canada writes: Recommended reading for Katherine R: 'Puritans and Prigs' by Marilynne Robinson, The Meaning of Conservatism by Roger Scruton
  30. Carol McIlroy from Stratford, Canada writes: I think the debate is helpful and the panelists articulate.
    I cannot get away from the fact that the whole reason we are able to have such debates and freedom of thought and expression is exactly because of our Jewish-Christian roots. This is why people from more repressive places come here. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
  31. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: If the Our Father is being said, then . . . how about saying the Hail Mary, too ?

    No one who favors the saying of the Our Father could object to that. Right ?
  32. Ken Knutson from Canada writes: When I oppose the invasion of organized religion into government it does not mean that I am an atheist or think that the Bible is just another book. I oppose Catholic and Protestant clergy who do not teach what the Bible says. For example, how many Christians really practice loving their neighbor, for that matter how many of the clergy do that? Jesus Christ was asked 'Who is my neighbor'? HIs answer revealed that our neighbor may live in another nation; he is not just the man next door. The Bible says Thou shalt not kill. In times of war the so called Christian clergy encourage our young men and women to go out and kill, very often to kill members of the same Christian religion, as happened in the two world wars. And according to Jesus' principle, are not Moslems and Hindus and Shintoists and even atheists our neighbors?

    Religion should be kept out of politics, period. Politicians can mess things up quite well without hypocritical helpers.
  33. Spring of Discontent from Ottawa, Canada writes: The sheer stupidity of Ontario is clearly evident that this has made frontpage headlines. While worldwide the move towards inter-twining values/core beliefs or faith into the political spectrum is occuring we reject it. In gov't offices, multi-national companies, etc.. they have been for years formulating core beliefs and values as to what they do and why they do it.

    Yet, for an individual we say they must devoid or reject any core beliefs or individual faith to make it into public office?

    McGuinty, rather than continually stir religious fires, should be focusing on how may further integrate peoples of all backgrounds, gender, race and religion as The Charter states. Encouraging others to have respect for one another's beliefs or personal values would go a lot longer to helping communities than some skewered RC ambition by Dalton.

    IMHO: The Ontario economy is in freefall, poverty is increasing, industries are faliing and a plethora of issues need to be addressed, yet we are wasting time on religion & politics?

    Pathetic leadership by McGuinty.
  34. Roman Spears from St. Catharines, Canada writes: Carol McIlroy says, 'I cannot get away from the fact that the whole reason we are able to have such debates and freedom of thought and expression is exactly because of our Jewish-Christian roots. '
    I wonder if the First Nations Peoples would agree with her sentiments.
    Tolerance is a social construct that we need to embrace in this kind of debate. Religious and secular tolerance are rare characters in this type of discussion. People who feel they are being attacked or restricted often feel the revolutionary's motivation to lash out. That is why we have all been urged at one time or another not to discuss politics and religion at the dinner table.
    Cooler heads must prevail or we risk losing the rational idea.
    I see no need for the Lord's Prayer. It does not influence the politician or his electorate. Therefore if it is left in place or it is removed it is of little concern to me. At some point in time it will probably become appropriate for it to cease being a legislative concern. If today is the right time then lets go ahead and do it as we should. If not today then we can wait til tomorrow without risk of harm to any resident of Ontario.
  35. Lupa Nare from Canada writes: I've been asking for quite reflection by MPPs in lieu of prayer for years. Is it as important as poverty, the economy, health care etc? The point is not to measure this against other issues, but to recognize it as another policy debate. One that we need to have (it's not like we can only work on two or three things at a time - that would be limited leadership).

    And I grow weary of those who cite tradition or morals as reasons for keeping the prayer. We dispense with many traditions when they become anachronistic, sexist, parochial, racist etc.

    Morals need not, and should not, come from religion. If the only thing standing between you and good, decent and kind behaviour is a sky fairy, you're on shaky moral ground to begin with. I treat people kindly because it's right. Not because I want to avoid some fantastical fire pit and hope for the golden keys to the celestial palace. Childish.
  36. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Gotta love the folks who pretend that 'freedom' is due to those 'Judeo-Christian roots'. The expression is just vague enough to evade scrutiny, but only for awhile. What in Western society DOESN'T have 'Judeo-Christian roots' and . . . 'Greek [pagan!] roots' and 'Roman [pagan!] roots', etc. Still, I'm waiting for an answer to my question: If the Our Father is being said, then . . . how about saying the Hail Mary, too ? I'm especially interested to know whether Protestant Christians have any objection to saying the Hail Mary; can ANY genuine Christian have an objection to that particular prayer ?
  37. Erik D. from Ottawa, Canada writes: Lets see, the Federal government doesn't say the lord's prayer, even in right wing Christian dominated Alberta they don't say it in their legislative body, in fact only three provinces still do. It was only started in 1969, so its not a long standing tradition either, it was likely brought in only to appease the Christian vote... The only ones who are upset are the hard line Christians. That says it all for me, its one religion trying to keep an upper hand over its competators. Separate the church and the state, next step: remove the Catholic school boards ...
  38. There is a crack in everything... cow town from Canada writes: Troy Beatty says that if you get invited into to somone's home, you don't criticize his wife or kick his dog... Fine; but if you invite the visitor to move in and help you build your deck and then pay for your kitchen's renovations or share in the cost of your children's education, then that someone will feel that he may have something to say in the way his money and talents are being used...
    As a lifetime Catholic, I say keep religion out of politics and viceversa. They both have a legitimate place in our lives, but separetly.
  39. Joel Howe from Toronto, Canada writes: I don't understand the big deal, here. Those MPPs who previously recited the Lord's Prayer can still do so while other MPPs can recite the prayer of their choosing.

    Symbols do matter, though there are plenty of other government-sponsored symbols that favour Christianity. You can get rid of nativity scenes, but the fact remains that the only government-sanctioned religious holidays are Christian ones. Yom Kippur doesn't merit a day of rest, but Victoria Day does?

    This year Ontario created a new holiday called Family Day. Why couldn't we have celebrated Eid ul-Fitr instead? I can't imagine the reaction if we replaced, say, Good Friday with a Muslim holiday, but it sure would help Christians understand the difficulties faced by others who must take days off work or school to celebrate their holy days. Imagine how much we could learn about other cultures if we had one of their statutory holidays, particularly if it was defined by the lunar calendar.

    We're not the only ones here, anymore, so we've got to stop acting like we are. As a Christian, I don't need the state to say my prayers.
  40. Sean L. from Toronto Center, Canada writes: Carol McIlroy from Stratford: another person restateing the myth that we owe our rights and freedoms to judeao-christian faith.

    Read some history my friend, you are short changing your own ancestors from Britain - it is the political movement towards contitutional democracy and human rights started in Britain to which we find our heritage - many of the first immigrants came to north america to escape oppression by religion.

    If you want to start debating how much influence judeao-christian morals had, you better be prepared to go back to greco-roman times and the pagan religions who's custome were enschrined and adopted by these later day religions. I think you will find that the the thinking of early political philosphers had greater influence on the evolution of individul rights than did any moral guidence by religion.
  41. Sean L. from Toronto Center, Canada writes: I don't recall ever starting abusiness meeting with a prayer - maybe they should just read roll call and the agenda to the session.

    If they really feel a strong need to do something as a group they can all do 25 pushups to get the blood flowing to their seldom used brains, and then maybe they can recite their oath of office to remind them that they are there to serve the people not screw the people.
  42. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: One suggestion:

    'Keep religion out of public places, and keep facts out of houses of worship.'
  43. Elspeth Dowell from Montreal, Canada writes: On page 7 of the panel discussion, Ms. Khan says there is nothing wrong with asking a higher power for guidance. I disagree. If by higher power you mean an unproven , supernatural entity, I disagree. 16 to 18% of Canadians have no religion. We pay our taxes. We absolutely don't want our politicians, who we pay, spending time with fairy-like creatures, discussing real life issues. Here is a 21st Century parable, a homeless man feels that god want him to run as an MPP, so he runs. So you know how it is, lot's of people are apathetic and don't vote. Theists outnumber non-theists, so the man gets elected. He can't read. He can't keep track of even small amounts of money. But he prays and god tells him how to vote on issues. Is that what we want? Surely we want politicians with experience, perhaps in the world of business, perhaps in finance, perhaps someone who has worked as a hospital administrator? Or are we going to give candidates a 'how close to god are you test' before they can run for election? End of parable. Some in these comments are suggesting that it's wrong to waste time debating the prayer issue, when there are so many issues like health that need to be discussed. Yeah, let's talk about health. Some hospitals refuse to give the morning after pill and refuse to do abortions. That's wrong. All hospitals should provide all legal services. If a theist, or non-theist woman doesn't want an abortion SHE SHOULDN'T HAVE ONE. Taxpayers, including atheists, are paying for health care. And don't try to tell me Catholic girls or any religion don't have abortions because all beliefs do, when the need arises. If Ms. Khan's higher power is the power of democracy, the power of the people, the all hail the higher power!
  44. Kevin Ranville from Canada writes: I'm a spiritual person and even I don't agree with mixing church and state. I wouldn't be too happy if the state sponsored religion was something other than my personal beliefs. I'm not gonna insist it be that way for someone else. God doesn't need the state to honour him in order to bless the believers of the nation.
  45. S H from Richmond, Canada writes: 2/3 of the world is worshiping the same God. Christians, Catholics, Islams, Muslims... what's wrong with a prayer in a governmental assembly? I'm a visible minority, to me this term is worse than being asked to pray.
    Canada is such a young country with so little of its own culture, why not preserve some existing values? You have already done eradicating the Aboriginal people long time ago, why talk about mutlti culturism now? Immigrants have to fit it before they promote their cultures. In a way, I feel like multi-culturism is a way to keep us, the visible minorities, foreverly different from the ordinary folks.
  46. Craig C from GenX in Vancouver, Canada writes: Religion will disappear in the next 100 years as the veil of ignorance is lifted by the new generation of non-religious genX's and genY's.

    Religion is and has been the root cause of most of the worlds suffering including war, racism, hatred and has done nothing more than divide our world. It is based on ancient rules and beliefs that you either have to suffer for your whole life or join a religion and be 'Saved'.

    Save yourself!

    Conscious thought and choice is how we evolve, not praying to some god in the sky to save you or carry out some task of salvation. The only belief that matters now is rooted in science and that the truth we all seek is simply that consciousness is the root of all being. That means that we choose everything. Happy, sad, depressed or angry; it's all a choice.

    As soon as we stop blaming others for our circumstances and become accountable for our own misery or happiness will we find true meaning to life.

    The only god there is, is the god within all of us. We are all divine in our own way and if you want to pray, pray to the god within you as only you have the power to change your life for the better. remove prayer from all institutions as this is something you should do on your own time.

    Instead of fighting about who's religion is more important, learn more about what Quantum Physics has proven about our universe and you will realize how religion has mislead us all.
  47. Molly Fairhaven from Buffalo, United States writes: There is no God.

    Start acting accordingly.
  48. James McDowell from Kitchener, Canada writes: The insights of quantum physics on the universe along with the mysteries that evoke the thoughts of an Originator of the quantum fluctuation meld together for me to point to the amazing amalgamation of spirit and material which is our present home...earth in a good universe. Reductionists and others might not agree with the idea of an Originator, but perhaps they might feel that a moment to reflect on the responsibilities of governing would be salutary for all legislators.

    From my perspective, a rotation of several prayers, with silence being one of them, and the Lord's prayer another, would be better than the arrangement we have at the moment, and better than nothing or just silence. Mutual respect should have been learned in our schools and certainly needs to be well modeled in the legislature.

    The panelists were articulate and reasonable, and I hope Mr. McGuinty will benefit from their reflections.
  49. C Meier from Canada writes: This debate is only the stepping stone for the next one. When are we going to get rid of 'God keep our land' out of our national anthem.

    Nothing is better than our national anthem for inspiring feelings of patriotism. I sing with enthusiasm whenever necessary. I cringe however when god is called upon to keep our land glorious and free. I am embarassed because anyone who is around me and hears me sing can automatically assume I believe in some mythical being whom will protect our land.

    To me, asking god to protect us is on the same playing field as asking a giant or a magical leprechaun to watch over me with their enchanted club. It's time the world took it's head out of their stone age butt and got rid of religion and all their sacred 'values and traditions.'
  50. Bohemian Grove Club Member from Canada writes: Really! The province is always changing? So why is he not changing the work force and lack of jobs in Ontario's industries to reflect the changing province? Seems to me he's all over this, yet wants nothing to do with real government work like employment of it's people.
  51. Kent Karapita from Lethbridge, Canada writes: There is nothing more religious or philosophical than the categories of private and public. These categories always grant privileges to particular groups or individuals in the form of positive or negative rights. I challenge the idea of a neutral public forum. If you expel eligious practices from a legislature or include all possibilities, the ideas of some group are going to gain an advantage by it. The assumptions of some ideological community are always going to be present. Excluding religion from the public sphere can be highly offensive to those who have a religious based identity. As an example, the exclusion of religion from the Israeli Palestinian peace process is seen by some to have created an identification with the secular elites on both sides and created a religious opposition who saw the process as antithetical to their interests in spite of their being able to agree with specific tenets of the peace deals. Some recent peacemaking efforts (Alexandria Declaration, Council of Religious institutions of the Holy Land) have operated with the view that everyone's interests are best served if religious particularities are brought to the table. In the court case that struck down the ban on Sunday shopping in Alberta, it was argued that the practice was insensitive to the presence of 50 Jewish families in Lethbridge. The outward implications of Jewish and Christian thought for ethical action differ mostly over the day. I would think that Jewish religious interests are not met by people who think that every day is to be devoted to economic enterprise, and that religious convictions are another commodity to be chosen or ignored at the whim of the individual, a religious and philosophical position. What difference would it make to public policy to consider the particularities of religion as a strategy of respect as compared to the excluding of religion and confining oneself to some illusionary and shifting pool of common values?
  52. Mike L. from Canada writes: Kevin Ranville from Canada writes: 'I'm a spiritual person and even I don't agree with mixing church and state. I wouldn't be too happy if the state sponsored religion was something other than my personal beliefs. I'm not gonna insist it be that way for someone else. God doesn't need the state to honour him in order to bless the believers of the nation.'

    Better not live in the UK, Denmark, Finland, Norway, or Iceland then. All pretty stable democracies; all with an 'official' state religion.

    Doesn't seem to stop them from doing a passable job of integrating immigrants either. We seem to have some strange notion that throwing our traditions overboard is necessary to accommodate immigrants.
  53. Dick Garneau from Canada writes: Our unique Canadian Culture is based on a set of Principles - Beliefs and Values.

    It matters not if it evolved from the American Natives, France, England, Etc. or the numerous Religious traditions.

    We should codify our Fundamental Canadian Principles:
    Example: 'The Principle of Democracy'
    'The value and dignity of every individual'
    Fundamental Principles are dogma and are those statements which other truths and values are derived.

    Beliefs are assumptions of right and wrong but cannot violate Principles and will evolve over time.

    Values are ways of doing things but cannot violate Principles and need to be tested against beliefs but will vary within various cultures.

    This set of Fundamental Canadian Principles and Beliefs could be incorporated into a 'Government Creed'

    It could also be used as a guide to identify which religious, educational or cultural organizations should receive special tax considerations.
  54. P Knudsen from Canada writes: Don't they have anything else to do with their time. It's been a part of our tradition since the beginning, and now they want to tear it down. Respect for our tradition and culture is the question, do they have any respect? About as much as the commenters on this board. Might as well scrap the whole country, and rebuild from scratch. Tear down all historical artifacts and museums. Destroy anything that shows a whiff of history, tradition and culture. This way, the atheists and anti-Canadians can have their day.

    Liberals have been re-writing our history and culture for so long, they don't know when to stop, and people don't know when to make them stop. This is so bloody typical of Liberals.

    McGuinty, why don't you start working on keeping Ontario out of the 'have-not' status, instead of doing diddly squat crap that you've been doing since elected.
  55. P Knudsen from Canada writes: C Meier from Canada writes: Yes, we should all become good little atheists, like....Stalin, Mao, Hitler and the rest of those little dictators around the world. Geez, whats the death count going on with those little angels...ooops, I meant good little atheists. What is it, 150 million between the 3 ? Hhhmmm, man...those religous guys have nothing on those atheists. Can't even come close. And it's all so recent too, not like those religious wars hundreds of years ago.
  56. Ken Knutson from Canada writes: I have noticed that the atheists who have responded to this debate have, almost to the man or woman, been very disrespectful of those who believe in a Supreme Being. They have suggested that anyone who so believes is stupid.
    A man who knew the eminent scientist Albert Einstein very well said this: 'he had no belief in the Church, but did not think that religious faith was a sign of stupidity, nor unbelief a sign of intelligence'.
    Einstein also said: 'In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I. with my limited human mind, am able to recognize. there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views'.
    I support the atheists' right to disbelief. They should respect my right to believe.
    Not believing in God is a private matter, like prayer. There should be no need to proclaim your atheism in public. Of course you do have the right to express your opinion but when you do there is no reason to be insulting to others.
  57. Elspeth Dowell from Montreal, Canada writes: I don't quite follow what Ms. Dueck is saying on page 9: 'Hello, Sean. Why should your constitutional right to have no belief in any religion trump my constitutional right to embrace Christianity?' Is she by any chance saying that a moment of silence would mean that non-theists had won out over the theists? The way it is now, or let's say having a prayer to any and all gods, implies that Atheists and Humanists are somehow lacking as citizens of Ontario. Like, 'You guys don't believe in this thing that we proper, upstanding citizens believe in.' Having a moment of silence doesn't mean that Atheism is being promoted. It means we don't know what the MPPs are thinking at that moment, as it's private. However, we could abolish prayers and forget the silence and someone could say, 'Welcome, the meeting is now in session.' As for keeping prayers because of tradition....well there was a tradition of slavery, but we did away with that. There were monarchies where people didn't vote. We don't have that anymore. We used to have democracies where only men could vote. We got rid of that tradition , too. For those who say that Christianity makes Canada a good country, I used to think that. Now I realize that the gospels never said we should have democracy, never said that women should be equal, never said that slaves should be freed. As others have mentioned in these comments, People in the west pulled themselves out of middle ages mentality DESPITE Christianity.
  58. Geoffrey May from Canada writes: As a practicing Christian , and user of the Lords Prayer , I oppose it's use in government functions . Even among Christian Churches, there are different versions of the prayer.I would support a moment of silence before the opening of parliaments , legislatures ,senates etc .Such a moment would allow for silent prayer, meditation, invocation , reflection, thought.
  59. E B from Canada writes: For those that wish to take religion out of government then be prepared to give up Good Friday, Easter Sunday, Christmas day as holidays you feel you are entitled to. These are Christian holidays and I am sure there are many citizens of this country that are forced to take those days off in recognition of Christianity even it it is not their belief.
    Take prayer out of the government and these Christian days will follow eventually as they are enacted by the government under the Labour Act. Or be prepared to start losing more work days to official religious holidays of the Jews, Muslims and other religions that are free to practice in this country as is their right. You cant have it both ways...either you allow religion to be part of the government in some capacity or it is not allowed at all in any capacity. This includes holidays.
  60. K A from Canada writes: S H from Richmond, Canada writes: 2/3 of the world is worshiping the same God. Christians, Catholics, Islams, Muslims... what's wrong with a prayer in a governmental assembly?

    ....

    Clearly, you have no idea what this country is about, or why it is special. EVERYONE is equal, including the atheists. Read the Charter.

    Until Christians, Muslims or anyone else can produce a real, living deity (who will naturally become Prime Minister with very little effort), efforts to defend or introduce religion into the public sphere will continue to be viewed, by me, as the height of fascist gall.

    ...
  61. Ken Knutson from Canada writes: RE religious holidays: There should be no government sanction for celebrating holidays such as Christmas and Easter.
    It is surely possible to have regular civic holidays completely divorced from any religious connotation. Such holidays could be observed on the same days as we now observe religious holidays if that is what the public wants.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top