A compelling argument for the validity of the separation of multiculturalism and state — and religion for that matter — lies with Quebec’s current predicament. What with its division of language and culture between English and French languages, Anglican and Catholic, Canada’s history has always been naturally multicultural. According to a Times article, the province of Ontario passed a law permitting religious authorities, under limitations, to arbitrate civil liberties if the citizen was willing to submit, yet still have the right to appeal to Canadian courts. However, with the explosion of the Muslim population, 600,000, they are demanding more than the usual religious annulments of marriage, Kosher dietary squabbles, and family business disputes.

The Shariah, Islamic extreme code of behaviors, is markedly different from Western culture in that everything is dictated by religious law. For instance, a son is allowed twice the inheritance of a daughter, and men have the right to divorce while a woman has no such right, not to mention forced marriage of young girls, tantamount to pedophilia — all of which are in direct confrontation with Canada’s bill of rights guaranteeing equality for women. In addition, Muslim Arbitrators, though there is no evidence of it such atrocities, has the power to sentence an adulterous woman to stoning, and still on the books of Shariah is the sentence of cutting off the hand of a thief.

It strikes me as weird that a liberal government open to multicultures and religious freedoms would be in this dilemma of having to decide either you are a Canadian or you are not. Is there a lesson here for the United States who harbor anti-democratic cults and unscrupulous religious sects?

Copyright © 2004 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: August 10, 2004.