Sure, Quebec Premier Pauline Marois' proposed ban on religious garb and symbols is an electoral stunt.
Yes, it's a political move to solidify the support of her Parti Québécois political base: Quebec sovereigntists (who love to antagonize English Canada), post-Catholic secularists and a strong feminist presence that sees face covering more as a symbol of the subjugation of women than the love of God.
So it's political - we hate it. There goes Quebec again. But let's not throw the baby out with the crucifix.
If all we do is pile on Quebec for its intolerance, we ignore the question this legislation raises: To what degree do we accept religious expression in our public service and institutions?
Perhaps our hysterical defence of religious freedom might soon redefine a blood transfusion as a procedure to be administered only if the doctor has no religious objection.
There is constant secular slippage in Canada, from the government's "Office of Religious Freedom" to Prime Minster Stephen Harper ending his speeches with "God Bless Canada."
We might be wise to reinforce our belief in the separation of church and state rather than just rant about Quebecois religious intolerance.
It's not too much to expect Canadian public servants to make personal religious allowances in deference to the majority.
Many Christian doctors perform abortions, contrary to personal religious objection. Non-religious Canadians sing "God keep our land, glorious and free." Non-Christian Canadians celebrate Christian holidays - including the story of Jesus.
Yet it seems that Quebec has hit on unassailable religious traditions that cannot possibly be expected to make similar allowances in support of our secular state.
Should a public servant be able to claim the religious freedom to wear a badge that says "I am an atheist" to work? Should a public employee be allowed to cover her face at work?
What about representing God and Jesus as immortal beings in a public school?
A crucifix in Quebec's national assembly?
I say no to all these questions, but that's just me.
The only thing worse than Quebec's charter initiative is our refusal to discuss what a secular public service might look like to us.
We're quick and unanimous to condemn Quebec; I wish we were as quick and unanimous to defend the separation of church and state.
