• NoneOfUrBusiness
    link
    fedilink
    103 months ago

    Any religious representation is offensive to secularism.

    That sounds more like China and USSR-style state atheism than secularism.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      43 months ago

      It only seems extreme because we live in a christo-fascist state. I’m also only talking about when the state is involved. This would be fine on a private building, sorry if I wasn’t clear.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness
        link
        fedilink
        93 months ago

        It only seems extreme because we live in a christo-fascist state.

        Uh… Canada is christofascist? What? You have to be kidding me. That aside this is a welcome sign not Sharia law; this sort of “the state can’t acknowledge religion ever” logic benefits no one and excludes people who don’t fit the state ideal of Christianity/atheism—and that’s the thing: A secular state shouldn’t have an ideal when it comes to people’s religious beliefs. It’s just another way to indirectly assert nationalist beliefs and exclude minorities with a vague appeal to secularism to make it more palatable.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          33 months ago

          No, canada is definitely not christofascist, I just assume everyone lives within ten miles of me at all times, sorry.

          That aside this is a welcome sign not Sharia law.

          That is true. It does seem a bit petty in a way. I’m not really ready to criticize but I wouldn’t have seen them as going against their own laws if they would have kept it. I sorely dislike all religions but this is the definition of inoffensif.