Ministry of Religious Freedom

[The_Squid]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/10/03/pol-office-religious-freedom.html

What happened to government restraint and cuts?

is this going to be a way for religious groups to prosthelize abroad with Canadian government support?

And I take issue with Baird's statement "where religion and democracy have vanished, good faith and reason in international affairs have given way to strident ambition and brute force."

It is patently false. Where religion has disappeared, the exact opposite is true. The least religios countries in the world certainly don't use "brute force" in their international affairs.

[Shady]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/10/03/pol-office-religious-freedom.html

What happened to government restraint and cuts?

is this going to be a way for religious groups to prosthelize abroad with Canadian government support?

Did you not read your own reference? It's all in there.

And it's not a ministry, it's an office.

That being said, I don't think that this office is necessary.

[waldo]

in an earlier U.S. flavoured thread speaking to religious freedom I made reference to the somewhat covert move to establish this new "Office of Religious Freedom"...

(Foreign Affairs Minister) Baird has not agreed to CBC News requests for an interview about the office:

But documents obtained through access to information laws suggest the government is worried about the perception that the office would be used to curry favour with religious and ethnic groups in Canada. And it shows nervousness about the office being seen as an attempt to blur the line between church and state.

One of the anticipated questions speaks to the heart of the government's ongoing partisan project to woo immigrants and ethnic groups: "Is the creation of this Office politically motivated to curry favour with certain constituencies?"

Also included in the media lines drafted for Baird was a question about the relationship of the government to religion, a sensitive topic among Conservatives who feel they've been unfairly branded in the past as beholden to evangelical interests.

P.O.V.

Is the planned office about human rights or political favour? Take our survey.

"Some have criticized the proposal to create the Office of Religious Freedom as a blurring of the time-honoured line that separates church and state. What's your reaction to this comment?"

Two lines blacked out

Finally, the lines include a question about who was chosen to attend the closed-door consultation in October to help the minister and his government decide what the nature of the office should be:

"How were participants chosen for the event?"

Two lines of response have been blacked out under an Access to Information Act clause that allows government to keep secret any part of its consultations between a minister and employees of the Crown.

It's not clear how the selection criteria for a group consultation would fall under this clause of the act, especially since the lines are presumably designed for audience consumption.

[Keepitsimple]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/10/03/pol-office-religious-freedom.html

What happened to government restraint and cuts?

is this going to be a way for religious groups to prosthelize abroad with Canadian government support?

And I take issue with Baird's statement "where religion and democracy have vanished, good faith and reason in international affairs have given way to strident ambition and brute force."

It is patently false. Where religion has disappeared, the exact opposite is true. The least religios countries in the world certainly don't use "brute force" in their international affairs.

I'm always looking to consider other views - could you name a couple of countries where religion and democracy have either vanished or been suppressed....and those countries are viewed as good places to live?

[punked]

I'm always looking to consider other views - could you name a couple of countries where religion and democracy have either vanished or been suppressed....and those countries are viewed as good places to live?

Religion is vanishing from many a successful country. You might want to look at some census data it is even happening in Canada.

[The_Squid]

I'm always looking to consider other views - could you name a couple of countries where religion and democracy have either vanished or been suppressed....and those countries are viewed as good places to live?

The Scandanavian countries are some of the least religious and most successful.

However, what Baird says does not even make any sense. Where has religion and democracy disappeared? He seems to think that they are somehow linked.

[bush_cheney2004]

in an earlier U.S. flavoured thread speaking to religious freedom...

LOL! When are they ever not "U.S. flavoured"?

[Keepitsimple]

Religion is vanishing from many a successful country. You might want to look at some census data it is even happening in Canada.

I agree.....but democracy is alive and well. North Korea, the former USSR, and some of the African dictatorships on the other hand.....

As for the link between religion and democracy - that's more of a philosophical argument - but one that has a lot of merit. People who believe in something higher than themselves would seem to be more likely to have a better defined value system. A huge percentage of people who don't adhere to "organized" religion (agnostics) still believe that there is something out there (or up there) - they just don't know what it is. There are very few true atheists out there - who believe in no "higher power".

[cybercoma]

When I think of the theocracies around the world, or countries where religion is alive and strong, I certainly don't think of democracy.

Edited January 3, 2012 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

Just to help visualize this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Religion_in_the_world.PNG

[Shakeyhands]

LOL! When are they ever not "U.S. flavoured"?

One. Trick. Pony.

[mentalfloss]

As for the link between religion and democracy - that's more of a philosophical argument - but one that has a lot of merit. People who believe in something higher than themselves would seem to be more likely to have a better defined value system.

Of course, but this association is just a cover for the fact that there are still more people in the world who rely on religion as a conduit for ethical behaviour. Since the turn of the 19th century, ethics philosophers have been correct in defining the parameters of ethics based on virtue or consequence.

Once society becomes more educated on the true nature of ethics, we'll be able to shed our religious skin and evolve from this outdated system - hopefully to some variant of utilitarianism or sustainable development.

Edited January 3, 2012 by mentalfloss

[OnTheIce]

Waste of money and not something this country needs. The CPC blew it on this one.

[Moonbox]

Waste of money and not something this country needs. The CPC blew it on this one.

They sure did. Harper, IMO, is trying so hard to pander to the ethnic vote at this point that he's starting to turn me off completely. How much more Chretien-esque Liberal can he get?

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Waste of money and not something this country needs. The CPC blew it on this one.

WTB: Fiscal Conservative.

[The_Squid]

People who believe in something higher than themselves would seem to be more likely to have a better defined value system.

Here are the most religious countries:

Egypt

Bangladesh

Sri Lanka

Indonesia

Congo

Sierra Leone

Malawi

Senegal

Djibouti

Morocco

UAE

Least Religious:

Estonia

Sweden

Denmark

Norway

Czech Republic

Azerbijan

Hong Kong

Japan

France

Mongolia

Belarus

Source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/114211/Alabamians-Iranians-Common.aspx

I don't think that your hypothesis is correct.

I would say that the least religious countries tend to have an excellent set of moral values.

The most religious countries are the most likely to have human rights issues and strife. Now, admittedly, there are a lot of other factors, however, looking at the least religious nations, I don't think it is possible to say that the more religious a country is ergo they have a "better defined value system".

[prairiechickin]

Squid, or is it The Squid? Thanks for bringing this up, it flew under my radar and I had no idea this was going on. I'll be watching this story unfold. Interesting that a government that openly cut funding for reproductive choice (Canadian funding for abortions in the third world), would suddenly and quietly open an office to protect religeous freedom around the world.

By the way, well presented with good references, we need more of that around here.

[Boges]

Here are the most religious countries:

Egypt

Bangladesh

Sri Lanka

Indonesia

Congo

Sierra Leone

Malawi

Senegal

Djibouti

Morocco

UAE

Hmmm I wonder what it the prominent religion in most these countries.

[Big Guy]

We are already guaranteed religious freedom by disassociating government from religion. We already have a judicial system which interprets the constitution and guarantees those freedoms. One sure way of inhibiting religious freedom is to create a “Ministry of Religious Freedom” by which a government can redefine those freedoms according to current political dogma.

This is not a good idea.

[Big Guy]

Here are the most religious countries:

Egypt

Bangladesh

Sri Lanka

Indonesia

Congo

Sierra Leone

Malawi

Senegal

Djibouti

Morocco

UAE

Least Religious:

Estonia

Sweden

Denmark

Norway

Czech Republic

Azerbijan

Hong Kong

Japan

France

Mongolia

Belarus

Source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/114211/Alabamians-Iranians-Common.aspx

I don't think that your hypothesis is correct.

I would say that the least religious countries tend to have an excellent set of moral values.

The most religious countries are the most likely to have human rights issues and strife. Now, admittedly, there are a lot of other factors, however, looking at the least religious nations, I don't think it is possible to say that the more religious a country is ergo they have a "better defined value system".

I suggest that the question might be; what is considered to be a “religious country”? One in which all religions are encouraged and most of the population participates - or countries where one religion dominates and is also part of the political process.

[The_Squid]

Hmmm I wonder what it the prominent religion in most these countries.

The most Christian of nations are several African and S. American nations. Is everything rosy in these Christian nations? Is that what you are getting at?

Rwanda is ~94% Christian.

[The_Squid]

I suggest that the question might be; what is considered to be a “religious country”? One in which all religions are encouraged and most of the population participates - or countries where one religion dominates and is also part of the political process.

Neither.... "Most religious" according to the Gallup poll that I was using as a source asked the question "Is religion an important part of your daily life?"

I'm sure there are different measures of what makes a "religious (or lack there of) country", and if you want to use other studies or polls that have differing results, then you should bring those forward to the discussion.

[Boges]

The most Christian of nations are several African and S. American nations. Is everything rosy in these Christian nations? Is that what you are getting at?

Rwanda is ~94% Christian.

Causation or Correlation.

Does poverty cause lawlessness or does religon cause it?

Saudi Arabia and UAE are both wealthy nations.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Boges

[cybercoma]

Look... they need a department to go find wars to wage, so they can use all the new toys they're buying.

[scribblet]

We are already guaranteed religious freedom by disassociating government from religion. We already have a judicial system which interprets the constitution and guarantees those freedoms. One sure way of inhibiting religious freedom is to create a “Ministry of Religious Freedom” by which a government can redefine those freedoms according to current political dogma.

This is not a good idea.

While I don't like the idea of another gov't office even though the budget is pretty small, this office is not about domestic freedoms, it's about promoting religious tolerance in other countries, why don't people understand that.

I would think achieved by promoting Canadian values and freedoms through votes and actions via the U.N. and other arenas. There is no talk of promoting war etc. that's just hysterical hyperbole.