A Secular Society

By Sheila Ayala

Humanists do not rely on any deity for their morals and codes of conduct. Rather, Humanists embrace a non- religious value system that teaches that we alone are responsible for our actions. We have to depend on our own intelligence to find solutions to human problems. We firmly believe in a secular state in which every Canadian child receives a good, sound education under one school system. We are against religious schools of any kind. We maintain that children from different backgrounds studying together will grow up appreciating the differences. They will be our doctors, our teachers, parents, shop assistants, politicians, our neighbours. Instead of spending their formative years segregated from and ignorant of other cultures, children would experience at first hand the great lesson Canada teaches on tolerance.

Humanists are not anti-religious. We understand that religion is a source of comfort for many, and that they put faith in sacred books to govern their lives. Humanists acknowledge that right. But we do take a stand against religious excesses. We condemn the Pope’s stand on birth control, and are very disturbed that the Catholic Church bans condoms, especially in countries where AIDS is prevalent. We also speak out against stoning and the cutting off of hands under Islamic law.

That is why we are critical of Sharia law being introduced into the Canadian legal system. We find it insulting that Muslims are saying that Canadian law is not good enough for them and they want to be guided by their own set of laws. Muslims have said to us that we don’t understand Islam. But I put it to them that they don’t understand Canada. Canada fosters a climate where freedom of religion and freedom from religion are embraced.

Communities are welcome to build their synagogues, churches, temples, and mosques and share in the opportunities that Canada has to offer. They are free to worship a god or gods in their way and without hindrance. Canada allows a wide latitude on religion but it is not absolute. For example, in some religions, a man can have more than one wife. This is not permitted in Canada, so there are limits to religious doctrines, and so there should be.

Islam is all embracing and affects every aspect of a Muslim’s life. Muslims themselves recognize it is difficult to embrace Islam in its entirety in a democratic state like Canada. But that is a situation Muslims must accept in choosing to live in Canada rather than Saudi Arabia or Iran.

For the most part, Muslim communities want to live quiet and respectful lives according to their values. No one can fault them for that. But Muslim communities, and non-Muslims, are ignoring to their peril the fact that among them are the political Islamic fundamentalists who do not share the same attitude. When political Islam becomes involved we should take note. Political Islam will push for Sharia arbitration in other provinces, and they will gradually impact on other areas of society. France was forced to take a stand on Islam because political Islamists were insisting on banning women teachers from teaching boys, separating boys and girls in schools and insisting that only female doctors can attend women patients. This was forcing Islamic values on a secular state. The same tendency has been growing in Canada too. Carleton University in Ottawa had to close down a pub because of protest from Islamic students. The students also wanted set aside special prayer rooms. We are quite certain that accepting arbitration tribunals will lead to increasing demands by political Islamists in other areas.

While other arbitration tribunals will base their decisions on a fair and reasonable compromise, Muslims will be subject to judgements according to Sharia law. This puts Canadian Muslims at a severe disadvantage to other Canadians. It will create a two tier-system, something Canadians abhor since Canada believes in equal justice for all.

To illustrate this point, consider the following: According to Sharia law, a husband only has to say three times ‘I divorce thee’ and the couple are divorced. If the husband later regrets his action, it makes no difference. Under Islamic law, they are still divorced. The only way the couple can remarry is if the wife marries someone else (and this marriage must involve sexual relations) and then the second husband divorces the wife. Following the second divorce, the wife can then remarry her first husband. It is perfectly legal in Canada for a woman to divorce her husband, marry someone else, divorce them and marry her first husband again. The Islamic Institute for Civil Justice states that the courts won’t accept anything they deem contrary to public policy. But how can the courts judge when it will not be brought to their attention that the wife was forced to marry the second husband?

There are other problems with the Institute’s proposal. Muslim women will be pressured to accept Islamic tribunals and their decisions. Although the

extreme measures of Sharia law will not be carried out in Canada, implementing Sharia law even in an attenuated form will give it credibility around the world. Further, since Canadian courts will enforce Sharia rulings, this

will lead to the disturbing situation of the Canadian courts and police acting as administrators of Sharia law. Sharia law differs between different Islamic sects, so the law will not be applied uniformly. It is only by keeping religion out of the justice system that all Canadians, including Muslims, are ensured that justice is equal for all citizens.

Adapted from speech given by Sheila Ayala, Humanist Association of Canada, in Toronto to organizations of women’s rights, March 2004.