The contemporary ‘convert-immigrant’ make-up of the Canadian Buddhist population not only complicates accommodating the diversity of Buddhist-Canadian religious rights, but also challenges the very definition of “creed” as it is currently formulated in the Ontario Human Rights Code. This paper highlights these dynamics as they pertain to two institutional settings: the penal system and the health care system.
The articles presented here offer many insights on human rights, creed, freedom of religion and the law, and take many different positions based on many different perspectives. These articles serve as a starting point as we move forward to craft a new creed policy that reflects the changing needs and realities of today’s Ontarians.
Les articles présentés dans ce numéro offrent de nombreux points de vue sur les droits de la personne, la croyance, la liberté de religion et le droit, et ils proposent toute une gamme de positions diverses fondées sur différentes perspectives. Ces articles servent de point de départ dans notre démarche pour élaborer une nouvelle politique sur la croyance qui tient compte de l’évolution des besoins et des réalités de l’Ontario d’aujourd’hui.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) has embarked on a revision of its 1996 Policy. The update aims to clarify the Commission’s interpretation of human rights on the basis of creed under the Code, and advance human rights understanding and good practice in this area more generally. The policy update will require extensive research and consultation and will take two to three years to complete (work began in 2011).
This paper seeks to provide a social and historical context for the efforts of the Ontario Human Rights Commissions attempt to re-evaluate its policy on addressing discrimination based on “creed” and protecting religious freedom.
From: La croyance, la liberté de religion et les droits de la personne
et article vise à offrir un contexte social et historique aux efforts déployés par la Commission ontarienne des droits de la personne dans sa tentative de réévaluer sa politique sur la discrimination basée sur la croyance et sur la protection de droits liés à la liberté de religion.
This paper encourages a rethinking of the ideas of tolerance and accommodation, suggesting that these concepts may be inappropriate for a country that has a history of diversity, multiculturalism and equality. The paper considers the contexts in which the language of tolerance and accommodation is located.
Critiques of Canada’s legal definition of religion run in opposing directions. Some argue that the definition is too wide and lacks an objective aspect; others claim that the definition is too narrow and fails to capture religion’s cultural aspects. The author suggests that religion may not be susceptible to a comprehensive definition, and argues that an approach that draws on analogies would be more appropriate.
The Ontario Humanist Society (OHS) is representative of Humanist ethical communities of choice, with an established institutional history supporting deeply held ethical beliefs and principles as a ‘living’ creed. These communities are currently excluded by definition from the concept of the OHRC definition of ‘creed.’ As a result, the collective rights of Humanists and other such ethical communities of choice are not recognized under the Ontario Human Rights Code. On that account, we argue for a more inclusive interpretation of the term ‘creed’ in this paper, which is a collaborative work by the OHS Ethical Action Committee.
This article explores the manner in which individuals, organizations, and institutions of civil society can identify and distinguish legitimate faith communities from those who would use the purloined language and symbols of religion to advance non-creedal and illegitimate objectives.
