Random Thoughts on Freedom of Religion

I have been thinking about writing on freedom of religion for awhile but have not been able to develop a framework for my thoughts so I decided to just set them out randomly and see if they organize themselves.

Any rational person today considering the matter without knowledge or consideration of the history behind it, would wonder why the freedom to believe the fairy tales or myths of your choice should be a protected right while the broader concepts of freedom of conscience, thought, belief, opinion and expression would cover it.

However the history behind freedom of religion goes back to when religion was inextricably intertwined with culture and was part of who people were. Freedom of religion was, and still is for many, the freedom to be who they are.

But that is not why we entrench the concept of freedom of religion. It is because for all of history people have been discriminated against and persecuted for their religion, persecuted to the point of genocide.

Which is why it has been entrenched in so many constitutions and declarations of human rights..

 

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 2

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Article 18

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

 

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Article 10

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

Article 21

Non-discrimination

1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.

 

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Rights and freedoms in Canada

1 The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Fundamental freedoms

2 Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

Equality Rights

Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law

15 (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Affirmative action programs

(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

United States Constitution - First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

The first thing to be said about freedom of religion is that it is not a right that belongs to religious institutions but one that belongs to believers, a right to believe in and practice the religion of their choice without discrimination or persecution.

The second thing to be said is that that right is not absolute, otherwise believers could be sacrificing virgins or stoning non-believers to death in the name of freedom of religion. In Canada that restriction is set out in clause one of The Charter of Rights which states that the protected rights are subject to “reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”.

This however does not mean governments can pass laws whose only purpose is to discriminate against or persecute people based on their religion.

This is why Quebec’s law (Act respecting the laicity of the State) requiring that public servants or others serving the public like teachers must hide their religious affiliation while working required the use of the notwithstanding clause in the Charter of Rights.

The notwithstanding clause essentially says if a government finds the human rights included in the Charter of Rights inconvenient it can ignore them. It is essentially a get out of human rights free card. It is a provision that should never be included in a Charter of Rights and is a stain on Canada’s reputation as an advocate of human rights.

The notwithstanding clause was also used by Alberta to persecute transgender youth.

Section 33 – Notwithstanding clause

Provision

33. (1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15 of this Charter.

(2) An Act or a provision of an Act in respect of which a declaration made under this section is in effect shall have such operation as it would have but for the provision of this Charter referred to in the declaration.

(3) A declaration made under subsection (1) shall cease to have effect five years after it comes into force or on such earlier date as may be specified in the declaration.

(4) Parliament or the legislature of a province may re-enact a declaration made under subsection (1).

(5) Subsection (3) applies in respect of a re-enactment made under subsection (4).

 

Also we need to recognize that some religious privileges are not based on freedom of religion. These include the treatment of confessions under the seal of confession as privileged communications and the practice of allowing churches to provide sanctuary to those wanted by the authorities, which are based on common law traditions.

Others such as the tax free status of religious institutions are simply government polices that can be changed.

In Canada the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance in December 2024 recommended that Canada “amend the Income Tax Act to provide a definition of a charity which would remove the privileged status of ‘advancement of religion’ as a charitable purpose.” However religious institutions could simply establish charitable foundations to do actual charitable work, but purely religious activities and proselytizing or attempting to convert people would not be considered a charitable purpose.

There is yet another religious privilege that is both unwritten and unspoken but just seems to be and that is the exemption of religious institutions from employment standards and gender equality laws.

Perhaps one of the most controversial aspects of freedom of religion are religious institutions claims that they should be exempt from hate speech legislation because religious texts or beliefs should not be considered hate speech. I would argue that using god as a defence for hate is indefensible.

The Canadian Criminal Code previously included an exemption for hate speech, "if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text." Bill C-9 which removed that exemption has passed the House of Commons and Senate and received Royal Assent on Thursday, June 18, 2026. (Globe and Mail article)

This may seem strange to Americans where freedom of speech is almost absolute except where money is concerned. While the United States does not have hate speech laws is does have libel and slander laws where people or corporations can sue for financial damages if they can show that someone’s free speech has affected them financially.

Freedom of religion must also include freedom from religion. No one should be forced to join a religion or participate in religious activities. Preferably, there should not be a state religion.

We cannot talk about freedom of religion and religious persecution without considering the current genocide taking place today in Gaza and the recent (and not so recent) attempts to redefine antisemitism to include any criticism of the Israeli government and in particular its genocide of the Palestinian people. This has even resulted in the designation of an anti-genocide organization as a terrorist organization. This, however, fits right in with declaring idea idea being anti-fascist as a terrorist organization. The world has truly turned upside down.

In conclusion, the bottom line on freedom of religion is that is is important to protect against religious discrimination and persecution but it is not a licence to violate the law, society’s values, or others’ human rights in the name of religion or god.

Banned In China Ottawa

Apparently, if you belong to a persecuted group you are assumed to be protesting, so you are not allowed to participate in Ottawa’s Canadian Tulip Festival “Where Ideas Bloom”.

The Ottawa Citizen reported “Organizers of the Canadian Tulip Festival faced accusations of censorship yesterday for the last-minute cancellation of a performance by a marching band of Falun Gong practitioners during one of the festival's opening ceremonies.” The Citizen article further stated “Organizers claim that had festival staff known the Tian Guo Marching Band were all Falun Gong members, they never would have been booked at the festival.” The article also stated “"We came here to celebrate a cultural event, and our religion should not stop us from participating," band spokeswoman Grace Wollensak said”

One can only wonder if the organizers would have said the same thing about a group of Catholics or Jews or even Muslims.

The only justification given was an assumption that the group was going to protest because they are known to be persecuted by the Chinese government, and the Chinese Embassy is a sponsor of the Festival and had a representative at the event.

I would like to draw readers to the following summary of facts posted on the CBC website by “GraceW”.

I feel obliged to clarify some facts:

1. We just applied to perform at Dow’s lake, not at the opening ceremony.

2. We send the link of the band in the application so the Tulip officer had chance to know everything about the band. http://tianguoband.org/, where the past performances (70 parades in community/cultural events in two years), as well as Falun Gong connection and uniforms are all clearly presented.

3. After the review of our materials, the program coordinator invited the band to play at the opening ceremony: O Canada and Maple Leaf Forever

4. The band accepted the invitation as an honor, not intent to ‘hijack’ the event as organizer claimed.

5. The appearance of the band at the Tulip Festival has no difference from the photos in the link that we sent to the Tulip Festival program coordinator. In another words, the band dressed up exactly the same as they did in the St. Patrick parade in Ottawa earlier this year and won the award of ‘Best Band’. Nobody accused of the band as ‘political’ or ‘protest’. http://tianguoband.org/News/2008/2008-03-15-St.Patrick-Ottawa.html

6. The fact is that we were removed on the basis of our name being shown. What political messages could be carried by playing O Canada and Maple Leaf Forever.

7. The band represents a cultural group that wants to participate in Canadian activities as ordinary members of this multi-cultural society. The identify of the band members should not be judged or discriminated.

8. Falun Gong is not a protest word. It is the name of our group. The fact that we are persecuted, and protest the persecution, it is not our fault and does not mean our name must be hidden from public view. If that were true, then no one should be allowed to use the words "African-American," "Jewish," etc., in a community event. In fact, suggesting such is already siding with the persecutor, accepting that there is something wrong with this group.

9. The band has performed in over 70 community events and has won numerous awards. To say the band's effort to join this community event was a "stunt" is insulting.

I think all governments, federal, provincial, and municipal should rethink their funding of this event in relation to the organizers disregard of Canada’s constitutionally entrenched policies of freedom of religion and multiculturalism.

And the organizers should be ashamed to call themselves Canadians.