According to an article published by CanWest NewsService last month, Canada’s religious right isestablishing a new social policy think tank, The Institutefor Canadian Values. Their goal is to increase therepresentation of religious values in government policywith the support of people like Stockwell Day. Ifsuccessful, they hope to do for social issues what theFraser Institute does for fiscal ones.

The fact that Mr. Day and the Fraser Institute are mentioned in relation tothe new institute pretty much maps out where it will bein the political spectrum, and which religious and socialvalues it will be promoting.

In assessing the view that life would be better if theinfluence of religion in society were increased, onemight take a look south of the border to the U.S. wherefundamentalist thinking of the kind sure to be drivingthe Institute for Canadian Values has been gaining anever-stronger hold on the American political apparatus.Tolerance and diversity, two important elements ofmodern Canadian society, are the big losers when thefundamentalists take control.

And, if the prospect ofhaving a society led by people like George Bush andthe social regressives who back him is not scary enough,look to Iran, Afghanistan and even Pakistan wherereligion plays a major role in determining how thecountry is governed.

A different religion you say? Intruth, fundamentalist Christians have much in commonwith the Taliban and other fundamentalist Muslims. Ashort trip back through history shows us numerousexamples of such kind and loving acts as witchcrafttrials and the excesses of the Inquisition, not to mentionnumerous and sundry religion inspired repressive rulesthat once filled the legal codes.

Today in our society we are progressive because wehave moved beyond much of the old intolerance andrepression that our ancestors were burdened with. Ourbetter society did not come easily though; each gain washard-fought-for and some bought with the blood ofthose who were brave enough to risk everything tobuild a fairer and more just future.

It would be amistake for us today to squander the accomplishmentsof those before us by allowing their gains to be strippedaway, one piece at a time as the fundamentalist sects of anynumber of different religions would love to do.

Inroads are happening frequently. Recently in Ontario,Marion Boyd, a former Attorney General, did a study forthe government on allowing the Muslim Sharia law tobe used in private settlements of civil and family lawdisputes. Her recommendation was that it be allowed:”The Arbitration Act should continue to allow disputesto be arbitrated using religious law …”

The first andmost obvious problem here is that Boyd’s report opensthe door to official validation of a system of ancientrules that are oppressive to women and fly in the face ofestablished Canadian values. Under Islamic law,women do not have the same rights as men and stilltoday are often abused and murdered in some Muslimcountries such as Pakistan for issues of honour or failingto obey fathers or other male family members who fearlittle if any retribution from the law.

Because of thepotential for intimidation in a culture of violencetowards women, the legalization of Sharia here wouldput Muslim women at a severe disadvantage in thesettlement of family matters.

The second problem here goes beyond the issue ofSharia and Islam to the greater one of why we areauthorizing religious arbitrations in civil and familymatters in the first place. Muslim, Christian, Buddhist,Jew, or what not — none of these institutions should haveany authority of legal standing in a secular state wherethe institutions of church and state should remainabsolutely separated.

It is well and good for people toseek out religious counselling and to look to their priest,pastor, imam, guru, bartender or whatever for help insolving issues. However, such solutions should residetotally outside of the authority of the state and be legallyunenforceable.

The argument is made that by allowing religiousorganizations to arbitrate certain issues it relieves aburden from an overcrowded court system and speedsup the process of resolution. This may be true, but thetrade-off is that issues involving civil rights and equalityget resolved through a system which may be respectfulof neither. In a secular, multicultural society such asours it is better to raise taxes if need be to adequatelyfund an efficient civil system where everyone will betreated equally by the same standard.

Religion is important in our society and to many of us,but religion is a belief system built on superstitionswhich require no other validation than the faith thatthey are true. In the progression of history we havebeen moving beyond these many different and oftendestructive beliefs to establish a society built on theconcepts of equality and human rights. We should bewary of anything that may reverse the trend.