- Reaction score
- 13,130
- Points
- 1,160
I believe you
Directives to military chaplains urge expunging God, religion from Remembrance Day, public ceremonies
- Thread starter Happy Guy
- Start date
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 8,221
- Points
- 1,210
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong here. But the way I read the latest CMP directive is ensuring institutional neutrality. While many have pointed our we are predominantly a Christian nation. From a governmental perspective, we are secular in order to seperate church from state. The charter also protects not just freedom to practice religion, but also the freedom to not have another religion shoved down our throats to put it bluntly.
If this is the case, I dont see a problem with it, as frankly we, as a organization that represents the entire spectrum of canada, shouldnt shoe favoritism towards any one religion.
If this is the case, I dont see a problem with it, as frankly we, as a organization that represents the entire spectrum of canada, shouldnt shoe favoritism towards any one religion.
- Reaction score
- 10,137
- Points
- 1,260
Its a matter of taking it seriously. NZ will have the Maori name for the army printed under NZ Army for example. It becomes a more developed frame work by doing the gestures well.
- Reaction score
- 42,213
- Points
- 1,210
The motto of the NZ Army is Ngāti Tūmatauenga, Tribe of the God of War.
New Zealand Army - Wikipedia
Canadian First Nations are much less monolithic, though. Conflating the Haida, Cree, Algonquin, Mohawks, Miqmac and the many other groups (to say nothing of sub-groups - Akwesasne isn't Kanesetake isn't Kanewake, just ask any Mohawk) just leads to confusion. Which is about as Canadian as you can get...
I remember losing a weekend in Meaford because we had to watch a Change of Command parade as well as be in attendance to watch two days worth of parade practices. But it could of been worse, fortunately I wasn't one of the staff chosen to fall in the ranks with the BMQ troops because they were short the desired number.
- Reaction score
- 10,137
- Points
- 1,260
100 percent itd be more difficult but not impossible.The motto of the NZ Army is Ngāti Tūmatauenga, Tribe of the God of War.
New Zealand Army - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Canadian First Nations are much less monolithic, though. Conflating the Haida, Cree, Algonquin, Mohawks, Miqmac and the many other groups (to say nothing of sub-groups - Akwesasne isn't Kanesetake isn't Kanewake, just ask any Mohawk) just leads to confusion. Which is about as Canadian as you can get...
- Reaction score
- 13,130
- Points
- 1,160
Should Canadians writ large embrace First Nations more as a part of our national identity?
- Reaction score
- 7,150
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 42,213
- Points
- 1,210
why? Should England reach out and embrace the Celts as a part of their identity? How about Hungary or Germany reaching back in history to the Goths and the Vandals? We should be taking steps to unify not diversify. We should learn from history definitely but not try to relive it. I cherish my past and have done a lot of research on my heritage. It was important for me to do and to pass on to my children but I don't expect you to cater to my national quirks any more than I would make a big deal of your heritage.
- Reaction score
- 10,137
- Points
- 1,260
You dont think the UK celebrates its Celtic history? Ever been to Wales? Hungary is literally named after the groups that formed the country, ans German traditions go back centuries. Were talking about groups that inhabit this country today.
I think we should celebrate the local traditions in this country. Its not a one size fits all but localized and where possible. I think land acknowledgments are performative nonsense largely but some encouragement and promotion of those local cultures to me would be a positive. Let's remember that Powwows and other cultural practices were illegal in this country for a long time. Until 1951 infacf, we you stomp something out unfairly you should probably make efforts to build it back up.
Your argument actually supports mine. We cherish our history whilst building our future and you don't do that by segregating a portion of your population. In a way, our reservations are nothing more than a 21st century version of the Jewish Ghettos in cities like Rome and Barcelona and many others. And it isn't just us 'white' settlers that have encouraged it. Local leadership has fostered the isolation for their own nefarious reasons. From what I have read the Metis were the result of European trappers marrying into tribes in the areas they were working. But they were kicked out, weren't welcomed or had no desire to return to their roots so ended up establishing their own communities. Louis Riel was the result of their being rejected. Separation/segregation always eventually leads to discrimination and our forced diet of land acknowledgements and legal shenanigans' is creating hate not acceptance. IMHO
- Reaction score
- 7,150
- Points
- 1,160
The recent posts don't really answer Jarnhamar's question of 'embracing FNs as part of our national identity'. In addition to my question of which one, my other question would be 'what does that mean'. Clearly no longer suppressing FN culture is a good thing. Spending public money to support FN culture, or that of any other 'contributing' culture (grants for events and festivals, etc.), might not be supported by everyone. Some might argue that anything less than total integration would be proforma and performative.
Does it mean integrating it (FN culture) into our parliamentary, legal, etc. structures? Changing our flag? Adding an official language? Again, it begs the question of 'which one'. New Zealand has the advantage being a small country reflecting a single aboriginal culture.
Another question might be how far the State can go to drive culture.
Does it mean integrating it (FN culture) into our parliamentary, legal, etc. structures? Changing our flag? Adding an official language? Again, it begs the question of 'which one'. New Zealand has the advantage being a small country reflecting a single aboriginal culture.
Another question might be how far the State can go to drive culture.
- Reaction score
- 42,213
- Points
- 1,210
And highlights the problem in the CAF - FN religious symbols and activities are considered part of "culture", not part of chaplaincy. Hence some of the disconnect.
- Reaction score
- 4,163
- Points
- 1,160
But that is just a reflection of how 'Canadian society' (the white, predominatly AngloSaxon-Franco Christian, with sprinkling of Eastern European peasants on the Prairies) viewed First Nations practices. What they (the FNs) did wasn't "religion" because they didn't believe in "God" - not "our God". The things they did - dancing, drumming, burning grass and other plants, etc was what the weirdos back in the old country did and that we (our European ancestors) burned them at the stake for when such irritated us.
The same "religious" disconnect could be applied to Sikhs and Rastafarians et al. I don't know if any Rastamen are currently serving with dreadlocks, but turbans are now a common sight. The acceptance of First Nations practices (both religious and cultural) is slowly catching up.
not of their choice. To the First Nations they are very much religious practices if you were to ask them. If they aren't we shouldn't be pushing to put them in a different category than, for special recognition. From what I have seen, whenever we discriminate; whether to accept Muslim prayers in school or smoking a pipe (illegal at all other indoor functions by anyone else) or having the chaplain actually pray we are singling out that group as being different or of requiring special handling and that is just plain wrong. This is one of those few times when I actually agree with the direction that Quebec has taken. Equality even on those occasions where you as an individual don't want it.
- Reaction score
- 13,130
- Points
- 1,160
Food for thought.
My issue is making the CAF institutionally participate in spiritual practices while excluding other religions on the basis that they’re cultural rather than religious. That feels disingenuous by the policy writers to me. Scoring cheap reconciliation(tm) points.
Historical wrongs don't justify selectively incorporating spiritual practices into military ceremonies while maintaining a general prohibition on religious ceremony
On a national level, I don't personally feel a need to participate in or adopt contemporary FN cultural or spiritual practices.
if I'm being honest part of my concern is that we romanticize an idealized version of Indigenous culture from centuries ago while ignoring the serious social problems affecting many communities today. That's why selectively presenting historical traditions comes across as performative to me.
- Reaction score
- 8,431
- Points
- 1,360
Like "which FNs do we use as a reference?" YMMV greatly on that depending on who you ask. It may also be an issue with hard-line definitions of "religion," "culture" and "spirituality," but I've known about as many say these are religious practices as I've heard say, "well, it's like going to church, but it's not."
or fish on Friday?
- Reaction score
- 10,137
- Points
- 1,260
To me this is essentially saying that on the off chance we might get something wrong we shouldnt try to get something right. Objectively we do have spirituality in the CAF, in fact we have an entire corps dedicated to it. I seem to recall strong opposition to the idea of removing chaplains. The idea that indigenous culture is from "centuries ago" ignores that people continued these practices despite the government's best efforts, these are contemporary cultural practices.
Similar threads
