What Canada 's Government Should Not Be Tolerated Under Multiculturalism

1698 WordsApr 6, 20177 Pages
In recent decades, modern liberal societies have become increasingly more diverse. As a result, governments have begun introducing multicultural policies which protect and accommodate the practices and beliefs of various minority groups. Granted that multiculturalism has enriched modern societies with creativity, innovation, and economic prosperity, problems have arisen. One of the significant challenges faces these societies is what should or should not be tolerated under multiculturalism. This question has resulted in conflicts between groups seeking to expand human rights and those trying to prevent such expansion because of their adherence to a set of cultural or religious beliefs. In this paper, I will seek to identify when religious…show more content…
Implying that government policy should not have the effect of favoring one idea of the good life over another. Therefore, scholars recommend that to maintain an impartial framework of neutrality, liberal democracies must uphold constitutions or laws that respect individual rights and freedoms to ensure that no harmful or exploitative philosophies are protected (Pierik 2014). Canada has had a long history of multiculturalism, having been the first country to formally declare it a policy in 1971 (Reidel 2009). Like what Pierik (2014) and other scholars have recommended Canada maintains neutrality by remaining committed to individual freedoms and human rights as interpreted by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Reidel 2009). The opposition to legalizing same-sex marriage provides a fascinating example of how Canada’s government manages both neutrality and multiculturalism. Those opposing same-sex marriage made arguments based on cultural and religious beliefs and asked that Canada’s government favor their interpretation (Reidel 2009). They argued that extending the right to marry same same-sex couples would violate their beliefs and lead to a deterioration of society (Reidel 2009). However, in this case, the demands for accommodation made by various religious and cultural groups were
Open Document