Tag Archives: politics

HumanistHeritageCanada.ca – Getting Ready for the Upcoming Years!

November 4, 2025 humanistfreedoms Leave a comment

In a few weeks, we will be celebrating the completion of our sixth year of publication here at Humanist Heritage Canada (HHC). Our first posts, under the name HumanistFreedoms.ca, were created in December of 2019.

Since then, we have provided ongoing, if sometimes infrequent, news and information about humanism in Canada and around the world. Most recently, we’ve taken an interest in telling the story of humanism in Canada – thus the name “Humanist Heritage Canada”. We believe that the humanists in Canada need to do a better job of communicating the important role that humanism plays in our lives and in the way that we help shape our communities.

From 2019 to 2022, our community grew each year, then declined in 2023 and 2024. The decline coincided with a decline in our efforts to keep the site continuously fresh and improving. In 2025, we recommitted time and energy and our readership responded in kind. Thank you for visiting HHC and telling your friends about our work!

The Humanist Heritage Canada audience trend since our founding in 2019.

Following is a rough plan Humanist Heritage Canada for the period 2026-2030.

One of our most recent initiatives is to produce timeline of secularism and humanism in Canada. We see the timeline as a valuable tool to connect with significant events in Canadian and global history. A timeline helps provide context to the advancement of the humanist movement. We will develop the timeline with events significant to the humanist movement in Canada.

Our original goal as HumanistFreedoms.ca was to promote contemporary applied humanism with a focus on the freedom of expression. As we have always done, we will continue to provide news and information about humanism in Canada and around the world.

While we have always been open to contributions of content from others, solicitation and inclusion of additional content has not been a significant focus of effort. We’ve been content to feature our own material and include additional material on a casual basis only. We will actively search for and invite contributions from Canada’s humanist community to help tell the story of humanism in Canada.

HHC has primarily been a text-based website. We will explore production of audio and video content. See our Youtube channel.

Advancement of humanism in Canada is often a result of the action of organizations that focus energy on humanist goals and objectives. We will investigate and report on the history and ongoing status of Canada’s humanist organizations and the individuals who drive them forward.

Do you think there are other ways that HHC can tell the story of humanism in Canada? Let us know.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of:

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Uncategorized

Steve Tomlins’ Navigating Atheist Identities

October 28, 2025 humanistfreedoms Leave a comment

Choosing to investigate, document and publish Canada’s Humanist heritage, as we have done on this website, it quickly becomes apparent that humanism is a perspective and identity that is quickly obscured by several forces. In some cases, the significant presence of humanism is hidden by its own vocal subcomponents. Proponents of narrow ideologies are often eager to stake ownership of humanism in the service of their (often trendy) preferred ideology. In other cases, proponents of ideologies inconsistent with humanism are eager to portray this identity as less consequential than it is. Some of those proponents are supernatural and religious in nature while others are more secular and political in nature. Either way, it can require a score-card to figure it all out.

Back in 2016, Steve Tomlins submitted a 359-page thesis to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies at the University of Ottawa in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctorate in Philosophy degree in Religious Studies. In some areas of study, a decade would be considered a long time. The advancement of Humanism in Canada isn’t really one of those areas.

The abstract to the thesis says,

“There is very little research that is empirically-based about atheism in Canada; this thesis seeks to contribute foundational knowledge in this area . It begins with a historical and contemporary overview of atheism in Canada by examining its appearance in government, law, and media. It then addresses the question: “How do atheists construct their identities in the context of a religiously diverse Canada?” through an analysis of data collected from participant-observation with an atheist university club, the Atheist Community of the University of Ottawa (ACUO), followed by an analysis of five significant themes which arose from forty life history interviews (twenty with ACUO members; twenty with Ottawa-area atheists who did not belong to an atheist community that met in person). These themes are: loss of religious identity and/or development of atheist identity; group belonging; perceptions of media and public understanding of atheism; the use of the United States for narrative or comparative purposes; and the frequency of receiving a negative reaction simply for being an atheist. This study found that most interviewees perceived the Canadian public and the media as not understanding atheism because the subject is not commonly reported on or discussed, and many said that (ir)religiosity rarely came up in conversations with strangers, acquaintances, or co-workers. These notions were often seen as resulting from a Canadian social etiquette which dictates that controversial subjects should be avoided in order to minimize the risk of causing offense. Moreover, members of the ACUO often said that they joined an atheist community because they wanted a safe space to meet like-minded people with whom they could freely discuss religion without causing offense to religious others. Unlike in findings from the United States, interviewees did not speak of their atheist identities as being considered ‘un-Canadian’ or as excluding them from their conception(s) of Canadian society. While interviewees often said they were selective with whom they decided to express their atheism, most felt quite positive about living as an atheist in Canada, especially compared to the plight of atheists living in other countries, and atheism came across as being ‘just’ another ‘idea’ in a mosaic of cultural ideas.”

Humanist, atheist and agnostic organizations in Canada ought to bear the largest responsibility for creating greater public understanding of their perspectives and for creating appropriate environments for discussion of their ideas. That may, perhaps begin with a clear-eyed study of the perspectives and ideologies contained within the universal label of Humanism. Leaders of humanist organizations across the country should hold themselves accountable to familiarize themselves with the work of Tomlins, Hanowski and others who have undertaken much needed work.

Perhaps also to replicate and publish it for their own communities.

Up For Discussion

If you’re interested in analyzing and discussing this issue, there are actions you can take. First, here at Humanist Heritage Canada, we are open to receiving your well-written articles.

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of :
https://ruor.uottawa.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/572affce-0324-4b23-895b-2fe4d4dfd74d/content

^{By continuing to access, link to, or use this website and/or podcast, you accept the HumanistFreedoms.com and HumanistHeritageCanada.ca Terms of Service in full. If you disagree with the terms of service in whole or in part, you must not use the website, podcast or other material.}

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Uncategorized

Antisemitism, the Left and 1967

October 26, 2025 humanistfreedoms

This article by Lloyd Hawkeye Robertson is adapted from a chapter of the same name in Unadorned: Conversations on Antisemitism, edited by Scott Douglas Jacobsen (In-Sight Publishing / Apple Books, October 2025).

Television was still “black and white” when I entered a high school oratory contest to talk about the U.S. war in Vietnam. A young Trotskyist subsequently recruited me to join the New Democratic Youth. I immersed myself in socialist political thought.

The U.S was a colonial empire and therefore, oppressive; however, as I understood Marx, capitalism was a necessary stage before socialism and eventual communism. The newly formed state of Israel was allied with United States and was, therefore, an oppressor. I noted that the majority of socialist thinkers I had been reading – Rosa Luxembourg, Leon Trotsky, Edward Bernstein, and even Marx himself were Jews. The Jewish Left must have switched sides out of self-interest – the worst sort of traitor. The Balfour Declaration was proof that Israel was a colonial Zionist plot from the beginning of the British mandate in Palestine in 1920. Zionism was said to be a form of religious fundamentalism based on a divine mandate for Jews to occupy this particular area of the globe thus offending my newly developing humanist sensibilities.

We weren’t told that most of European Jewry had rejected Zionism. From 1919 to 1932 only 120,000 immigrated to Palestine joining the 60,000 to 80,000 Jews already present. In comparison, 280,000 to 380,000 European Jews migrated elsewhere, mainly to the Americas. After 1932, as conditions for Jews in Europe became progressively worse, western governments limited Jewish immigration to their countries. We also weren’t told that Britain had never allowed Jewish immigration to the 60% of Palestine east of the Jordan River or that in 1939 they stopped Jewish immigration to Palestine entirely. This trapped potentially hundreds of thousands who could have been saved from the holocaust. The Left has had more sympathy for non-Jewish refugees.

In an act of ethnic cleansing, 850,000 Jews were expelled from Arab lands following World War II. While the United States and France took 250,000 of them, most had no choice but to resettle in Palestine. In 1947, the United Nations offered a “two state” solution for that part of Palestine that was not already part of the new state of Jordan. The Jews accepted the plan and named their portion “Israel.” The Arabs refused the two-state solution, invaded and lost. The majority of Arabs and all of the Jews were expelled from that part of Palestine designated for the other group. Why are the descendants of the Arabs still designated as refugees but not the descendants of Jews who also lost their homes?

I learned that most Zionists were not religious fundamentalists. Zionism was a movement for the re-establishment of a Jewish nation in Palestine. I still opposed Zionism for the same humanistic reason I would oppose nationalism generally – it is restrictive of minority populations who may not fit into the ethnic and linguistic definition of “the nation.” I have since learned that the leaders who established the state of Israel were from the Jewish Enlightenment tradition and they implemented a constitution guaranteeing liberal values, secularism and democracy. Three quarters of Israel’s population are Jews and a quarter of these are atheists. More than 20% of Israel’s population are Arab Muslims with full rights of citizenship. Women, gays transsexuals and religious minorities have constitutional equality. In a nod to socialism, the two hundred and seventy kibbutzim that dot the landscape are rural communes. Why would the Left abandon the only people in the Middle East that have established a democracy with at least some semblance of socialism?

In 1967 Canada got colour television and Egypt, Jordan and Syria once again invaded Israel. They lost. Israel took the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza from Egypt, the West Bank from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria. This was also the year the Arabs from these regions began referring to themselves as “Palestinians,” as distinct from other Arabs. In defence of the Left, Nasser of Egypt, Arafat of Palestine and the Baath parties of Syria and Iraq sounded like socialists but, like Josef Stalin in the Soviet Union, they needed totalitarian methods to compensate for their lack of popular support. All were eventually replaced by Islamists bent on restoring a Medieval view of mankind with a strict fundamentalist interpretation of Islam. Humanists are opposed to the imposition of religious doctrine on subject peoples. Why did the Left support these reactionaries?

The Arab Palestinians were offered their own state with East Jerusalem as its capital in 2000 and again in 2008, but their leaders again rejected this “two-state” solution. Likud led by Benjamin Netanyahu was elected in 2009 on a platform opposed to such territorial concessions while favouring settlement expansion. The Israeli Labor Party has not had a role in government since. Why does the Left malign the Israeli Left?

With the return of the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt agreed to recognize Israel as a state. In 2005 Israel ended its occupation of Gaza “trading land for peace” by forcibly removing nine thousand Jews in 21 communities from the territory. The Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) won elections for the Palestinian Authority in 2006 and subsequently formed the government of Gaza violently repressing opposition. Since its founding charter promised the elimination of Israel, the Israelis have maintained a blockade to prevent Hamas from acquiring heavy weapons. The Left has equated this blockade with occupation thus broadening the meaning of the term which had meant “control and administration.”

On October 7, 2023 Hamas led Gazans invaded Israel and murdered 1,200 mostly civilians, including 378 who were attending a music festival. They did not spare infants or elderly. They took 251 hostages in preparation for the inevitable counter-attack. The Left accused Israel of “genocide.”

“Genocide” is a term that was coined to describe attempts to remove a people from the gene pool. Six million Jews were placed into concentration camps and systematically murdered during World War II. The population of European Jews decreased accordingly. There has been no corresponding decrease in Muslim Arab populations, for example, the population of Gaza was 356,000 in 1967 growing to 2.1 million on 2023. In a reverse of this growth, the number of Syrian Christians dropped from 2.1 million in 2011 to 300,000 by 2022. Where is the outcry? At one time there were 14,000 Lebanese Jews but fewer than 20 remain alive today, yet no one has accused the Muslims of genocide. Hamas has reported that 300 Gazans have died of hunger since October 7, 2023 but during the same time period 100,000 to 150,000 people have died from hunger in Yemen and 50,000 to 100,000 have died in South Sudan. Where are the demonstrations on Western university campuses opposing Yemeni and Sudanese “genocide?”

Israeli forces have been targeting Hamas operatives who dress in civilian clothes and operate in civilian areas. In Ukraine the Russian forces actually do engage in indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas. Why has the Left not organized mass demonstrations against Russian “genocide?”
We need to consider that Israel stands accused of genocide for defending itself from an enemy that refused to release its hostages unconditionally and who refuses to surrender. The term “genocide” was created to represent the intentional extermination of a racial, ethnic or religious group from the gene pool. To expand the definition of genocide to mean “war crimes” or even the effects of war on civilian populations, we negate the meaning and purpose of the original concept. Expanding the definition in this way equates the holocaust with other phenomenon –thus erasing the significance of the concept – a clever form of holocaust denial.

The Left claims to be anti-Zionist, not antisemitic, but they appear to have a special set of rules for the only majority Jewish state in the world; and, their “Pro-Palestinian” campaign has resulted in attacks on synagogues and Jewish run businesses. Students have expressed fear of identifying as Jews in Canadian universities. Jews only represent 1% of the Canadian population, but in 2023 there were 900 police reported attacks on Jews representing 70% of all religiously motivated hate crimes in the country. In the modern context “anti-Zionism” has become an engine of Jew hatred. At least some of the Left can trace their antisemitism to a misreading of Marx who said: “What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. […] In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism” (Marx, 1844/2008) .

These words were used by Stalin and his successors in the Soviet Union to justify widespread purges that killed or imprisoned thousands of Jews while equating Zionism with imperialism and fascism. The American Communist Party justified Arab pogroms against Jews in Palestine and North Africa while conflating Jewish financiers with plutocratic exploitation. Soviet bloc propaganda, allied with authoritarian Arab states, funded vicious campaigns demonizing Israel as a colonial outpost, and influencing the New Left of the 1960s and 1970s to adopt tropes of Jewish power and victim-blaming. Marx would not have been pleased. In the context of his writing, he was telling Jewish capitalists to give up on capitalism. His words were part of a movement that saw Jews embrace socialist and union activity in an attempt to integrate with workers the world over. But Marx’s more literal followers turned class politics into identity politics.

It began with Marcuse and the New Left in the 1960s (Coughlin & Higgins, 2019) . In an act of revisionism, it declared students and academics, as opposed to workers, to be the revolutionary class. By the 1980s it had replaced workers in another way – designated identity groups were now seen as the primary victims of oppression. In the 1980s and 1990s this not-so new Left adopted postmodern relativism with at least one important difference – while postmodernism held that all knowledge is socially constructed by people with power, the new Left held that its own ideology could not be critically examined. Pinker noted this new belief system had the trappings of a quasi-religion (Pinker, 2003) . This new religious movement that has become increasingly strident and intolerant is commonly referred to as “Wokism” (Robertson, 2021; Robertson & Tasca, 2022; Samuels, 2022) .

Any religion or ideology based on identity groups and politics will inevitably favor some groups over others thus promoting racism. The tropes used to demonize Jews from the left frequently channel those used by 20 th Century fascists. Since Enlightenment science and reason are seen as “Eurocentric” with Jews defined as ultra-white, the resultant demonization is often impervious to logic. Humanists need to consider how ideological belief that is religiously held can damage free speech, reason and, ultimately, compassion.

The media often see the Wokists as “the Left,” but there is a branch of the traditional Left who believed Enlightenment tools of science and reason could be used to address social problems and build a better society. Guided by humanist compassion, Democratic Socialists like Bernstein sought to curb the excesses of capitalism while preserving individual liberty and human rights. They rejected the authoritarianism of both the far-left and the far-right championing free speech and open discussion to overcome the bias and programing that would otherwise determine our worldview. Over the years, my views have evolved accordingly. I still do not pretend I have it exactly right and I remain open to refining my understanding through continued reflection and dialogue.

Cold hearted orb that rules the night
Distorts the colours from our sight
Red is grey and yellow white
But we decide which is right
And which is illusion.
-The Moody Blues, 1967

References

Coughlin, S., & Higgins, R. (2019). Re-remembering the Mis-Remembered Left: The Left’s strategy and tactics to transform America. Unconstrained Analytics.

Marx, K. (1844/2008). On the Jewish Question. Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher.

Pinker, S. (2003). A biological understanding of human nature. In J. Brockman (Ed.), The new humanists: Science at the edge (pp. 33-51). Barnes & Noble.

Robertson, L. H. (2021). Year of the virus: Understanding the contagion effects of wokism. In-sight, 26(B). Retrieved March 1, from https://in-sightjournal.com/2021/02/22/wokism/

Robertson, L. H., & Tasca, E. (2022). Waking from Wokism: Innoculating Ourselves against a Mind Virus. Free Inquiry, June/July, 21-25.

Samuels, D. (2022). How Turbo-Wokism broke America: Oligarchs and activists are playing for the same team. UnHerd.
https://unherd.com/?p=446548tl_inbound=1&tl_groups%5B0%5D=18743&tl_period_type=3&mc_cid=d6deab138c&mc_eid=bb998e3506

Up For Discussion

If you’re interested in analyzing and discussing this issue, there are actions you can take. First, here at Humanist Heritage Canada (Humanist Freedoms), we are open to receiving your well-written articles.

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of : New Enlightenment Project

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Uncategorized

Is it time to ask if All’s well at Indwell?

August 11, 2025 humanistfreedoms

Indwell markets itself as “a Christian charity that creates affordable housing communities that support people seeking health, wellness and belonging.” Whenever a contemporary charity actively affiliates itself with religion, there are probably good reasons to be on guard. Foremost on our minds ought to be why the chartable agency (a form of legal entity or corporation) needs to feature religion. Is the actual work being done by the organization not good enough to stand on its own?

With that in mind, we recommend a review of Home Safe Home – But Not at Indwell, a report by Marvin Ross and Karen Ross with files from Dr. David Laing Dawson.

The 27-page report begins with the question, “Is the Christian charity Indwell so focused on the heavens that they cannot see the many problems in their building?” and concludes that, “Until Indwell is forced to address the violence in their buildings then Indwell will never be Home Safe Home.“

Humanist, atheist, agnostic organizations in Canada have frequently expressed concern regarding tax advantages doled-out to clergy. Perhaps it is also time for secularists to extend that concern to overtly religious charities. And perhaps it is time for the citizens of communities that host these organizations to be considerably more demanding that powerful charities face significantly more scrutiny and accountability.

After all, as a corporation, Indwell claims to be, ” the fastest growing developer of new supportive affordable housing in Ontario. Indwell’s communities support over 1300 tenants in regions across Southern and Southwestern Ontario—with several projects currently under construction or pre-development. Indwell empowers tenants to achieve health and wellness goals, and to constructively engage with their communities.” If that doesn’t cause humanists concern…it probably should.

Did you know that the Canadian Centre for Christian Charities serves a membership of 3200 organizations and…”Based on total annual revenue: 13% have less than $100,000 revenue, 33% are between $100,000 and $300,000, 31% are between$ $300,000 and $1 million, 20% are between $1 million and $10 million, and, 3% have more than 10 million in revenue”.

Up For Discussion

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of : New Enlightenment Project
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13ERArBT24-mIUiYtGheu6BZjQItX9t4j/view
https://indwell.ca/
https://dawsonross.wordpress.com/2024/11/11/guest-post-the-myth-of-wrap-around-supports-at-supportive-housing-indwell-and-an-armed-standoff-with-police/
https://dawsonross.wordpress.com/2024/12/04/a-government-funded-slum-our-second-comprehensive-report-on-indwell/

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Uncategorized

Breaking Down Silos: Fostering Reason and Respect in a Divided World

August 11, 2025 humanistfreedoms

Submitted by NEP’s Lloyd Hawkeye Robertson

A recent discussion among New Enlightenment Project board members highlighted a growing breakdown in meaningful communication across societal “silos.” Groups divided by differing beliefs on divisive issues—such as Palestine, immigration, equal rights for men, gender ideology, or systemic racism—are increasingly polarized with the result that they are left shouting at each other rather than talking to each other. Left, right and people in-between have been undermined with lies, defamation, negative gossip, innuendo, social ostracization, and asymmetric application of institutional ethics guidelines. This divisiveness has also fragmented the humanist movement, spawning competing organizations vying for a limited constituency. As a result, some humanist groups avoid discussing controversial issues to prevent further division, but this limits our ability to advance knowledge at individual and societal levels.

The Enlightenment-inspired advocate will stick to the argument and not the presumed character of the other. Even when we disagree—perhaps especially when trust is lacking—we must show respect for others, honoring the humanist principle of valuing every individual’s dignity and worth. This requires epistemic humility: acknowledging that our knowledge is limited and subject to change with new evidence. So why does society struggle to embrace respectful, reason-based discourse?

From a psychological perspective, three factors may explain why those engaging in reasoned debate are often maligned or censored. First, individuals with a dualistic worldview—dividing the world into good versus evil—may justify harmful actions against those labeled as “evil.” They may believe that silencing such individuals prevents others from straying from the “right” path. This mindset isn’t limited to religious ideologies; any belief system that paints non-adherents as oppressive, racist, or hateful can foster this trap.

Second, people may actively censor or malign others due to an underdeveloped or fragile sense of self. To such people, presenting ideas that run counter to their beliefs might feel like violence directed towards them. More extremely, some people run from the responsibility of having a volitional self and instead merge who they are with a religion or ideology. Any attack on the religion or ideology is then felt as violence directed against them and they “defend” themselves accordingly. Since reasoning only invites a reply which is then experienced as another attack, they seek to suppress free speech.

Third, some individuals view power as the only reality, leaving them desperate to control others. Feeling vulnerable when not in charge, they may resort to manipulation or bullying. When aligned with a movement seeking power—often framed as a moral crusade—they gain a sense of legitimacy, justifying their efforts to silence reasoned discourse.

These conditions—moral dualism, fragile identity, and a fixation on power—are treatable through psychotherapy. However, individuals with these traits often seek counseling only when their efforts to silence or control others fail, expecting the world to change rather than themselves. Promoting societies that consciously value objective reason, diverse thought, and free speech at every level may encourage such individuals to reflect and grow. This cultural shift could foster the change we need. Indeed, this is the mandate of the New Enlightenment Project: A Canadian Humanist Initiative (NEP).

The NEP was created by refugees from the culture wars within Canadian humanism who saw the need for a platform where all subjects of concern could be discussed freely and where civilized debate could be held without fear. So, we took this discussion from the board and invited member comment. Here are some of the comments that now appear on our website:

Gleb: “Intolerance of emotional intolerance should be the cornerstone of NEP.”

Myron: “But they are not interested in facts, just in perpetuating their dogmas and the lies they depend on.”

Bob: “We always assume that ours the only way to think, and that the other side is just wrong-headed.”

Mathew: “My mother survived Warsaw Uprising as a child, and witnessed how her father almost lost his life as he was chased in front of German tanks as a human shield. But she always encouraged me to “hear out the other side.” She had every reason to believe that some people, and some ideologies, are beyond redemption, and yet was ready to hear out even them.”

To maintain progress as a civilization we need to understand other points of view and we need to be willing to modify our own points of view, dependent on the evidence. Enlightenment Humanism is progressive in that we are capable of making incremental progress using the skills of science, reason and free speech. We are concerned that these skills are not being sufficiently taught in our society. We publish articles, maintain a blog, have a Facebook discussion page, and we conduct interviews on a YouTube channel. We worry that, in effect, we are creating our own silo and we wish to reach out to others that perhaps have different perspectives. We are exploring co-hosting “The Other” conference to provide opportunities for people who hold opposing viewpoints to discuss them in a fair and respectful forum.

A function of this conference is, to echo Steven Pinker, the open acknowledgment and utilization of Enlightenment values such as freedom of thought and speech, human reason, scientific inquiry, and continued improvement of the human condition, while steel-manning those who would question or oppose them. The conference would be more about listening and discussing rather than judging and drawing political lines in the sand. By considering what and why the ‘other’ side holds counter viewpoints to our own is to appreciate and understand how biases influence our views within particular contexts. But how do we bring together people with such diverse opinions together?

One way would be to have groups that represent the spectrum of humanist thought co-sponsor such a conference with agreed upon rules for building an argument, acknowledging biases, reiterating or “steel-manning” other points of view, and acknowledging good points and areas of common agreement prior to critical assessment. Such a conference would be a success by demonstrating to each other and to the greater public at large that it is possible to gather in a public forum and discuss very sensitive issues in a respectful and helpful manner.

We learned last month that the World Humanist Conference for 2026 had been moved from Washington to Ottawa, Canada due to fractured and politicized discourse in the United States. We would hope that Robert Hamilton, the president of Humanist Ottawa, which is independently affiliated with Humanists International, will have a visible role in this event. We would also propose that the other humanist groups in Canada that are not formally affiliated with each other be invited to co-host an event that will demonstrate the skills we have suggested for the “Other” conference.

In the meantime, you can visit the NEP website at THE NEW ENLIGHTENMENT PROJECT – A Canadian Humanist Initiative. Check out our blog, visit our Facebook page, participate in the discussions. You can view our podcast interviews at https://www.youtube.com/@nep-humanismca6881

Up For Discussion

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of : New Enlightenment Project
https://humanists.international/event/ga2026/

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Uncategorized

Review: Elliot Hanowski’s “Towards a Godless Dominion

June 22, 2025 humanistfreedoms Leave a comment

A few months ago, we mentioned an intention to acquire and read a copy of Elliot Hanowski’s 2023 book, “Towards A Godless Dominion: Unbelief in Interwar Canada”. While we were a little late in discovering the book, we’re very glad that we did…and we’re very pleased with following-through on our intentions.

Our copy is a soft-cover with about 330 pages and we read the book over the course of several weekend mornings in May and June. We can confirm that our earlier expectation that it is an obvious must-read for anyone wishing to examine Canada’s humanist heritage was correct.

There are eight chapters, several of which feature a regional focus. Depictions of events in Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec dominate the book, but there is also a brief chapter covering “Unbelief on the Coasts“, as well. The bibliography is about 22 pages long, giving credit and credibility to Hanowski for what must be un-counted hours of research.

According to McGill-Queen’s University Press, Elliot Hanowski is an academic librarian at the University of Manitoba. Hanowski is the author of Towards A Godless Dominion: Unbelief in Interwar Canada. Hanowski is also one of the founders of the International SocieWety for Historians of Atheism, Secularism and Humanism.

The book’s publicity materials state, Towards a Godless Dominion explores both anti-religious activism and the organized opposition unbelievers faced from Christian Canada during the interwar period. Despite Christianity’s prominence, anti-religious ideas were propagated by lectures in theatres, through newspapers, and out on the streets. Secularist groups in Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, and Vancouver actively tried to win people away from religious belief. In the first two cities, they were met with stiff repression by the state, which convicted unbelievers of blasphemous libel, broke up their meetings, and banned atheistic literature from circulating. In the latter two cities unbelievers met social disapproval rather than official persecution. Looking at interwar controversies around religion, such as arguments about faith healing and fundamentalist campaigns against teaching evolution, Elliot Hanowski shows how unbelievers were able to use these conflicts to get their skeptical message across to the public. Challenging the stereotype of Canada as a tolerant, secular nation, Towards a Godless Dominion returns to a time when intolerant forms of Christianity ruled a country that was considered more religious than the United States.

What we gained from having read the book is a renewed sense of connection to the humanist heritage that is an unjustly obscured part of our Canadian identity. The Canadian humanist community has not been particularly effective in recalling and telling its own story. Hanowski’s book is a an important and effective gift to the collection of “nones” that make up such a large part of Canadian society.

The final sentence of Hanowski’s book states, “Interwar unbelievers demonstrated considerable courage and determination in their struggle to create a godless yet more humane Canada.” and that may be the best place to conclude…along with our encouragement to everyone to go ahead and acquire a copy of this book, read it over a few weekend mornings and connect with the heritage that it contains.

Up For Discussion

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of : https://umanitoba.academia.edu/ElliotHanowski
https://www.mqup.ca/towards-a-godless-dominion-products-9780228018834.php#!prettyPhoto

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Uncategorized

A New Campaign to Oppose Ontario’s Public Funding of Religious School Systems

May 24, 2025 humanistfreedoms

We have received notice that the Society of Freethinkers (SoFree)and it’s lobbying partner, Secular Connexion, based in the Hamilton/Burlington and Elmira areas (respectively), have launched a new campaign to oppose Ontario’s system of public funding of religious school systems.

Here’s what we’ve been told so far:

Secular Connexion Séculière is a national non-profit lobby group that seeks justice for non-believers. Please join The Society of Freethinkers and us in an e-mail campaign directed at Ontario MPPs to change funding for the RC separate school system by distributing the attached email and MPP contact list to your members and friends.

We want to demonstrate the overwhelming support that exists in Ontario for a change to the current funding of Catholic separate schools. This e-mail sets out the facts about the current system and the savings that would be generated.

It is being sent to Secular Humanist organizations, religious groups, public school teachers’ organizations and others who have expressed support for this change. Our hope is that an inundation of e-mails from various sources, including from non-Catholic religious groups, will convince them that it is time for a change. Ontario is a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious province that differs markedly from the Ontario of 1867.

Please distribute the attached e-mail and and contact list to members of your organizations and to others who may also support this endeavour.

There are many myths and misconceptions around the current funding of the Catholic school system. The email we are asking people to send presents these facts:

• the current full funding of the Catholic school system is not constitutionally guaranteed. The Constitution grants provinces the right to determine the amount of funding for denominational schools if they funded such school systems prior to joining Confederation. Ontario chose to fully fund Catholic elementary and high schools as did Québec. Quebec changed their school system, in 1997, to one based solely on language, not religion, by merely asking the Federal government to let them stop the funding. Newfoundland and Labrador also changed their school system to eliminate funding of Catholic schools.

• 74%1 of Ontarians are not Roman Catholic, but pay for a system that can legally refuse to hire them as teachers, and can exclude their children from its schools.

• the municipal taxes of Catholics pay for, at most, 8% of the operating costs of the separate system: the balance is paid out of taxes paid by all Ontarians, be they Catholic, Protestant, Atheist, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, etc.

• Ontario could save over $1.5 billion a year by having one non-denominational public school system

• parents who send their children to non-Catholic private schools pay tuition fees which are generally not tax deductible, and must also pay their municipal taxes, including the education portion

We need our children to learn what unites them, not what divides them.

Please contact either of us for additional information. Should you wish to see the source documents for the figures cited above, these can be provided.

Thank you for your consideration of our proposal.

Doug Thomas, President, Secular Connexion Séculière,
president@secularconnexion.ca
Isobel Taylor, Vice-President, SOFREE, vicepresident@sofree.ca

Up For Discussion

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Uncategorized

Reading List: Eliot Hanowski’s “Towards a Godless Dominion

April 6, 2025 humanistfreedoms 2 Comments

According to McGill-Queen’s University Press, Elliot Hanowski is an academic librarian at the University of Manitoba. Hanowski is the author of Towards A Godless Dominion: Unbelief in Interwar Canada. Hanowski is also one of the founders of the International Society for Historians of Atheism, Secularism and Humanism.

The book appears to be an obvious must-read for anyone wishing to examine Canada’s humanist heritage…and we’ll be acquiring a copy soon so that we may share our impressions.

In the meantime, we’ll make do with an overview provided by the publishers:

In recent surveys, one in four Canadians say they have no religion. A century ago Canada was widely considered to be a Christian nation, and the vast majority of Canadians claimed they were devoutly religious. But some were determined to resist. In the 1920s and ’30s, groups of militant unbelievers formed across Canada to push back against the dominance of religion.

Towards a Godless Dominion explores both anti-religious activism and the organized opposition unbelievers faced from Christian Canada during the interwar period. Despite Christianity’s prominence, anti-religious ideas were propagated by lectures in theatres, through newspapers, and out on the streets. Secularist groups in Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, and Vancouver actively tried to win people away from religious belief. In the first two cities, they were met with stiff repression by the state, which convicted unbelievers of blasphemous libel, broke up their meetings, and banned atheistic literature from circulating. In the latter two cities unbelievers met social disapproval rather than official persecution. Looking at interwar controversies around religion, such as arguments about faith healing and fundamentalist campaigns against teaching evolution, Elliot Hanowski shows how unbelievers were able to use these conflicts to get their skeptical message across to the public.

Challenging the stereotype of Canada as a tolerant, secular nation, Towards a Godless Dominion returns to a time when intolerant forms of Christianity ruled a country that was considered more religious than the United States.

Up For Discussion

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of : https://umanitoba.academia.edu/ElliotHanowski
https://www.mqup.ca/towards-a-godless-dominion-products-9780228018834.php#!prettyPhoto

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Express, Uncategorized

Statistics Canada: Migration from USA to Canada

March 29, 2025 humanistfreedoms

In light of recent interest in Canada-USA relations, Statistics Canada has released an analysis of migration flows from the US to Canada.

The analysis, and the information it is based on, is not interesting merely to satisfy curiosity about how many “Americans” are moving to Canada – nor even to fuel narrow and competitive nationalist views between the two countries. Instead, this information seems valuable to understand who may be interested to move to Canada as policies within the USA change over time. And, incidentally, what perspectives they may wish to bring to Canada as their new home.

This interest to know who may wish to join Canadian society, and why, is stimulated by recent USA politics, but a similar curiosity ought to extend to any jurisdiction from which Canada accepts a significant quantity of immigrants.

Humanists should use controversial topics of this kind to inform their humanist principles…and use their humanist principles to inform their outlook on controversial topics of this kind.

We present the StatsCan report in full below for those who may be interested.

Recent trends in migration flows from the United States to Canada

by Feng Hou and Max Stick

Release date: March 26, 2025

Introduction

Canada has long been a destination for American expatriates because of its geographic proximity, familiar culture and similar socioeconomic environment. However, migration flows have historically fluctuated in response to economic, political and social factors (Boyd, 1981; Kobayashi & Ray, 2005). Notably, shifts in U.S. administration policies—particularly those affecting immigration, labour markets and social stability—have influenced U.S. residents’ intentions to move north (Croucher, 2011).

Media reports have offered mixed assessments of how political shifts in the United States impact migration to Canada (Benenson & Mattey, 2025; Cain, 2016; Singer, 2024). These reports primarily focus on U.S. citizens, overlooking the migration of U.S. non-citizen residents. This group is often more affected by U.S. immigration policy changes and is a key target of Canada’s efforts to attract high-skilled workers (Arnold, 2020; Rose, 2020). Additionally, little attention has been given to Canadian-born individuals and permanent residents who previously resided in the United States but returned to live in Canada.

This article examines recent trends in migration flows from the United States to Canada. U.S. immigrants are individuals who obtained permanent residency in Canada and whose country of birth, citizenship or last residence was the United States.^Note The analysis distinguishes five immigrant categories: (1) U.S.-born individuals whose last country of residence was the United States, (2) U.S. citizens born outside the United States, (3) U.S. non-citizen residents, (4) U.S. citizens who were temporary residents in Canada before obtaining Canadian permanent residency^Note and (5) U.S. citizens who were temporary residents in a third country before obtaining Canadian permanent residency. The analysis draws on data from the Longitudinal Immigration Database. The article also uses Canadian census data to estimate the number of Canadian-born individuals and Canadian permanent residents who previously lived in the United States and returned to live in Canada.

While this study explores whether migration flows from the United States to Canada align with changes in U.S. administrations, any observed patterns should not be interpreted as causal. Beyond political factors, economic conditions and personal motivations also influence migration decisions. The relative strength of U.S. and Canadian labour markets affects cross-border movement, as seen during the 2008 financial crisis, which led more Americans to seek jobs abroad (Singer & Wilson, 2009). Additionally, Canadian immigration policies—such as Express Entry for skilled workers and targeted programs for health care and technology professionals—may have facilitated migration from the United States since 2015 (Arnold, 2020).

Migration flows of U.S. citizens and residents to Canada

Chart 1 presents the number of U.S. immigrants to Canada, revealing several salient trends in their composition and numbers.

First, there have been significant changes in the composition of U.S. immigrant inflows to Canada based on U.S. citizenship status, country of birth and country of last residence. In the early 1980s, almost all immigrants were U.S. citizens, with more than three-quarters born and last residing in the United States. While this share declined in the following decade, it remained above two-thirds until the early 2010s, when it began to drop rapidly. Meanwhile, the proportion of U.S. non-citizen residents immigrating to Canada rose sharply from the early 2010s, reaching 45% in 2019—the year before the COVID-19 pandemic. The share of U.S. citizens who were previously temporary residents in Canada also increased significantly during this period, peaking at 54% in 2017 and fluctuating in subsequent years. The proportion of immigrants who were not born in the United States but acquired U.S. citizenship ranged from about 8% to 12% before the early 2010s but declined to 2% by the early 2020s. As a result of these shifts, the majority of U.S. immigrants to Canada in recent years have been either U.S. non-citizen residents or U.S. citizens who had already been living in Canada.^Note

Second, there was no clear correlation between changes in U.S. government administrations and the number of U.S. immigrants to Canada from the early 1980s to mid-2005. The decline in inflows during the early 1980s was a continuation of the gradual decline from a peak in the mid-1970s, following the end of the Vietnam War, and coincided with recessions in the United States and Canada (Kobayashi & Ray, 2005). Similarly, the decline in the early 1990s corresponded with an economic downturn and a reduction in overall immigration levels in Canada. Inflows of U.S. immigrants remained low until the early 2000s.

Chart 1: Numbers of new permanent residents to Canada who were U.S. citizens or U.S. residents before immigrating to Canada, 1980 to 2023

Data table for Chart 1

Third, fluctuations in U.S. immigration to Canada following changes in U.S. government administrations since the mid-2000s were associated with different categories of U.S. immigrants. U.S. citizen residents (both those born in and outside the United States) were the primary drivers of the increase in migration to Canada during the second term of the 43^rd presidential administration and the decline in the early years of the 44^th administration. In contrast, the rise in inflows during the initial years of the 45^th administration was driven primarily by U.S. non-citizen residents whose numbers quadrupled from 2,100 in 2016 to 9,310 in 2019. This may suggest that restrictive U.S. immigration policies—such as visa caps, delays in employment-based green cards and heightened deportation risks—pushed temporary migrants (e.g., H-1B workers and international students) to seek more stable opportunities in Canada. Conversely, U.S. immigration to Canada decreased by 20% in the first three years of the 46^th administration compared with the same point in the 45^th administration, despite a 38% increase in overall immigration during this period. This decline was primarily driven by U.S. non-citizen residents.

Returning Canadians from the United States

Chart 2 presents the estimated number of returning Canadian-born individuals and permanent residents^Note who lived in the United States five years prior but resided in Canada at the time of the census.^Note

The number of returning Canadian-born individuals increased by 92% from 1996 (under the 42^nd presidential administration) to 2006 (under the 43^rd administration) before declining by 29% from 2006 to 2016 (under the 44^th administration). Similarly, the number of returning Canadian permanent residents rose by 122% from 1996 to 2006, followed by a 23% decline over the next decade. These trends suggest that the trend of returning Canadians broadly aligned with changes in U.S. government administrations from the mid-1990s to the mid-2010s. From 2016 to 2021, there was a small decrease in the number of returning Canadian-born individuals (-6%), while the number of returning permanent residents increased by 15%. The inflow in the 2016-to-2021 period was likely affected by COVID-19 travel restrictions.

Chart 2: Estimated number of Canadian-born individuals and Canadian permanent residents returning from the United States to Canada in the previous five years

Data table for Chart 2

Returning Canadian-born individuals and permanent residents were more likely to be in their prime working years and had higher educational attainment than other Canadian-born individuals and permanent residents in Canada. In 2021, 58% of returning Canadian-born individuals and 72% of returning permanent residents were aged 25 to 64, compared with 50% of other Canadian-born individuals and 64% of other permanent residents. Among those in this age group, 64% of returning Canadian-born individuals and 70% of returning permanent residents held a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared with 27% of other Canadian-born individuals and 42% of other permanent residents. These findings suggest that individuals with higher levels of human capital tend to be more mobile.

In sum, there have been significant shifts in the composition of U.S. immigrants to Canada since the 1980s, when migration inflows were dominated by U.S. residents born in the United States. In recent years, the majority of U.S. immigrants to Canada have been either U.S. non-citizen residents or U.S. citizens who were temporary residents in Canada. These changes are likely driven in part by the large increase of temporary foreign workers in Canada and the increasing selection of immigrants from this pool (Hou, Crossman & Picot, 2020).

Additionally, the number of U.S. citizen residents (both those born in and outside the United States) moving to Canada increased during the second term of the 43^rd presidential administration and declined during the 44^th administration, whereas U.S. non-citizen residents moving to Canada quadrupled in the first three years of the 45^th administration and decreased under the 46^th administration. The movement of Canadian-born individuals and permanent residents returning from the United States also reflected shifts in U.S. government administrations.

Looking ahead, given the changing political and economic landscape in the United States, the results of this study could inform the potential immigration patterns of U.S. non-citizen and Canadian-born individuals currently living in the U.S. to Canada over the next several years.

Authors

Feng Hou and Max Stick are with the Social Analysis and Modelling Division, Analytical Studies and Modelling Branch, at Statistics Canada.

References

Arnold, Z. (2020). Canada’s skilled immigration system increasingly draws talent from the United States.

Benenson, L. & Mattey. (2025). Trump’s First 100 Days: Potential Immigration Actions. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Boyd, M. (1981). The American emigrant in Canada: Trends and consequences. International Migration Review, 15(4), 650-670.

Cain, P. (2016.) Some U.S. liberals walk the walk: Immigration to Canada doubled after Bush’s 2004 re-election. Global News. Accessed February 11, 2025.

Croucher, S. (2011). The nonchalant migrants: Americans living north of the 49^th parallel. International Migration & Integration,12:113–131.

Hou, F., Crossman, E., & Picot, G. (2020). Two-step immigration selection: An analysis of its expansion in Canada. Statistics Canada: Economic Insights, Catalogue no. 11-626-X — 2020009 – No. 112.

IRCC. (n.d.). Permanent Residents – Monthly IRCC Updates – Canada – Permanent Residents by Country of Citizenship. Open Government Portal. Accessed February 15, 2025.

Kobayashi, A., & Ray, B. (2005). Placing American emigration to Canada in context. Migration Policy Institute. Accessed February 11, 2025.

Rose, J. (2020). Canada wins, U.S. loses in global fight for high-Tech workers. NPR.

Singer, A. & Wilson, J. (2009). How the Recession’s Affecting Immigration. The Brookings Institution. Accessed February 13, 2025.

Singer, C. (2022). What Americans Should Know About Canada Immigration in Light of Trump’s Election Victory – Canada Immigration and Visa Information. Canadian Immigration Services and Free Online Evaluation. Accessed February 15, 2025.

Statistics Canada. (2022). Immigrants make up the largest share of the population in over 150 years and continue to shape who we are as Canadians. Statistics Canada, The Daily. Accessed February 13, 2025.

Notes

Note

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) usually uses the country of citizenship to define the source country in reporting immigrant statistics (e.g., IRCC n.d.), while statistics from Canadian census data generally use the country of birth (e.g., Statistics Canada, 2022).

Note

This group includes those who reported Canada as their country of last residence or held temporary residency permits in Canada before obtaining Canadian permanent residency.

Note

Additional analysis revealed variations in sociodemographic characteristics across different types of U.S. immigrants (table not shown). In 2019, 92% of U.S. non-citizen residents were admitted through the economic class, compared with 35% of U.S. citizens who were temporary residents in Canada and 59% of U.S. citizen residents. Among economic principal applicants, 89% of U.S. non-citizen residents held a graduate degree, compared with 47% of U.S. citizens who were temporary residents in Canada and 66% of U.S. citizen residents born in the United States.

Note

Returning permanent residents are individuals who obtained Canadian permanent residency at least six years before the census. Similar trends are observed when a restriction criterion of five or seven years before the census was used.

Note

This method is different from that of the Demographic Estimates Program at Statistics Canada.

Up For Discussion

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of :
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/36-28-0001/2025003/article/00004-eng.htm

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.

Express, Uncategorized

Canada: Election 2025

March 24, 2025 humanistfreedoms

A federal general election has been called for April 28, 2025. Throughout the month, we’ll refresh this post with any news, information or resources that may be of interest. Check back often!

1745881200

days

hours minutes seconds

until

Ontario Provincial General Election

Having achieved leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada, Mark Carney announced that voters will have their opportunity to reflect on Canadian politics and submit their vote in the 45th general election.

Elections Canada has provided an informational video to help Canadians to know what to expect when they go to vote:

This election became inevitable as confidence in the Liberal government, as led by Justin Trudeau, had been effectively lost late in 2024. However, the lack of confidence in Trudeau’s Liberals has not been the dominant issue in the news. Canadian’s attention has shifted from whether the Liberals could be trusted to govern in the post-COVID global environment to what Canada and Canadians must do in light of dramatic changes in the foreign and trade policies of the United States of America.

In the meantime, what can we expect politicians and media to focus on until election day? Here are a few obvious topics:

National Unity and Federalism: Quebec separatism, Western alienation, US-Canada relations and the role of the federal government in addressing regional concerns and national unity.
Foreign Aid Policy, Trade, International Relations: Global relationships are getting a shake-up. Canadians may be getting a wake-up.
Climate Change and Environment: Canada’s commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy policies, and addressing the impacts of climate change, selling oil.
Economic Growth and Inequality: A few decades ago, Jean Chretien won an election on a chant of Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!….in 2025, it may be time for a politician to chant Homes! Homes! Homes.
Immigration and Border Security: The management of Canada’s immigration system, border security, and the balance between economic growth, social cohesion and pressures imposed by the USA.
Gun Control and Public Safety: Gun control laws and measures to address public safety concerns, including mental health and community well-being and human rights.

Some potential (and perennial) concerns for Canadian humanists in the 2025 federal election might include:

Secularism and Church-State Separation: Humanists in Canada should continue to be concerned about the role of religion in public life and the separation of church and state.
Science, Education and Critical Thinking: Humanists will want nee to be on the watch for science and critical-thinking in policy-making.
Social Justice and Human Rights: Humanists often prioritize social justice, equality, and human rights, including issues like LGBTQ+ rights, access to healthcare, and Indigenous reconciliation.
Freedom of Expression and Speech: Humanists may advocate for the protection of freedom of expression and speech, including the right to criticize religion and other forms of oppression.
Social Justice: Addressing issues of poverty, inequality, and systemic racism, including promoting affordable housing, increasing the minimum wage, and supporting marginalized communities.
Environmental Protection: Taking action to address climate change, promoting renewable energy, and protecting Ontario’s natural resources for future generations.

Canadians are well-aware that the primary options for electing a candidate in their riding include, along with the already-mentioned Liberals, the Conservative Party of Canada as led by Pierre Poilievre, Jagmeet Singh New Democratic Party , the Green Party of Canada and the Bloc Quebecois (for those living in Quebec).

Certainly, there are a few aspiring hopefuls, like Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party of Canada, but Canadians also know the real contest of who will form the next government is between team blue and team red.

Pundits, experts and horse-race fans will be eager to pitch their favorite team based on their individual biases. And that may be the biggest hint that any humanist voter needs to make their local selection. Take heed of your preferences, biases and priorities and vote for whichever party or candidate that seems likeliest to make decisions the way you want them made.

Up For Discussion

Second, we encourage you to visit the New Enlightenment Project’s (NEP) Facebook page and discussion group.

Citations, References And Other Reading

Featured Photo Courtesy of :
https://www.elections.ca/home.aspx
https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=pol&dir=par&document=index&lang=e

The views, opinions and analyses expressed in the articles on Humanist Freedoms are those of the contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the publishers.