On November 8, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights finished its study of a bill to amend Canada's Criminal Code. In its clause-by-clause examination, the committee unanimously agreed to maintain the repeal of section 296, Canada's blasphemy law. However, the committee decided not to repeal Section 176, which criminalizes disturbing a religious worship, and instead amended its language.

It's a busy week for our efforts to promote human rights and challenge religious privilege.

This afternoon, I'm meeting with Parliamentary Secretary Ravi Kahlon as part of the Government of BC's consultations on its new Human Rights Commission.

I'm going to present him with a copy of our petition to add "nonreligion" as a protected class to the Human Rights Act. Right now that petition has 947 signatures but I want to have 1000.

Will you add your name if you haven't already?

Once you've signed, please email the petition to your friends, or share it on Facebook or Twitter.

Last week, meanwhile, we submitted a brief to the House of Commons Heritage Committee's study on systemic racism and religious discrimination. In that brief, we raised a litany of concerns around religious privilege and the importance of protecting the rights of the nonreligious in Canada.

All of this is made possible by your support. We're approaching the end of the year, so if you haven't recently, please donate to help us continue this work into 2018.

The BC Humanist Association submitted a brief to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage today as part of its study of Systemic Racism and Religious Discrimination.

In its brief, the BCHA highlights how religious privilege continues to marginalize the nonreligious and members of minority faith communities in Canada. It explores how the nonreligious in immigrant and indigenous communities are often unseen when the identities of diverse groups of people are reduced to the majority faith of the country they came from. Finally, it provides commentary on debates over terminology that have arisen in the context of this committee.

November 11 is a chance for us to reflect on the cost of global conflicts. As British Historian Dan Snow wrote in 2014:

There is no greater sacrifice than giving one’s life for one’s fellow citizens, and, correspondingly, there is no greater responsibility we have as voters than to send our armed forces into harm’s way on our behalf.

The importance of remembering those sacrifices is tainted when some organizers choose to put religion front and centre in official Remembrance Day ceremonies. Snow pushes back against that infringement of secularism in his op-ed, and we've done the same over the past two  years.

We'll continue to work to support secular and inclusive Remembrance ceremonies, as well as raising awareness of other civilian casualties and the importance of peace through our partnership with the Peace Poppies memorial.

This morning, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed a freedom of religion case launched by the Ktunaxa Nation that sought to block development of a year-round ski resort in the East Kootenays.

The Ktunaxa believe that Grizzly Bear Spirit inhabits Qat’muk, the Jumbo Mountain region where Glacier Resorts sought to build their resort. Construction of permanent structures on the mountain would drive the spirit away. In this way, the Ktunaxa, like many other indigenous spiritualities, see the land itself as sacred or as part of the divine. This is in contrast to Western religions that typically separate the spiritual and physical realms. As such, the Ktunaxa argued that allowing development on the sacred land would destroy the focus of their worship and render their religious views moot. You can’t pray or worship what is no longer there.

This case was one of the first tests of religious freedom claims by an Indigenous group in Canada. The Ktunaxa lost at trial and the BC Court of Appeal, with both courts dismissing the freedom of religion claims and stating that the government had fulfilled its constitutional requirements to consult with the Nation.

On Monday, October 30, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights met to continue its discussions over the bill to amend the criminal code.

The BC Humanist Association submitted our brief to the committee last week. In it, we set out why we support the government's decision to repeal sections 296 and 176 which prohibit blasphemous libel and disrupting a religious service respectively.

On Saturday, November 11, we will once again be co-hosting Let Peace Be Their Memorial at Seaforth Peace Park in Vancouver.

The event commemorates refugees and other civilian victims of war, who aren't normally included in traditional ceremonies.

The event starts at 2:30 PM and you can find more details on our website.

The BC Humanist Association today submitted its brief to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights supporting the proposed repeal of sections 176 and 296 of the Criminal Code, the prohibitions on "blasphemous libel", obstructing clergy and disturbing religious worship.

MPs on the Committee are currently studying Bill C-51, which would repeal the two sections and make other amendments to the Criminal Code.

Last week we launched a petition asking the Government of BC to add "nonreligion" to the Human Rights Code.

We've already received nearly 500 signatures, which is a fantastic start!

To continue to build the case for this simple change, I published an editorial in The Tyee today where I set out the motivation for this effort. It's one of the most read articles on their site and I encourage you to read and share it.

Finally, if you've faced discrimination for being an atheist or not believing in god, I want to hear from you. Simply reply to this email with your story and if you'd be okay sharing it (even anonymously) publicly. Personal stories can be some of the most effective ways to raise awareness about the importance of changes like this.

This petition is the first step in our response to the province's effort to re-establish the Human Rights Commission. Keep up to date on our response by signing the petition.

As some would have us believe, Quebec’s Bill 62 doesn’t explicitly mention niqabs or burkas, and anyway, such face coverings are cultural and not religious. Therefore, we’re told, that the renewed debate about the niqab and freedom of religion is completely unnecessary.

If only that were so.