Your Worship, Councilors, fellow Citizens

(Speech by Elka Ruth Enola at Oakville Town Council Meeting on May 5, 2008) 

My name is Elka Ruth Enola. 
I am the Past President of the Halton-Peel Humanist Community.
The issue we are considering tonight is not about religion.
It is about inclusiveness.
It is not about legality.   It is about fairness.
It is not about tradition.   It is about current values.
It is not about numbers.  It is about ethics and morality.

It is not about religion because no one’s religion is being challenged.  Replacing oral prayer with silent prayer does not force anyone to accept or reject any religion.
It does not force anyone to participate actively, or passively, in any religious activity.
It is about inclusiveness.
For example, retaining a verbal and official prayer as part of Council proceedings gives a very clear message to Humanists like me that there is no point even contemplating running for office.
I would not be welcome.  I don’t even know if there is a secular oath of office.
As a child, I attended my local public school in Montreal.  The student body was over 90% Jewish, yet we were all required, by law, to spend the first 20 minutes of each day in Protestant religious instruction.  In fact, the English public board was called The Protestant School Board of Greater Montreal. 
Requiring every student to participate in daily Catholic or Protestant religious activities is a ‘tradition’ that, I am glad to say, has ceased.
Jews who did not go to a private school were required, by law, to attend the Protestant School Board of Greater Montreal. 
Yet, Jews were not permitted to sit as trustees for that school board until 1970. 
The requirement that only Christians could be trustees was another ‘tradition’ that I was glad to see go.
When I was growing up, it was taken for granted that if you wanted the best lawyer or the best doctor you sought out a Jewish lawyer or a Jewish doctor.
The reason for that was that at McGill, there was a quota on the number of Jews permitted into law and medicine. (I have been told that a similar situation existed at U of T ). 
I don’t think you’ll find a written statement to that effect, but if you check the statistics, you will find that during that time, the percentage of Jews in those faculties was small and constant. 
Then, when the unofficial, traditional, restrictions were lifted, the percentage of Jews in those faculties increased dramatically.
So, while I was growing up, only the very best of the Jewish applicants made it into law or medicine.
If you went to a Christian lawyer, you might get a great lawyer or you might get a mediocre one.  But if you went to a Jewish lawyer you could only get an outstanding one.
The ‘tradition’ of limiting the number of Jews in the professions was another tradition whose end I applaud.
In Quebec, everyone had to have a religious affiliation. 
Although I was an atheist, when I wanted to go to Teachers’ College or university, I had to give a religious affiliation.  I had to do that when I applied for a teaching job. In 1967, I was forced to have a religious wedding because civil marriages were not permitted. 
Thankfully, the requirement of a religious affiliation is another ‘tradition’ that has been abandoned.
I have heard a great deal about ‘tradition’ from those who want to retain the oral prayer.  But they are being extremely selective.  They are not defending the keeping of tradition.  They are only choosing those past practices that are appropriate for their argument and calling them ‘Canadian Traditions’.
For example, they are not considering those traditions upon which Canada was founded that permitted only white Christian men of property, or of certain financial means, to vote or stand for office.  
Certainly not Blacks.  Certainly not women.  Women weren’t even legally ‘persons’. 
 It was a great day for democracy and inclusiveness when that ‘tradition’ came to an end.
Traditions are sets of behaviors that we choose to repeat.  We don’t have to repeat them.  We can abandon them entirely or we can adapt them as circumstances change. 
 This issue is not about legality. 
 Frankly, it doesn’t matter to me whether or not opening with a prayer is legal.  What matters to me is how each of you, as human beings, regards other human beings. 
How do each of you, as councilors, regard the residents of Oakville that you represent?  Are some more equal than others?
To say that something is legal is to say that it may be done. But, just because it may be done, does not mean that it should be done. 
One has to make moral, ethical decisions
This is also, not an issue of numbers, of majorities. It is very much an ethical issue. 
Catholics formed the majority in Quebec.  That did not make it ethically acceptable for them to publicly announce that, in certain areas, neither Jews nor dogs were allowed. 
Can you imagine how I, as a child,  felt, when I saw those signs?
A civilized society structures itself so that every person gets equal consideration.
I felt the sting of religious restrictions throughout my years in Quebec, either as a Jew or as an atheist.
But this is cosmopolitan, sophisticated multi ethnic,  multi cultural Oakville.     And the year is 2008. 
Surely, things are different here.
 Surely, things are different now.
All my life, I have been excluded.  Legally.   Officially.  As well as by tradition.
I do not want to be excluded any more.

Thank you.

 To view listen to the speech on Oakvile TownTV visit link

http://www.towntv.ca/08council.htm
Click on May 5, 2008 link. Enola is second speaker and her speech starts at 21th minute.