The limits of tolerance
How much is too much?
JEFF VALDIVIA
We often think of tolerance as the kind of virtue of which no one can have enough. And why not? We are taught to accept the differences that others have in terms of their values, beliefs, and what religion they hold, so that we can better get along with each other. So, if it is true that tolerance allows humans to better get along, how could we ever be too tolerant?
Well, we do not tolerate cultures in which slavery is acceptable. We do not, or at least should not, tolerate cultures in which female genital mutilation is practiced. But would we tolerate cultures in which murder or physical and mental abuse is acceptable? Recent court decisions in Germany indicate that we should find these things tolerable under certain conditions.
German law requires spouses to be separated for at least one year before a marriage is divorced, but this process can be expedited under exceptional circumstances. According to the Guardian, a young Muslim woman from Morocco recently asked a German court to expedite the one-year process because her Muslim husband was beating her and threatening her life. Her request was denied by the judge, who explained the decision by claiming that this young woman should have known what she was getting herself into by marrying a Muslim man. The judge in this case claimed that because the Qur’an indicates that the husband is allowed to use physical punishment as a means to keep his wife obedient and subservient, the woman should have expected her husband to act in such a manner. Thus, the judge claimed, the young woman’s circumstances were not exceptional enough to warrant an expedited divorce.
This is not the only case that has shown cause for concern in Germany. For instance, German courts have recently ruled so-called honour killings as manslaughter rather than as murder, according to articles by
“While we certainly ought to be culturally tolerant, we ought not to allow our cultural tolerance to permit anyone to be treated without regard for their fundamental rights and freedoms”
German wire service dpa. Honour killings are often premeditated acts of murder committed, typically, by male family members on a female family member when the family feels she has dishonoured them.
These sorts of blatant misapplications of the concept of tolerance, although occurring in courts in Germany, should not be ignored on the basis of distance and irrelevance. If discrimination based on religion is occurring in German courts, we should expect this very same issue to emerge here in Canada. For example, in Ontario faith-based “courts” have already been legally established, in which such things as divorce, custody and matters of inheritance are dealt with by appealing to the principles of some particular faith. Of course, participants in these court proceedings must consent to having such types of arbitration, and these courts must operate under strict guidelines. Faith-based “courts” are important to some cultures because they often wish to legislate issues like divorce, custody and inheritance differently from the rest of Canada.
There have been recent attempts in Ontario and Quebec to establish a court system operating under Sharia law, which is, roughly, the rules by which a Muslim society is supposed to function. Yet any attempt so far to establish an arbitration system based on Sharia law has been denied due to the claim that men and woman are not treated equally under this system. Any faith-based arbitration systems, according to former Ontario attorney general Marion Boyd, would have to comply with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
There are already problems with faith-based arbitration systems, such as people being pressured by their families to consent to faith-based arbitration, as well as the need for government to establish and properly run an oversight body over these institutions. Most important, there is an ominous danger that faith-based systems of arbitration may eventually lead to a specific culture evolving its own legal system outside and separate from the Canadian judiciary as it exists today.
Would it be a bad thing for there to be a separate legal system for, say, Muslims? Certainly, if that separate legal system did not abide by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Consider the Moroccan woman in Germany who cannot get an expedited divorce because she should have expected her husband to physically abuse her. Here, the German courts treated her differently from other people solely because of her religion. As Canadians who claim to uphold our Charter of Rights and Freedoms — which states that we are all equal under the law without discrimination based on religion — it seems that we should abhor the German court for this ruling.
While we certainly ought to be culturally tolerant, we ought not to allow our cultural tolerance to permit anyone to be treated without regard for their fundamental rights and freedoms. When it comes to cultural tolerance, the line needs to be drawn when that same cultural tolerance results in conflicts with our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Jeff Valdivia is a graduate student studying natural resources management with a BA in philosophy.
