Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
Thu Nov 24, 2016, 12:21 PM Nov 2016

Skiers v the religious rights of Canadas indigenous peoples

A case in the Supreme Court will set a noteworthy precedent



The day the grizzlies have their protest

Nov 26th 2016 | OTTAWA

THE Ktunaxa First Nation, an indigenous group in south-eastern British Columbia, believes that the grizzly-bear spirit resides in a sacred part of the Purcell mountains that they call Qat’muk. For 25 years they have resisted a scheme to build a ski resort in this wilderness. On December 1st the Ktunaxa will bring their fight to Canada’s Supreme Court. They will argue that their religious freedom takes precedence over the right of mountain-bombing masses to experience the deep powder for which the area is famed.

The case will set a precedent in Canada and reverberate abroad. Sacred sites are an issue in protests against the Dakota oil pipeline in the United States. New Zealand’s government recently conferred the rights of a person on a national park sacred to the Maori people. Canada’s Supreme Court has ruled before on indigenous people’s rights over land use, but never on the basis of their religious beliefs.

The nature of that faith, which assigns sacred value to features of the landscape, poses a puzzle for the courts. The Ktunaxa maintain that skiers will drive away the grizzly-bear spirit, making their rituals meaningless. Canada’s Supreme Court must now decide whether that danger represents an infringement of the religious freedom established by the constitution, and whether that infringement is justified.

The Ktunaxa lost the first two rounds of legal tussling. Lawyers for Glacier Resorts, which is developing the project, say the Ktunaxa informed them only in 2009 that the site was sacred. They point out that the Shuswap First Nation, which settled near the sacred area in the 1850s, supports the resort, which will bring employment. British Columbia’s appeals court rejected the argument that the Ktunaxa do not hold their beliefs very strongly. But, it ruled, their faith may not restrict use of land by people who do not share it.

http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21710857-case-supreme-court-will-set-noteworthy-precedent-skiers-v-religious-rights

http://www.scc-csc.ca/home-accueil/result-resultat-eng.aspx?q=Glacier+Resorts&submit=Search

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Skiers v the religious rights of Canadas indigenous peoples (Original Post) rug Nov 2016 OP
I am not a fan of religion HassleCat Nov 2016 #1
Why are gods/spirits so fragile? AtheistCrusader Nov 2016 #2
Why are some people such stumbling buffoons? rug Nov 2016 #3
More about contract law and property ownership, really. AtheistCrusader Nov 2016 #4
 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
1. I am not a fan of religion
Thu Nov 24, 2016, 12:57 PM
Nov 2016

But it sometimes prevents environmental destruction, so it's not all bad.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
3. Why are some people such stumbling buffoons?
Fri Nov 25, 2016, 06:25 PM
Nov 2016

This is all about human sensibilities and those who don't give a shit about them.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Skiers v the religious ri...