The minority Liberal government has struck a deal with Bloc Québécois to “eliminate long-standing Criminal Code safeguards for freedom of expression and religious freedom in exchange for the Bloc supporting Bill C-9,” according to the National Post.
Currently, the law exempts hateful or antisemitic speech if it based in good faith on the interpretation of a religious text, but that immunity is set to be removed. Additionally, the Liberals are expected to back off plans to eliminate the need for a provincial attorney general’s sign-off to pursue a hate-propaganda prosecution.
The removal of the religious exception clause is being driven by the Bloc Québécois, who have long sought to entrench cultural secularization. Months ago, the province of Quebec signaled their intention to introduce legislation to ban prayer in public. The Post continues:
Canada’s hate speech laws currently say people cannot be prosecuted for expressing, “in good faith,” an argument or opinion on a religious subject or “based on belief in a religious text.”
If this amendment is adopted and Bill C-9 is passed, people of faith could be imprisoned for up to two years for expressing deeply held religious convictions that the government finds offensive.
Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet said in a statement Monday “Speech that incites hatred is a criminal act, regardless of whether it is uttered under the guise of religion or not.”
Justice Critic Rhéal Éloi Fortin added “If we are serious about fighting hate, I think that… removing the religious exemption in the Criminal Code is important..We really need to clean up the criminal code and remove these kinds of exceptional defences, which are unacceptable.”
Conservative Part leader Pierre sounded the alarm after the Liberal chair of the House of Commons Justice Committee, Marc Miller, insisted that the bible contains passages that are “clear hatred” and as a result prosecutors should be able to press charges.
“Clearly there are situations in these texts where these statements are hateful. They should not be used to invoke or be a defence.”
Pollievre and the Conservatives vowed to fight the removal of the exception.
6 responses to “Canada Moves To Make Quoting Certain Bible Passages ‘Hate Speech’”
Combating propaganda by suppressing the truth. It’s jeenyus. Hoo boy.
What they’re really saying is that the line between love and hate is different than the line between the truth and falsehood. Which, even by secular reasoning, is just plain stupid.
What’s loving about a lie?
What’s hateful about the truth?
Love does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth – 1 Cor. 13:6
What they’re basically doing is declaring by law that there is no eternity, is no eternal judgement, is no heaven or hell, and is no just God. Because these facts change everything in terms of what speech is considered to be hateful or not. What they’re basically doing, is themselves trying to take God’s place, to decide for themselves what is or is not hateful, and by extension, suppress the truths they want to suppress, and advance the lies they want to advance.
You don’t combat lies with more lies. You combat lies with the truth.
What sort of “law” would demand lies? What are they going to do when someone is sworn in on the witness stand? Make them swear to tell the truth, or swear to not say anything that might hurt somebody’s feelings?
At that point, there is no law at all …
If the line between good and bad, right and wrong, love and hate, is other than the line between truth and falsehood, then they might as well just make it simple and pass a one sentence law abolishing all law. The result is the same.
It’s stupid even by the most secular of logic. Yet mankind has been believing that same stupidity since the serpent deceived Eve – with pretty much the exact same cunning falsehoods.
How in the sam hill do they think they can form any sort of sensible, working legal code, to which all are held accountable, with the determining factor of what’s right and wrong being whether or not somebody’s feelings are hurt? What are you going to do about a thief who’s feelings are hurt because he’s called a thief? Turn him loose, and encourage him to keep stealing? How could such a “standard” then be the same for everyone?
They’re not making law. They’re abolishing law. And they’re too reprobate of mind to begin to have a clue what they’re doing.
No, the line between right and wrong, love and hate, good and bad is exactly the same as the line between truth and falsehood. Because the Creator made it so, set it in place, and it will never change. And even the most secular of logic bears out this fact. It’s irrefutable.
Would they pass a law making it illegal to lie?
The obvious answer to that question pretty much tells you all you need to know. Of course they wouldn’t.
Flipping their reprobate reasoning back upright. You’re in a courtroom. The criminal committed a crime, “in good faith”, somehow justifying what he did. The victim of the crime is also in the courtroom.
A witness is called to testify. Made to place his hand on the Origin of the Species, and sworn to say only what makes people feel good.
What in the flying sam hill could they witness say that would make both the criminal, victim, and their loved ones all feel good?
You cannot end propaganda by mandating propaganda. You cannot end lies by mandating lies. At the end of the day, the only result is that they themselves are trying to impose and mandate their own beliefs, own propaganda, and own lies, forcing everyone else to comply and fall in line. But the end result of it is ultimately total anarchy. Destroying the very law they’re trying to use and abuse.
At the end of the day, such preventative, preemptive, pre-crime suppression of the truth is not law at all – it’s anarchy. When there are as many standards of law as there are people with feelings, that’s the result. At that point, there is no law.
There’s a reason the scripture often refers to being born again as “knowledge of the truth”.
To the Liberals in the Canadian government that commands us to not teach nor preach Jesus Christ:
We ought to obey God rather than men.
The New Testament is a collection of witnessed facts. The Old Testament are historical writings and prophecies.
The Quran is a collection of beliefs based on an ideology and perceptions of a single individual who started a movement destined to take over the world and kill thousands of innocent people every year in the name of a Prophet who hated the world. It is unfortunate that the Canadian Government see the need to include the New Testament in this Bill simply to avoid the responsibility of identifying the Quran and the building of a strong Islamist Movement in Canada whose sole long goal and purpose is to take over the control of our country like they have done elsewhere. Liberals should instead do their job by declaring the Islamist and Muslim movements a terrorist group and kick them out of the country instead of bringing them in the the millions a year like they are doing.