Adoption by the Canadian home of Commons Act C-9, referred to as the ‘Compatting hatred Act’, triggered a violent reaction by conservative and pro-life environments. According to critics, fresh laws can in practice lead to a regulation on spiritual freedom, or even the penalisation of public expression of Christian beliefs. In their opinion, this is another step towards the ideological transformation of the state under liberal elites.
Canada adopted an anti-Christian bill. paper C-9 was voted by a majority (186 to 137), mainly thanks to the support of the Liberal organization and the Québécois block. The opposition's broad coalition of conservatives, the fresh Democratic organization and the Greens expressed opposition. This fact alone shows how deep the divides caused the project.
The top controversy is the removal of spiritual freedom records. fresh regulations let for the pursuit of those quoting Bible passages if they are considered to be “a hatred speech”, especially in the context of issues specified as sexuality or sex identity. In practice, this would mean subjecting conventional Christian morality to modern ideological standards imposed by the state.
Conservative politicians do not hide outrage. In their opinion it is simply a "dark day" for freedom of speech and religion in Canada. They stress that the legislative process was carried out in a way of serious uncertainty – Parliamentary debate was limited and the amendments to defend freedom of conscience were rejected. specified actions are seen as a manifestation of increasing ideological dominance in which votes of opposition are marginalised.
From the critic's perspective, the current Canadian authorities are consistently implementing a programme to redefine social values. It is pointed out that for years we have observed the gradual limitation of space for Christianity in public life – from the liquidation of institutions supporting spiritual freedom to ideological pressures in government programs. Law C-9 follows this trend, being its most extremist manifestation.
The possible extension of the powers of state authorities is besides of concern. According to any experts, the fresh government may lead to a situation where a subjective sense of "image" will form the basis for legal action, which opens the way for abuse and selective enforcement. In specified a system, the boundary between hatred protection and censorship becomes dangerously thin.
Supporters of the bill argue that its goal is to fight extremism and defend minorities. However, critics answer that under this slogan solutions are being introduced that hit the foundations of free society. In their view, the state should not decide which spiritual beliefs are acceptable and which should be penalised.
OUR COMMENTS: highly left-wing, globalistic Canadian authorities are an example of how progressive politics in a democratic country reduces fundamental civilian rights. Not even the communists in the Stalinist russian Union dreamed of specified censorship.
Photo by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney.
