O Canada! What is happening to you? Perhaps this has been in the works for some time, but it was new to me. Kyle Shileder at Townhall.com reports that mischief is afoot in Quebec:
The Quebec Parliament is currently debating whether to pass Bill 59, a bill that would grant the Quebec Human Rights Commission (QHRC) the authority to investigate so-called “hate speech”, even without a complaint being filed.
The Head of the QHRC, Jacques Frémont has already openly said that he plans to use such powers, “to sue those critical of certain ideas, ‘people who would write against … the Islamic religion … on a website or on a Facebook page’” according to Canada’s National Post.
Two years ago, the Canadian Parliament abolished “hate speech” conveyed by the Internet or telephone as part of human rights laws. Why this step backwards? It appears, as suggested above, to be a reaction to the misguided efforts to protect criticism of Islam. How dare Frémont single out Islam and ignore other faiths? There’s further evidence:
Marc Lebuis, the Director of Point de Bascule, which publishes research and information on the threat posed to Canada by Islamist organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, pointed out in his testimony before the Quebec Parliament that this resurrection is motivated in part by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
What Mr. Frémont did not tell Radio-Canada when he alluded to these UN resolutions on December 2, 2014 is that they originally came from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the OIC, that claims equivalence between hate speech, blasphemy, criticism of Islam and defamation of religions.
Lebuis is rightly aware that Quebec’s proposed law will not be applied uniformly just as Section 13 [the section overturned in 2013] was not. In 2008, Lebuis filed a complaint against an Imam whose writings lauded beheading and exterminating homosexuals, denigrated Jews, and called for violent jihad in any place Muslims had the power to overthrow non-Muslim rule.
The Human Rights Commission declined to hear the case.
Let us make no mistake about it: it is odious for any democracy to prohibit criticism of any religion, be it Christianity, Islam, or Scientology. Such a prohibition is contrary to Enlightenment principles and inimical to social progress. “Hate speech” is often a euphemism for “criticism of religion,” or even “criticism of ideas I don’t like.” Yes, there can be genuine hate speech, like that uttered by the Imam above, but I don’t believe any of it should be banned unless it calls for imminent violence.
That’s the way the U.S. operates—or is supposed to. Is there any reason why our enlightened neighbor to the north shouldn’t follow suit? Not that I see. Fortunately, the saner Canadians are raising serious questions about this bill (see here, here, and here). Even some Canadian Muslims, peace be upon them, feel that the bill is unnecessary. Let us hope it dies a quiet death.
Here’s a map showing where blasphemy is criminalized. Black means you can be executed for it, red means you can be imprisoned for it, orange means you can be fined for it, and yellow means there are local restrictions on blasphemy. France and Australia—seriously?











