- A new bill in Canada would create new hate-related crimes, including banning the public display of certain symbols and making it illegal to intentionally block access to places like churches, schools, senior homes and cultural centers.
- It would increase penalties for crimes motivated by hatred and allow prosecutors to charge someone with a separate hate crime offense in addition to the original crime.
- Critics are especially concerned because the act removes Canada’s current religious-speech exemption, which had protected opinions based on religious texts when expressed in good faith.
Canada is attempting to intensify the legal consequences of “hate speech.”
At the end of March, the country’s Combatting Hate Act passed 186-137 in the House of Commons, and it now heads to the Senate, which is more of a formality in Canada.
If the legislation passes, which it likely will, the bill could pose a threat to religious speech in Canada.
Current criminal code includes an exception for hate speech if it was expressed based on a religious opinion or text. The House-passed version does not include the clause. Canadian conservatives have described it as an “assault” on religious freedom, according to a CBC report.
‘Hate Crime’: If the commission of the included offense is motivated by hatred based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, color, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, is guilty of an indictable offense and liable to the punishment provided for in subsection (5); or guilty of an offense punishable on summary conviction.
— Canada's Combatting Hate Act, Section 320.1001
What does the Combatting Hate Act do specifically?
The attempt to squash “hate speech” is conducted on several fronts.
First, the bill bans “terrorism and hate symbols” and any promotion of “hatred against any identifiable group” — specifically Nazi symbols. However, if these symbols are displayed for journalism, education or art, their display is legal.
Second, the bill raises the ceiling of potential prison time. If a judge determines the crime was motivated by hatred based on a certain set of factors, the proposed law could lead to a harsher sentence within the existing range. Further, the bill allows the accused to be charged with a hate crime offense instead or, in addition to, the original crime, triggering higher penalties.
Third, the bill creates a standalone crime for intentionally blocking someone from entering specific buildings. These buildings include religious, educational, cultural or administrative buildings. They also include day cares and senior residencies.
Fourth, for the first time, Canada has codified a definition of hatred.
Hatred is “an emotion of an intense and extreme nature that is clearly associated with vilification and detestation.”
A hate crime is an offense that is motivated by hatred for one or more of the following characteristics:
- Race
- National or ethnic origin
- Language
- Color
- Religion
- Sex
- Age
- Mental or physical disability
- Sexual orientation
- Gender identity or expression
However, the bill adds that hatred should not be determined based solely on the victim’s belief that it “discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends” them.
What are people saying?
Andrew Lawton, a member of Canadian Parliament told Fox News the bill “weakens protections for freedom of expression and freedom of religion.”
He referenced the religious “hate speech” exemption and said some Canadian officials have already suggested that quoting certain Biblical passages would classify as hate speech.
A similar concern is spreading across Europe, especially after Finland’s Supreme Court convicted MP Päivi Räsänen for a religious pamphlet she wrote in 2004, in which she wrote that homosexuality is a “developmental disorder that can also be healed.”
“It’s not for government to decide which religious beliefs are legitimate or not,” Lawton said. “People of faith can and should debate this. But it’s incredibly concerning when a Liberal cabinet minister says that certain verses of Scripture are so inherently hateful that prosecutors should be able to press charges against those who quote them.”
Lawton referenced remarks from Marc Miller, the minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, made last October.
“In Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Romans, there are passages with clear hatred towards, for example, homosexuals,” Miller said during a debate over the bill last October, according to minutes from the committee meeting.
“I don’t understand how the concept of good faith could be invoked if someone were literally invoking a passage from, in this case, the Bible, though there are other religious texts that say the same thing. How do we somehow constitute this as being said in good faith? Clearly, there are situations in these texts where statements are hateful. They should not be used to invoke ... or be a defense. There should perhaps be discretion for prosecutors to press charges,” he said.