|
IF
Bill C250 gets reintroduced in 2004, understand that the
Criminal Code combined with C250 requires PROFILING of
Canadians. It will require evidence as to whether the
accused is a religious or non religious citizen and if
religious what religion one belongs to.
The
author of Bill C250 amendment, bisexual activist, Svend
Robinson however says he believes that religious people
should be protected or exempted from the hate laws. Why?
So they may incite and promote hate? Robinson says he
defends a supposed clause for religious opinion/ religious
text as an exemption. Religious people find Robinson’s
reasoning offensive. Religious people are not homophobic
and "inciters of hate" that need exemption because
they hold to moral standards and religious text teachings.
We also know it is dishonest to claim there is protection
for religion knowing that courts have overridden religious
rights in favour of homosexual approval.
C250
combined with section 318 and 319 is also is anti- free
thought, expression, opinion, and conscience and thus
violates the Charter ( Section 2). Freedom of speech:
that is the expression of opinion, thought, conscience
and even religion is guaranteed in the Charter for ALL
Canadians.
Bill
C250 when applied in context of section 318 or 319 of
the criminal code is unconstitutional. It will violate
at least 4 rights guaranteed to ALL Canadians.
Bill
C250’s intent is undoubtedly an attempt to stop ALL
Canadians from publicly opposing homosexual behaviour.
The
arguments put forth by Robinson for Bill C250 are confused:
first he condemns a few “religious people” who
have made outrageous statements, but then says religious
people should be and are protected. He says C250 is to
protect homosexuals from getting attacked and even killed
but then says people must not SAY things that would hurt
homosexual’s feelings. But the worst inaccuracy of
his rhetoric is that religious debate or opinion will
be protected. Human rights tribunals and even judges in
the Trinity case, Brockie case and Owens case have proven
Robinson wrong. He knows that and in fact is counting
on that to happen again and again. Only this time the
charges will be criminal.
What
Bill C250 does, if Robinson’s argument were correct,
is to PROFILE ALL non-religious Canadians that oppose
homosexual behaviour or homosexuality. Those who cannot
prove themselves religious are not protected and must
be the target of investigation and perhaps prosecution.
But we also are not fooled into thinking that religion
is a defence under this section of the criminal code.
This
PROFILING of Canadians based on religion or lack of it
is no less acceptable than racial profiling. It violates
the Charter.
If
the government of Canada were to pass this kind of profiling/
two-tiered justice it would be violating the very Charter
itself. The Charter guarantees equality under the law
for ALL. Both MPs and Senators have a duty to ensure law
protects all equally and violates none.
Those
MPs who voted September 17, 2003 FOR Bill C250 amendment
( YEAS) have been listed on a website as having violated
the Charter rights of all Canadians, as having supported
the restriction of free speech, thought, opinion and religious
freedom. Those who failed to have the courage to vote
due to absence or abstention will also be listed as though
they supported the above restrictions.
Those
lists will be public and circulated prior to the next
election. For a list of voting results see CFAC's “MP
Vote Record” on this issue.
Bill
C250 combined with section 318 and 319 of Criminal code
will have to face a constitutional challenge.
MPs
will face a voter challenge next election.
Canada Family Action Coalition
|
