Related Stories
…
To date, when a person charged with wilfully promoting hatred has tried to rely on the Section 319(3) “religious defence” (expressing or attempting to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text), courts have rejected that defence when the accused person mixed hatred with religious statements. In other words, this defence is not a “blank cheque” or “free pass” to invoke religion when spewing hate.
Following are some examples of religious teachings which, in Canada in 2024, would readily be construed as the criminal promotion of hatred against an identifiable group, if the Section 319(3) religious defence was removed from the Criminal Code.
The Torah states in Leviticus 20:13: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” St. Paul in his first letter to Timothy writes, “We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, … for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church (2357) states: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law.” The Qu’ran (7:80-81) states: “And remember when Lot scolded the men of his people, saying, ‘Do you commit a shameful deed that no man has ever done before? You lust after men instead of women! You are certainly transgressors.’”
In addition to condemning sexual behavior outside of a male-female marriage, Christianity and Islam each teach that their faith is the only path to salvation, with non-believers risking eternal damnation. Those who find such teachings repugnant should remember that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms serves to protect unpopular minority beliefs, opinions, religions, associations, and peaceful assemblies. Majority religious beliefs and majority political opinions do not need constitutional protection, because society tolerates them in any event.
Believing that sex ought to take place only within marriage, between a husband (male) and wife (female), is not hateful. Publicly proclaiming that belief should not result in criminal charges. Yet removing the Section 319(3) defence would pave the way for criminal prosecutions against those who proclaim what their scriptures teach.
The Globe
quotes Bloc MP Rhéal Fortin as stating: “Religious texts should never be used as an excuse to spread hate about people’s sexual orientation, their gender, race or any other religion.”
Defending charter freedoms for all Canadians requires protecting rabbis, imams, priests, pastors, and all religious believers who rightfully cherish their freedom to teach and proclaim what their faith believes. As demonstrated by Mr. Fortin’s comment, the current trend in Canadian society and law is to move away from respecting our fundamental freedoms of association, expression, conscience, religion, and peaceful assembly.
Some would argue that it’s silly to worry about religious texts being criminalized as illegal hate speech. They would do well to remember the promise that was made—publicly and repeatedly—by LGBTQ advocates in the 1990s when “sexual orientation” was added to federal and provincial human rights legislation. Advocates claimed that this new addition would never be used to censor religious people who teach what their sacred texts say about homosexuality. This promise, whether made in good faith or not, was promptly broken. Publicly proclaiming what the New Testament, Torah, and Qu’ran say about sexuality is now borderline illegal in Canada, with citizens facing human rights prosecutions if they do not choose their words very carefully.
If Bill C-367 is passed by Parliament, this will remove the Section 319(3) religious defence. This, in turn, would make it possible to characterize certain sections of religious texts as illegal hate speech.
Censorship spreads like a cancer. If religious claims about sexuality and salvation are criminalized, other ideas, beliefs, and opinions will also fall victim to that same cancer.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.