Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
I used to think the Bloc had zero redeeming factors, but Blanchet has Bill C-367 and I gotta say, there is zero way any logical thinking human can be against this.
https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/e.../first-reading
https://www.criminal-code.ca/crimina...ces/index.html
Now, I'm not a fancy law takin' guy, but as I understand it right now you can get away with hatred of a group if you can find a line in an old book that defends you, and you really really sell that you believe it. This means that there is no supremacy of Law, because it defers to fiction.
Will be interesting to see the objections to this. |
My first instinct is that this may rankle with the Charter, and thus if passed likely challenged to the Supreme Court.
But, it seems the charter does contemplate this a bit:
Quote:
Freedom of religion is not unlimited, “…and is restricted by the right of others to hold and to manifest beliefs and opinions of their own, and to be free from injury from the exercise of the freedom of religion of others. Freedom of religion is subject to such limitations as are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals and the fundamental rights and freedoms of others” (Ross, supra at paragraph 72; B.(R.), supra) at page 385; Big M, supra at page 337; Amselem, supra at paragraph 62).
A section 1 justification is unavailable where the purpose of the legislation is to infringe freedom of religion (Big M, supra at page 353; Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 92).
|
Though, perhaps an argument could be made that this specific legislation is meant to infringe on freedom of religion?
I think this one will be quite complicated.