The recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, strongly spurred on by religious lobbies, invite us to reflect on the influence of these groups in Canada.
Posted yesterday at 10:00 a.m.
Here are some examples of Canadian policies that appear to be the product of religious lobbies. It is important to know them and to question their possible impact on democracy and the religious neutrality of the State.
The religious exception for hate propaganda
The Liberal government of Paul Martin amended the Criminal Code on hate propaganda in 2004 to provide protection for religious speech harmful to an identifiable group, when made in good faith.1. This initiative, which offended many, had never been discussed during the election campaign, which suggests that it is the fruit of the religious lobby.
Since then, hate speech has multiplied on social media, including those based on religious texts.
The sermons of Canadian imam Younus Kathrada condemning homosexuality, Jews, atheists or others, widely disseminated on social media, are eloquent examples of this.2.
However, none of the Canadian government’s bills aimed at countering the scourge of hate propaganda proposes the repeal of this religious exception. Confessional lobbies seem very active in protecting this achievement. Conversely, these lobbies condemn legitimate criticism of religions, considered by some to be hate speech. They are thus free, in Canada, to utter hate speech against identifiable groups, but they would also like to prohibit any criticism of their dogmas.
Federal government initiatives to combat online hate will need to be carefully monitored to ensure they do not negatively impact freedom of expression and legitimate criticism of religions, abhorred by some lobby groups. religious.
Religious exception for the vaccination passport
No right is absolute. It is the balance between individual rights and freedoms and the collective interest that makes it possible to live in society. Moreover, our charters recognize that individual rights may be restricted “within limits that are reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”.
However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, certain religious groups convinced decision-makers of the “supremacy” of religious freedom to evade health measures aimed at protecting the general well-being of citizens, in a situation of exceptional health emergency. . This is how the federal government and several provinces (including Ontario and Alberta) have granted a religious exception for compulsory vaccination, despite the imperatives to protect public health.
Prayer in the House of Commons
Unlike municipal councils, legislatures and parliament are not bound by the decisions of the Supreme Court. Thus, the Parliament of Ottawa uses its parliamentary privilege to avoid submitting to the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision regarding the prohibition of the recitation of the prayer by state officials. It’s a bit like Parliament using a notwithstanding clause to maintain prayer in the House of Commons, despite the principle of state neutrality and respect for the freedom of conscience of MPs. It is very likely that this decision, contrary to the principles of the Charter, was motivated by the influence of religious lobbies.
The right to abortion
This is one of the subjects on which there is consensus among the Canadian population, but which clashes with religious lobbies. The latter work tirelessly with the various parties to counter the general consent3.
For example, after giving the assurance that he would not question the right to abortion during his election campaign, the leader of the Conservative Party Stephen Harper, then majority, had voted in favor of the Private Bill C -484, which would have greatly limited access to abortion by recognizing fetuses as full-fledged victims of criminal acts. This bill, strongly supported by religious lobbies, fortunately died on the order paper when Parliament was dissolved in September 2008. One wonders whether certain MPs act as representatives of their constituents or as representatives subject to religious groups that want to impose their values. After the success obtained by religious lobbies in the United States, vigilance is also required here in Canada.
These four examples demonstrate the impact that the religious lobby can have on Canadian politics. In the United States, it is through the appointment of judges that the religious lobby has succeeded in invalidating democratically voted laws. In Canada, the federal government appoints the judges of the Supreme Court and the superior courts of the provinces and territories. This is an enormous power knowing that these judges, not elected, are called upon to decide on major social, economic or associated political questions. The Canadian process for appointing judges is not infallible, it is important to ensure its integrity, in order to respect citizens’ decisions.