Peter Menzies: Faith on Trial: Bill C-9 Risks Chilling Religious Speech in Canada

Finnish MP Päivi Räsänen in Helsinki, Finland, on April 18, 2015. Roni Rekomaa/AFP via Getty Images

Commentary

If you want to get some sense of what life in Canada could be like if the federal government’s new hate speech law passes, check out Finland.

There, Päivi Räsänen, a medical doctor and member of Parliament, and Bishop Juhana Pohjola of the Evangelical Lutheran Mission Diocese of Finland, are awaiting the verdict of their third hate speech trial—all for the same issues—since 2019.

The prospect of a similar future “Bible Trial” now hangs over Canada, thanks to the minority government’s apparent openness to making a deal with the Bloc Québécois to ensure the passage of Bill C-9, “An Act to amend the Criminal Code (hate propaganda, hate crime, and access to religious or cultural places)”.

Already contentious, the contemplated amendment that would remove the current protections for sincerely held religious belief could very well stifle the ability of Christians, Muslims, Jews, and others to freely refer to their most sacred texts.

As the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops puts it: “The removal of this provision risks creating uncertainty for faith communities, clergy, educators, and others who may fear that the expression of traditional moral or doctrinal teachings could be misinterpreted as hate speech and could subject the speaker to proceedings that threaten imprisonment of up to two years.

“Eliminating a clear statutory safeguard will likely therefore have a chilling effect on religious expression, even if prosecutions remain unlikely in practice.”

Räsänen, a former interior minister, was charged under a section of the Finnish criminal code titled “war crimes and crimes against humanity” after jointly publishing a 2004 pamphlet with Pohjola that described traditional religious views on marriage and sexuality. Also involved were a 2019 live radio debate and a tweet in which she questioned a decision by Finland’s majority church, the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church, to formally support a Helsinki Pride event.

Both she and Pohjola were acquitted at their initial trial and, again unanimously, upon appeal. The prosecution, determined to get convictions, then took the case all the way to Finland’s Supreme Court, where the third trial wound up on Oct. 30. At the time of writing, a verdict is pending. The accused face up to two years in prison if convicted.

Given that a total of six judges have, so far, not been convinced that quoting Bible passages constitutes a hate crime, that level of punishment seems unlikely. But as Räsänen has written, “The greatest danger is the threat of society-wide censorship and the crushing effect on freedom of speech and religion. A judgment against me would open the floodgates to a broad ban on the public expression of religious views or other beliefs and the threat of modern book burnings.”

While that may alarm those of us who still adhere to increasingly old-fashioned views on freedom and liberal democracy, there’s no doubt that the move to suppress religious expression—and some of its very unfashionable concerns regarding sexuality—has a strong fan base.

Quebec, where a crucifix inexplicably remains mounted in the National Assembly, appears particularly keen on this approach. Its Bill 21 banned the wearing of religious symbols or clothing by certain public employees and is now being extended to daycare workers and others. Its “burka ban” also insists a person’s face must be uncovered when receiving public services and is making it illegal to pray in public without government permission.

Prompted by the mass Islamo-Leftist coalition demonstrations that have occupied Montreal’s streets for the past two years, it seems unlikely that one would be busted for bowing one’s head to commune with the Almighty while sitting on a park bench. But the fact that it might be possible could just be enough to discourage one from doing so.

This is why the Bloc Québécois is so keen to assert its leverage within a minority Parliament and stands ready to assist its passage if the exemption (“if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text”) within current hate speech legislation for people sincerely motivated by their faith is removed.

Indeed, Bloc Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet believed he had a deal but that the Liberals—led by a regular attendant at Roman Catholic Mass, Prime Minister Mark Carney—“fear a backlash” and may try to find another dance partner. That hesitance, according to Blanchet, may have motivated the suspension of a Dec. 4 House of Commons Justice Committee.

Conservative MP Andrew Lawton also wondered on X if the committee was putting the bill on hold, stating: “The Liberal chair of the Justice Committee says he cancelled today’s Bill C-9 meeting so MPs could ’regroup.‘ He refuses to say whether he’ll call next Tuesday’s meeting.”

Meanwhile, the very idea that the exemption might be removed has lit up Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, who, already opposed to Bill C-9 because of its restrictions on free speech, declared that it would “criminalize sections of the Bible, Qur'an, Torah and other sacred texts.”

I don’t know that it would. But it could. And that should be enough to alarm all those who believe in a God greater than the state. Just in time for Christmas.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.