I don't agree that it has everything to do with discrimination. I am extremely sensitive to issues of discrimination. I am appalled by stories of people who are unfairly put on no-fly lists.
However, remember that revocation under this law would only happen following a conviction in a court. Unless we're saying now that Canadian courts are discriminating against certain groups of Canadian citizens....
I mean, this is not just an arbitrary “I pick you, you and you, and I'm revoking your citizenship”. This is that a court has found a person guilty of a certain crime. I'm assuming that you feel as I do that Canadian courts do a pretty good job of assessing the guilt or innocence of a particular person. This is rooted in a legal conviction.
In terms of the general, slippery-slope argument, again, I think every law has to be assessed based on the merits of its actual words. If it's created tightly enough, then I don't believe it can be used to then go after people in an arbitrary or discriminatory fashion.
If I don't agree with the language.... I feel that my job at FDD is to support whoever is in power—we are totally non-partisan—and to try to put together the best possible policies on whatever the issue happens to be. My goal is to make sure that any particular bill is written as well as it possibly can be to meet the objectives of the legislation without unintended consequences.