That's interesting. Essentially, equality rights are the mandate of our organization. We want to seek equal rights for all religious groups and non-religious people as well.
So yes, as I outlined in my opening remarks, subsection 176(1) is worded in a way that implies there's a bias toward one side, and the point I mentioned about the potential chill on free speech with subsections 176(2) and 176(3) are unequal because, granted, it is limited in scope, but you're providing protection to religious dogma or orthodoxy in certain situations. So, by definition, that is a violation of equality rights.