Madam Speaker, I am so pleased that the member has asked that question because what I am hearing from the member is doublespeak. We cannot have it both ways. That very argument was specifically used for why we did not need Motion No. 103, because so many of these things are already covered in our laws.
However, I want to express that this particular section was actually used recently, on June 9, in a criminal case here in Ottawa. It has been applied.
“Sins” are the term we use in my faith to represent that one has missed the mark in some way. There are sins of commission and there are sins of omission: things that one should not do that one has, and things that one should have done but did not.
This would be a sin of omission in my books because we are removing something that speaks very strongly to Canada's values and democracy, of which we are celebrating 150 years, and it is a statement within our Criminal Code. We value those who lead religious communities, their facilities, and their right to share their faith in the public square, just as we did with the Muslim community in Ottawa City Hall last night.