Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, the only people who have anything to fear from Bill C‑9 are those who want to incite hatred—so they are already doing wrong—by hiding behind their religion, using passages from the Bible, the Torah or the Quran, for example. All the bill does is remove the religious exemption. Someone who is accused of inciting hatred would not be able to hide behind a text and say that they are simply quoting it.
The bill includes interpretation provisions stating that, if the speech is part of a sermon and it is only reproducing a text, no charges will be laid. It has to be proven that the aim was to wilfully promote hatred.
Why does my colleague object so strongly to what has been proposed in the bill so far?