Motion-103 opens the door to theocracy

Posted September 20, 2017 1:22 pm by Editor

Motion-103 opens the door to theocracy
Motion-103 is misguided and unnecessary

Motion-103 is known as “Systemic Racism and Religious Discrimination.” Canada’s Parliament has passed it, and now the Liberal government must both condemn Islamophobia and develop policies and regulations to reduce and try to eliminate it in every branch of government as well as society. A committee chaired by Liberal MP Hedy Fry has already started the work by hearing from selected Canadians, and then come up with recommendations for the government to implement. The Liberal MP Iqra Khalid who introduced the motion was the first to address the committee. We believe this is a waste of time and taxpayers’ money. It’s also a very regressive step for the nation.

Motion-103 is flawed and unnecessary for many reasons. We will point out two major shortcomings. First, what is wrong with the motion? Just consider substituting “Islamophobia” with “Chrstianophobia” or “Judiasmophobia” in the wording. Let’s try it. Here’s the text of Motion-103 and the proposed word changes in parenthesis:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear; (b) condemn Islamophobia (“Chrstianophobia” or “Judiasmophobia”) and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination and take note of House of Commons’ petition e-411 and the issues raised by it; and (c) request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study on how the government could (i) develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia (“Chrstianophobia” or “Judiasmophobia”), in Canada, while ensuring a community-centered focus with a holistic response through evidence-based policy-making, (ii) collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities, and that the Committee should present its findings and recommendations to the House no later than 240 calendar days from the adoption of this motion, provided that in its report, the Committee should make recommendations that the government may use to better reflect the enshrined rights and freedoms in the Constitution Acts, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

What do you think? Here’s our take. To begin with, the Liberal government would never have considered a similar motion for any other creed. Why? Because it’s religious based. It would be viewed as discriminatory and biased against other religions or views. The government has the elected responsibility to treat and protect religions equally. But Christian beliefs have become open season. Judaism can defend itself. However, Islam gets a pass from the government and the mainstream media, with the CBC leading the charge. Motion-103 is flawed because it’s unjust and in essence superfluous.

Canada has a Constitution and the Charter to protect all Canadians equally. Islam should not get preferential treatment. Motion-103 in reality is an exercise to legitimately silence and possibly punish those who dare criticize Islam. It’s an attack on free speech and true religious liberty. There is no such reality “to better reflect the enshrined rights and freedoms in the Constitution Acts, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” by trying to protect false rights that the Motion doesn’t clearly define when it uses the word “Islamophobia.”

The next problem with Motion-103 may be even worse. It’s the idea of using Islamophobia so the government, the media and the rest of Canadian society believe that there is institutionalized xenophobia in the country. Raise the fear level and the goal is accomplished. Of course, there is some discrimination against Muslims in Canada but the same can said about Jews, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus and other religious or non-religious groups. Implementing Motion-103 and the committee findings will benefit those who wish to silence any opposition to Islam.

Raheem Kassan in his book, “No Go Zones: How Sharia Law Is Coming to a Neighbourhood Near You,” includes an observation by Phil Haney co-author of “See Something, Say Nothing: A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission.” Here’s part of what Haney say about Islamophohia:

To me the word Islamophobia is a secular political term for Quranic concept: Fitna. Fitna is the opposition to the advancement of Islam. It’s also translated quite frequently as oppression. It also means resistance, interference with, a lot of different adjectives. But basically understand the concept of Islam advancing forward and anybody who stands in the way of that–whatever it be in the social, political, or law enforcement arena–it’s causing the Islamic community fitna.

It’s a capital offence according to them. So for me Islamophobia … this is by Muslims who know the concept of fitna and in their mind I’m sure are thinking: “Your are causing the Islamic community opposition or oppression or resistance. You’re committing fitna.

… So for me Islamophobia is a disguise word. When they say Islamophobia, they are thinking fitna.

… The Western world is trying to hold back tide …just the act of trying to hold back is fitna. (Pages 238-239)

With Canada marching to legally stop any criticism of Islam, how long will it be before we too have no go zones and speech censorship on anything to do with Islam? Motion-103 exploits tha undefined term Islamophobia which too easily can become a blasphemy law. Canada is founded on a democracy and the freedom of speech, not a theocracy. Lastly, the Liberal government needs to realize that Motion-103 was NOT an election issue. The majority of Canadians don’t want Hedy Fry and her appointed committee to make decisions that open the door to Sharia Law. Canada’s roots are Christian. If the Trudeau Liberal government insists on Motion-103, then give Canadians a real say with either a referendum or a vote.


Send this to a friend