Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:02 am    Post subject: liberals consider changes to controversial Islam motion Reply with quote

( there is definitely some concerns about this motion , are they trying to make it illegal to even question or criticise the islam faith ? well at the same time people are openly allowed to question and criticise other religions like Christianity and Jehovah's witnesses as examples )

Liberals considering changes to controversial Islamophobia motion

anthony furey
By Anthony Furey, Postmedia Network
First posted: Monday, February 13, 2017 04:05 PM CST | Updated: Monday, February 13, 2017 05:47 PM CST

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid is considering softening the language in her so-called anti-Islamophobia motion, the Sun has learned.

After Conservative leadership candidate and Ontario MP Erin O’Toole reached out to Khalid with his concerns, the controversial motion may be amended.

“I suggested amendments that I believe would address valid concerns about limiting free speech while ensuring she can bring the debate she wants to bring to the House of Commons,” O’Toole told me in an email. “These would remove any ambiguity with respect to free speech being limited including criticism of radical Islam or even criticizing the faith or its practices like any other faith. We had a good discussion and she said she would consider my proposed amendments.”

A number of leadership candidates have drawn attention to the fact the anti-discrimination motion M103 singles out Islamophobia while also failing to define the nebulous term. While the motion originates from Khalid, sources have revealed the prime minister’s office has an interest in the wording of the motion.

(Khalid’s office has turned down requests to appear on my radio show and did not respond to requests to discuss the motion for this column.)

See also: Canada's so-called anti-Islamophobia motion is nothing but trouble

For similar reasons O’Toole outlines, Maxime Bernier, Andrew Scheer and Kellie Leitch have all indicated they won’t be voting for it. Bernier, in a Facebook note, says he’ll vote against it unless the word Islamophobia is removed, to make it clear the motion doesn’t grant preferential status to one religion.

They and the tens of thousands of Canadian who’ve signed petitions against this motion are right to be concerned. While House of Commons motions are usually toothless measures voted on for symbolic reasons, this one calls on a committee to study the matter.

These studies are the first step to legislation as they typically recommend new laws. And it’s a legitimate worry that legislation designed to tackle so-called Islamophobia could include some form of anti-blasphemy legislation. After all, according to the Pew Research Center, a quarter of the world’s countries have some form of anti-blasphemy laws, many of which criminalize criticism of Islam.

Since Canada welcomes tens of thousands of people from these countries every year, clearly many new arrivals are at least accustomed to these sorts of restrictions if not in support of them. According to census data, the Muslim population in Canada grew steeply from 575,000 in 2001 to 1,050,000 in 2011.

As it stands, depicting Muhammad in cartoon form is already heavily frowned upon in North America. It’s not that much of a stretch to see the liberal chattering classes, who heavily influence political circles, fail to speak out if a formal cartoon ban is floated.

See also: Yes, Canada's anti-Islamophobia motion poses a problem

Meanwhile, the Quebec City mosque tragedy is already being used as a pretext by activists to further their agendas.

A CBC story focuses on “calls to clean up Quebec City radio.” After first reading only the headline, I thought perhaps the hosts in question were despicably applauding the attack or calling for more. But instead, the story explains, their great sins were simply that they “air segments voicing concerns about Muslim immigration and the threat of Islamic terrorism.”

Likewise, the National Council of Canadian Muslims writes “the question for all of us must be – now what?” in a release, then goes on to call for special training for local police forces, sensitivity courses in schools nationwide and the naming of January 29th as National Day of Remembrance and Action on Islamophobia. It’s quite a wish-list.

It’s clear that if M103 passes as is, it won’t be the last call for action that casts a favourable eye upon the fastest growing religion in the country. Khalid is right to hear out O’Toole’s concerns. Fingers crossed.


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( well the other leadership candidates have been coming out against this motion , one plans to vote for it )

Chong plans to vote for Islamophobia motion

Says it’s important that parliamentarians study anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic prejudice and discrimination

Janice Dickson

Tuesday, February 14th, 2017

Conservative leadership candidate Michael Chong said today he will vote in favour of Motion 103, which condemns Islamophobia and instructs the heritage committee to study discrimination against Canadian Muslims, as well as other religious and racial groups.

“In light of the mass shooting at the Quebec Islamic Cultural Centre in Quebec City last month, where six Muslims were killed and 19 injured while they prayed in their mosque, it is appropriate and important that Canadian parliamentarians study the issue of anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic prejudice and discrimination,” he said in a statement this morning.

Chong said that some have suggested the motion singles out Canadian Muslims for special...

Progressive Tory

Joined: 04 Dec 2010
Posts: 1200
Reputation: 119.9
votes: 1

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2017 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't read much about this but I don't really understand what the issue is with the motion.

Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2017 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The real threat behind M-103 is 'mission creep'

lorne gunter
By Lorne Gunter , Edmonton Sun
First posted: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 06:31 PM EST | Updated: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 06:35 PM EST

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid is considering softening the language in her so-called anti-Islamophobia motion, the Sun has learned.

“Mission creep,” that’s the real threat of M-103, the anti-Islamophobia motion proposed by Mississauga Liberal MP Iqra Khalid that is likely to be debated in the House of Commons on Wednesday.

There are fundamental problems with the wording of the motion, of course. As currently written, the motion singles out Islam for special protection.

While purporting to oppose all forms of religious discrimination, the only form specifically mentioned is Islamophobia. And no definition of Islamophobia is given, leaving the door wide open to the broadest possible interpretations – including public statements condemning radical Islamic terrorism and even academic papers questioning whether Islam truly is a religion of peace.

Also, beyond merely condemning Islamophobia, Khalid’s motion calls on the federal government to root out Islamophobia where ever it exists within the government. And it calls for the elimination of “systemic” discrimination.

Systemic discrimination is one of those catchall phrases that cannot be disproven. People accused of it are guilty until they can prove themselves innocent. And the definition of what qualifies as discrimination is anything that outrages the most easily offended member of any identifiable group.

But what truly has me worried is the way such seemingly innocuous, goody-goody government actions quickly morph into something larger and more ominous. They can expand again and again, rapidly, until they provoke witch hunts with the force of law behind them.

Think I’m over reacting? Consider the case of Antonio Padula.

In the wake of the horrific murders of six innocent Muslim men while they were praying at a Quebec City mosque, Padula, a man in his mid-40s from the Montreal suburb of Kirkland, is said to have got into a Twitter battle in which he tried to mock extreme, anti-Muslim suggestions about how to keep Canada safe from Islamic terrorism.

His alleged tweets were facetious, although admittedly dark. And ultimately, they were difficult to understand in context. (Although they were not impossible to understand.)

In one example, Padula is said to have asked another tweeter who was calling for stringent measures against Muslim immigrants, “I need u to tell me how do we stop sharia law … I can only think of killing innocent Muslims while praying. You?”

That’s a bit jarring, to be sure. In a 140-character tweet, it’s hard to convey the subtly such sarcasm requires.

But what Padula got for his lack of delicacy in the alleged tweets was a small fleet of police cars roaring to a halt in front of his west end Montreal home late on a Wednesday evening, less than 24 hour after the tweets were posted on social media.

Padula was arrested, taken from his home in handcuffs and thrown in a cell for the night. He was also charged with “uttering threats … and public incitement of hatred against an identifiable group.”

And Padula was told to visit his doctor with 48 hours and to take whatever medication or undergo whatever treatments his doctor ordered. Because, you know, Islamophobia is a mental disorder, I guess.

The real utter lack of subtlety here is on the part of police and prosecutors. And that’s the problem with a proclamation like Khalid’s M-103.

Quebec’s human rights laws didn’t start out with the intent to monitor citizens tweeting in their homes and locking them up for being crass, just as M-103 will not initially provoke a witch hunt.

But these well-intentioned government directives evolve overtime. They give bureaucrats, special interest lobbyists and activist judges permission to push and expand and pump up their meaning until anyone publishing an unflattering cartoon of Mohammed or identifying terrorists as radical Muslims runs afoul of Canadian authorities.

That’s the motion’s very real danger.


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Liberal MP keen to allay ‘fear and anxiety’ on anti-Islamophobia motion but will not change it in face of ‘hatred’

David Akin | February 15, 2017 7:15 AM ET
More from David Akin | @davidakin

OTTAWA — Liberal MP Iqra Khalid said she is keen to allay the “fear and anxiety” some Canadians have about her attempt to have the House of Commons denounce Islamophobia, systemic racism and intolerance.

Akin blog On The HillIn an exclusive interview Tuesday with the National Post, Khalid, a Pakistan-born first-time MP from Mississauga, Ont., said she is not willing to alter her motion, which has been given the parliamentary designation M-103, even though some Conservative MPs have suggested she do so and even though she says she has been subjected to “a lot of hatred” and abuse since she first proposed the motion last December.

“Watering down the motion will not be in the best interests of Canadians who are working to fight this (intolerance),” Khalid said.

Debate on M-103 is expected to begin at about 5:30 pm ET Wednesday in the House of Commons and run for about an hour. And while it is procedurally possible that a vote could also happen Wednesday, it is much more likely that the vote will be put off until early April.

Khalid will find significant support from her own caucus colleagues and from the NDP but not as much from the Conservative benches. Rona Ambrose, the interim Conservative party leader, in an interview with the National Post Monday, said she is opposed to Khalid’s motion and several of the contenders to become permanent leader also oppose it.

Kevin O’Leary, believed to be the front-runner in the Conservative leadership race, told the National Post Tuesday night that if he had a seat in the House of Commons he would vote against the motion.

“You can’t legislate out intolerance and hate,” O’Leary said. “It is ill-conceived and it is a slap in the face to other religions and to other races.” Brad Trost, a Saskatchewan MP who is running for the Conservative leadership, called Khalid’s motion “a farce.”

Some leadership hopefuls are expected to speak at an anti-M103 rally Wednesday in Toronto organized by Charles McVety, the Christian evangelical leader and head of the Canada Christian College.

Khalid’s motion seeks to accomplish three things: First, that the House “condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination;” second, that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage be instructed to study the issue of “eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia;” and, finally; that the federal government collect data on hate crimes for further study.

Andrew Vaughan/ The Canadian Press

Andrew Vaughan/ The Canadian PressConservative MPs Andrew Scheer, left, and Maxime Bernier are among several candidates for the Conservative leadership will oppose a Liberal MP's anti-Islamophobia motion. .

The motion is not proposed legislation. Indeed, many opponents and commentators, including O’Leary on Tuesday night, often refer to M-103 as “a bill”. It is not and, should it pass in a House of Commons vote, it would create no new laws nor would it change any laws.

Michael Chong, believed to be the lone Conservative leadership candidate who supports Khalid’s motion, made that point in a statement he released Tuesday morning.

“The motion is simply denouncing discrimination and prejudice against Muslims and people of the Islamic faith. Nothing more or less,” Chong said. “Motion 103 will not prevent anyone from criticizing Islam or radical Islamic terrorists.

Dan Vandal, a Winnipeg Liberal MP who is a Metis and a member of the Commons heritage committee, supports Khalid’s motion and would like to see the issue referred to his committee.

“Anything that we can do as a government, as a society to combat violence, to combat hate crimes, to combat intolerance is a good thing,” Vandal said. “I think we need to take a whole-of-government approach, a whole-of-society approach to do what we can to educate our citizens … to combat intolerance, to combat hate.”

Khalid tabled the motion in September after a petition, signed by nearly 70,000 Canadians called on MPs “to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.”
When she tabled her motion, Khalid told the House of Commons, “I am a young, brown, Muslim, Canadian woman. When I moved to Canada in the 1990s — a young girl trying to make this nation my home — some kids in school would yell as they pushed me, ‘Go home, you Muslim,’ but I was home. I am among thousands of Muslims who have been victimized because of hate and fear.”

On Tuesday, Khalid said her motion had the support of people of many faiths, including the synagogue in her riding.

“This motion outlines that, yes, we do have a racism problem in Canada,” Khalid said.

For the federal Conservatives, the debate represents a potential political trap. During the last federal election, the party was branded as bigoted and intolerant for, among other things, proposing policies such as a “Barbaric Practices Snitch Line.” And while many Conservatives oppose Khalid’s motion on the grounds that it could lead to an abridgement of speech rights, the danger for that party is that its opponents will use opposition to this bill to brand the party, once again, as intolerant.

“Voting against this motion is simply nonsensical,” said Karl Belanger, who spent 19 years as a top adviser to three leaders of the federal NDP. “No matter what the convoluted explanation is, you are voting against condemning Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination. That will stick.”


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CPC leadership contenders rile crowd at Rebel event opposing M-103

Ainslie Cruickshank

Wednesday, February 15th, 2017

Faith Goldy of the Rebel gets a standing ovation from the crowd at an event hosted by her outlet in protest of motion M-103. iPolitics/Ainslie Cruickshank.

As most members of Parliament debated a Liberal MP’s motion denouncing Islamophobia in the House of Commons Wednesday evening, four Conservative leadership contenders took their opposition on the road to Toronto.

There they riled a hundreds-strong crowd gathered at the Canada Christian College. The majority in attendance were middle aged, but there were a number of twenty-somethings among them, and some children, presumably there with their parents.

The event, hosted by Conservative pundit Ezra Levant and his right-wing website The Rebel, gave the Conservative MPs a chance to rail against motion M-103 among like-minded supporters.

A place where their concerns – that the non-binding motion would stifle free speech, that it doesn’t define Islamophobia, that it places one religion above others, and that it does nothing to address the threat of terrorism – drew cheers.

“Chronic political correctness is strangling free speech in Canada and it has to stop,” said Pierre Lemieux, the first of the Conservative leadership candidates to speak.

Next at the microphone Kellie Leitch, who drew ire last year for suggesting immigrants should be screened for Canadian values, said “freedom is a Canadian value” and urged the crowd to sign her petition opposing motion M-103.

Chris Alexander, who faced backlash after the last Rebel event he attended in Alberta, where the crowd devolved into chants of “Lock her up” in reference to NDP Premier Rachel Notley, was delayed but made it in time to share his own reasons for opposing the motion.

“I have a lot of trouble with a motion that talks about hatred this, phobia that and doesn’t mention the number one threat in the world today which is Islamic jihadist terrorism,” he said.

Brad Trost was the last of the Conservative leadership hopefuls to speak out against M-103.

“We in Canada shouldn’t have a thought police,” he said.

“We need to talk to discuss the serious security threats tied in with extreme Islamism with jihadism, and we need to have the freedom of speech to do it,” he said.

“Do you see what’s happening here?” asked Levant.

“The deliberate blurring of having a dissenting opinion, labeling anyone who dares to even have a public conversation about the real issues of Islam, whether it’s the treatment of women, the separation of Mosque and state, non-violent solutions to problems, proper integration and assimilation of refugees, proper vetting of refugees, terrorism.”

“There are so many live and genuine public policy issues that Justin Trudeau wants to swallow up whole and call every single one of those issues Islamophobia and if you dare criticize his massive unvetted, un-integrateable Muslim migration…that’s Islamophobia”

The motion under attack at the event was tabled by MP Iqra Khalid in December.

It calls for the government to “recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear” and “condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination.”

It also asks the government to “take note of the House of Commons petition e-411 and the issues raised by it.”

That petition, which was tabled by Liberal MP Frank Baylis with 70,000 signatures, asked the government to recognize that extremists “do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.”

Finally, Khalid’s motion asks that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to study how the government could “develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia, in Canada.”

CBC reported Wednesday evening that Khalid defined Islamophobia as “the irrational hate of Muslims that leads to discrimination,” and said she wouldn’t remove the word from her motion, during the debate in the House.

“I will not do so, any more than I would speak to the Holocaust and not mention that the overwhelming majority of victims were six million followers of the Jewish faith and that anti-Semitism was the root cause of the Holocaust,” she said. “We cannot address a problem if we fail to call it by its true name.”

The debate surrounding Khalid’s motion comes as hate crimes against Muslim people in Canada have increased.

In April of last year Global reported that hate crimes against Muslim people that were reported to police more than doubled between 2012 and 2014, from 45 crimes to 99.

Following the shooting in a Quebec Mosque last month hate incidents in that province rose dramatically.

In Montreal, police received 29 calls regarding hate incidents in the three days after the shooting, the Globe and Mail reported in early February.


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I’m a liberal Muslim and I reject M-103

Farzana Hassan
By Farzana Hassan, Toronto Sun
First posted: Thursday, February 16, 2017 02:36 PM EST | Updated: Thursday, February 16, 2017 02:51 PM EST

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid and Heritage Melanie Joly
Liberal MP Iqra Khalid makes an announcement about an anti-Islamophobia motion on Parliament Hill while Minister of Canadian Heritage Melanie Joly looks on in Ottawa on Wednesday, Feb. 15, 2017. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Patrick Doyle

The most damaging assault by Islamic fundamentalists on Western values – and indeed Western civilization itself – is in the realm of free speech.

There have been attempts to quash free speech right here in Canada.

The Canadian Islamic Congress objected to Mark Steyn’s book America Alone, and Calgary imam Syed Soharwardy actually filed a human rights complaint against former Sun News Network host Ezra Levant for publishing the prophet Mohammad’s cartoons back in 2006.

Privately, a handful of liberal Muslims endure a daily barrage of angry emails because they challenge the obscurantism that characterizes radical Islam.

Internationally, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has moved to curtail "Islamophobia" in the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights. I categorically reject such restriction on free speech, just as I reject M-103, tabled by Liberal MP Iqra Khalid, who has refused to remove the term from the motion.

Does Islamophobia mean a fear of all Muslims? Islamic practice? Islamic culture, perhaps?

Is this fear, like any true phobia, an irrational fear?

What M-103 supporters need to ask is how often their opponents incite violent acts.

Let me venture a guess. People who read newspapers and form opinions about certain communities almost never pick up guns to shoot members of those communities.

The educated appreciate and embrace differences.

They also understand that in evolving societies discussions are paramount if positive change will ever occur. Calling their disagreement a phobia devalues their critical opinion.

Journalists across Canada, including my colleagues at Postmedia, always avoid hate speech.

When we challenge a certain Islamic practice, we are careful to exclude the moderate majority and focus our attention on a small segment of the Muslim community. Yet some claim that even such discussion conflates the radicals with the moderates.

If Khalid believes such discussions include all Muslims, she is unwittingly admitting that all Muslims are indeed like the fundamentalists.

Khalid is mistaken if she believes any rational discussion on Islamic practice castigates all Muslims. She must understand that any well-intentioned and constructive discussion on a religious practice or ideology is a fundamental right of every Canadian.

There is no phobia of Islam in Canada. There is genuine resentment toward orthodox Islam. But it has little to do with the usual public discourse.

Some practices, whether we discuss them in public or not, are commonly known to be associated with orthodox Islam, such as polygamy, wife battery and ostracism of religious minorities.

It is up to moderate Muslims to distance themselves from these outrages as much as possible. So far no robust public challenge to such practices has emerged from moderate segments of the community.

Without such a grassroots challenge any social observer, professional or amateur, can form any opinion on orthodox Islam, whether positive or negative.

We know some Muslims are working to institute gender equality, and others are partners with the government in fighting terror. However, these efforts need to become the norm rather than the exception. Once this takes place, the world will automatically begin to see Muslims in positive light.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has talked about finding the right balance between protecting a religious minority and also protecting our Charter rights.

The answer to his dilemma is simple: Do not put the slightest dent in our right to free speech.

To balance this, the prime minister can take more measures to protect the security of all minorities with tighter law enforcement and stricter punishments for alleged offenders like Alexandre Bissonnette


Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 5707
Reputation: 282.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There seem to be lots of Moslems who are frightened by the legal changes that Trudeau is inflicting upon us. This is a video of a few of them giving testimony, so to speak. These are the kind of voices we need to hear from our moslem community.


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

M103 motion on Islamophobia needs to change its wording


First posted: Friday, February 17, 2017 08:19 PM EST | Updated: Friday, February 17, 2017 08:45 PM EST

It’s disappointing to learn Liberal MP Iqra Khalid has zero interest in softening the tone of her controversial motion on Islamophobia.

If the Liberal government believes all racism and discrimination is worthy of equal condemnation, then it should encourage Khalid to change its wording to reflect that.

Right now, it singles out Islamophobia and calls for a committee study to look into ways to tackle all religious discrimination.

As several Postmedia columnists have explained, what “Islamophobia” means is up for debate.

To some people it means an irrational hatred of Muslims, which any Canadian who believes in an inclusive society should denounce.

But to others, notably in some parts of the Muslim world, "Islamophobia" means any criticism of Islam or its prophet.

This is also wrong. No one in a free society should support this view.

Religions consist of ideas and ideas are open to criticism.

This is non-negotiable in any free society.

Despite this, Khalid says she will not eliminate the word “Islamophobia” from the motion and replace it with a more clearly-defined term.

By contrast, former Liberal cabinet minister and prominent human rights activist Irwin Cotler proposed the term “anti-Muslim bigotry” as a possible substitute.

That’s certainly a better option than the vague and contentious term, “Islamophobia”.

However, the better option would be to denounce all forms of discrimination by not singling out a specific religion.

Unless, of course, Khalid’s intention is to give a special status to Islam, instead of equally denouncing all forms of religious discrimination.

This is unclear, because she has responded to few media requests seeking clarification of her views.

No politician should be playing partisan games in the aftermath of the tragic Quebec City mosque shooting.

Yet that’s what the Liberals appear to be doing by drawing a line in the sand with this questionably worded motion.

Their motivation seems to be to trap the Conservatives into a no-win situation, where they will be called out as intolerant simply for raising legitimate concerns about how the motion is worded.

If so, this is a cynical ploy.

It’s important to strike the right balance on a motion like this. Symbolism matters.

This is why until changes are made to it, it should be voted down.


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8702
Reputation: 289.4
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Feb 18, 2017 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

( a liberal mpp , has decided to introduce a similar Islamophobia motion to the Ontario legislature , apparently this sort of thing is political gold for the liberals and too good to pass up )

MPP wants Ontario legislature to debate on Islamophobia motion

The Canadian Press

Saturday, February 18th, 2017

TORONTO – The furor in the House of Commons over a motion condemning Islamophobia is prompting a similar debate in the Ontario legislature next week.

Liberal MPP Nathalie Des Rosiers sent a letter to other members on Friday asking that they support a motion that she intends to introduce next Thursday.

It calls for the House to condemn all forms of Islamophobia.

A similar motion debated in the House of Commons this week sparked some responses from some members of the public that were sexually demeaning and contained racial slurs.

They were directed at both the Ontario MP who originated the motion and Heritage Minister Melanie Joly who added her support to the measure.

Des Rosiers said the reaction to the federal debate prompted her to ask the government House leader to allow her to make her motion in the legislature next week.

“I believe that Islamophobia needs to be addressed head on as we have seen too many acts of hatred and violence, most recently the mass shooting at the Quebec Islamic Culture Centre in Quebec City,” Des Rosiers’ letter says.

Six men died in the Quebec City shooting.

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1


Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

liberals consider changes to controversial Islam motion

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB