It's All for the Children. Think of the Children

 

The Trudeau Liberals’ proposed new Bill C-63, the “Online Harms Reduction Act” is supposed to criminalize child pornography online. But it also provides for preventative detention or possible life imprisonment for “hate crimes.” 

Child pornography online is already illegal. And preventative detention on suspicion of perhaps committing a crime in future, and life imprisonment for hate crimes, are unconstitutional. Not to mention an obvious violation of human rights.

What is the government up to?

Perhaps they are counting on the Conservatives to vote against the bill, as the outrageous violation of human rights that it is, and they will then propagandize this as “The Tories support child pornography!” This would be a useful counter to rightists objecting to men in women’s bathrooms, or drag queen story hours. They have used this tactic before; notably on the bill purportedly establishing free trade with Ukraine, which in reality sought to make the carbon tax impossible to rescind, as a matter of treaty obligation.

But the child pornography provisions might instead be cover for actually pushing through the outrageous violations of human rights. Although unconstitutional, it is naïve to expect the Canadian justice system to defend either the Constitution, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, or human rights. They have not done so in the past. After all, the Prime Minister appoints the judges. And the judges can always appeal to the rider that this or that violation of rights is “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” We are supposed, for example, to have freedom of expression. That ship left the pier long ago, with no passengers on board, when the “hate speech” laws were passed.

“Hate crimes” are inevitably in the eye of the beholder. It will be easy for the government to declare any opinion they dislike “hateful,” and lock up opponents for life. 

Nor will even silence protect you. If they suspect you of dissent, they can use preventative detention.

Can we trust Poilievre to rescind this law, and similar laws? For that matter, can we trust the present government to allow another election? I can’t even say another “free and fair” election. We have reason to believe elections have not been truly free and fair in the recent past. There seems to have been, at a minimum, Chinese interference, which the government has been covering up.