Conservatives are wrong to oppose Islamophobia motion

If you ask the online trolls — and we strongly recommend you do not — they will tell you that M-103, the private member’s motion tabled in the House of Commons by Liberal MP Iqra Khalid, represents the beginning of the end of free speech in Canada and a step toward the country’s complete Islamicization.

This is an obviously ludicrous, though widely tweeted mischaracterization of what is in fact a mere motion, of no legal consequence, which carries a message of inclusion that in better times would seem rather anodyne: namely, Islamophobia has no place in Canada. Surely that is an opinion with which only the denizens of the internet's darkest corners would disagree. Right?

Well, as it turns out, no. Every Conservative leadership candidate but one — the ever-decent Michael Chong — intends to oppose the motion on the grounds that it singles out one religion above others and is an attack on free speech. Never mind that the motion is clearly a gesture of solidarity in the wake of the recent murder of six people at a Quebec City mosque. Never mind that it does nothing whatsoever to constrain speech. Never mind that their opposition irresponsibly feeds the trolls.

Kellie Leitch, playing to type, launched a petition to stop the motion, accompanied by an image of a blueeyed girl with tape over her mouth. Maxime Bernier suggested that “it is a first step towards restricting our right to criticize Islam,” while Kevin O’Leary claimed it was “a slap in the face to other religions.” The Conservatives even tabled their own motion on Thursday, which condemns intolerance and racism of all kinds, but avoids any specific mention of Islamophobia.

In fact, there’s good reason to specifically address Islamophobia when discussing intolerance in Canada today. It is true that Muslims are not the religious group most victimized by hate crimes (Jews continue to hold that unfortunate distinction), but crimes against Muslims have been rising at an alarming rate. Between 2012 and 2015, they doubled. And in the days since the mosque shooting, police in Quebec say they’ve seen another sharp spike.

Especially as tens of thousands of Syrian and Iraqi refugees, mostly Muslims, settle into Canada, the message that this rising tide of intolerance reflects a fringe view, explicitly rejected by government, is an important one. Yet the Conservatives, ostrich-like, refuse to acknowledge this real and emerging problem, preferring instead to jealously contend that Muslims don’t deserve their own special motion.

Their response is reminiscent of the petty grievances of the All Lives Matter movement, Heterosexual Pride Day, the Men's Rights movement and other crypto-bigoted counter-movements that seek to protect privilege in the guise of promoting equality. The motion is a “slap in the face to other religions” in precisely the same way that the Black Lives Matter movement is a slap in the face to other races, which is to say, it’s not. Of course all religions deserve to be equally protected and racism of all kinds should be equally rebuked. But allowing these truisms to obscure the ways in which they remain unreflected in our society is perverse if we really mean them. By emphasizing a particular problem, we don’t deny that other problems exist. Inclusion is not a zero-sum game.

The Tories’ refusal to face the emerging and unique challenge posed by Islamophobia is not simply silly; as Heritage Minister Melanie Joly suggested on Thursday, it’s also dangerous. “They’re scared of denouncing Islamophobia and by not denouncing Islamophobia they are actually contributing to the problem,” she said. Our leaders should not be feeding whatever audience there is for hate. Appealing to citizens’ worst instincts may buy some votes, but at what cost?

(This editorial was published Feb. 16 in the Toronto Star and distributed by the Canadian Press.)

“Of course all religions deserve to be equally protected and racism of all kinds should be equally rebuked. But allowing these truisms to obscure the ways in which they remain unreflected in our society is perverse if we really mean them.”