A newly passed Canadian hate speech bill is drawing growing criticism from some lawmakers and religious groups, who argue it could have unintended consequences for free expression and faith-based speech.
Bill C-9, known as the Combatting Hate Act, was introduced by Liberal Justice Minister Sean Fraser and cleared the House of Commons on March 25. It now moves to the Senate for further consideration. The legislation expands existing hate speech laws, introduces a new hate crime offense, and sets penalties for actions like obstructing access to places such as houses of worship, schools, and cultural sites.
The most debated part of the bill centers on its removal of a long-standing legal defense related to religious expression. Previously, individuals accused under certain hate speech provisions could argue that their statements were made in good faith and rooted in religious belief. Critics say eliminating that protection could open the door to legal challenges against sermons, religious teachings, or even quoting scripture.
Conservative Member of Parliament Andrew Lawton has been among the most vocal opponents. He argues that the change lowers the threshold for criminal charges tied to speech that others may find offensive. In his view, the bill weakens protections for both freedom of expression and freedom of religion, particularly because it removes explicit safeguards for statements made in a religious context.
Canada politicians have lost their minds.
A new bill if passed considers parts of the Bible hate speech.
The bill may remove or weaken a religious exemption.
I hope Canadians conservatives are making noise about Bill C-9.
Should Canada maintain the religious exemption in the new hate speech bill?— Patrick Bet-David (@patrickbetdavid) April 4, 2026
Some of those concerns stem from earlier discussions among lawmakers. During a House justice committee hearing last year, Liberal MP Marc Miller raised questions about whether certain passages from religious texts could be considered inherently hateful, particularly those addressing homosexuality. His comments have been cited by critics as evidence that the law could be interpreted in ways that bring religious speech under scrutiny.
Faith groups, including both Christian and Muslim organizations, have echoed those worries. They argue that the lack of a clear religious exemption could lead to hesitation around preaching or engaging in open theological debate, especially on sensitive topics.
Supporters of the bill, however, push back on those claims. The Liberal government maintains that the legislation is designed to address rising hate crimes, including antisemitism, not to target religion. The bill itself states that speech is not considered hateful simply because it offends or hurts others, and it affirms that discussions on matters of public interest, including religious topics, remain protected as long as they do not cross into willful promotion of hatred.
Fraser has also emphasized that Canada’s constitutional protections for religious freedom remain unchanged. He has said Canadians will continue to be free to practice, teach, and express their beliefs without fear of criminal penalties, provided those expressions are made in good faith.
The debate comes amid a broader trend. Canadian government data shows police-reported hate crimes have risen significantly in recent years, increasing steadily over the past six years. Similar legislative efforts to address hate speech have also emerged in other countries, including parts of Europe and Australia.
