Section 13 deems anything “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” discriminatory if it involves an identifiable group.

“Our government believes that Section 13 is not an appropriate or effective means for combatting hate propaganda,” Nicholson responded. “We believe the Criminal Code is the best vehicle to prosecute these crimes.”

Nicholson urged MPs to support the bill and promised amendments to strengthen the Criminal Code’s hate provisions.

“We were very encouraged to hear Mr. Nicholson come out in support of this change,” said Catholic Civil Rights League executive director Joanne McGarry.

Constitutional lawyer and law professor Iain Benson also applauded the move. Benson said “hatred at the moment has been over-extended to cover what I call ‘hurt’ speech.”

Catholics who have run afoul of Section 13 or related provincial acts have also rejoiced at the move.

“Finally, alleluia!” said Calgary Bishop Fred Henry, who faced complaints in 2005 under the Alberta Human Rights Act for a pastoral letter defending traditional marriage. “This section is such a no-brainer that it should have been excised long ago.

“The ‘feeling offended’ nature of the clause was an open door to not only adjudicate, but also to promote a politically correct agenda,” the bishop said. “Ardent secularists tended to use commissions as swords rather than shields and targeted others for ideological reasons. 

“It was almost like open season on traditional Christian beliefs and, unfortunately to the detriment of society, many of those preyed upon kept their heads down and out of sight,” Henry said.

“I’m all in favour of really putting the hate act out of business,” said Catholic Insight editor Fr. Alphonse De Valk, who spent $30,000 defending his small-circulation magazine against Section 13 complaints made by an Edmonton-based homosexual activist.

The Basilian priest said hate speech is not clearly defined in these provisions, so the commissions “make it up as they go along.”

De Valk said human rights commissions have “railroaded the homosexual lifestyle into the consciousness of Canadians and demanded they get full recognition.”

“It has done much harm,” he said. “The sooner this act is rescinded or rewritten in such a way, only applicable to those who do acts of violence, not those who simply speak their minds, the better.”

McGarry said all who speak or write from a Christian perspective have faced concerns they could be subject to a complaint based on Section 13 or similar provisions in provincial human rights legislation.

“It wasn’t so much about being able to say hurtful things, or speak without thinking,” McGarry said. “We need to be able to speak freely if it is part of Church teaching.”

Section 13 and provincial counterparts are so vague they do not provide enough clarity on what one can or cannot say, she said. If there are restrictions in a democracy, “we need to know what they are.”

The League has always argued the Criminal Code was the proper legislation to govern the limits of hate speech, she said.