OTTAWA—“Disgusting.” “Stupid.” “Ridiculous.”

Justin Trudeau got an earful from Canadians after his Liberal government got behind a dying MP’s effort to change the wording of the national anthem to make it gender neutral.

“No, no, no to changing the wording of the national anthem. It is perfect the way it is,” one Canadian wrote the prime minister. “I am fed up with having to be politically correct with everything; we can barely speak nowadays without insulting someone or something.”

Emails from Canadians poured into the Prime Minister’s Office this spring, many expressing opposition to the move as politicians debated the move.

“How can you guys be so out of touch with what Canadians want?” one person wrote to Trudeau.

Another opted for a simple, blunt message: “LEAVE OUR ANTHEM ALONE!”

Using access to information, the Star obtained comments sent to the Prime Minister’s Office in May and the first two weeks of June as politicians were discussing the change on Parliament Hill.

Former prime minister Stephen Harper got much the same reaction in 2010 when his Conservative government proposed asking Parliament to examine a gender-neutral wording of the anthem. The government scrapped the idea just days later, apparently because of the public hue and cry.

Liberal Mauril Belanger launched this most recent attempt at change in January when he introduced a private member’s bill to change the English-language version from “in all thy sons command” to “in all of us command” to make it gender neutral.

Just a few months earlier, Belanger, then-MP for Ottawa-Vanier, had revealed that he was suffering from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a fatal neurological disease also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease.

While private member’s bills rarely become law, this one won the backing of both the Liberals and New Democrats.

His health quickly failing, Belanger was in the Commons in mid June when MPs approved Bill C-210 by a margin of 225 to 74. Belanger, 61, died in August. The legislation is now is in the Senate.

The comments received by Trudeau’s office reflect a range of views. Many were against the move, condemning it as politically correct, tinkering with tradition and grammatically wrong.

“ ‘In all of us command’ is sloppy, ungrammatical, and is not even used in everyday speech,” said one writer, condemning the move as “second-rate token of appeasement.”

Another said they were “embarrassed” by what they branded as “poorly considered illiterate phraseology.”

But others thought it was time that the “sexist” anthem caught up with the times, saying the current version gave short shrift to women.

“The daughters of Canada should no longer be excluded from what should be our anthem,” said one writer.

Said another, “I find the offending words of Canada’s national anthem, ‘our sons,’ sexist.”

One writer said the change was warranted, noting, “It is after all 2016.

“I hope the members of the Government of Canada will see fit to recognize that both words and actions are important in acknowledging inclusiveness,” the email said.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

One woman told Trudeau’s office that unless the change were made, she would remain seated during the playing of the anthem. “I will encourage other women to do the same. If my country disrespects me I will respond with equal disrespect.”

Still, opposition to the move dominated the comments. One writer told Trudeau to keep his hands off the anthem, declaring that “for better or worse,” it was part of the country’s heritage and a symbol of its national pride.

There was plenty of concern that the change was being hastily driven by “sympathy” for Belanger’s declining health.

“I do not believe that such a significant issue should be decided on this basis or in such a seemingly rushed manner,” said one.

“If you want to make a ‘legacy’ honouring Liberal MP M. Belanger, you can do so in another manner, but not by tampering with our national anthem,” wrote one Ontario resident.

Others said it was “abhorrent” that little consideration appeared to be given to the views of Canadians on the issue. “It feels like there is an unreasonable push to get this put into law without proper consultation of the Canadian public,” read one email.

One writer urged Trudeau to reject the change, predicting it would “open a can of worms” that would inspire demands for even more changes.

And indeed, others petitioned the Prime Minister’s Office for other changes, urging, for example, that religious references be struck from the anthem as well.

Still another questioned the impetus to make the change. “Was there an outcry to change our anthem? I think not! In fact, most Canadians oppose this action,” said one writer, who vowed to continue the singing the existing lyrics even if the change was made.

More than a few thought the Liberal government should have more pressing priorities to occupy its time. “Start focusing on some things that really require attention — monstrous deficits, high unemployment, REAL job creation,” the writer said.

Everyone who wrote the Prime Minister’s Office got a stock response, saying that Trudeau welcomes the views of Canadians, “whether supportive or critical.

“You may be assured that your comments and suggestions have been duly noted and are appreciated,” the reply said.

Read more about: