Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suggested that some of the opposition to Islamophobia legislation was an example of sexism.

It could not be further from the truth that sexism is in any way involved in opposing MP Iqra Khalid’s anti-Islamophobia motion M-103.

A private member’s motion was passed in March by female Member of Parliament Iqra Khalid, that identified a “public climate of hate and fear” in Canada and demanded that Islamophobia be treated as a hate crime and be subject to prosecution under the Canadian criminal code.

Scrutiny and criticism of any religion has never been deemed a crime in the West. If Islam is to be treated equally, then it should not be immune from criticism. Given the global crimes against humanity committed by jihadists and Islamic supremacists today, it is fundamental to scrutinize Islam. The Indonesian Muslim scholar Yahya Cholil Staquf, general secretary of the 50-million-member Nahdlatul Ulama, stated:

“Stop pretending that orthodox Islam and violence aren’t linked…The West must stop ascribing any and all discussion of these issues to “Islamophobia.” Or do people want to accuse me — an Islamic scholar — of being an Islamophobe too?”

The inconvenient truth is that Islamic supremacists globally are persecuting Christians on a genocidal scale; killing other Muslims deemed not Muslim enough (over 11 million since 1948); abusing minorities and women; seeking to obliterate the Jewish state of Israel; and infiltrating Western nations (which they consider part of the House of War). Infidels are beheaded, an alarming number of “white girls” in the U.K. are raped and abused by Muslim grooming gangs because of their race and creed; gays are thrown off rooftops; beheadings and stonings are still sanctioned for crimes in Sharia states; women are worth less than men under the Sharia; FGM is practiced routinely worldwide; it is blasphemy to criticize or mock Muhammad; and it is illegal to challenge the Sharia, as it is regarded as divine law.

Questioning and public scrutiny of Islam are not the same as attacking all Muslims, and to criminalize so-called “Islamophobia” is an affront to democratic principles; free speech is a cornerstone of any free society. Canadians are not hatemongers, but are generally peaceful, accepting and tolerant. To impose anti-Islamophobia motion M-103 is a sad commentary on what the Trudeau government thinks of Canadians.

If Iqra Khalid’s Motion M-103 had been presented explicitly as an anti-Muslim bigotry motion, chances are high that Canadians would have accepted this motion, despite the fact that Jews and blacks are the biggest targets of hate crimes; but Khalid was rigid on that motion being an “anti-Islamophobia” one; thus dividing a once peaceful country. “Anti-Muslim bigotry” is prejudice and intolerance against Muslims; “Islamophobia” has been used in the same way, but also to refer to criticism of Islam. The claim is that to have any concern about any aspect of Islam (however justified) is to target Muslims; therefore one must not criticize it. M103 also declares Islam to not be connected to violence, intolerance and hate. It is important also to recall that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has an entire Observatory aimed at compelling Western states to criminalize “Islamophobia.”

It is not sexism against her to oppose motion M-103. To suggest such a thing is grasping at straws.

“Trudeau: Opposition To ‘Islamophobia’ Law An Example Of Sexism”, by David Krayden, Daily Caller, September 12, 2017: