Now that M-103 has passed many Canadians have concerns that the country is creeping towards some form of anti-blasphemy legislation.

They’re worried that the motion that singles out the ill-defined Islamophobia for special treatment will, in some way, criminalize robust criticism of Islam.

It’s not as wild of a fear as others are making it out to be. After all, some Muslim-majority countries criminalize a broad definition of Islamophobia that ensnares things, such as critical blogging and drawing cartoons of the prophet.

The committee study M-103 called for will invariably issue a report that ends with recommendations for action. And these recommendations are typically used to advise parliamentarians on the crafting of new laws and initiatives. Canadians are right to keep on guard for any future legislation.

But they should also cast their gaze backwards and look at the blasphemy laws that are currently on the books. Yes, that’s right. Blasphemy is already a crime.

Here’s Section 296 of the Criminal Code, headlined as “Blasphemous Libel”:

“Every one who publishes a blasphemous libel is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years ... It is a question of fact whether or not any matter that is published is a blasphemous libel.”

It ends with the following caveat: “No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section for expressing in good faith and in decent language, or attempting to establish by argument used in good faith and conveyed in decent language, an opinion on a religious subject.”

The problem is there seems to be a lot of subjectivity loaded into that disclaimer.

“[Section 296] offensive to at least three fundamental freedoms (expression, belief, and conscience) and its weak defences (“good faith” and “decent language”) are clearly inadequate to protect it from Charter scrutiny,” criminal law scholars Dennis Baker and Benjamin Janzen wrote for a Macdonald-Laurier Institute paper back in 2013.

“Its survival in the Criminal Code is largely due to the fact that the last known prosecution was in 1935,” they add. “No prosecutor today would proceed with a charge that is so obviously constitutionally infirm.”

That’s good to know. Then again, if our human rights tribunals have taught us anything in recent years, it’s that there are prosecutorial zealots in our midst who shouldn’t be trusted around such laws, no matter their staleness.

And as Derek James From, a staff lawyer for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, observed in a 2015 op-ed piece for the Calgary Herald, “there is no certainty that the charter’s guarantee of freedom of expression would overturn the blasphemous libel prohibition. That question has not been tested in court.”

From reasonably concludes that “for these reasons, it’s best to repeal Section 296 rather than to leave it in force and assume that it will never be used for ill-purposes in the future.”

Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould recently announced the Liberals are looking to strike "zombie laws" from the books. These are laws that have already been rendered useless by the Supreme Court of Canada, yet still stick around in the text of the Criminal Code.

The blasphemy law isn’t one of them. It stays for now. That’s because, as per From’s point, it’s never been struck down by the courts. That said, there’s no reason the Liberals couldn’t make a move to eliminate this section as well.

The other week I finally got the chance to see the hit musical The Book of Mormon. It was hilarious and also extremely blasphemous.

North American culture largely accepts that most religions, particularly Christian sects, are fair game for mockery and ridicule. We’re nowhere near at that point yet when it comes to Islam, which has an increasing presence in our communities.

Muslims themselves, for the most part, certainly aren’t there yet. Good luck getting away with a satirical musical about the life of Muhammad.

Given everything that’s happening right now, the time is ripe for a serious push to eliminate Canada’s old blasphemy laws.