Why M-103 Still Matters

It’s a sad fact that most of us forget the news. We’re busy, and we tell ourselves that we can’t  make a difference. It’s understandable. The frantic post modern, internet based crazy 21st century universe consumes us, and it’s easy to push events from our minds. Who needs the added stress and worry? But we shouldn’t adopt this attitude. Some issues are just too important.

M-103 not over

One of them is motion M-103. A lot of the hoopla about it has passed. It’s not in the news, anymore and articles aren’t being written about it. The public is gradually beginning to forget about it, and that’s a tragedy,  because it’s far from over. In fact, if anything, it’s more important than ever, and its implications are potentially more frightening than they have ever been.

We need to remember that it represents a potential first step in the removal of our right to free speech. That alone should give Canadians tortured and sleepless nights. I remember my reaction on hearing that Sharia Law had become legal in Great Britain. I didn’t sleep a wink. The idea that British common law had been superseded by Islamic religious law was terrifying. There are now 85 Sharia courts in the U.K.

No Sharia Law in Canada

Unfortunately, this event has also passed from the news, and people have gone on with their lives. But think about it. They actually accepted the idea that some parts of the U.K. could be ruled by Islamic law. Frankly, I never want to see that here, and I weep for England, a nation we once affectionately referred to as the “mother country.”

The only kind of law I want to see, despite its faults, is the kind we are supposed to have now, an objective system designed to respect the rights of the individual, allowing free speech, thought and expression. Religious law, in particular Sharia Law, does not do this, and should never take root in Canada.

Can’t Happen? Think again

The worst thing we can do is forget M-103. We will not soon be forgiven if we do. Examining this, we can see that there are five steps that could potentially result in Sharia Law in Canada. First, M-103 is passed, singling out Islam for special consideration.(Done)A long term parliamentary study into “Islamophobia” and “Systemic Racism” is launched. (Already beginning) A recommendation of action is made, leading to the introduction of a Bill in the house, and finally, the Bill is passed by the Liberal majority, banning all public criticism of Islam in Canada. Again, think about that. An artfully worded motion ends up crushing free speech and establishing special status for one religion, not Canada’s historic faith. Who would have thought that possible, but a few years down the road we could be there. Don’t believe me? Ask the British.

  Our Choice. Canada’s future. Petition Parliament

Considering this, we don’t have much choice. We must continue to resist M-103 and its ugly cousin C-16 until they have been revoked and rescinded. The price of not doing so is the loss of our fundamental freedoms. That’s too high a price to pay.

Please sign the following parliamentary e-petition against Sharia Law and urge your friends and family to do so as well. The first step in resisting begins with you.



  • Hal Adam
    May 4, 2017

    Have signed this and forwarded this to ALL my relatives and most of my friends.

  • freedomdefencecanada
    May 5, 2017

    Excellent. It is so important that we let them know that Sharia is not acceptable in Canada, a free and democratic Western nation with a Judeo Christian history and a secular way of life. Thanks again.

  • Jacob
    May 10, 2017

    Just came across this blog post and was curious if you are aware that there are no Sharia courts of law in Britain, only councils that deal with certain religious and family matters. They don’t actually have the power to create or change laws. I admire what you do in this organization and that you are standing up for Conservative freedoms, but this is a blatant half-truth. We don’t want to sink to the Liberal level.

    • freedomdefencecanada
      May 13, 2017

      Thanks for your comment. I have only ever heard them referred to in connection with Sharia Law. However, I don’t think I am wrong in stating that this is a dangerous precedent. If they are able to deal with family matters using Islamic law then, in a very real sense they are making legal decisions concerning affairs that should be settled by the regular British legal system. I am sure that Britain has an extensive legal codex concerning family matters. It does not need a parallel Islamic one. Also, as I am sure you would agree, we can ill afford to let Islam make these inroads, however well disguised or limited.

      In any case, thank you for the compliment regarding FDC and for the information as well. You are right of course.We should never make the mistakes Liberals make or stoop to their level.

      • Jacob
        May 15, 2017

        I probably did take the term from a source that was sugar-coating it, my apologies. But even these articles say that the courts deal with “financial, family and marital disputes”, meaning that they still do not have the power to enact new laws. They can’t force British citizens to follow Sharia. While I don’t agree with Sharia Law at all, it has not superseded British Common Law in any sense of the phrase, as it is restricted to Muslims only. I definitely agree with British MP’s investigating these flagrant violations of human rights, but to claim Sharia has replaced British law is untrue.

        • May 16, 2017

          Where and by whom was it said on this Blog that “…Sharia has replaced British law”? Can you agree that there should ONLY be ONE law for any country? If so, can you agree that the idea of some special law based on a particular fasicst system (and that is was Islam is) is repulsive?

      • Jacob
        May 23, 2017

        Actually, it says that directly in this blog: “The idea that British common law had been superseded by Islamic religious law was terrifying.”

    • freedomdefencecanada
      May 15, 2017

      Thank you for your return replies both Hal and Jacob. We want to promote lively but respectful debate on this website in connection with our blogs and the topics associated with them. However, in regards to Jacob’s comments I don’t think there is any way we can deny the fact that the entry of Sharia Law in any form is an extreme danger to Western society. If we minimize it by saying…”Oh well…it’s just financial, family and marital disputes…” we are being extremely naive, and at this juncture in the history of Islam and the West we absolutely cannot afford to be.

      Either you accept a crossover between religion and public life, saying that there is no real separation between church and state, or you strictly enforce it. If we accept the first premise then I definitely want to see the Lord’s Prayer back in schools, Christmas concerts everywhere and the Lord’s Day Act re-instated. (So, by the way, an atheist friend of mine who abhors the moral vacuum in our society) But if you don’t, then no religion should get special treatment or privileges, especially Islam. Why especially Islam? Because, as anyone who has studied it knows, the holy book and the sword go together in that faith, and there is no separation between church and state, not really.

      Whether or not the Sharia courts can legislate is ultimately not the real point. The main point is that this is a form of domestic law, a dangerous precedent, and that it is dictating people’s behaviour based on religious law, specifically Islam, however minor or seemingly obliquely. I don’t want to see Canada undergo the obvious social carnage that is happening in Europe, with no go zones, Islamic areas and violence associated with Islamic residents.

      I am told that today prime minister Trudeau met in closed door session with Canadian Islamic leaders. No press coverage was permitted and no informational bulletin was forthcoming. I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. Today domestic courts, tomorrow the fate of Lutton, Leicester, north London, Marseilles and numerous other European neighbourhoods and cities where these areas are virtually entirely Muslim. Even the police do not go into many of these areas.

      Believe me, I am not trying to be difficult here. It is just the way things are, and I do not want to live in a fantasy world that allows it to happen here.

      • May 16, 2017

        Well said .. except that all left wing parties are actively pursing making this happen here. It might make some wonder how the left wingers who promote the Capital Letter perversions could also promote Islam since Islam would deal harshly with these perversions. IMO it is very simple. They BOTH follow the same ‘father of lies’.

    • freedomdefencecanada
      May 15, 2017


      Here is the proof. I see this as very alarming. Closed to the media.

    • freedomdefencecanada
      May 15, 2017

      Check the P.M.s itinerary for May 15th.

      • May 16, 2017

        OK thanks.
        “Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Monday, May 15, 2017:
        Ottawa, Ontario
        10:30 a.m. The Prime Minister will participate in a Muslim Leadership roundtable.
        Closed to media.”
        Due to this censorship of EVEN the left wing media, this almost sounds sedicious?

  • Reed Elley
    May 11, 2017

    Couldn’t agree more with this. We must not allow Sharia law to become enshrined in our British common law tradition. No other religious community would be allowed to do this.

    • freedomdefencecanada
      May 13, 2017

      Agreed. In my opinion, the very existence of Canada depends on it. We are Western, democratic and Judeo Christian or we are not Canada at all.

  • freedomdefencecanada
    May 24, 2017

    Actually, it never says that Sharia Law has replaced British Common law in the Blog. It says “The “idea” that British common law had been superseded by Islamic religious law” was terrifying.” That idea, I think, would terrify anyone. It is the idea and potentiality that is terrifying, and, as has been said before, there definitely should not, in my opinion, be two competing legal systems in Britain on any level, especially not one that sees itself as superior to civil or common law and all encompassing. That is how Sharia sees itself in countries where it predominates, and how a majority of Muslims see it in many Muslim nations, and sizeable numbers in Western countries. Either we have separation of church and state or we do not.

Leave a Reply to Hal Adam Cancel reply

You have to agree to the comment policy.