Tag: religious freedom

Canada’s House of Commons passes ‘anti-Christian’ bill that would criminalize quoting Bible

The majority of Canadian MPs have voted to pass a Liberal bill that will allow the criminalization of religious expression and belief when quoting parts of the Bible, including about homosexuality and gender.

Early Wednesday evening, MPs from the Liberal Party and the Bloc Québécois, in a 186–137 vote, passed Bill C-9, known as the “Combatting Hate Act.” Conservatives, NDP, and Green Party MPs voted against the bill in a rare form of unity among the usually opposing parties.

The bill now heads to Canada’s rubber-stamp Senate for review.

A last-minute effort by the Conservatives to change the wording of the bill failed to pass.

Earlier this week, Liberal MPs forced the bill through the report stage, after earlier, as reported by LifeSiteNews, shutting down all debate on the bill in the committee stage.

In comments sent to LifeSiteNews, Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) blasted the passage of Bill C-9 and called upon “Christians and pro-life advocates to prepare for increasing hostility.”

“With the passage of Bill C-9 in the House, Christians and pro-life advocates will almost certainly face an entirely new level of hostility, as the door swings open to actual persecution under a cloak of supposed legality,” said CLC’s Campaigns Manager David Cooke, who is also a Christian pastor.

Cooke said the Bill C-9 was framed as a law going after “hate,” but, in reality, it is a bill that religious leaders from various faith communities “say could lead to hate-related charges against believers – empowers ideologically-driven police officers and judges to target, for the first time, the very word of God on matters of life, family, and faith.”

“We must prepare for the battle ahead,” said Cooke, adding Canadians must “commit” to the “One who has won the ultimate victory over every foe, demonstrated by His resurrection on that first Easter morning.”

CLC Director of Political Operations Jack Fonseca noted that Bill C-9 must be stopped in its tracks in the Senate, but admitted it will be a hard battle, as most of the senators were appointed by former Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Keep reading

Hegseth Makes Troops Prove “Sincerely Held” Faith in Latest Beard Crackdown

The latest edict from beard-obsessed Secretary of War Pete Hegseth adds strict new regulations to his crusade on facial hair, which rights groups have characterized as an attack on troops’ civil liberties.

In a March 11 memo, Hegseth, who has made grooming and appearances a central focus in his time at the helm of the U.S. military, raised the bar to qualify for a religious exemption to his blanket ban on beards. The guidelines lay out a strict new process by which service members may apply for a religious exemption and subject those who’ve already received one to a reevaluation, arguing they need to ensure their religious beliefs are “sincerely held” and have a genuine conflict with the grooming standards.

Service members who have spoken against Hegseth’s focus on grooming standards say his restrictions on beards are exclusionary to people from religious communities that require adherents to follow specific tenets of faith around beards, hair, and other grooming matters.

Sikhs, for example, who have served in the U.S. military since at least World War I, are required by their faith not to cut the hair on their head, to keep a beard, and to wrap their long hair in a turban. Members of many schools of Muslim tradition likewise have rules around beards and hair length.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Arrested Christian Street Preacher

A Mississippi street preacher who sued a community over a law that banned him from preaching near an amphitheater has won his battle to challenge the law.

Gabriel Olivier claimed his arrest under a law passed by Brandon, Mississippi, violated his First Amendment rights, according to the Associated Press.

The city said he had shouted insults, and invoked the law to fine Olivier and slap him with a year of probation. Olivier paid the fine and completed his probation.

The decision allowed Olivier to move forward but does not ensure he will win the suit.

“This is not only a win for the right to share your faith in public, but also a win for every American’s right to have their day in court when their First Amendment rights are violated,” Kelly Shackelford, president, CEO, and chief counsel for First Liberty Institute, said in a news release on First Liberty’s website.

“We’re delighted that the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed Gabe’s right to his day in court. It’s just common sense that a citizen who is arrested under an unconstitutional law should be able to challenge that law. As people of faith, we look to the judiciary to protect our constitutional right to spread the gospel,” Allyson Ho, co-chair of First Liberty’s nationwide Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group, added.

“No American should be criminally charged for sharing their faith in public,” Nate Kellum, senior counsel at First Liberty, remarked. “This is a wonderful day for Gabe and for the First Amendment.”

Olivier himself said that “my goal from the beginning was to be granted my rights as an American citizen under our great Constitution.”

“Now all people with deeply held Christian religious beliefs who are called to share the good news can do so in the public arena.”

As noted by SCOTUSBlog, Olivier was battling an argument from the city that a 1994 ruling, Heck v. Humphrey, should be used to block his lawsuit. The ruling limits challenges convicted criminals can bring against a law under which they were convicted.

Keep reading

Christian Teacher Fined $750,000 for Refusing to Agree That There Are More Than 2 Genders – Persecution in the First World

At this point, Canada hasn’t just done away with common sense. It’s dumped gasoline on it and set it ablaze for the world to see.

For example, former Chilliwack, British Columbia, school trustee Barry Neufeld must pay $750,000 for violating the Human Rights Code.

What exactly did Neufeld do for such a massive fine?

A Tribunal concluded he “invoked negative and insidious stereotypes about LGBTQ people, especially trans people, which denied their inherent dignity and, in some cases, reflected the hallmarks of hate against them as a group,” as the CBC reported Feb. 20.

“For five years, he publicly denigrated LGBTQ people and teachers and associated them with the worst forms of child abuse,” the Tribunal said further.

Neufeld had a complaint brought against him by Chilliwack Teachers’ Association and B.C. Teachers’ Federation after making Facebook posts, a speech, remarks at school board meetings, and comments to the media that the sentencing body felt would make those groups the target of hate.

One unnamed teacher said his comments had family members urging this person to reconsider career paths. The Tribunal said Neufeld “poisoned” the workplace.

He is a Christian, and his comments were relayed by The Christian Post. They aligned with historic Christian teaching on sexuality to which millions still subscribe today.

“It dawned on me that for a Christian, there are two approaches to take. The pastoral approach is one of compassion and empathy while firmly refusing to buy into their client’s delusional thinking. As one pastor said to a transgender person: ‘it is my responsibility to love you: but it is God’s job the [sic] change you’. However, while helping me grasp a better understanding of gender Dysphoria, the [issue] is so complex that it is hard to apply these insights in a debate at the political level, especially on Facebook,” Neufeld wrote.

He said his mission is to try “speaking out to the lawmakers in Victoria and trying to motivate lukewarm Christians who are sitting idly by as all of Society ‘Slouches towards Gomorrah.’”

Further, he spoke about the political ramifications of gender ideology, noting that it has “demonized people of faith who believe that God created humans male and female: In the Image of God.”

Keep reading

‘The People Showed Up’: South Carolina Lawmakers Side With Parental Choice in Two Vaccine Votes

South Carolina senators clashed Wednesday over childhood vaccination policy, but ultimately sided with parental choice in two key votes, the South Carolina Daily Gazette reported.

A Senate Medical Affairs subcommittee voted 7-1 to advance legislation prohibiting vaccine mandates for children under age 2.

Minutes later, the panel voted 6-2 to reject a separate proposal that would have removed religious exemptions for the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine.

Advocacy groups supporting parental rights called the outcome a major statement on constitutional protections.

“Yesterday was a remarkable day for South Carolinians — and a reminder to the rest of the nation and the world that constitutional rights still matter,” Andrea Lamont Nazarenko, Ph.D., of the South Carolina Health Rights Cooperative said in a joint statement with Ashley Jones and Christi Dixon of South Carolina Family First.

“At a time when inalienable liberties are increasingly restricted in the name of public health, the South Carolina Senate made it clear: not here,” the groups said.

Dawn Richardson, director of advocacy for the National Vaccine Information Center, said the decision to halt the MMR proposal sends a broader message about vaccine mandates.

“It sends a strong message nationally that forced vaccination with the MMR or any vaccine holds no legitimate place in health policy or law in the U.S.,” she said. “Vaccine mandates need to be repealed, not entrenched.”

The debate unfolded amid South Carolina’s largest measles outbreak in decades. State health officials reported 990 measles cases as of March 3.

Linda Bell, the state’s epidemiologist, told lawmakers that about 95% of measles cases involve unvaccinated people. She said infections appear to be slowing after a surge in vaccinations last month, which rose about 70% compared with February 2025.

Federal health officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are expected to arrive next week to help contain the outbreak, according to Reuters.

Keep reading

Arbitration victory for workers denied COVID-19 vaccine exemptions

During COVID-19 lockdowns many Canadian employers implemented vaccine mandates, forcing employees to choose between job loss or an unwanted COVID-19 vaccination. TDF lawyers met with many union members confronted with this dilemma, and explained their legal rights under human rights legislation and collective agreements

Many religious union members who opposed vaccination due to their sincerely held religious beliefs, filed religious exemption requests with their employers. However, these religious exemptions were often denied arbitrarily and superficially. Sometimes employers requested written proof of relevant spiritual doctrine from a religious objector. Sometimes employers summarily rejected claims of sincere religious belief.

In 2022, the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), on behalf of 7 unionized Air Canada pilots, brought grievances against Air Canada for improperly rejecting their vaccine exemption requests. After their religious exemption requests were denied, the pilots were placed on unpaid leaves of absence. The union members alleged workplace religious discrimination under their Collective Agreement and the Canadian Human Rights Act.

A labour arbitrator has now ruled in favour of the pilots, as reported in Air Canada v. Air Line Pilots’ Association 2026 CanLII 16803 (CA LA).

Arbitrator Hayes ruled that denying these religious exemption requests was improper and resulted in workplace discrimination contrary to the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Collective Agreement. The arbitrator held that it was not appropriate for Air Canada to direct employees to justify religious exemptions with a “personalized, written, and dated explanation from your religious leader explaining the religious reasons why you are unable to be vaccinated against COVID-19.” Arbitrator Hayes reiterated that the law requires an employer to assess an individual’s subjective religious beliefs rather than making an overly objective determination of whether those beliefs objectively conform to the mandates of the religion.

Keep reading

Liberal Carney government moves to end debate on bill that could criminalize quoting Bible

Conservative MP Andrew Lawton warned that the Liberal government intends force an end to debate on Bill C-9, the censorship bill that has attracted a massive backlash from religious Canadians because it would remove protections for sincerely held religious beliefs, particularly regarding LGBT issues.

“The Liberals have put a motion on notice in the House of Commons to cut off debate on Bill C-9 and force all amendments to a vote with no discussion,” Lawton wrote on X on March 5. “They are censoring debate on their censorship bill.”

The motion, tabled as “Government Business,” instructs the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to “immediately resume clause-by-clause consideration of the bill whereupon all remaining amendments submitted to the committee shall be deemed moved” and that “the Chair shall put the question, forthwith and successfully, without further debate on all remaining clauses and proposed amendments and subamendments.”

This means that votes will be called on all amendments, and the meeting cannot end until Bill C-9 has passed review. A report will then be sent to Parliament “no later than two sitting days after the completion of clause-by-clause consideration,” and the bill would then go through both the report stage and third reading in a single sitting day each.

“WOW,” Conservative MP Garnett Genuis responded to the news on X. “Carney is now trying to ram through C-9 ‘without further debate on all remaining clauses’ at committee. This is deeply disturbing. Call your MP now and tell them to oppose this attack on freedom of speech and freedom of religion.”

Keep reading

Ukrainian Christians Go Underground in Face of Persecution and Church Seizures

Some Ukrainian Christians have been forced to retreat to the “catacombs” to worship because of persecution and church seizures, the Daily Caller reported Friday.

Furthermore, the embattled Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) is in danger of being shut down under a 2024 law prohibiting churches from having any ties to Russia.

The UOC — which, according to the Daily Caller, “traces its roots to the 17th-century Russian Orthodox Church (ROC)” — claims to have full autonomy from Moscow except for its canonical relationship. (For instance, sacraments performed by the UOC are considered valid in the ROC and vice versa.)

However, wrote the Daily Caller, “Opponents claim the UOC’s divine liturgy often includes Russian propaganda — such as prayers for Patriarch Kirill, head of the ROC, and vocal supporter of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”

OCU vs. UOC

The Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU), which has no Russian connections, benefits enormously from the government’s antipathy toward the UOC. This is not surprising since the OCU was, at Kyiv’s instigation, “artificially constructed” in 2018 from two schismatic Orthodox branches to serve “the political interests of the government,” Metropolitan Feodosii, head of the Cherkasy UOC, told the Daily Caller.

UOC churches are being seized and transferred to the OCU, with priests and parishioners often brutalized in the process, Feodosii and other UOC leaders allege.

The Daily Caller recounted one such incident:

Nearly a dozen UOC parishioners described to the Caller an alleged violent takeover of St. Michael’s Cathedral in Cherkasy in October 2024.

Parishioners claimed more than 500 men — many wearing masks, camouflage and armed with crowbars and bolt cutters — arrived just after liturgy ended. The men allegedly used tear gas and trapped nearby residents in their homes before parishioners briefly fended them off.

One parishioner showed the Caller bruises still visible on his legs. Another claimed her husband was beaten so badly he could not even talk, and he suffered “many fractures of his bones.” The woman’s youngest child was so traumatized by the event that he went almost a whole year only addressing himself as “kitten” instead of his given name, she told the Caller.

Feodosii allegedly suffered burns and a concussion during the fracas and ended up in the hospital.

“Parishioners alleged priests from the OCU stood along the fence laughing with the police as they waited to take over the property,” wrote the Daily Caller.

Keep reading

Tennessee House Passes Bill Protecting Right to Decline Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Tennessee House of Representatives approved legislation Thursday that would allow private individuals and organizations to decline to recognize same-sex marriages.

According to LifeSite News, House Bill 1473 passed by a majority of 68-24. All Republicans voted in favor, while all Democrats voted against it.

The bill does not challenge the legality of same-sex marriage.

However, it would exempt banks, medical institutions, and other private entities from recognizing what it calls “a purported marriage between individuals of the same sex.”

It also states that government officials may not face discipline or sanctions for “declining to celebrate or officiate at a marriage or commitment ceremony that falls outside the definition of marriage provided in this code.”

The measure challenges the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

“Private citizens and organizations are not bound by the Fourteenth Amendment or by the Supreme Court’s purported interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment in Obergefell v. Hodges,” the bill states.

Republican state Rep. Gino Bulso introduced the legislation.

“It was the U.S. Supreme Court on June the 26th of 2015 that overstepped its bounds and invented this ‘right’ to marriage of individuals of the same sex, despite there being no support whatsoever in the language of the 14th Amendment for that proposition,” Bulso said.

The bill now heads to the Republican-controlled state Senate, where it is currently under review in the Judiciary Committee.

Bulso referenced Tennessee’s 2006 Marriage Protection Amendment, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman and passed with 81 percent support.

“The overwhelming majority of Tennesseans already affirmed what we have known for all of history: marriage is between one man and one woman,” he said in a press release.

“This legislation protects religious liberty in the Volunteer State by clarifying that private citizens can never be forced to recognize any other definition,” Bulso added.

Keep reading

Congress Members Urge DOJ to Investigate 4 States That Prohibit Religious Exemptions

A coalition of federal lawmakers today urged the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate four states whose laws prohibit religious exemptions for school vaccine mandates.

In a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, lawmakers warned that vaccine mandate laws in New York, California, Maine and Connecticut violate the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.

Lawmakers also asked the DOJ to intervene in two New York lawsuits where Children’s Health Defense (CHD) is either a plaintiff or is financing the case.

Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) is the lead author of the letter, which is also addressed to Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant attorney general for Civil Rights.

As of this afternoon, 13 Congress members had signed the letter.

“Religious freedom is the cornerstone of our Republic,” Steube said in a statement to The Defender. “It is inexcusable that New York, California, Maine, and Connecticut refuse to provide people of faith with a religious exemption from their vaccine mandates. This is not only a direct violation of the Free Exercise Clause, but it is also a grave assault on civil liberties.”

He added:

“Your constitutional rights should never take a backseat to a vaccine mandate. That is why I am requesting Attorney General Pam Bondi and Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon launch formal investigations of all states that continue to violate the constitutional rights of the American people via coercion and infringement on their religious beliefs.”

Allowing the four states to violate citizens’ constitutional rights has emboldened states like Massachusetts and Hawaii, which are considering eliminating religious exemptions for vaccines, to “further encroach upon Americans’ rights,” according to the lawmakers.

The four states make up nearly 20% of the U.S. population, said Cait Corrigan, a former congressional candidate from New York and a medical freedom advocate who helped raise awareness at the federal level and worked with Steube’s office on the effort.

Corrigan said she hopes the DOJ will intervene in “the tragedy that is happening in these four states.”

Keep reading