The biggest problem with this is that it's an inversion of the master/servant relationship between the public and the government that's critical to a free society.
In a free society, the public are the master and the government are the servants. The public, through representative democracy, tell the government how to govern based on the public's beliefs and opinions.
What have here is the government telling the public what to think/believe. That's not the government's role in a free society. That's what governments do in totalitarian dictatorships like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the government is supreme and the public is subordinate. It's supposed to be the other way around in a free society. That's exactly why freedom of conscience and freedom of expression are at the very top of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the US Bill of Rights etc.
The biggest problem with this is that it's an inversion of the master/servant relationship between the public and the government that's critical to a free society.
In a free society, the public are the master and the government are the servants. The public, through representative democracy, tell the government how to govern based on the public's beliefs and opinions.
What have here is the government telling the public what to think/believe. That's not the government's role in a free society. That's what governments do in totalitarian dictatorships like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the government is supreme and the public is subordinate. It's supposed to be the other way around in a free society. That's exactly why freedom of conscience and freedom of expression are at the very top of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the US Bill of Rights etc.
Are the Cons which introduced this bill also part of this government telling the public what to think and/or believe?