text: Allan Ross: The argument made in the article is that the M-103 is essentially toothless and irrelevant. So why bother with it anyway? Of course, there's an element of political mischief making involved. But the motion itself contains some dangerously broad verbiage, such as its blanket condemnation of "Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination." What does "all forms" mean? We already have a pretty concise definition of hates crimes in our criminal law and actual discrimination is addressed under federal and provincial human rights laws. So what else is in play if we continue down the "all forms" road? That's what properly scares people who care about democracy and all its inherent rights. Remember that words matter.