Action Centre

Demand the Ontario Legislature Repeal Totalitarian Bill 89

Background on the Issue
Bill 89, or the Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017, passed by a vote of 63 to 23 on June 1 at Queen’s Park.

It allows the state to potentially take away children from parents who do not adopt the Liberal government’s delusional gender ideology and, in effect, it prevents couples who also reject this ideology from adopting or fostering children. While “gender identity” and “gender expression” are added as factors to be considered “in the best interests of the child,” no longer will the religious faith in which the parents are raising the child be considered as a factor. This bill furthers the government’s dangerous intrusion into the lives of families and their very homes, and it must be repealed by this government or the next.

Use the automated tool below to quickly send your local MPP a pre-written message. If you wish, you can add to the pre-written message with your own, personalized note. To view and select an alternate pre-written message, refresh your browser screen. After sending your email, a blind copy will also be sent to your inbox, for your own records.
Show More Background
Step 1: Compose your message
Local MPP
“Gender identity” and “gender expression” ambiguous terms
Dear M.P.P [Recipient's name will be automatically inserted]:

The federal Liberals passed Bill C-16 into law, adding “gender identity” and “gender expression” as protected grounds under the Canadian Human Rights Act, and to the list of identifiable groups in hate crime legislation. The terms “gender identity” and “gender expression” are also contained within Bill 89, or the previous Ontario Liberal government’s new anti-parental rights law, the so-called Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017.

It is unclear, however, just how far gender identity and gender expression extend. If one’s child identifies as some gender off of Tumblr’s master list and a parent refuses to acknowledge it, have they committed a transgression? Is a parent obligated to let their “aesthetigender” (“a gender that is derived from an aesthetic”) child get whatever clothes, piercings, etc. that their gender demands?

Is a parent committing “child abuse” by curtailing gender expression if they prevent their “hydrogender” (“a gender which shares qualities with water”) child from going to the pool or beach, or “astralgender” (“a gender that feels connected to space”) child from staying up late to watch a meteor shower? These may seem like facetious examples but new gender identities are being invented all the time, and it seems that gender can be expressed in any way.

The language of gender identity and expression is inherently problematic. When the Minister of Children and Family Services says that disagreeing with a child’s identity is “abuse,” and admits that it is grounds for removing a child from their family and into “protection where the abuse stops,” it is even more problematic. Bill 89 and Bill C-16 are supplanting fiction over fact.

Please use your influence as M.P.P of [Recipient's riding name will be automatically inserted] to work for the repeal of Bill 89.
* - Required Fields