If I personally attack someone, be it verbally, in print, social media, etc because of their skin colour, gender, legal sexual idiosyncrasies, religious beliefs, and so on, I will be called upon for my actions if it infringes on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But, it has to be proven that I did it with the intent of causing harm and that I was aware what I said was for lack of a simpler word, bad. For example, if I got pushed by a gent and said-watch it f_g- and he happened to take affront to that because he enjoys the company of men, I could end up in court. Only problem is I can turn around and say it’s a term of endearment amongst homosexuals, and the court cannot inquire to my orientation as it infringes on the right to privacy so the charge ends up going nowhere.Sadly not the case in litigious USA where individuals and small businesses have been intentionally targeted to the point of bankruptcy for daring follow their principles and consciences.
I fully admit my example is an oversimplification of the farce of what is happening here and I have no desire to put it to the test.
I don’t know if you’ve ever perused them, but I brought across the border a set of George Hayduke books as well as a US Army manual on improvised incendiary devices and the border agent didn’t give them two looks. There was a huge push at one point to get the Satanic Verses banned here as it caused followers of a certain religion to get their knickers twisted, didn’t work out for them in the end.