Those of us who were ignorant of Charlie Kirk expected that his background would back up the posthumous honorifics. Instead, what we see is the story of a man who went out of his way to sow division based on race, gender, and religion.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 22, 2025.

OTTAWA—Until just recently, the only famous Kirk I knew was Captain Kirk from Star Trek, which first launched on the CTV network in Canada in 1966.

But on Sept. 10, the murder of American Charlie Kirk, co-founder of Turning Point USA, on the campus of Utah Valley University reverberated around the world.

The president of the United States ordered all government flags to be lowered in mourning, and announced the posthumous provision of the Presidential Medal of Freedom for the slain political activist.

Those of us who were ignorant of Kirk expected that his background would back up the honorifics.

Instead, what we see is the story of a man who went out of his way to sow division based on race, gender, and religion.

Media Matters for America, a not-for-profit that tracks conservative media statements, published the following direct quotes from Kirk’s appearances and podcasts.

He had this to say about Black people: “Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.”

On former First Lady Michelle Obama, he had this to say: “If we said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama … were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us. …You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.” Not sure how Obama stole a white person’s slot as her partner was elected by a majority vote, but it was this kind of racist vitriol that attracted attention to Kirk.

As for women, in a discussion of musician Taylor Swift’s engagement to footballer Travis Kelce, Kirk said: “reject feminism. Submit to your husband Taylor. You’re not in charge.”

Kirk also said that if he had a 10-year-old daughter who was raped, he would force her to carry the fetus to term: “Yes. The baby would be born.”

He also promoted access to guns, suggesting that “it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.”

On religion, Kirk said he believed “Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.” He also did not support the separation of church and state, claiming the concept is “a fabrication, a fiction, it’s not in the constitution. It’s made up by secular humanists.”

As for his views on the LGBTQ+ communities, “We need to have a Nuremburg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately.”

On immigration, he said he believed that “America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever.”

So why are so many people being excoriated—even fired—for criticizing Kirk after death? And why is Donald Trump trying to convince the country and the world that Kirk is a patriot, and that his assassin was a crazed liberal?

Why was Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre upset that Prime Minister Mark Carney did not post a condolence message quickly enough after the murder?

All party leaders eventually posted messages, generally referencing Kirk’s family and the fact that differences in political perspective should not be met with violence.

Of course, that is self-evident, but in the case of Kirk, he deliberately provoked reactions by the nature of his absurd racist, homophobic, and misogynistic statements.

Kirk on the former president: “Joe Biden is a bumbling, dementia-filled, Alzheimer’s-corrupt tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty for his crimes against America.”

There is never an excuse for politicians to solve problems with a weapon. That is one of the reasons why the majority of Americans want the government to promote gun control.

While innocent people—including children—are slaughtered almost every week in America by crazed individuals, Kirk spent his life lobbying against limiting that access.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Iran’s decision to rain missiles upon Tel Aviv last week will unleash a response that means trouble for the whole world. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 7, 2024.

OTTAWA—We are commemorating the one-year anniversary of the Hamas slaughter of innocent Israelis this week.

On Oct. 7 of last year, Hamas attacked young people attending a music festival and old people quietly living in their homes with a fury that seems impossible to understand.

But those of us who don’t understand why have only to take a page from the book of Iran’s supreme leader.

He can tell women what to do and what to wear, and what the penalties are for not following his advice.

If you don’t have your head covered in the right way, you can be subjected to physical attacks and imprisonment. In some cases, those attacks have led to death.

In 2022, Mahsa Amini was killed while in custody after being arrested for not properly wearing her head covering.

Penalties can also be levied for sexual relations outside of marriage, including stoning someone to death.

Likewise, if someone is not heterosexual, sexual relations with a same-sex partner is also punishable by death.

Death as punishment for homosexual relations is unique to Iran in the world, although Afghanistan is currently reviewing the application of a similar policy.

There is a reason that hundreds of ex-patriot Iranians around the world were celebrating the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Iran is the chief patron of Hezbollah, and has supported Nasrallah’s leadership for 32 years.

Ex-pats blame Nasrallah and the Iranian government for the oppression that has dampened the spirit of Iranian people for years.

A United Nations fact-finding mission concluded that the Iranian government was responsible for Amini’s death, and accused Iran of committing “crimes against humanity” as the result of a months-long security crackdown that killed more than 500 people, and detained more than 20,000.

The UN report said that Iranian security forces regularly used submachine guns and assault rifles against peaceful demonstrators, and noted a pattern of protesters being “branded” by shooting them in the eye, leading to permanent damage.

Iran’s Supreme Commander Ayatollah Ali Khamenei doesn’t see any problem with his country’s internal situation, although thousands of Iranians may think otherwise.

He has been in power since 1979, the year which marked the end of “westernizing” Iran with the departure of the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

His government’s view of the Middle East is that all problems would be solved if only Israel would disappear. He blames all challenges there on the Israeli attacks in Gaza and Lebanon.

Thousands of Canadian supporters of Palestine have been lobbying non-stop for an end to the war in Gaza in an effort to save thousands of lives, and end the displacement of thousands more.

There are now more than one million Lebanese who are on the move to get away from the fighting, and to find safety for their families.

Most protesters would not want to strengthen Iran’s hand, but they have been silent on surrogates in the region like Hamas and Hezbollah.

Hamas carried out an unprecedented civilian slaughter on Oct. 7, 2023.

Silence doubles as support for Hamas, and one result of the Iranian attack on Israel is that Iran is no longer silently fuelling Israel’s enemies.

Instead, it is leading the charge with its stated intent to eliminate Israel’s existence.

Israel is receiving international support for the right to defend itself against the Iranian incursion.

Its ground invasion of Lebanon has already led to military casualties.

But the incursion into Gaza and the wanton deaths of thousands of civilians have raised the global ire of millions.

To date, most of the pressure has been focused on Israelis to withdraw from Gaza as the only way to secure the release of the hostages who have now been held for a full year.

But now the pressure point will be on Iran. And those in the Arab world who do not support Iran will be called to engage in the fight.

Iran’s decision to rain missiles upon Tel Aviv last week will unleash a response that means trouble for the whole world.

Already one of the outcomes is a rapid hike in the price of oil, which puts the fragile economic recovery under threat.

The hike may help producers, but will put further stress on Canadian consumers.

Meanwhile, the world is waiting with bated breath as we teeter on the edge of a world war.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 25, 2023.

OTTAWA—Protests and counter-protests on the rights of children to use their chosen pronouns were held across the country last week.

New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh led a counter-protest in Ottawa, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took to X (formerly Twitter) to condemn “hate and its manifestations,” and reiterate his support for the 2SLGBTQ+ community across Canada.

Not surprisingly, Conservative Members of Parliament were silent on the issue, with the Canadian Press reporting that the leader’s office had told them not to discuss the protests with the media or on social media outlets.

A memo, shared with CP, was sent from the leader’s office claiming that protesters against LGBTQ education in the schools have a legitimate point to make about “parental rights.”

Heated clashes in cities across the country led to arrests in Halifax, Vancouver, Victoria, and Ottawa. The issue is heating up as governments in New Brunswick and Saskatchewan have introduced legislation requiring students to get their parents’ permission before teachers can address them in their preferred he/she/they pronoun.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s office may not be able to stop Members of Parliament from weighing in when so many of them were elected thanks to support they received from social conservatives who do not support LGBTQ education in schools. The fact that the opposition leader is trying to keep a lid on comments shows that he understands the issue is a political hot potato that will win his party no new supporters.

As his party’s numbers climb, Poilievre has to be very careful to appeal to voters who are leery of social conservatism. Chances are the solidarity of potential power will not be enough to silence those in the caucus who got their political feet wet on recruiting social conservatives.

It is no coincidence that when Leslyn Lewis first ran for her party’s leadership in 2020, she was the first choice of Saskatchewan Tories. She swept the province where the premier and his government have recently enacted legislation to prevent minors from changing their pronouns without their parents’ permission.

Anti-trans rallies were organized across Canada last week by a group identifying itself as the “One Million March For Children,” which said it stood against gender ideology. But the marches were countered by groups defending the rights of 2SLGBTQ+ youth. Some are concerned that adolescents should not be outed to parents, and others wanted to support those teenagers who have self-identified as trans or gay.

Hate crimes against the gay community are on the rise, according to a report by Statistics Canada released last December. The report stated that police-reported hate crimes increased by 60 per cent between 2019 and 2021, reaching their highest level in five years.

Meanwhile, Ontario Premier Doug Ford promised to change the sex education curriculum when he was courting socially conservative voters during his leadership campaign. However, while in government, he was accused of re-introducing a sex education curriculum that was virtually identical to the one he had criticized during his campaign. Ford learned quickly that modifying sex education is probably not a top-of-mind priority for most Ontarians.

Poilievre is likely discovering the same challenge at the federal level. But how is he going to be able to stop his right-wing caucus members from aligning themselves with the thousands who rallied across the country against sex education involving the 2SLGBTQ+ community? The temperature is rising on both sides, so it is difficult to see how the Conservatives are going to be able to stay out of the fray.

And when the leader of the New Democrats makes it his business to lead the counter-demonstration, he obviously understands the political issues at stake.

Most Canadians don’t really involve themselves in the adolescent pronoun debate. However, they do support rights for the LGBTQ community. With the advent of same-sex marriage and support for choice in sexual orientation, most people appreciate the wave of equality that has evolved in the past two decades.

But the small percentage of people who oppose transgender teaching in schools has unleashed the wrath of the silent minority. The number of parents and grandparents who showed up last week to support their transgender progeny could translate into a significant voting bloc in the next election.

If the issue provokes enough interest, it will actually move votes in the next election. Therein the reason why the Tories don’t want to be on the record with any comment when it comes to transgender policies in local school sectors.

Their political silence is golden. But it may not be sustainable.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

In Canada’s case, the unanimous view of Parliament sends a message to the world that trying to educate someone into a change in their sexual preference just does not work.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 6, 2021.

Canada’s conversion therapy ban was a stellar political moment for Parliament.

As members from all sides of the House of Commons came together with hugs and handshakes, it showed how politics can actually provoke real change.

The unanimous consent made the decision even sweeter. It also sends an important message to the world that Canada will not brook homophobia or gay bashing.

In the same week, the Court of Appeal in Botswana, in a unanimous decision, outlawed the criminalization of consensual same-sex activities.

In a stern rebuke to political leaders who still want to criminalize gay sex, the court of appeal judge president said, “Those (criminal code) sections have outlived their usefulness and serve only to incentivize law enforcement agents to become keyhole peepers and intruders into the private space of citizens.”

Prior to the Court of Appeal ruling, same-sex intercourse could result in a seven-year prison term in Botswana.

Government officials have not yet decided on appeal but in its presentation to court, the state claimed that the penal code outlawing gay sex was still the prevailing choice in Botswana.

In Canada’s case, the unanimous view of Parliament sends a message to the world that trying to educate someone into a change in their sexual preference just does not work.

The unanimity of the vote was great news for Conservative leader Erin O’Toole who saw his recent electoral hopes dashed when his party was deemed too right wing to govern.

Unanimity took most observers by surprise since, in the last Parliament, 62 Conservatives had voted against a similar ban, claiming the language was too vague.

This time, Justice Minister David Lametti said he clarified the language, and the motion for unanimous consent was introduced by Conservative Rob Moore.

The Conservative leader’s spokesperson backed the support by saying O’Toole “has long been an ally to the LGBTQ community and will continue to support efforts to ban conversion therapy.”

Unanimous voting from the New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois was expected but no one thought the Conservatives would band together en masse in favour of the legislation.

Because of unanimity, individual votes were not required. That may prove problematic for the Tories.

Leadership candidate Lesyln Lewis came third in the leadership that chose O’Toole. She ran in support of conversion therapy.

As a new Member of Parliament, Lewis was shunned by O’Toole in shadow cabinet because of her anti-vaccine views.

The leader must believe he can withstand internal forces against conversion therapy.

The vote marginalized social conservatives in the caucus, as O’Toole stood down any internal opposition.

And that puts pressure right back on the Liberal government of prime minister Justin Trudeau.

The Liberals have been very successful in differentiating themselves from the Conservatives in the last several elections.

The Tory leadership went to O’Toole largely on the strength of social conservatism.

Otherwise, Peter MacKay would have been the winner. But MacKay’s reference to the “stinking albatross” of social conservatism weighing the party down effectively cost him the leadership.

His observation was right, but his timing was all wrong as O’Toole was able to enlist the second ballot support of all those social conservatives, he is now trying to dissociate himself from.

Last week’s unanimous vote means that no individuals will have their votes recorded when it comes to the conversion ban status.

But that may not prevent internal Conservative infighting between the leader and the social conservatives in his caucus.

By laying out a strong case to support the conversion therapy ban and supporting it with real numbers in the House of Commons, O’Toole is definitely moving away from the stigma which has hurt his party in the last couple of elections.

But politics is a long game, and it may not be so simple for the Conservative leader when private members’ bills on issues like abortion come up for debate in the House.

With the anti-abortion movement gaining steam in the United States, their Canadian counterparts will be emboldened. And the only party that carries their brief, albeit briefly, is the Conservative Party.

Members who have been absent from last week’s conversion therapy voice vote will not stand down when it comes to restrictions on abortion.

O’Toole has managed to move his party closer to the centre with last week’s unanimous vote. But whether he can keep the rest of his caucus there is the larger question.

If he can, that spells trouble for Liberals. The one thing standing between O’Toole and government is the moderate middle.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.