I think if a person was allowed into Canada, afterward becoming devoutly religious for some reason, they are going to have problems even without any legal interference. These problems arise from potentially erroneous beliefs, and I think they need to be made aware of that fact.

Sounds like an anti-religious intervention to me. Almost evangelical in its focus. Letting them know the error of their ways, and so forth.

If you would not reply positively to the first of my make-believe questions, then everything you have said about your belief in religious discrimination is false. What you advocate is abridgement of civil rights based on religion.

Some religions are evangelical by their very nature, so to say that they are not to evangelize restricts their religious freedom in a fundamental way. We currently have an interesting situation with military chaplains in the US who come from evangelical Christian sects. They say that their religion directs them to convert non-Christians. Soldiers who are not Christians object to their efforts. It's still being argued. If past actions are any indicator, the non-Christians will retain the right to tell them to push off, but the chaplains will have the right to ask if a soldier has accepted Jesus Christ as his or her personal savior -- once. Religious tolerance is a tightrope, but one anyone who wishes a free society must walk.

People can, and are, screened for criminal priors now, without having to restrict people's movement based solely on their religious beliefs. I see no reason why that can't continue.