An example: human rights bills are not, in many cases, laws as such. They are really modifications of many other laws and regulatory guidelines. A bill consisting of a few dozen pages is really a far reaching modifications to many laws. Even experienced experts must rely on speculation,  political warfare outside their competency.*

A recent bill affectes the courts, regulators and vastly expanded discretion down to lower level bureaucrats or employers.  The facile terms may be appealing or contentious, but they are not really words at all. Conservatives may disagree with the abuse of language, but these are not even words in any definable way. They are, what Stephen Coughling calls attack narratives.  

 This tendency is all too evident in Canadia.  Every federal party holds in their founding documents the sinister platitude that diversity is our strength. 
Another exmaple: the conservatives never challenge the 1995 employment equity act. [For those not familiar with this 30 year old legislation, it mandates employers hire a portion of applicants members of the familiar victim groups. They must keep up-to date documenation of their efforts to 'represent' various groups, even to the point of offering raises and proportions to retain diversity hires. These efforts can be audited at the discretion of institutionally entrechned networks of petty tyrants.]


* Stephen Coughlin, who is a CIA expert in political warfare and subersion, provides a superb dissection of one "Racism", another attack narratives are disguised as words.  https://unconstrainedanalytics.org/warning-on-racism/