Is Canada really such a hive mind now that people have lost that skill?
This is a very interesting question because there has been a public process that has been fascinating, if disconcerting, to watch.
I will say first that it does not describe everyone. There are people who think differently. But even more than in the UK, there is this progressive sector of society that requires more and more unity of thought.
What seems to me to have happened is that as certain facts and histories have been eliminated from the consciousness of these groups, the ability to think differently has also been eliminated. In this case, it's the history of abortion and the law, which is somewhat unique. Much like other western democracies, some of the older laws were struck down by the courts, but unlike the others, there was never the political will to create new ones. So Canada has zero laws on abortion, at any time, there is no attempt even in the final days of a pregnancy to deal with the idea that the foetus might be worth some consideration or protection.
This is a result of political happenstance though, it wasn't necessarily a reflection of what most Canadians thought or a reflection of the constitutionality of abortion (indeed the judges who threw out the old laws mostly believed that new ones, of a more limited nature, were constitutionally viable.) It was also taken for granted in this period that it wasn't really a party issue, there were diverse opinions in all parties, based on values that really weren't political in nature.
The public forgetting about this went through two stages. In the first, certain groups remained resolutely quiet about it all, it was never brought up. A great many people, more than half IIRC, actually believed that we did have some restrictions on late term abortions.
More recently, maybe two or three election cycles ago, a new narrative began which maintained that the lack of any abortion laws was because the courts had decided they were unconstitutional, and in fact people like Trudeau even claimed that abortion is a protected right under the constitution. Both the Liberal and NDP parties began to require candidates to accept whipping of votes on the issue. In this past cycle, in quite a break from their roots, the Greens made it clear that although they don't whip votes as a matter of policy, they would prevent anyone from running who had different views on this. So as it stands now only the Conservative party allows MPs to vote as a matter of conscience.
Essentially in most public life, all potential arguments about when we should assign personhood, what makes someone, or even a non-human, eligible for protections, and this is important - the idea that there could be competing rights in questions like this, are simply not heard, at all. If they are brought up they are quickly labeled unCanadian, bigoted, and unconstitutional. (The trans narrative has followed the very same pattern with excellent results, as we see.)
What I have found strange, but I guess it makes sense, is for many people it seems that if they have never heard these discussions, it's like they can't understand the kinds of concepts or values that might surround them. They don't even know the words, so the ideas don't exist.