Speak Out against Canada Persecution Plans

[2shelbys]

The other thing about this is the little-known fact that the term “separation of church and state” is not in the Constitution anywhere. It originated in a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to concerned southerners in 1802. If you read the Federalist Papers or any of the writings of the founding fathers you find that their motive behind the concept was to A) prevent the government from interfering with anyone’s right to practice and express their faith and B) prevent the government from establishing one government sanctioned church like the “Church of England” that was created by the king who then made himself the head of the church…

Thanks to a left-leaning Supreme Court the concept of “Separation of Church and State” was perverted into being exactly the opposite of what was intended, a constant situation of the government preventing people from expressing their faith. It is just another example of why the Democrats can not be allowed to continue to trash the Constitutional limited intent of the filibuster to block decent judges who would interpret law, not invent it, and who would stop this kind of thing.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Scott_Lafrance:

As part of the immigration reform, I say we send all the liberals to canada and they can send all their conservatives here. We can even give them Caulifawnia, Oregon, and Washington State.

You forgot most of New England and New York. That way we get rid of Kerry, Kennedy, and Clinton in one broad stroke.

PF

 

[2shelbys]

You forgot most of New England and New York. That way we get rid of Kerry, Kennedy, and Clinton in one broad stroke.

All you have to do to get rid of them is require truth in political advertising like we do in other advertising.

 

[philipmarus]

2shelbys:

The other thing about this is the little-known fact that the term “separation of church and state” is not in the Constitution anywhere. It originated in a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to concerned southerners in 1802. If you read the Federalist Papers or any of the writings of the founding fathers you find that their motive behind the concept was to A) prevent the government from interfering with anyone’s right to practice and express their faith and B) prevent the government from establishing one government sanctioned church like the “Church of England” that was created by the king who then made himself the head of the church…

Thanks to a left-leaning Supreme Court the concept of “Separation of Church and State” was perverted into being exactly the opposite of what was intended, a constant situation of the government preventing people from expressing their faith. It is just another example of why the Democrats can not be allowed to continue to trash the Constitutional limited intent of the filibuster to block decent judges who would interpret law, not invent it, and who would stop this kind of thing.

I believe you’ll find that the term “wall of separation between Church and State” does not appear in a Supreme Court case until the Everson case in 1947.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

lifesite.net/ldn/2005/jul/05071906.html

Read the above article about state control over Catholicism coming to Canada. The fact that Canadian Public Broadcasting would even dare to air such programs is proof of what lies in store for Catholics in Canada. This is very, very bad news. Jaypeeto2

Catholicism has often been under state control - Ferdinand V of Spain made it a capital offence for Papal Bulls to be brought into Spain without permission from the Crown.​

Most Catholic monarchs after 1500 were very keen on controlling the CC in their dominions - including, naturally, the choice of bishops; in 18th-century Austria this included supervising the building of new monasteries, the number of would-be seminarians: even which feasts of saints were kept. Spain even had its own Index. The centralised, papally-controlled, liturgically more or less uniform CC so many Catholics seem to take for grantede is a very recent development.

So it’s hard to be too worried by whatever Canada is going to do now - it’s not new, but is merely an up-to-date instance of a very old tendency and a very old problem: the problem of how to accommodate both Church & State - both of which are divine in their origin.

It’s hard to be impressed, because the CC is for ever whining about how she is treated - she can dole it out, but she can’t take it when it comes her way. For the CC, freedom is entirely one-sided: she can police others - but they must not presume to try policing her. In view of the recent horrible events of 2002, maybe she should be policed. It wouldn’t be necessary, if she would only keep her clerical “employees” under control. She has no one to thank for her woes but herself, because she doesn’t welcome intervention from others.

People are not just Catholics, or Jews, or of whatever religion is being discussed - they are also subjects or citizens of the states to which they belong; so when they are interfered with by church or other religious personnel, the state is entitled to take an interest. It would be failing in its duties if it did not. If religions need to be kept under state control so that they don’t preach hate or molest the young or commit some other evil, then let them be controlled, if they won’t control themselves. ##

 

[reen12]

You know what I think?
Many Christians in the US will do nothing, if this type
of “religious hate speech” legislation is proposed here.
Many will continue to vote for politicians who would
love to “gut” religion…and they will vote for them
over “pocket-book” issues.
Do you think our opponents will stop at “religious
hate speech”?]

If we need a biblical example, take the Babylonian
Captivity. Many in Israel followed after false gods,
“pocket-book” issues?]…Israel was warned by the
prophets and ignored them. They were taken captive
and hauled off to Babylon.
“By the waters of Babylon we sat and wept, as we
remembered thee, O Jerusalem.”

“By the waters of the Hudson and the Potomac we
sat and wept, as we remembered thee, O Freedom.”

reen12

 

[reen12]

You know what I think?
Many Christians in the US will do nothing, if this type
of “religious hate speech” legislation is proposed here.
Many will continue to vote for politicians who would
love to “gut” religion…and they will vote for them
over “pocket-book” issues.
Do you think our opponents will stop at “religious
hate speech”?]

If we need a biblical example, take the Babylonian
Captivity. Many in Israel followed after false gods,
“pocket-book” issues?]…Israel was warned by the
prophets and ignored them. They were taken captive
and hauled off to Babylon.
“By the waters of Babylon we sat and wept, as we
remembered thee, O Jerusalem.”

“By the waters of the Hudson and the Potomac we
sat and wept, as we remembered thee, O Freedom.”

reen12

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

BibleReader:

The problem is even deeper than this. Canada is already criminally and civilly punishing public reference to the Bible verses condemning homosexual behavior.

Most countries which pass for civilised, criminally and civilly punish such practices as slavery and polygamy - both of which are fully endorsed by the OT; slavery does not number the NT writers among its opponents.​

So why should attitudes endorsed by the Bible all be regarded as not to be criticised or not to be penalised ?

Jihad is in one of its forms simply the Muslim equivalent of “holy war”, such as Joshua practiced - if Joshua lived today, he would be tried as a war criminal: and quite rightly. ##

 

[RikasAngel]

Hello All,

Sorry, but CALIFORNIA is staying right where it is. The U.S. economy would fall apart without California’s agriculture and Multi-Billion dollar Entertainment industry. Plus, I doubt Mr. Keating wants Catholic Answers to be based in Anti-Catholic Canada.

The madness happening in Canada is ridiculous. The Pope needs to visit Canada and publicly condem this behavior. I am so glad I am an American with First Amendment protection. Canada has more Catholics than America, but the Majority is being manipulated the Socialist Pig goverment. Catholic Canadians need to take to the streets and let Marxists in Ottawa know that they will not be silent. They need to vote for the right candidates. Catholic Answers needs to spread the “Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholics” across the Commonwealth before it’s too late.

 

[Lost_Found]

Scott_Lafrance:

As part of the immigration reform, I say we send all the liberals to canada and they can send all their conservatives here. We can even give them Caulifawnia, Oregon, and Washington State.

Yeah? K, beam me up Scotty my bags are packed.

You know, I travelled the US extensively, years ago. I literally kissed the ground when I got back home to Canada. Partly because it was home, but also because I sensed that in America, what group you belonged to, defined you in others’ eyes. Kind of like small town everywhere. That was the difference; no one cared about that in Canada, they just cared about treating everyone with dignity…Accepting everyone…don’t make that mistake those horrible Americans make…well well well…and ya know, that just would have worked, if the value system wouldn’t have shifted completely. So, here we are, and we have accepted all these new values. And, once again, feelin’ like I’m in a foreign country, only this was once my home.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

WanderAimlessly:

You forgot most of New England and New York. That way we get rid of Kerry, Kennedy, and Clinton in one broad stroke.

PF

WEll I can’t think of everything. Well, I can, just not all at once. Thanks for the heads up. ACtually ceding New Engliand to Canada would make it easier on family reunions. (I am a Mainer).

 

[Neithan]

The problem is that Canadians have no backbone. I hate to say it… but my God… it is true. We are a like a herd of cows up here, always following the status quo, always trying to live in peace with everybody. This is one of the most vulnerable atmospheres for the attacks of relativism, and we bit into it bad… ‘hook, line and sinker.’

I’m not giving up, I’m not givin in either. As much as I love my country, my loyalty lies chiefly with my Church, and I won’t let em abuse it. What a loser attitude it is to pack up ones bags and move south. Did the German Catholics move to Austria under the oppression of Bismarck? Hell no, they stayed and fought it out, and the ensuing kulturkampf was one of the most poignant displays of Catholic solidarity in history. Canadian Catholics need to band together and fight any sort of government pressure to subdue the Truth.

 

[Lost_Found]

Neithan:

What a loser attitude it is to pack up ones bags and move south.

But brother, I’ve stayed around fighting 'till now but how can a guy refuse such an offer. They’re gonna vacate the liberals for me so I can move in and feel at home. And the liberals will be happier than pigs in p**p up here.

(I’m considering Alaska or northern mid-west, I ain’t cut out for that hot sticky weather or lots of people)

 

[AlanFromWichita]

This guy’s jerking your chain.

His speech is clearly a characature.

“Brain” is the only one in this thread who got it.

He seems to be against gay marriage, but is trying to make a point against deaf members of parliament who don’t believe the religious speakers that gay marriage will cause religious persecution.

See the rest of my brilliant analysis here at the thread “How sad is this”.

Now watch. I’ll be wrong.

Alan

 

[Lost_Found]

AlanFromWichita:

This guy’s jerking your chain.

His speech is clearly a characature.

“Brain” is the only one in this thread who got it.

He seems to be against gay marriage, but is trying to make a point against deaf members of parliament who don’t believe the religious speakers that gay marriage will cause religious persecution.

See the rest of my brilliant analysis here at the thread “How sad is this”.

Now watch. I’ll be wrong.

Alan

If that’s the case, then it’s the station of jokers. Because you can tune in on any morning and you will hear the same nonsense as that, every bit that bad. If I listen to them I get madder than Donald Duck and fire off emails to them, so mostly I just change channels.
But maybe I have learned something from you today Alan of Wichita. Maybe they are amused at seeing me spitting and slobbering like Donald Duck. Maybe I should be turn the tables on them and reverse the satire. Yes, a more gentlemanly counter satire is in order and I may need some help in devising it…

 

[2shelbys]

I believe you’ll find that the term “wall of separation between Church and State” does not appear in a Supreme Court case until the Everson case in 1947.

I think you are absolutely right about that. I do not know of an earlier case where the term is used.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Lost&Found:

Maybe I should be turn the tables on them and reverse the satire. Yes, a more gentlemanly counter satire is in order and I may need some help in devising it…

You are suggesting this may actually NOT be satire? Please tell me it’s not so! It seemed he stayed just “sober” enough to be taken seriously.

Counter satire sounds like a good plan. What did you have in mind? What exaggerations do you want to make? Do you deal with human beings who actually believe that stuff? Maybe you can specify a hypothetical sample attack to which we can devise a delicious response.

Alan

 

[2shelbys]

…no one cared about that in Canada, they just cared about treating everyone with dignity…Accepting everyone…don’t make that mistake those horrible Americans make…

Well, not really. What about the laws in Quebec requiring businesses who want to post signs in English to keep those signs at no more than half the size of their French signs?

 

[chipusa]

I don’t mean to sound confrontational, but aren’t we supposed to be rejoicing over something like this? Understand, I’m not implying we shouldn’t be concerned to a point, and discuss it, but at the same time we need to realize that what Christ said about the world hating us is coming to pass more and more. I kind of get a kick inside about things like this and thank God that I am His and my faith will be rebuked. Oh well, just my take. God bless and keep all of you and may our Blessed Mother smile on you.

 

[Wolseley]

“Now what is the point of proposing this? I do it because I am worried that the separation between church and state is under threat. Religion is important in our lives, but it can become a danger to society when people claim that the unalterable will of God is the basis for their opinions and actions. Yes religion can be a comfort and a guide, but we cannot take rules from our holy books and apply them to the modern world without democratic debate and due regard for the law.”

Now what is the point of proposing this? I do it because I am worried that the separation between church and state is under threat. Government is important in our lives, but it can become a danger to society when people claim that the wants and demands of statused minority groups is the basis for their opinions and actions. Yes, government can be a protection and a guide, but we cannot take rules from our legislators and apply them to Christ’s Church without moral examination and due regard for the faith of the people.