blackbird

Perhaps you don't realize there are scientists and scholars who don't believe something as incredibly complex as the universe and life could not possible just happen or come into existence from nothing without a Creator. You have not faced up to that reality. You have no answer except to dismiss the idea of an intelligent designer Creator. It is not rational to think the universe just happened without an outside power who is separate from the universe. Even mathematician scientists have said the mathematical laws of probability say for life to come into existence by chance is so small there is not enough time in the universe for it to have happened. But that still doesn't explain the intricate and complex atomic particles, energy, gravity, radiation, etc. None of that could even exist unless it were created. So the question is if it was not created by God, where did it all come from. You have no answer. You non answer and dismissal of God is what is fantastic. Some things like how or where the universe came from simply cannot be answered in any other way. Scientists simply don't have the answer because there is no other answer than God that makes sense.

Here is a thought I bet you have not considered. Quote "Gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force, and the whole plethora of subatomic particles are alien to the world of absolute nothing -- the 'before' of the universe. We have lived so long with these matter and laws that we forget that they are exceedingly strange to a world of absolute nothing - for out of nothing, nothing comes. Objectively speaking, can nothing prefabricate these complex atomic structures from nothing, and then shackle them with even more complex laws of nature governed by even more complex mathematical equations to which they must subserviently obey? Is it not perfectly logical that the more improbable an event, the more it points to a design and a designer? Unquote - Darwin's Universe I think I must ask who is living in delusions? One who believes it required an intelligent designer we call God to create this complex and intricate universe or the person who thinks belief in such a God is believing in an "imaginary friend". I think the answer is clear to anyone who looks around a little at the universe, it's complexity, and functioning, realizes it just couldn't come into existence from nothing or without an extremely powerful, intelligent designer.

"And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: " Hebrews 9:27 KJV Then there's this passage which seems to show judgment during this life: "20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: {so…: or, that they may be} 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. {more: or, rather} 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; {to retain: or, to acknowledge} {a reprobate…: or, a mind void of judgment or, an unapproving mind} 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: {without natural…: or unsociable} 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. {have…: or, consent with} " Romans 1:20-32 KJV This does sound like God even judges people in this life, don't you think?

You found a new phrase. Do you actually think throwing that around shows any kind intelligence, wisdom, or knowledge about anything? Put the bottle down for a change this morning.

quote Darwinists hope to bury God in an avalanche of a causeless universe and a godless evolution. But instead of liberating us, they plunge us into a cosmic depression. We are reduced to: From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing - an accidental leftover from the Big Bang, evolved by a lucky chance, and are here for no ultimate purpose. unquote... - Darwin's Universe You want everyone to live like animals and be free do just kill themselves for any reason whatsoever. You apply the same kind of radical libertarianism to what people do with their lives and sexuality. I suppose you would approve of bestiality if one was so inclined? Maybe a sheep or goat right? Pornography and brothels?? No problem. There is nothing one should not be able to do, right? After all in your world view, nobody is accountable to God. You think it should be basically a free-for-all as long as one doesn't step on someone else's toes I guess.

Sound very ambiguous. So do you think a biological male, who claims to be a girl, should be able to use girl's washrooms and change rooms for sports?

No, you have proven nothing. Your ideas can easily be shown to be nonsensical and irrational. It is fairly easy to demonstrate that God is real and his word is authoritative and credible. You have not been able to defend your beliefs at all. You are like a naked man shouting in the wind. You need to read the book Darwin's Universe, From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing -- Survival for Nothing by Yan T. Wee. We did exchange a few comments, but we hardly scratched the surface. You have said nothing to convince anyone of anything rational. You are a self-convinced extreme libertarian, which practically nobody else would buy into. If you had a little brother who was unhappy, you would be ok with him choosing suicide according to what you've said. You would hold the same thinking for any boy in school who decided he wanted to be a girl. That's just the kind for freedom you believe in.

Your ideas are suspect because you reject God and his word, the Bible and think everyone should be able to do their own thing to the extent that you advocate anyone should be free to have medically-assisted suicide. You promote a free-for-all society which is anarchy.

How about instead of demanding special treatment or recognition or special days for one group, treat everyone the same... with respect. What you are essentially doing is giving special treatment and recognition to one particular group and saying everyone else get behind in the line. Isn't that discrimination? Dividing society into two groups Michael. This is no-brainer. Just stop this nonsense and teach students that everyone should be loved and treated with respect.

You have it backwards Michael. Western society is not built on a "pluralistic confederation" specifically. Western society was built on Judeo-Christian civilization and culture. That is where democracy and human rights came from. We don't need this diversity-inclusion nonsense as if something new is being invented. Simple go back to basic Christian principles of love for thy neighbour and respect for individuals. Everyone should be treated the same, with respect. No need to single out one group for special treatment as they are doing now. Just teach respect and love for every individual.

This article says an organization in Montreal received $200,000 in federal funding from the Liberal government and now it was discovered this is where the police are investigating a possible Chinese police station. What is going on here? Also, why are Canadians tax dollars being thrown around for everything under the sun? Group suspected of hosting Chinese 'police station' received up to $200,000 in federal funding (msn.com)

I'm sure you are correct. I'm in the older age category now and will probably be gone long before anything to do with the Constitution or Charter is changed. I have to amend my will now. That is my priority; not the Constitution which I have no control over. It is a very difficult thing to change. Too bad we don't have some politicians that would show real leadership and start the process. I don't even know if there is a way to start the process to amend it. There should be.

There is no such thing as absolute freedom of choice in a civilized society. Everything we do effects society and effects others in society. Even just by example, we are effecting others. Our words affect others. Our actions speak louder than words and they affect others. "Biblical principles God’s word makes clear the sanctity of life: “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13). “This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live” (Deuteronomy 30:19). “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; may the name of the Lord be praised” (Job 1:21). “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies” (1 Corinthians 6:19–20). “No one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church” (Ephesians 5:29). There are times when believers may have to give their lives in the service of Christ and his kingdom (cf. Mark 8:34–36; John 13:37; Philippians 1:21–22). But voluntary martyrdom is not usually considered suicide. As we have seen, our postmodern culture claims that absolute truth does not exist (note that this is an absolute truth claim). In a nontheistic or relativistic society, it is difficult to argue for life and against suicide. If we are our own “higher power,” we can do with our lives what we want, or so we’re told. But if God is the Lord of all that is, he retains ownership over our lives and their days. He is the only one who can determine when our service is done, our intended purpose fulfilled. It is the clear and consistent teaching of Scripture that our lives belong to their Maker and that we are not to end them for our own purposes." Suicide: What does the Bible say? | Voice (christianpost.com) We are not just some chemical blob or accident of the cosmos. We were Created by an intelligent designer which we call God. The universe and all life forms even down to the single cell, has proven to be extremely complex and required vast amounts of information to be put in it to function. This could never happen by random chance processes as Darwinism claims. Many have rejected the Darwinism theory. Darwinism is a dead end and rejects any real meaning for life. It rejects the sanctity of human life. Therefore, whether some like or not, we are all accountable to God who created us and who owns our bodies.

The fact polls show one third of Canadians are fine with giving assisted suicide to the homeless just shows the sad state Canada is in and the lack of education on historic Christian principles and love for thy neighbour. Giving people MAID is not love for thy neighbour. It is a rejection of the sanctity of human life and a promotion of the psychology of death. Once Canadians accept the notion that assisted suicide or legalized suicide is acceptable, then Canada is on a slippery slope. It is on that slope now. There is nothing to stop MAID from being expanded for any reason or for no reason. The very fact that the sanctity of human life is now rejected by our government and a large part of the population just demonstrates the sad state of Canada. Don't kid yourself. There is a connection between this and the murder of ten police officers in the past ten months. One reason we have lax bail and parole laws is because of the lack of respect for human life. Such disrespect for life reflects itself in other laws that allow dangerous offenders out on the street to attack innocent citizens. Why worry about human life or safety if it doesn't have much value. Individual freedom for offenders is more important and freedom to choose death by MAID is more important than protecting the sanctity of life. This general lack of respect for human life by Canadians will also reflect itself in the public health care system as well. It is a natural consequence of the rejection of historic Biblical values.

88 thousand dollars for clothing spent by GG office. What is going on here? OTTAWA – Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet reiterated his call to abolish Canada’s Governor General after learning the office had spent $88,000 on clothing since 2017, describing the office as a costly “circus.” Bloc Québécois calls Governor General's office a 'circus' after $88k clothing bill (msn.com)

Some lawyers are saying the government's proposed changes to the bail laws won't pass the test of the Charter of Rights. If this is the case and dangerous offenders cannot be kept behind bars, how can police and Canadians be protected? Perhaps we need action to change the Charter of Rights to stop the release of dangerous offenders. The protection and safety of Canadians comes before anything else in my mind. We have very liberal lawyers, sociologists, and professors who seem to disagree. These "progressives" want to make it difficult to keep dangerous offenders behind bars to protect the public and they seem to have a lot of influence for some reason. The mainstream media, CBC, CTV seem to be always giving them a platform. Who are the CBC and media protecting? There may be a number of them already on the Supreme Court. Also the process to change the Constitution and Charter appears to be a very difficult process. Perhaps that needs to change. The method of choosing Supreme Court judges should also be examined. The safety of Canadians and maintaining law and order comes first. Liberals' new bail reforms could run up against Charter, have limited impact: experts (msn.com) Thousands of people are expected to come out today in Ottawa to the funeral of Sgt. Eric Mueller. Ten police officers have been killed in the past ten months.

Sure bud! And the PM never declared a state of emergency for the Convoy protesters last year? LOL

That's not true. The PM already has the extraordinary power to prorogue Parliament. That means if a PM wants he can prorogue Parliament and they cannot even meet. That was done a number of times by PMs in Canada. If the Monarchy was abolished, the only person left in charge of the armed forces and RCMP would be the PM and his cabinet. The RCMP would have to obey the PM if he declared a state of emergency. The courts would have to obey him as well. That's all there is to it. Anybody who tries to stop him would be arrested and thrown in jail. Simple as that.

No, it's not a silly statement. If the monarchy was abolished, all a Prime Minister has to do is declare a state of emergency or use the emergency act to dissolve Parliament and set himself up as dictator. What is Parliament going to do if it is dissolved? Courts can't stop him. They don't have the power.

You have to understand how it works. If there was no Constitutional Monarchy, what would there be to stop a PM from just abolishing Parliament and setting himself up as dictator? It happens all the time in other countries. The existence of the Monarchy is kind of a safeguard to prevent a would-be dictator from taking over.

The king can have opinions about things and he does, but if he wants to remain popular he knows he has to keep it low key. His opinions don't make the government or Parliament change or make new laws. They are just his opinion. Parliament is the authority for changing or making laws. The King cannot make laws.

That would not mean more democracy. We already live in a Constitutional Monarchy. All laws are made by our elected Parliament. The monarch does not decrease democracy. The function of the Monarchy is actually to ensure democracy continues and prevent a dictator from taking over and abolishing Parliament. Many countries have no Monarchy and are totalitarian dictatorships. So having no monarch does not ensure you will end up with democracy. What ensures democracy continues is the Constitutional Monarch in Canada's case and allegiance to the Monarchy by the nation in general.

What more democracy are you talking about? We already have a parliamentary system where we elect our representatives, MLAs and MPs.

No, I didn't miss it. I understand what you're saying but it doesn't make much sense. The Supreme Court has a certain purpose which is to hear cases that are appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. They have a full time job. The GG is an entirely different job and does not require the legal skills or knowledge of Supreme Court judges. The GG is appointed to act in place of the King in Canada. She attends many functions as a representative of the Crown. She approves new laws that are passed to bring them into effect. She dissolves Parliament when necessary and under only certain conditions. That is the GG's role. It has nothing to do with the Supreme Court.

Different functions entirely. That is just the way democracy and the Parliamentary system evolved. Countries were once ruled by absolute monarchies. But over the centuries they evolved into democratic systems such as what we have now. The role of the Crown or monarchy or GG is limited to things that cannot be done by the elected government or Parliament. "The Magna Carta or 'Great Charter' was an agreement imposed on King John of England (r. 1199-1216) on 15 June 1215 by rebellious barons in order to limit his power and prevent arbitrary royal acts like land confiscation and unreasonable taxes. Henceforward, the king would have to consult a defined body of laws and customs before making such declarations. The Magna Carta ensured that all freemen were protected from royal officers and had the right to a fair trial. Consequently, the charter became a symbol of the rule of law as the ultimate sovereign. Although not entirely successful in its aims, the charter did permit further constitutional developments in England in subsequent centuries and it provided inspiration for similar models of limited monarchy in other European states." Magna Carta - World History Encyclopedia