blackbird

By remaining silent and non-committal, you are by default supporting abortion. That's a cop-out. It's the easy way out to avoid being in opposition to anyone.

You are ignoring the fact that the Supreme Court already supports anti-Christian laws such as abortion, same-sex marriage, medical assistance in dying, etc. We know how they rule on almost any questionable issue.

Good question. Don't think she even speaks French, but everyone else in the higher ranks of the civil service must speak French when serving all of Canada.

Actually, the Governor General has to approve the laws passed by Parliament and the Senate, not the King. The King has nothing to do with it. We have an Inuit old woman (an obvious liberal woke person) who has the power to approve or not approve of the laws believe it or not. She was appointed by Trudeau based on liberal DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) ideology. Nothing wrong with old women, but this appointment was for the liberal agenda of reconciliation and wokeness.

One of the worst things to have repeatedly come out of the Supreme Court and other courts in Canada is soft-on-crime rulings. A life sentence is no longer a life sentence. The SCC likes shocking rulings using the phrase "cruel and unusual punishment" for serial murderers. quote One could be forgiven for believing the courts are soft on violent crime. It isn’t always so, but it frequently seems like it. On Friday, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously ruled that consecutive sentences for this country’s most violent killers was tantamount to “cruel and unusual” punishment and unconstitutional. The 2011 Criminal Code provision brought in by then Prime Minister Stephen Harper allowed judges to impose parole ineligibility periods of 25 years to be served consecutively for each murder, rather than concurrently. Previously, anything after the first homicide was a freebie — unless the killer was tagged with a dangerous offender label. No more. Murder victim Laura Babcock is shown in a Toronto Police Service handout photo. For Linda Babcock, whose 23-year-old daughter, Laura, was the victim of one of three murders, committed by rich kid killer Dellen Millard and his goofy sidekick Mark Smich it is another kick in the face. “This means that every life does not matter,” Babcock told the Canadian Press through her tears. .. “Our life has been destroyed by their crime. And yet the courts feel that it is cruel to have them in prison for life. Why do the victims have less rights than the criminals?” unquote HUNTER: Court clueless on 'cruel and unusual' in multiple murder ruling | Toronto Sun

The liberal left (Liberals, Green, and NDP) who support abortion are part of the problem because they support the killing of unborn babies. There are about 90 or 100 thousand babies aborted per year in Canada. This means a million less people born in Canada in a ten year period. This means that many people less to contribute to and support the pension system. People think this is solved by immigration, but it doesn't work that well because when people are born in Canada and grow up here, they will contribute to the pension plan all through their life and contribute to society on a natural time scale from youth to old age. Immigrants are brought in at different ages and do not replace the smooth predictable aging process of people born in Canada. So it does create problems and make the future of the pension system more unpredictable. This also makes the health care system more difficult to manage and more unpredictable.

Yes, I have known this for years. Many people regard them as kind of gods and think they know more than anyone else about everything. In fact they are hand-picked by the sitting government which means they are mainly liberal judges, much like the Senate which is also appointed by the sitting government or through a process created by the PM. The end result is liberal decisions by the SCC and the Senate. There should be some kind of safeguard to limit the powers of the Supreme Court but there appears to be none. They are more powerful than our elected Parliament. How can anyone believe we live in a absolute democracy when the Supreme Court judges and the Senate are unelected. Democracy is a very questionable term and how much of our government is democratic is really debatable.

It all depends on the business and the laws involved. Without knowing exactly the situation, it is hypothetical. There should be no unnecessary regulations, taxes, and red tape on business. Canada has interventionist governments at all levels. It is very hard and expensive to get houses built in some cities in Canada for example because of all the fees and regulations, not to mention the approval processes and environmental reviews. It takes sometime more than ten years for a mining application to be approved. That is ridiculous.

I never said businesses should not be regulated. They do get licences to operate. So what? Are you alleging business are criminal without any evidence or proof of anything? What is your problem?

Anybody who seriously understands the Arab mind (Islam) should understand Israel requires all the land it has to defend itself. A so-called "two-state" solution would mean carving up Israel and giving part to the Muslims who are bent on destroying Israel. It is obvious from history that dividing Israel, which is already a very small country between Israel and its historic enemies would never bring peace and would only threaten the very existence of Israel. Those that demand or even suggest Israel be divided up are not real friends of Israel. Canada's government is completely wrong and mixed up in supporting a two-state "solution". It would solve nothing.

"God chose Israel for two main reasons. Firstly, He had promised Abraham that his descendants would become a great nation and occupy the land of Canaan 1. Secondly, God wanted Israel to be a model nation for all other nations to follow 12. The Israelites were chosen to become a model nation of God’s way of life, so that all people could have His blessings 1. God blessed Israel because of the faith and obedience of Abraham, but He made it clear it wasn’t because they were great or righteous 1. Unfortunately, they failed to be the model nation God desired; and because of their national sins, they incurred God’s punishment 1. God loves all people and He is now working spiritually with individuals from all nations." Bing Chat with GPT-4 " Gentiles are welcome in the Old Testament Although God chose to work with the ancient nation of Israel, this decision did not exclude people from other nations (Gentiles) from understanding God and serving Him. God instructed the ancient Israelites to respect the people of other nationalities who came to live with them. Regarding the observance of Passover (one of the festivals ordained by God in both the Old and New Testaments), God said: “But if a foreigner lives with you and wants to celebrate the Passover to the Eternal, he will celebrate it, and it will be like one of your nation; but no uncircumcised man may eat of it ”(Exodus 12:48). Because He was impartial to everyone, God continued: “The same law will apply to the native and the stranger who sojourns among you” (v. 49). God later added, “You shall neither deceive nor repent of the stranger, because you were a stranger in Egypt” (Exodus 22:21). "A good example of God accepting the Gentiles in the Old Testament is found in the life of Ruth. Although she was a Moabite by birth (Ruth 1: 1-4), she came to respect and follow God. As Ruth told Naomi, her Israelite mother-in-law, after her husband’s untimely death: “Your people will be my people, and your God my God” (v. 16). So Ruth married an Israelite man named Boaz and became part of the family from which Jesus would come (Matthew 1: 1-16). Gentiles are welcome to church When the Holy Spirit was given to the followers of Jesus and the New Testament Church was founded on the day of Pentecost, the people of this first church were Jews (Acts 2: 5), one of the 12 tribes that made up ancient Israel. . Because God had specifically chosen and worked with their ancestors and now continued to do so, they considered themselves part of the “citizenship of Israel”, which gave them access to the “covenant of promise” (Ephesians 2:12). These Jews who were the first Christians did not fully understand that God would also bring Gentiles to church. When God miraculously gave the Holy Spirit to a Gentile named Cornelius and his house, just as He had previously done to the Jews on the day of Pentecost, Peter and the members of the New Testament Church were able to understand that God was now calling to the gentiles. The future of Israel The ancient Israelites were taken captive for their sins and lost their national prominence, causing many to wonder why God chose Israel. Regardless, there is a bright future for these people. When Christ returns to this earth and establishes the kingdom of God, He will restore Israel to her position of leadership in the world (Isaiah 11:12; 14: 1-2). Then an obedient and humble people will play the role God assigned them." Why did God choose Israel? - King James Version Bible (kjvonline.org) The gospel has been preached in the world. You have heard it, but what you do with it is up to you. You can easily be part of God's family. "12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." John 1:12, 13 KJV

Complete nonsense. Capitalism or free enterprise is perfectly honest. There is of course organized crime in the world. But honest dealings is promoted in the Bible. There is nothing wrong with free enterprise or Capitalism as long as no laws or criminal behavior is involved. As long as property is earned and purchased honestly, there is no theft involved. It is ridiculous to say Capitalism is theft. So nonsensical.

" "Wait a minute!" you say. "Didn't Jesus answer, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's when the Pharisees tried to trick him into denouncing a Roman-imposed tax?" Yes indeed, he did say that. It's found first in the Gospel of Matthew, 22:15–22, and later in the Gospel of Mark, 12:13–17. But notice that everything depends on just what truly did belong to Caesar and what didn't, which is actually a rather powerful endorsement of property rights. Jesus said nothing like "It belongs to Caesar if Caesar simply says it does, no matter how much he wants, how he gets it, or how he chooses to spend it." The fact is, one can scour the Scriptures with a fine-tooth comb and find nary a word from Jesus that endorses the forcible redistribution of wealth by political authorities. None, period." Rendering Unto Caesar: Was Jesus A Socialist? - Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org)

This is speaking about individual charity, not state ordained theft. There are other verses that speak about individual charity as a good and desirable thing. But never about forced confiscation of wealth to redistribute to society. You will have to go to some book on Robin Hood to find that or Karl Marx. Private property is protected in the Ten Commandments in Exodus and Deuteronomy as I pointed out. How do you ignore that? Those are central commandments. " The Bible is Against Socialism and Communism Christians must oppose socialism and communism, for these systems of economy and governance are contrary to God’s design of both man, government and economy. Socialism is antithetical to the very nature of both God and man. By creating man in His own image (Genesis 1:26-27), God created man with perfect free-agency -- the power to choose. Free agency is one of our greatest gifts from God. Socialists hate the notion of "rugged individualism," for it emphasizes the strength of the individual over the collective. Under socialism and communism, personal freedom is sacrificed for the "greater good" of government and society. by Tim Haile Karl Marx defined socialism as the step between capitalism and communism. Under socialism, all property and means of production are owned and controlled by the society (the community). Of course, without free-market forces balancing supply and demand, some person or group of people must eventually plan the economy. This opens the door to the central planning of communistic or other totalitarian forms of government. For central planning to work, all members of the collective must allow the planners to make all decisions about what is to be produced, grown and manufactured. Planners must also be allowed to decide how much of each item is produced. In the past, miscalculations, ineptitude, inefficiency and indifference on the part of the planners has resulted in the starvation deaths of millions of people. It should also be noted that socialism empowers the ruling class to direct state-sponsored violence and persecution against potential threats to the system. History contains many examples of such persecution being directed against people on the basis of political, ethnic and religious differences. Along with the millions who have starved to death because of socialistic policies, millions of others have been deliberately slaughtered." The Bible Against Socialism and Communism (hope-of-israel.org) " This point is even clearer in Acts 4-5. The NIV translation of Acts 4:34b-35 says, “From time to time, those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet.” Blomberg comments: Again we have a rash of imperfect verbs here, this time explicitly reflected in the NIV’s “from time to time.” The periodic selling of property confirms our interpretation of Acts 2:44 above. This was not a one-time divesture of all one’s possessions. The theme “according to need,” reappears, too. Interestingly, what does not appear in this paragraph is any statement of complete equality among believers. John Stott affirms Blomberg’s conclusions on property in the early church, also underscoring Luke’s use of the imperfect tense: Neither Jesus nor his apostles forbade private property to all Christians. . . It is important to note that even in Jerusalem the sharing of property and possessions was voluntary . . . It is also noteworthy that the tense of both verbs in verse 45 is imperfect, which indicates that the selling and giving were occasional, in response to particular needs, not once and for all. There is also sufficient reason to believe that the early followers of Christ did not sell all they had, but rather occasionally sold part of their possessions and gave the proceeds to the apostles for distribution. For example, in Acts 5, Ananias sold a piece of property (v. 1) and kept a portion of the proceeds for himself and his wife, Sapphira. The problem was not that they were required to sell their possessions and give all of the proceeds of their land to the apostles, but that Ananias lied about the true price he received for the land (v. 7). Peter points out that he could give or keep the money as he saw fit (v. 4) but still lied to Peter and to the Holy Spirit (v. 5). But even if, for the sake of argument, we grant that all believers sold all their possessions and redistributed them among the community, this still would not prove socialism is biblical. The next two reasons explain why. The act in Acts was totally voluntary — Socialism implies coercion by the state, but these early believers contributed their goods freely. There is no mention of the state in Acts 2-5. Elsewhere in scripture we see that Christians are even instructed to give in just this manner, freely, for “God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Cor. 9:8). Even if the believers sold all their possessions and redistributed them among the community, this still would not prove socialism is biblical, since the state is not the agent selling property to those in need. There is also plenty of indication that private property rights were still in effect, therefore this was not even even be considered socialism if the term were used to refer to a regulated system of community ownership. The narrative was not a universal command. — To prove Acts 2-5 commands socialism, you would have to show that this historical precedent is a mandatory prescription for all later Christians. You cannot get the imperative (all Christians should do this) from the indicative (some early Christians did this). The fact that some Christians “shared all things” does not constitute a command that all Christians should follow their example, because it is not clearly taught in passages of Scripture elsewhere." Does the Book of Acts Command Socialism? (thegospelcoalition.org)

"There is probably no more disputed real estate on earth than the land of Israel. Even calling it “Israel” will raise objections from some quarters. The Jewish people lay claim to the land because they first held possession of it millennia ago and because God directly gave them the land, as recorded in the Bible. In Genesis 12:7, God promises Abram, who had just arrived in Canaan, “To your offspring I will give this land.” Later, in Genesis 15:18, God expands on that unconditional promise: “To your descendants I have given this land, From the river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates” (NASB). Then, in Genesis 17:8, God reiterates the promise to Abraham, adding that the land gift is irrevocable: “The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you.” God later repeats the promise to Abraham’s son Isaac (Genesis 26:3–4) and Isaac’s son Jacob (Genesis 28:13), whose name God later changed to Israel. In the Abrahamic Covenant, then, God laid out the extent of the land that would belong to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—a territory including all of Canaan and stretching from Egypt to modern-day Iraq. Several centuries later, when it came time for the Israelites actually take possession of the Promised Land, God again spoke of a vast area “from the Negev wilderness in the south to the Lebanon mountains in the north, from the Euphrates River in the east to the Mediterranean Sea in the west, including all the land of the Hittites” (Joshua 1:4, NLT). The promise of land belonging to the children of Israel is permanent. Even when Israel was expelled from their land, which has happened twice in history, God promised they would return: “Even if you have been banished to the most distant land under the heavens, from there the LORD your God will gather you and bring you back. He will bring you to the land that belonged to your ancestors, and you will take possession of it” (Deuteronomy 30:4–5). This promise is part of what is today sometimes called the Palestinian Covenant or the Land Covenant (Deuteronomy 29:1—30:10)." What is the land that God promised to Israel? | GotQuestions.org

" Socialism is theft. A majority that votes to redistribute wealth at gunpoint does not make it any less so. It is a violation of the 8th and 10th commandments. It should therefore come as no surprise that support for socialism has grown among an increasingly secular and godless people. A fatherless people will look to the state for provision, and a churchless people will look to the state for charity. Socialism will bring utter ruin on society, and Christians should have no sympathy for such a wicked system." " All Forms of Socialism Are Theft Central to the moral argument against socialism and quasi-socialism is the 8th commandment: You shall not steal (Exodus 20:15; Deuteronomy 5:19). This command teaches the concept of private property and forbids the taking of property from an innocent person. God added to this condemnation of socialism by prohibiting envy in the 10th commandment: You shall not covet (Exodus 20:17; Deuteronomy 5:21). God is a capitalist, which we know because God endorses private property." The Bible Prohibits Socialism — Knowing Scripture

“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Genesis 12:3 KJV This is speaking of antisemites.

That's not what I said. I said "But I don't think government and government-funded bureaucracy is capable of providing the best health care." Layers of bureaucracy and layers of administration are an impediment to providing good, efficient and timely health care and take a huge chunk out of the health care budget. Also, there is less incentive to do things faster or efficiently when the system is run by government and bureaucrats. Why should they think of efficiency when they all get paid the same regardless of whether the system is slow or rapid and efficient? I could give you personal examples of the long waiting times involved between tests and procedures that happens in B.C. Cancer does not wait to spread and heart disease does get worse if untreated quickly.

This is a farce. Man cannot control the climate and never will. Trying to control the climate is similar to what the people did several thousand years ago when they tried to build a tower to heaven. " 1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. 3 And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter. 4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5 And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. 6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. 8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. 9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth." Genesis 11:1-9 KJV So the people thought they could be God or gods and build a tower to heaven. How foolish is that? I see a similarity to the globalist U.N. who invented the claim of man-made climate change and spread the idea that man can take certain actions and control the climate change. Of course these actions fit in with the U.N.'s agenda of increasing global control of mankind and wealth re-distribution. Poorer countries are demanding the advanced countries start paying them for the effects of climate change even though there is no proof that man is the cause or even contributing to climate change. The whole thing is nothing but a clever scam that millions have fallen for. Notice it says in Genesis " 6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do." Gen. 11:6 KJV Notice it says NOTHING will be restrained from them. Isn't that the same today? Man has a huge ego and is controlled by pride. Man has completely deceived himself into thinking he is a kind of god and can do anything, even change the climate or control it. It is ludicrous and one of the biggest lies in existence. It wouldn't be such a big issue if it weren't for the fact that this madness affects all of us in various ways such as extreme government control and regulations against various industries, carbon taxes pushing up the cost of everything. Now at a time when we are facing a housing crisis and extreme costs for food and the high cost of home heating for many people. The war on climate change and the phony claim that we must fight "pollution" is costing everyone a huge amount and for what? It will do nothing and will not make one iota of difference to climate change. 97% of CO2 in the atmosphere is natural and man contributes only 3%. Out of that, Canada's contribution is miniscule. Yet the Premier of BC, David Eby says if the rest of Canada stops collecting carbon taxes on home heating, B.C. will continue to collect it. This sounds like madness. It is tragic.

Unfortunately the rallies may be just a gang of antisemites who do not believe Israel has a right to exist. How many Palestinians do not believe in Israel's right to a nation? I am not in favour of antisemitic or anti-Israel rallies being permitted in Canada. They may simply just be spreading their antisemitism and hate. There are many trouble makers who have been allowed to immigrate into Canada and they bring their foreign wars with them.

That is just anti-Semitic propaganda and anti-Israel hate. Israel occupied that land several thousand years ago and it was fought over ever since. The Romans took over two thousand years ago and destroyed Jerusalem. The Jews were dispersed to different countries in the early centuries. The Muslim conquered the area shortly after Islam was started in the 7th century. It has been fought over probably more than any other place in the world by different groups. The Jews have a perfect right to their homeland. So in the 20th century they were able to finally get it back. It was their land and is their land. Get over it. Jews have been hated throughout the world for around two thousand years. So your claims are all just part of that hate. Nothing new. Same garbage that led to the Holocaust and murder of six millions Jews in the gas chambers.

I already explained that. Everyone would have to have private health care insurance. Without insurance you cannot afford the care if you need to go to the hospital or need medical procedures. I would pay for private care and we would not be paying taxes for a public system. That's the way it works. People who are incapacitated and cannot work, would receive the government-funded coverage. Nobody buys their own healthcare. That's not how private health care works. It's all paid for by insurance companies.

Are you in favour of taxpayer funded healthcare? I already answered that in detail. It doesn't matter what I am in favour of. We have only a public system and there is no choice. But I don't think government and government-funded bureaucracy is capable of providing the best health care. Millions of people don't have their own doctor. They don't have any choice.

We don't have a choice. That is the only system available in Canada. We pay for it through taxes. A private system might be more efficient with no long waiting lists for some things and we could pay for it by private health insurance if it existed. That might be better for some health care services where the service is poor now. But that is not going to happen because the government outlawed private health care except for very rare situations. Our public health care system is not the best in the world. There are lots of problems with it.

You constantly ranted against Israel and "Zionist supporters". That means you are anti-Israel. What else could explain your obsession in wanting to see proof of beheaded babies?