blackbird

That is just social justice warrior (Communist) nonsense that is never going to happen. What you're saying is society must provide everything for criminals that don't do anything for themselves. You expect society to provide everything in the hope then they won't commit crimes. That's a pipe dream. It's not how the real world works. Nonsense. Every suspected criminal gets a trial with legal representation is innocent until proven guilty. That doesn't need to change. How would dealing with criminals be like living in China? Not at all. In China, there is no real justice system. I never said we should follow that system. Only if you are a criminal yourself and would be locked up; then you might call it like China. But it is nonsense. You must live in some kind of alt reality. "socio economic inequality" sounds like Communist ideology. We live in a free country (to a good degree) where those who are fit can get a job, learn a trade, and look after themselves. Nobody expects taxpayers to provide everything for some who don't want to work. What a strange way of thinking you have. You must be listening to some real wacko ideologues.

Just reported on the news that support for the monarchy as grown to 66% of Canadians. I think Trump really helped boost support for the monarchy. Thank you Mr. Trump. We don't want to be Americans and don't want a Republic.

Nonsense. You don't know anything about Canadians. As for King Charles III, it doesn't matter what he believes. He still is King of the realm. I know the Anglican church has gone downhill a long way. But that is the way the world is today. Many denominations have gone downhill as well. However, politics and the type of system we have in Canada is still preferable to Canadians than what is going on in other countries.

No. King Charles III 's father, Prince Philip was baptized into the Greek Orthodox Church but King Charles III, his son, was not. "Prince Philip was baptized in the Greek Orthodox Church as a baby, but by the time he married Queen Elizabeth, he identified as an Anglican. However, unless he was officially received into the Church of England, he remained a member of the Greek Orthodox Church." Google head of Church of England. quote The supreme governor of the Church of England is the titular head of the Church of England, a position which is vested in the British monarch. Although the monarch's authority over the Church of England is largely ceremonial and is mostly observed in a symbolic capacity,[2] the position is still relevant to the established church. As the supreme governor, the monarch formally appoints high-ranking members of the church on the advice of the prime minister of the United Kingdom, who in turn acts on the advice of the Crown Nominations Commission.[1] Since the Act of Settlement of 1701, all Supreme Governors have been members of the Church of England. unquote Supreme Governor of the Church of England - Wikipedia That means KIng Charles III is the titular head of the Church of England.

The Liberals are mostly Papist Liberals and they rule the country to a large extent. They are also backed by Quebec. Ironically, we still have that small lifeline, the Constitutional Monarchy, King Charles III. Not sure how long it will last. If Rome can find away to take that away from us, they will.

Guess you don't own a business in some small sized, medium or large city where repeat offenders walk in frequently and just walk out with an armload of goods. If they are arrested, the court releases them right away. But that's all right with you. Or the woman visiting Vancouver and walking in a park is almost beaten to death. The guy is arrested and released within days. How you figure keeping these repeat offenders behind bars and off the street would make life suck for everyone. Do you cry when you think of the criminals in prison or mentally ill in an institution? You talk about socioeconomic inequality, but reject law and order and the safety of society just because you are in a small place where nothing bad happens. Millions don't live in the backwoods and must keep their doors locked and watch their back and where they go.

The Charter of Rights apparently can be interpreted by the Supreme Court almost any way they wish. Whatever they decree it is so. There is no higher appeal from the SCC rulings. They are the final word on what a few sentences in the Charter mean even though sometimes there is nothing in the Charter remotely resembling the SCC decisions. An example is" "The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Carter v. Canada that parts of the Criminal Code would need to change to satisfy the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The parts that prohibited medical assistance in dying would no longer be valid. The ruling only applies to competent adults with enduring, intolerable suffering who clearly consent to ending their lives123." However MAID has been allowed for people to make prior authorization and it has been used for people who are not experiencing enduring, intolerable suffering. MAID is currently scheduled to be offered to people solely with mental issues as of March 17, 2027. There is nothing in the Charter of Rights that gives anyone the right to receive MAID or medical assistance in dying. This is purely a fabrication by the SCC and liberal politicians. If anyone can find where MAID is even referred to in the Charter, please let us know. I could not find anything on it.

Surprise, surprise. It was the Right Honourable Prime Minister, John Deifenbaker, who brought in the Bill of Rights in 1960. Pierre Trudeau brought in a Charter of Rights in 1982, however this was long after the 1960 Bill of Rights and was largely a copycat work of John Deifenbaker's conservative government's Bill or Rights. The problem is not what is written down in these documents. The problem is the liberal-appointed Supreme Court judges and liberal party/polician's wild liberal way of interpreting the rights in the Constitution. Liberals made the soft-on-crime laws that grant bail to practically everyone and parole to practically everyone, especially FNs. The judges and liberals determined that the go-to goal should be to bend over backwards to release FNs people from custody. That is why they release dangerous offenders and that is why a dozen FNs people were murdered in Saskatchewan a few years ago by a FN offender released on parole who should never have been. Here is the 1960 Bill of Rights canadian-bill-rights-eng.pdf

Don't forget King Charles III reigns over about fifteen countries. He can't be everywhere. We have a governor general who represents the King here. The GG carries out the duties as necessary. The system works fine.

It's been six month since we had a Parliament sitting. Thank the Liberals. They don't seem to care much about democracy. Whatever benefits the party is all that matters.

Do you know what the Charter did? It allowed all the mentally ill people to be released from mental institutions and left on the street to start committing criminal offences and stabbing people. The Supreme Court and powers that be thought communities would take care of all the mentally ill. It never happened. Communities don't have the resources or ability to do that. It also made catch and release of dangerous offenders the norm. It made parole for dangerous offenders more likely, especially if one is a FN offender. That's what led to the mass killing of a dozen people in the Cree Nation in Saskatchewan a few years ago. That's an example of the Supreme Court interprets the Charter.

Never said that. Why do you not want to have a decent country with law and order? So what you mean is we can't stop all the crime and disorder in society? Doesn't sound too rational. Do you seriously think arresting and immediately releasing dangerous offenders is a Charter Right? No rational person would think like that. Many of the problems we have with crime and bad behavior is because they have mental problems and nothing is done about it. How about creating mental institutions and committing people who are determined to be a danger to society. The liberal ideology that they should not be in mental institutions has proven a disaster. Carney mentioned tightening up the bail laws, but he didn't say anything about all the mentally disturbed people that are everywhere.

I am talking about our country. I did a search and am unable to find the reasons why the situation is bad in the U.S. The U.S. has a far bigger population and crime rate. However, that is not the subject in this OP. We're talking about Canada. Since you bring up the U.S., why don't you do some research yourself and tell me why? Fix the problems in Canada before worrying about other countries. What is happening in other countries is no excuse to let the disaster continue in Canada.

Yes, because the legal system in Canada is a joke. Very light sentences. Anybody caught drug dealing in China with more than 50 mg of certain drugs could get the death penalty. Perhaps if we had serious penalties for drug dealers, there would be a lot less fentanyl deaths. Fentanyl deaths are not a plague that just goes around by itself. It is caused by drug use that has no punishment and dealers that don't get serious penalties if caught.

No, law and order does not mean anybody has to be religious or conservative. It simply means having strict laws against all the bad things going on and enforcing it. It means not having liberal rights for criminals, easy bail and easy parole, light sentences. It means one doesn't get a 3, 5, or 7 year sentence for drunk driving and killing someone but they would get real time in prison like 20 years or more.

Correct. There is no such thing as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. in China.. If you just bow to the state's wishes, they won't bother you. The Communist Party runs everything and expects everyone to do as they say. If you step out of line, you could go to prison. There is no such thing as a Bill of Rights or Charter of Rights and the judicial system does not provide much protection against the state if they go after you. If they charge you the default is guilty. By the same token they do not allow everything that is allowed here, like open drug use or any illegal drug use or selling of drugs. Possession for sale of over 50 mg of certain drugs could mean the death penalty. All I can tell you is what I told you from an eye witness who has worked in China off and on for years I believe. He also travels around to other cities and observes the population. He said plainly there is no homeless, no druggies, nobody trying to sell you things on the streets, no beggars, no pot smells, no ladies offering their love for money in sight, no drugs in schools, no loved ones overdosed. Your claim doesn't make sense. China simply does not allow that kind of stuff to go on. You don't oppose what the authorities tell you because they don't fool around.

We would do well to look at what happened in the past and understand what must be done to avoid this kind of thing in the future. Basic human rights must be upheld and respected for everyone.

" The Heretic's Fork was a medieval torture device used during the Inquisition to punish accused heretics. This simple yet brutal tool consisted of a metal fork with two sharp prongs at each end, connected by a leather strap or collar. One end of the fork pressed under the chin, while the other pierced the chest, forcing the victim to hold their head upright. If they moved or nodded off, the prongs would stab into their flesh. This device was designed to inflict prolonged discomfort, rather than immediate death, instilling fear and control over the accused...."

But why? It got much worse in Canada I think in the past ten years. I don't recall housing being so expensive and don't recall tent cities in Canada, all the addicted people and drug deaths, and all the criminals being arrested and immediately released. I am not sure it is this bad in other western countries.

"12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. " 1 Timothy 2:12-15 KJV According to these verse woman are more easily deceived than men. I will say I have seen many deceived men in the world too, but the principle here is I think that men and women were created with different roles in society. We know they are created biologically different than men, right? You will admit that. Maybe you will agree that they are created to have different roles than men. Men are supposed to be physically stronger while women have the ability to give birth to children and the natural ability to raise children. They are much better at that. I'm not saying they need to be barefoot and pregnant. Just saying there is a difference between men and women which you seemed to miss. Men have generally held the leadership roles in society all through history. Except I believe some aboriginal tribes have women elders. Not sure if they are chiefs too.

Is it not possible to have a good society with law and order without a communist dictatorship?

I have a Canadian acquaintance who works in China. He reports: "No homeless, no druggies, nobody trying to sell you things on the streets, no beggars, no pot smells, no ladies offering their love for money in sight, no drugs in schools, no loved ones overdosed. I got blood pressure medication at the pharmacy in minutes without prescription (modern medicine individually sealed). If only people realized how bad they have it in Canada." So why are the things he mentioned so bad in Canada and not in China? Is the problem the kind of governments Canadians elect and what is taught in schools? Should we be doing things different. It would seem that if we wanted to eliminate all the problems he listed, it would take a massive change in thinking and type of government. It is a fact that many of our liberal of left-leaning politicians believe that freedom must include the freedom to be homeless, be druggies, prostitutes, drugs in schools, support sexual orientation/gender change ideology, LGBTQ+2s rights (whatever that is), take drugs on streets or anywhere, and freedom to live in a country with a failing health care system.

" The Inquisition was a powerful office set up within the Catholic Church to root out and punish heresy throughout Europe and the Americas. Beginning in the 12th century and continuing for hundreds of years, the Inquisition is infamous for the severity of its tortures and its persecution of Jews and Muslims. Its worst manifestation was in Spain, where the Spanish Inquisition was a dominant force for more than 200 years, resulting in some 32,000 executions. Catharists The Inquisition has its origins in the early organized persecution of non-Catholic Christian religions in Europe. In 1184 Pope Lucius III sent bishops to southern France to track down heretics called Catharists. These efforts continued into the 14th Century. During the same period, the church also pursued the Waldensians in Germany and Northern Italy. In 1231, Pope Gregory charged the Dominican and Franciscan Orders to take over the job of tracking down heretics." Inquisition - Spanish, Roman & Torture | HISTORY

Many people don't know much history, especially the violent history of Romanism. Rome ruled the western world for centuries and for four centuries they had the Holy Roman Inquisition. You can Google it and find books to read that describe what that was like. Anyone who did not bow the knee to Rome or anyone who questioned Rome by joining any group of Bible believers could be dragged before a tribunal of the Inquisition. They could be found guilty of heresy, imprisoned, tortured, or executed. An unknown number of so-called heretics were martyred over the centuries. Rome's religious system is a very complex system of beliefs. When people heard about what the Bible teaches they discovered the early system of Christianity from the time of Christ and the Apostles was a very simple faith. It was simply faith in Christ alone. There was no Pope, priests controlling everything in everyone's personal life through a confessional, no sacraments except a simple baptism of believers. So nobody had to be a slave to a rich, powerful church that controlled everyone's life for 1,700 years. When people heard what Christianity was like in the days of Christ, they were converted to Christ. This didn't sit well with Rome down through the centuries because then they lost control over these people. Hence the Inquisition. But there is a lot more to it than that. History is a long story and takes us up to today.

Voting NDP is voting for Socialism. All forms of Socialism are theft. Socialism also is a failure where it has been tried. Our health care system is an example of a failure of Socialism. Government runs it but can't put enough money into it to run it successfully. Millions of people don't have their own doctor. Thousands of people have died on waiting lists. ERs close periodically. Politicians don't have enough money at their disposal to fund it and the health care system is another government bureaucracy likely over bloated with high-paid bureaucrats. Politicians oversee it in a very broad sense as they determine the funding and are under other demands for every kind of service imaginable. It is naive to think government can provide everything. Is is also naive to think things will get better as time goes on. The Bible Prohibits Socialism — Knowing Scripture There are many reasons why we should believe the Bible.