blackbird

The policies and laws created by liberals are actually immoral if one goes by the Bible and Judeo-Christianity. Liberalism is just the ideology of letting everyone do their own thing regardless of what it is. Their existence as a political party depends on that ideology because that is what their supporters believe in. It is all about getting liberal votes. Nothing about morality or higher principles in it.

With all the liberal policies being implemented including SOGI in schools, I thought SOGI was supposed to stop the bullying in schools by students. We seem to hear of a lot of assaults by teens in schools these days. Why didn't SOGI teaching stop that?

Nice diversion. You cleverly avoid the subject I mentioned, i.e. abortion, MAID, same-sex marriage and teaching SOGI to kids in elementary school. That progressivism. It does not really fall under the title of Communism. But it seems to be the brainchild of liberalism.

Maybe but God is in control and will only allow things to happen for a period of time and many may suffer the consequences in the meantime of their evil. There is a price to be paid for evil. Ask the 100 million who were killed by Communists. There are likely billions of people in hell for all the evil they did too. Nobody wins with evil. Nobody wins with Communism either.

So you support abortion on demand, same-sex marriage, sexual orientation and gender identity teaching to young kids in schools, medical assistance in dying. Does that include medical assistance in dying for mentally ill people and minors too?

I was talking about America. Liberals have not taken over. America is divided. Liberals in Canada have taken over to a larger extent. The have changed in the last few decades and become much more radically progressive in various ways.

Never said it is binding. If you say it isn't, that is fine.

I guess liberals consider churches in general as "far right extremists". That's how liberals and NDP come across.

You still haven't said what liberal progressive policies you support and which ones you don't support. Why are you being evasive?

I don't think liberals have really "taken over". The fact is America is divided right down the middle. Roe versus Wade will likely be overturned in matter of weeks while half of America is on the street protesting against overturning it. Half of the states will ban abortion as much as possible soon and many have already done so. They are divided over trans rights and men using women's washrooms. Biden has a certain amount of control but it is limited more to federal government departments and things under federal government jurisdiction. He can't even get the states to get the people vaccinated. Only about 60% of Americans have been vaccinated with one or two doses. Covid is still a threat and spreading around.

No, cultural Marxism includes much more the Islamophobia resolution which you say is non-binding. We are all still waiting to hear what Islamophobia actually means. The federal liberals are planning to change the culture in the Canadian Forces and created a committee to root out any "far right extremists" whatever that is. They were planning to root out any chaplains that were somehow associated with any church that had beliefs contrary to liberal progressive LGBTQ , abortion ideologies (which would be most churches). That is cultural Marxism. However, they backed off getting rid of the chaplains for the moment (there would be none left and nobody would likely want anything to do with military). In addition it would give pretty solid grounds for a court case against the violation of freedom of religion by the federal government. Some government lawyer may just have alerted them to that fact. One would think they would know the basics of Charter Rights.

The downside is we have liberals and NDP who do not believe in financing Canadian Forces properly.

This is in response to those who say America is not protecting Canada. Sure they could if the U.S. was not protecting Canada. They could easily hit a few cities in Canada, like Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver and the government would have to surrender right away or be wiped off the map. But because America is protecting Canada, it won't happen. We live off the coat tails of America.

China and Russia both have lots maybe thousands of missiles. They have warships and many aircraft. China has something like a million trained soldiers. It wouldn't take much to take over Canada with it's miniscule military and practically no airforce or navy.

Yes all political parties have failed to maintain our military. The defense budget should be at least doubled. The NDP are the worst. They believe in delivering foreign aid but not supporting the military. They live in some kind of alternate reality or dreamworld. Lot of peaceniks.

China and Russia could easily take over Canada if America was not there to prevent it. China and Russia both have the military power to easily take over. Logistically yes they could. Canada has a very small military and very few military ships and aircraft.

Trudeau, the Liberals and NDP love living off the military strength of America. Canada won't even meet it's NATO commitment of 2% of GDP spending on the military and Trudeau has no intention of meeting it. Trudeau talks a great line to the world about supporting Ukraine and sends 675 Canadian soldiers to Latvia to join NATO, but this is all virtue signaling. Trudeau refuses to step up and properly finance the Canadian Forces even though the Conservatives have been pointing this fault out for years. The NDP is strongly opposed to spending on the military. They live in some kind of pacifist dream world. Russia or China would walk right in and take over Canada's north if it were not for the U.S.

The words cultural Marxism refers to today's liberal ideology which I am sure you must have heard and are well aware of. Multiculturalism is one of the official policies which tries to give equal prominence or respectability to all religions in Canada. We have freedom of religion in the Constitution which I agree with, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with other religions. I am still free to hold my own beliefs. A good example of the government's pushing their cultural Marxism is the motion and law against Islamophobia. Nobody tries to define exactly what that means, but we know what liberals think it means. It is a form of cultural Marxism. We still live in a western style, Judeo-Christian society and many of our laws are based on that. But liberal ideology is trying to destroy that and create some kind of cultural Marxist society. They want to root out all forms of what they see as institutional racism in the military for example and even have gone so far as appointing a special committee to examine the armed forces and change the culture. They were going to get rid of all ministers in the military who did not fit in with their cultural Marxist ideology, but backed away from that and said they can stay now or at least for now.

No, it not a made up thing. Liberal Marxist refers to such things as cultural Marxism which the liberals/NDP are always pushing and trying to force on society. To them all cultures, all religions, all belief systems except Biblical Christianity, should be embraced by everyone. If you don't embrace liberal / cultural Marxism, you are a racist.

Which ones would you agree with and which would you oppose or disagree with?

I don't think the true God listens to liberal progressives that support or legalize things that oppose the Bible. The only god liberal progressives follow is the evil one, commonly called the prince of this world, the Devil.

Really? What would you say about liberal progressivism on subjects like abortion, same-sex marriage, sexual orientation and gender identity, medical assistance in dying and now in the process of being legalized to include the mentally ill? Would you say liberal support of these agendas are "moral"?

He said destroy them "metaphorically". Granted, he should have avoided using the word "destroy", but the fact he gave a long, detailed post of what the problem is demonstrates he is using words, not violence. He also showed his support for discussion but stressed the liberal/Marxists are not interested in discussion. I don't think he is advocating physical violence. So can you refute or debate the points he makes on feminism, racism, the class struggle, etc.?

Exactly! It is not physically possible to inspect the alleged culprit's mind. It would be guesswork. Nobody in a robe or fancy suit could objectively tell the court what caused the crime. It seems Canada in it's quest to look like it is righteously upholding a constitution or Chart Right for an accused criminal, even murderer, must give an appearance it is bending over backwards. It thinks it can play god in effect. The whole idea is absurd. They should not be focused on a Charter Right because once an accused commits a crime there should be no Charter Right to protect them from accountability for their heinous crime. The accused should be judged for the harm they did and not for their decision to become intoxicated and then excused for the crime. That should be the rule and there should be no deviation, otherwise there is no justice. When one commits a crime, they should be charged and punished for the crime. Period.

Many may agree with you, but also many would disagree. It seems to boil down to whether one is a liberal or left-leaning or a conservative-leaning. Liberal-left people seem more willing to accommodate people accused of crimes if the accused's lawyer can make a strong enough argument that the accused was mentally ill at the time of the crime. This is similar to the Supreme Court ruling of intoxication or the accused's lawyer claiming the accused was acting as an automon and didn't know what he was doing. Conservative-leaning people often don't accept that argument because they believe someone who commits a serious crime should be held accountable regardless of his state of mind at the time. Often the question of state-of-mind of an accused is very difficult to prove or discern because it is an abstract thing that has come and gone by the time the person is apprehended and tried. The problem with giving legitimacy to these things as a defence is they ignore the rights of the victim and their family who have a right to see justice. Letting the accused off may also put society at greater risk as well as sending the message the accused is getting off or getting off lightly. Letting criminals off on NCR or intoxication as a defence is also seen as the liberal soft-on-crime approach which it is. We have seen convicted murderers sent to aboriginal healing centres which led to a huge outcry from the public and opposition party. We have also periodically seen criminals let out on parole who went on to murder other people. In addition we periodically hear the police warning about a dangerous potential rapist who has been released in the community. These releases were all made by our courts and criminal justice system. In Victoria right now, groups of young people have been going into downtown, some with knives or bear spray, and creating mayhem and then being arrested. But as soon as they have been arrested, they have been released shortly after. There are countless cases of repeat offenders in cities in B.C. who have been arrested for crimes of various sorts and they have been released shortly after their arrest. Some dozens of times and even cases of individuals who have been charged hundreds of times and they spent little or no time in jail. Not criminally responsible a slippery designation: DiManno | The Star