blackbird

The fact that half the population seems to support the evil Socialism is just a sign that many people don't really understand what Socialism means and how it is evil. Part of the reason might be the cost of living crisis for many people, the inability to buy a home and seeing no hope of ever being able to own one, or the failing health care system. This is a serious problem for the older people who depend on a proper health care system. Many people die on waiting lists because they don't get the care they should have received a lot sooner. Many of these people vote for a Socialist party like the Green party or NDP thinking they will solve the problems. Sadly these parties have only created the problems and continue making them worse. The solutions of parties is increasing taxation and increasing social programs and spending. All this inevitably results in increasing government debt. Debt is a serious issue because it must be paid down and interest must be paid for it. All this means less money available for all these social programs that the government promises. Government does not provide anything free. The debt must be born by every person one way or another. The solutions to the economic problems are not easy or simple. But we won't find the solutions in Socialist governments.

Why? Because Peterson exposes the DEI nonsense of Trudeau. DEI is part of Trudeau's foreign policy with China and India. Those countries just laugh their heads off at Trudeau and his DEI policies, thinking he can impose them on China and India. When will liberals learn they can't force the rest of the world to accept their DEI progressivism ideology? Nobody is buying it much of the rest of the world, especially in non-democratic countries like Russia, China, India which have a somewhat different system than Canada. Trudeau and liberals thought they could bring in thousands of Sikhs and these people could carry on their Khalistan stuff in Canada. In India there are terrorists among them and there has been a history of trouble. Now Trudeau is learning that allowing foreign groups to bring there struggles to Canada, such as the Khalistan movement and now the Palestinian radicals, just doesn't work. It only leads to problems.

I never said that. But the names of MPs who are involved in foreign interference should be announced. What good is it to keep it secret? If the government is going to keep everything secret and handcuff the opposition in order to give them any information, then that right there should tell you there is something wrong. How can anything be done about it if nobody knows except a few politicians who agree to keep it secret? If the public is told, that would be a big deterrent for politicians thinking of getting involved in it. This is simple logic, like grade 1 school level.

You missed the point. What good is it to know names of those involved in foreign influence if you can't speak out about it? You are the one in ignorance. Agreeing to the government's security clearance silences the person who agrees to do it. That is what the government wants to do, silence the opposition.

What is the use of a security clearance to hear supposed high security information if it prevents you from speaking about what you hear or going public with the names? If you are a political leader, it seals your mouth shut. That benefits Trudeau and the government because you can't talk about the details of information in Parliament or in public and the media. Trudeau and the Liberals are the ones who benefited from foreign interference. China helped elect Liberals. Also, why should the names of MPs who participated in foreign interference be kept confidential anyway? How is that protecting Canadians from foreign interference? Conservatives are much wiser to not agree to any kind of security clearance which is just a way to silence people. In politics, if you can't speak, you have been neutralized.

"I served as minister of finance and held other cabinet portfolios in British Columbia’s New Democratic Party governments over the past seven years. Ostensibly, for my impolitic words about the state of the land that became Israel, I was fired from cabinet by David Eby, who hopes to be elected B.C.’s premier next Saturday." Selina Robinson: NDP's cynical ploy to gain Muslim votes by championing the Palestinian cause The NDP federal and provincial seem to be bent on causing divisions between Canadians.

This comment is only my opinion based on what I believe I observed. But you can read the article about the NDP fought dirty. The BC NDP ran television ads repeatedly day after day claiming the BC Conservatives would cut 4.1 billion dollars out of the health care system. This was denied by the BC Conservatives who said it was a lie. There were other claims made by the NDP in the ads that are questionable. A large union also ran television ads repeatedly every day for a while making the same claim that the BC Conservatives would cut 4 billion dollars out of health care. How many seats did the NDP win based on these claims? The parties appear to be in a tie with BC NDP winning 46 seats and BC Conservatives winning 45 seats and Greens with 2 seats. How can this election be considered legitimate if it was won based on lies? Is there some kind of enquiry that could be held to examine how this elections was conducted to determine if it was legal and legitimate? Should such an enquiry have the power to rule on whether the election results are legitimate or illegitimate and a new election ordered? If what I am saying is correct, this is not democracy. Elections should not be determined by lies. It is more like a crooked banana republic. It seems that the ordinary citizen is powerless to do anything about it. Amy Hamm: The NDP fought dirty. I wish John Rustad had fought back

BC NDP and BC Conservatives are neck and neck and as of 3AM Sunday the election is not finalized. Several ridings have to be re-counted because they are so close. Greens won two seats and they are quasi Socialist as well as environmental radicals. This means there is a good chance the Green party will form an alliance with the NDP in order to form government although this is not definite until the votes counting is finalized. This does not look good for the people of B.C. because the NDP are quasi Socialists and are dead against allowing any private health care with private insurance to help fix the failing health care system. The NDP are opposed to the oil and gas industry to some degree and the Greens are outright against the oil and LNG industry. The NDP have failed in every department. The health care system is failing, there are mills shut down, the cost of living is out of sight, housing is unavailable to many, crime and the justice system is a revolving door and is failing, etc. If the Greens hold the balance of power they will try to force the NDP to follow their agenda in exchange for allowing the NDP to form the government. A majority of the 93 seat legislature is required to form a normal majority government and no party appears to have achieved that. But NDP has about 46 and with the 2 Green seats, could form a majority government. The two Green MLAs will likely make an agreement with the NDP in exchange for following the Green party agenda to some degree. That is a major problem. The Green Party is a fringe party but will have far more power than their number warrants. It will be a very divisive and fractious government.

This kind of smearing of a citizen like Peterson is very low and dishonest. Trudeau will stoop to any level to try to regain some credibility and votes. Same thing in claiming some Conservative MPs are involved in foreign interference without naming them. It has been well-established the Liberal party has been the main beneficiary of foreign interference in recent elections in several specific ridings.

Canada produces about 1.5% of human CO2 emissions and human emissions are only 3% of the atmospheric CO2. Do you know anything about what you are talking about? No matter how much oil and gas extraction is reduced in Canada, it will obviously make absolutely no difference to the total CO2 in the atmosphere. Just do the math. What is 1.5% of 3%? That should tell you something. It is next to nothing. On top of that there is no proof man-made CO2 emissions affect climate change. Canada's contribution to atmospheric CO2 is equivalent to throwing a Tim Horton's cup of coffee into an olympic-sized swimming pool.

I don't know why they put people in the store front or to answer the phone who can't speak English. This is just dumb.

" B.C.: Billions spent on mental health and addictions, along with a decriminalization model and safe supply project that haven’t reduced deaths The government of B.C. has invested almost $2 billion of direct, indirect and targeted funding into the province’s toxic drug crisis since 2014, according to an audit by Glacier Media. However, experts say these investments have not done enough to lower the number of overdose deaths." Adding up the billions of government dollars directed at Canada’s opioid crisis - Business in Vancouver (biv.com) Surely two billion dollars could have gone a long way to improving the health care system and other problems in B.C.

I agree we have spent enough time on this. I don't see any sign of reaching agreement on the thing that matters, the word of God. I don't believe it is productive to go on with useless debates back and forth. You either accept the written word of God or you just want to debate it endlessly. The Bible teaches that the fool rejects the word of God. I accept it as absolutely true. It is the key to forgiveness and eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. " 1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. {ungodly: or, wicked} 2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. 3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. 4 The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. 5 Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. 6 For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish. " Psalm 1 KJV

What I said is absolutely within the definition of freedom of speech. Why do you want to ban someone from speaking and still claim to believe in the Charter of Rights and be a Canadian? We have a few Ayatollahs on this forum who want to dictate what others can speak. You're in good company.

That requires more time and I don't have it tonight. I have taken a particular interest in the versions issue and was convinced the KJV 1611 is the inerrant, preserved word of God. I have read a lot of information on it and am studying a book on the versions right now and have been for some time. But I don't have time now to get into it in detail. Maybe tomorrow. There is convincing evidence that the KJV 1611 is the absolutely accurate inspired English translation of the original manuscripts which no longer exist. Leave that for another day.

You're hilarious now. Of course what Jesus said is absolutely true. Of course the Old Testament is inerrant. I never suggested it wasn't. The question is how you interpret the vast number of things in the Bible. That requires some study and takes time. Not every thing is simple or black and white. That's all I meant.

Carbon emission caps will do nothing to stop forest fires or anything else except make millions of people poorer.

Nobody said it was. You don't understand the world we live in. Knowledge about anything is communicated from one person to another. How do you think schools, colleges, and universities work. People learn from the teachers and professors. Everything you know had to come from someone else whether it was in an institution or a book or paper. Nobody said you are required to believe what I believe just because I said something. At the same time, what I say might be the truth, whether you believe it or not. You seem to have the idea that everyone's speech should be controlled and you should not have to hear anything you don't believe or agree with.. That is how Ayatollah's or dictators think. In Canada we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. You don't accept that. Why are you here? I never said I have the right to impose anything. That is just your twisted way of thinking.

I have read most of it but not all books of the Old Testament. There are some books that are difficult I admit. But I do understand that some books in the Old Testament are historical in nature and everything cannot be taken to apply to Christianity today. There is no stoning of people in Christianity. I have studied countless articles in commentaries on subjects in the Bible. I have studied many booklets, and written material and listened to countless sermons in several different churches on central subjects of the Bible over the last 44 years. Unless the Holy Spirit teaches them what it said, they won't learn anything. So your question doesn't really prove a lot. There are 66 books of the Bible and modern versions are corrupt and based on corrupt manuscripts. I have ample proof that in English only the King James Bible (1611) is accurate and trustworthy. So reading the Bible from cover to cover doesn't necessarily prove anything because people often don't understand what they read or it doesn't sink in. Doctrines sometimes take guidance from Bible teachers or books to fully understand. I have lots of information in other theology books as well written by godly men that have a lot of teaching that is backed up by the Bible. The Bible cannot be interpreted as just one book. It is impossible to understand many things in the Bible without some help from books or teachers. One can learn a lot by just reading the Bible, but to really understand certain things requires some guidance by theological books or books that expound certain themes and doctrines. I can find the answer to a lot of things and find the scripture verses to back them up. I have spent a lot of time studying things. There is lots I don't know I admit. But I know some of the basics about how to understand what parts apply to Christianity and what parts in the Old Testament do not apply to Christianity. It is not as simple as some people think.

Not true. You are making up things again. Christian denominations have common beliefs about what the Bible teaches in many things. You can read those beliefs in church confessions and statements of faith. You can google them and see for yourself. What people believe has to be backed up with the correct interpretation of the Bible. That is nonsense. Again you make a broad silly claim without any basis. What truth do you have that is the opposite of what the Bible teaches? What is the source of such a truth?

That is not the Ten Commandments. Those are laws that only applied to Israel several thousand years ago. They have nothing to do with Christianity which began 2,000 years ago. This shows your complete ignorance. Who is advocating stoning children or adulterers, or not eating shrimp? Tell us who. You are cherry picking something out of the Old Testament which Christians know is just recorded history that only applied to Israel at that time in history. That does not apply today or have anything to do with Christianity. The Ten Commandments were given to Moses and are a different matter. Some of those commandments are repeated in the New Testament and are eternal commands that nobody would disagree with. Some of them are enshrined in law centuries ago because they are universally accepted. Thou shall not steal, thou shall not kill, thou shall not covet thy neighbour's property or wife, etc. Who would in their right mind disagree with that? That is where our laws on those things came from. Also God created man and woman and told them to go forth an multiply. The Bible teaches the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman. Nobody in their right mind agrees with teaching children they can change their sex. This is wrong from every level. Christian oppose this kind of ideology being brainwashed into minds of young kids in schools. It is absolutely right for Christians to oppose that. It is also right for Christians to oppose the killing of pre-born babies. That is not trying to impose a theocracy. It is just the right thing to do. You sadly don't know anything at all about Christianity or the Bible. I have often seen people like you cherry pick something out of the Old Testament and try to use it to smear Christianity. It is really sad. I feel sorry for you. You said "You want a theocracy, move to Saudi Arabia." Again you are lying through your teeth. I never advocated a theocracy and don't think any normal Christian would. Wanting sensible laws is the purpose of government. Everyone wants to see law and order. That is all that talking about Biblical principles refers to. It does not mean Christians want a theocratic dictatorship. Stop listening to radical Satan worshipers and anarchist lefty liberals. You are brainwashed with a false view of Christianity.

You have said nothing. Just referred to the law of Moses as being backward. With no explanation. What is backward about it?

Could you explain that please?

What exactly does "separation of church and state" mean?

I think we have lots of Ayatollahs here.