blackbird

Seriously? What on earth are you trying to say? Do you seriously think Romanism is Christianity? Not sure what kind of churches you have attended but if they taught you Romanism is Christianity, they are extremely apostate and don't know anything about Romanism. Rome does not believe in or teach the true gospel of salvation by faith alone in Jesus Christ, as taught in the Bible so how can it not be a salvation issue? Why do you think the Reformation was necessary? I think you need to do some serious study before replying to this.

Correct. I never said one needed a church or denomination to be in contact with the Creator. "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." 1 Timothy 2:5, 6 King James Version (KJV) Catholicism teaches you need the Roman church's priest's sacraments and Mary.

If one really believes the Bible and understands what Rome teaches versus what the Bible teaches, he will know that it is a false religion. Since PM Carney is a devout follower of the false religion of Romanism, can his judgment be trusted in his position as PM? Many of our PMs have also been a part of that religion, but many of them were probably not particularly devout. Maybe more nominal if they did not attend that church regularly and follow all of its practices. Many bad decisions have also been made down through the history of Canada since Confederation. This article reveals why it is a false religion. quote The Truth About Roman Catholicism by Marion H. Reynolds, Jr. (1919-1997) ©Fundamental Evangelistic Association The Roman Catholic Church is by far the largest and wealthiest of all the so-called Christian denominations. It has always falsely claimed to be the only true Church—the Church which was founded by Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry. In recent generations, the Roman Catholic Church has embellished its image and attracted and held members by claiming to be the one Church that has never changed. However, all such claims are false. In fact, the Roman Catholic Church has done an about-face, actually boasting of the many changes it has instituted to meet the changing needs of Catholics and non-Catholics alike in this modern age Is the Roman Catholic Church the one true Church? Are its past and present teachings and practices Scriptural? Of course not! How has the Roman Catholic Church changed through the centuries? How much has it changed in our lifetime? Have these changes been foundational or superficial? Where is the Roman Catholic Church headed today and in the future. The purpose of this article is to turn the spotlight of truth upon Roman Catholicism, examining both its past history and present teachings. Our sincere desire is to be of help to Catholics, many of whom are well aware that, in recent years, their church has instituted many changes that have left them confused, uncertain, and deeply troubled. For the first time in their lives, many Catholics are raising serious questions about their Church, its leaders, its teachings and its practices. They now realize that their church is not united but divided over issues such as birth control, abortion, divorce, celibacy for priests, women clergy, gay clergy, Papal infallibility, prayer, worship, music, purgatory, confession, Marioltry and even the meaning of the Mass. The moral degeneracy and financial scandals that have rocked the Charismatic movement have also been exposed in the Roman Catholic Church, from the Vatican to the local parish. Confusion reigns supreme and Catholics who take their religion seriously don't know which way to turn. A source of further confusion for many is the fact that for centuries Roman Catholics were taught that all those outside their membership were heretics to be shunned, persecuted or even killed. It was not until the middle of this century that the Roman Catholic Church modified and softened its stand by calling non-Catholics, "separated brethren." More recently, even that negative connotation has been eliminated. Today, Catholics are taught to consider "all Christians" to be "brothers and sisters in Christ." However, these changing outward attitudes on the part of Roman Catholics toward non-Catholics and their increasing usage of evangelical terminology has unfortunately resulted in many evangelicals mistakenly believing that the basic false doctrines and heresies of Romanism have changed, something that simply is not true. Thus, both Catholics and non-Catholics alike should take a fresh look—a Biblical, historical and current look—at this world's largest, supposedly Christian denomination. If it is the one true Church, as it claims to be, then every believer in Christ should become a part of it. But if it is a false church, as it actually is, then all who truly believe the Bible and trust Jesus Christ as Saviour should separate from it, warn about it, and urge others to do likewise. Through our extensive radio and literature ministries, it has been a great blessing to hear from many former Roman Catholics who have been delivered from the bondage of the false doctrines of Romanism. They experienced the new birth by faith in Jesus Christ alone and are now attempting to reach their Catholic loved ones and friends with the Word of God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. At the same time, it has been a real heartache to realize that so many non-Catholics who profess to know Christ as Saviour have been deceived by the new attitudes and evangelical vocabulary of Catholicism. The Roman Catholic Church is now being accepted by many evangelicals as a sister church with only minor differences rather than a false church which preaches "another gospel"—a false gospel. The Truth About the Roman Catholic Church is that it always has been and continues to be a false church. Those Biblical doctrines it professes to believe and teach are vitiated by Roman Catholic dogma based upon tradition that contradicts the Bible, God's infallible Word. Error is never more deceptive than when it is presented with a veneer of truth. The leaders of the Catholic Church have always fit the description of the false teachers who God warned in advance would come on the scene in the last days, deceiving many by their "feigned" (pretended or hypocritical) words—their "great swelling words of vanity," as described in 2 Peter 2:1-3,18,19. Before examining and refuting some of the well known false teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, it is essential to understand that two basic false teachings of Roman Catholicism (even apart from its many other errors), clearly classify it as a false cult rather than a true church. These two basic errors are: First, Roman Catholicism, although teaching that the Bible is the Word of God, adds the spurious apocryphal books to the Scriptures, and also elevates church tradition and the edicts of popes and councils (the words of men), to the same or an even greater level of authority than the Word of God. This amounts to adding to the Word of God, thereby placing Roman Catholicism under God's curse. Deut. 4:2; Rev. 22:18,19. Second, Roman Catholicism, although teaching that faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation, actually denies the truth of the Gospel by adding sacraments, good works, and purgatory as additional requirements for forgiveness of sin and for eternal life. This amounts to the preaching of a false Gospel which places the Roman Catholic Church under God's curse. Gal. 1:6-10. Thus, by Scriptural standards, the Roman Catholic Church is a false church that can only expect God's judgment, not a true church that can claim God's blessing. No amount of outward change should be permitted to obscure this fact. unquote For the rest of the article go to: Roman Catholicism Resources If one is a Bible believer, he should try to understand why someone believes all these false teachings of Rome. LIke many people in the world today, these people were probably inculcated with this false religion from their childhood. Maybe their parents took them to their church where they learned the false teachings. Or maybe they attended a RC school and were taught all the errors there. Either way they grew up believing these things and so today those are the beliefs they hold. Trudeau was a Romanist and even though he did not appear to be a devout or regular church attender, he had what appeared to be a strong disdain for evangelical Christians, and it is reported that he once said they were the worst kind of Canadians. That seems to be a Liberal belief. The biggest problem is the Liberal belief system that they hold. Romanism does not seem to forbid the worst liberal beliefs. The problem is when one's mind is locked into the Romanism system, their mind is closed to Biblical truth. These truths expose the evils of Liberalism. Only by God's grace does one begin to read and believe the Bible. That is the only way they might be delivered from the Liberal ideological mindset.

We will have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. I don't believe punishing Canadians with tariffs and making life more expensive for everyone will solve the tariff crisis or tariff war with Trump. Why make life more miserable for millions of Canadians? We have to pursue other solutions the main one being changes in our economy to build a strong economy. Build, built, build, drill, drill, drill kind of thing and find other markets than the U.S.

I'm glad you asked. Most people would ask the same question. " The Bible is relevant today because: It provides guidance and direction for everyday life. It explains the human story and provides a historical context for our lives. It provides fresh insight, fresh nuggets of truth, and fresh application every time we read it. It is the foundation of our faith and connects us with our past and points us to our future. It informs our practices, directs our actions, and guides our life. It protects us from wrong teaching. It is God’s written word to us, complementing God’s spoken word through the Holy Spirit." "Hebrews 4:12 says, “For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” While the Bible was completed approximately 1900 years ago, its accuracy and relevance for today remain unchanged. The Bible is the sole objective source of all the revelation God has given us about Himself and His plan for humanity. The Bible contains a great deal of information about the natural world that has been confirmed by scientific observations and research. Some of these passages include Leviticus 17:11; Ecclesiastes 1:6-7; Job 36:27-29; Psalm 102:25-27 and Colossians 1:16-17. As the Bible’s story of God’s redemptive plan for humanity unfolds, many different characters are vividly described. In those descriptions, the Bible provides a great deal of information about human behavior and tendencies. Our own day-to-day experience shows us that this information is more accurate and descriptive of the human condition than any psychology textbook. Many historical facts recorded in the Bible have been confirmed by extra-biblical sources. Historical research often shows a great deal of agreement between biblical accounts and extra-biblical accounts of the same events. However, the Bible is not a history book, a psychology text, or a scientific journal. The Bible is the description God gave us about who He is, and His desires and plans for humanity. The most significant component of this revelation is the story of our separation from God by sin and God’s provision for restoration of fellowship through the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Christ, on the cross. Our need for redemption does not change. Neither does God’s desire to reconcile us to Himself. The Bible contains a great deal of accurate and relevant information. The Bible’s most important message—redemption—is universally and perpetually applicable to humanity. God’s Word will never be outdated, superseded, or improved upon. Cultures change, laws change, generations come and go, but the Word of God is as relevant today as it was when it was first written. Not all of Scripture necessarily applies explicitly to us today, but all Scriptures contain truth that we can, and should, apply to our lives today." Is the Bible relevant for today? | GotQuestions.org The subject of Israel is a central issue in the Bible. Israel was God's chosen people. He had and has a plan for Israel. So what the Bible says is nothing to take lightly or dismiss as irrelevant. It is the most important source of truth that there is. The first question you must therefore ask yourself is where do you stand in your personal relationship with God. The Bible tells us what that is. Each one of us is either a redeemed child of God or we are still in rebellion against God. That is the most important issue in life.

This has been Canada's position all along but the fact Carney says this now on the eve of his trip to meet the Pope reveals he is trying to appease the Vatican. He is simply repeating the Vatican line now. The Vatican has a history of being anti-Semitic for 1,500 years. They do not accept what the Bible says on the subject at all. " The Bible affirms that Israel owns their land forever, emphasizing God's sovereignty and the covenantal relationship between God and Israel. Key verses include: Deuteronomy 28:15: "I will give you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be your God." Genesis 15:18: "To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates. " From any rational view, dividing Israel in half would be a major threat to its continued existence. The Palestinians are the same religion, Islamic, as all of the populations in the countries surrounding Israel. They have no interest in a two-state solution, oppose the existence of Israel, and such a scheme would never guarantee peace or the security of Israel. One must ask what PM Carney is thinking and where he gets his ideas.

Carney follows a complete apostate or false religion. It is a man-made religion for the most part in contradiction to the Holy Scriptures which is in English, the King James Bible. Rome's beliefs are invented by men and not taught in the Bible. How will that work having a devout follower of a false religion as the PM of Canada? His allegiance is to the Pope in Rome. Secondly, he is a diehard climate change fighter and elite globalist who belongs to many international organizations. Where does that place Canada on his list of priorities? He does hold some woke beliefs that liberals hold which are contrary to the beliefs of Rome, but Rome turns a blind eye to that and there are no consequences in this world for holding woke beliefs apparently, things such as women's right to choose (killing pre-born babies), teaching LGBTQ+ to school kids, authoritarianism, and Marxist Socialist government. But as for Socialism, Rome is a supporter of Socialism and their objective is the expansion of world- wide political-religious domination. The Vatican is the richest corporation in the world, having accumulated billions in wealth over the many centuries. Read the book "The Vatican Billions" by Avro Manhattan, available online at the archive website. They talk about the need to help the poor. Why don't they set an example with all their wealth?

A so-called two-state solution is not viable or realistic for the simple reason it would carve Israel in half and destroy its ability to defend itself against the very people whose belief is that Israel must be completely eliminated or destroyed. I idea of a two-state solution is built on naivety and blindness to the real world. It thrives on anti-semitism which is prevalent in the world and has been for two thousand years.

I don't agree. We all know Trump is doing it for possibly two reasons. 1. He believes auto industries and possibly others will move their industries to the U.S. He believes tariffs will encourage more things to be produced by American instead of importing them. 2. It is also very likely one of Trump's bargain ploys to try to get a better deal for the U.S. in a new free trade agreement. He thinks he is a master of "the art of the deal". So I doubt they are permanent. When Americans see that the tariffs are costing them a lot of money and not a real benefit, he might be forced to start dropping the tariffs. But whether they are permanent or not, punishing Canadians with tariffs is not going to solve anything. No, it is not my plan. I just don't believe putting tariffs on Canadians will force Trump to drop the tariffs. It will not help the auto industry. It is quite likely Carney was advised by top government financial and economists that putting tariffs on Canadians won't help but it would actually hurt Canadians, especially those who are already struggling to make ends meet. I believe that is what experts probably told Carney. I trust them more than ordinary Canadians who just think somehow tariffs is going to be the solution when it's not. We are a much smaller country compared with America's and they have many other markets they can sell to. Putting tariffs on Canadians would hurt us far more than hurt them. That's the problem.

I know it sounded good to fight back with tariffs on imported goods when Trump first started his threats of tariffs. But in reality it makes no sense to punish Canadians in a useless effort to stop Trump's tariffs. Canada just doesn't have the economic clout and has no chance to make any difference that way. Glad the feds wiped out the idea to put tariffs on most incoming goods. Incoming tariffs will do absolutely nothing to stop Trumps tariffs on goods moving from Canada to U.S. Canada is just too small a country compared with the U.S. Tariffs on incoming goods would hurt Canadians by driving up the price of goods. Where's the sense in that? It would do nothing to stop Trump's trade war but would hurt Canadians, especially those who are already trying to make ends meet. I trust the economic experts who likely advised Carney not to follow through with all the tariffs on Canadians. It is the one bit of good news. Let Canadians decide to avoid buying imported goods from the U.S. when possible and avoid holiday travel to the U.S. Let's not punish those who can least afford it.

PM Carney is going to Rome to attend the new Pope's first mass and meet the Pope. I wonder if taxpayers are going to fund this since the trip is a religious trip. Why should the taxpayer's be paying for these kind of trips?

Cities do not have affordable housing now, so we shouldn't be taking any more immigrants until the problem is solved. The situation is dire. Young families will never own a home because the cost is out of sight. Some cities would take an income of $155,000 per year to be able to even have a chance to save enough for a down payment. That eliminates most middle income people. Even higher than average income is still far short of what is needed.

Quite true. But the elite globalists liberals believe in tearing down borders and creating a one world system where everyone can move and live wherever they wish. If you read between the lines of the U.N. social development goals, you can conclude that they wish to create that kind of world. They believe the way to end world poverty and solve all the world's problems is to just have one world government and redistribute the wealth to everyone. This of course would make everyone equal in poverty. Such a system is completely flawed and against human nature. Such a system does not respect individual initiative, work, or private property. Nobody would want to work for one thing. Why work if the system is going to give you everything? That's the flaw with Socialism and Communism and the U.N. thinking. But they want everyone to bow to them as the great benefactors and caretakers of humanity.

Well, this article gives a very clear answer to that question. He is clearly a diehard Liberal with similar ideology to previous Liberal Prime Ministers. He comes across as more benign and gentlemanly than some of the more aggressive PMs, but holds much of the same liberal ideology. quote Some Canadian Catholics are eager to have a prime minister who shares their faith yet offers a contrast to Justin Trudeau. Mark Carney appears to fit the bill. In 2015, while serving as Governor of the Bank of England, Carney was named Britain’s “most influential Catholic” by The Tablet. My co-religionists would be wise, however, to look beyond flattering headlines and critically examine the political machinery Carney represents. Carney is no moderate. Nor is he a reformer. He is a well-connected globalist with deep ties to institutions such as the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, Bank for International Settlements, and the Financial Stability Board. These organizations place little value on national sovereignty, individual liberty, or democratic accountability. His rise is not rooted in public trust or grassroots support. It’s the product of backroom deals, media adoration, and elite coordination. The need for “Catholic Carney caution” goes well beyond the veteran national banker’s personal strengths and weaknesses. It is rooted in the very party he has chosen to lead. The federal Liberal Party has long been Canada’s most aggressive force opposing Catholic social teaching. It pushes policies that are openly hostile to the Church’s moral framework. This is the party that: Labels opposition to abortion as “misogyny” and being “anti-women” Proposes revoking the charitable status of “anti-abortion organizations” and seeks to amend the Income Tax Act to eliminate “the advancement of religion” as a charitable purpose Aggressively promotes Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), turning euthanasia into a default “solution” for those suffering from poverty, mental illness, or disability Advances radical gender ideology, pressuring institutions – including Catholic schools –to adopt policies that contradict basic Catholic anthropology, including the sterilization and chemical castration of vulnerable children The concerns don’t end there. The party Carney leads also: Demonizes political dissidents Demonizes those who stand for medical freedom and against coercive vaccine mandates Freezes the bank accounts of peaceful protestors Shows sympathy toward Communist China Promotes censorship and restricts free speech through legislation such as Bill C-16 and Bill C-4 This is not a party that tolerates dissenting views rooted in Catholic moral teaching, let alone advocates for them. Carney’s Liberal party alignment raises serious questions about the principles that will shape his leadership. Concern extends beyond personal religious consistency. Canadians, Catholic or otherwise, must consider the broader consequences of a government led by Mark Carney: Continuation of the Trudeau era’s economic failures: Reckless spending, heavy taxation, and inflationary policies disguised with buzzwords like “green transformation” Opposition to financial decentralization: As a lifelong central banker, Carney is a vocal critic of Bitcoin and other decentralized cryptocurrencies, which challenge centralized monetary control. While the world increasingly embraces financial independence through digital currencies, Carney is committed to preserving central bank dominance by ensuring Canadians remain tied to inflationary fiat currency Expansion of financial surveillance Preference for global elites over Canadian citizens: Through his involvement with the World Economic Forum and similar global institutions, Carney shows his priorities lie with transnational technocrats – not ordinary Canadians An undemocratic path to power: Carney’s political rise is not a reflection of popular support. It’s the result of elite orchestration. Less than 0.5% of Canadians had any say in his leadership Mass Immigration: Mark Carney recently appointed Mark Wiseman chair of the Century Initiative, an organization advocating for a Canadian population of 100 million by the end of the century. Wiseman has said publicly Canada should eliminate all immigration screening and adopt an open-door policy Carney is not a neutral technocrat. He represents the calculated continuation of a political order built on control and centralization of power. He is Trudeau 2.0. unquote A Catholic’s caution about Mark Carney | The Catholic Register Some believe he is going to lead change. Whether this is true or not, it is hard to believe he would just throw the long-established liberal ideologies and policies out the window. I somehow doubt he will change much. Time will tell, but I am not holding my breath for any significant changes. People voted for him to a large extent because he promised to be the master in dealing with Trump and the 51st state threat. However, many people don't know he was chosen as the new Liberal leader by a very small number of people. Then the election was called and behold, there was was only a choice between a couple of parties, one of which he was the leader of and PM to be. Many people perhaps did not know he has been a long-established Liberal elite globalist and is to a large extent controlled by a party which has a long-established Liberal ideology that is not likely going to change.

In Roman Catholicism, yes, you are correct. One can be quite devoted and a practicing Catholic, yet be a committed Liberal progressive at heart and reject traditional moral values. Look at Trudeau 2.0. He was a Catholic but never followed their teachings on opposing abortion, and he supported MAID and the LGBTQ+2S agendas including sexual orientation and gender identity. Carney will be the same. Rome does not enforce its moral beliefs on its members. It is basically a free-for-all. So, you are correct. Even devout followers do not take the moral teachings of their religion seriously. Globalist and liberal ideology comes first.

Hey I just found a far more revealing article describing PM Carney and what he will be like. So I am replacing the previous post with this one. It shows you are actually quite correct. According to this article, Carney is Trudeau 2.0 or really 3.0 (Trudeau 1.0 being Pierre Trudeau). It looks like Carney is a very typical liberal and so we can expect pretty much a continuation of Liberal policies and ideology. quote Some Canadian Catholics are eager to have a prime minister who shares their faith yet offers a contrast to Justin Trudeau. Mark Carney appears to fit the bill. In 2015, while serving as Governor of the Bank of England, Carney was named Britain’s “most influential Catholic” by The Tablet. My co-religionists would be wise, however, to look beyond flattering headlines and critically examine the political machinery Carney represents. Carney is no moderate. Nor is he a reformer. He is a well-connected globalist with deep ties to institutions such as the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, Bank for International Settlements, and the Financial Stability Board. These organizations place little value on national sovereignty, individual liberty, or democratic accountability. His rise is not rooted in public trust or grassroots support. It’s the product of backroom deals, media adoration, and elite coordination. The need for “Catholic Carney caution” goes well beyond the veteran national banker’s personal strengths and weaknesses. It is rooted in the very party he has chosen to lead. The federal Liberal Party has long been Canada’s most aggressive force opposing Catholic social teaching. It pushes policies that are openly hostile to the Church’s moral framework. This is the party that: Labels opposition to abortion as “misogyny” and being “anti-women” Proposes revoking the charitable status of “anti-abortion organizations” and seeks to amend the Income Tax Act to eliminate “the advancement of religion” as a charitable purpose Aggressively promotes Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), turning euthanasia into a default “solution” for those suffering from poverty, mental illness, or disability Advances radical gender ideology, pressuring institutions – including Catholic schools –to adopt policies that contradict basic Catholic anthropology, including the sterilization and chemical castration of vulnerable children The concerns don’t end there. The party Carney leads also: Demonizes political dissidents Demonizes those who stand for medical freedom and against coercive vaccine mandates Freezes the bank accounts of peaceful protestors Shows sympathy toward Communist China Promotes censorship and restricts free speech through legislation such as Bill C-16 and Bill C-4 This is not a party that tolerates dissenting views rooted in Catholic moral teaching, let alone advocates for them. Carney’s Liberal party alignment raises serious questions about the principles that will shape his leadership. Concern extends beyond personal religious consistency. Canadians, Catholic or otherwise, must consider the broader consequences of a government led by Mark Carney: Continuation of the Trudeau era’s economic failures: Reckless spending, heavy taxation, and inflationary policies disguised with buzzwords like “green transformation” Opposition to financial decentralization: As a lifelong central banker, Carney is a vocal critic of Bitcoin and other decentralized cryptocurrencies, which challenge centralized monetary control. While the world increasingly embraces financial independence through digital currencies, Carney is committed to preserving central bank dominance by ensuring Canadians remain tied to inflationary fiat currency Expansion of financial surveillance Preference for global elites over Canadian citizens: Through his involvement with the World Economic Forum and similar global institutions, Carney shows his priorities lie with transnational technocrats – not ordinary Canadians An undemocratic path to power: Carney’s political rise is not a reflection of popular support. It’s the result of elite orchestration. Less than 0.5% of Canadians had any say in his leadership Mass Immigration: Mark Carney recently appointed Mark Wiseman chair of the Century Initiative, an organization advocating for a Canadian population of 100 million by the end of the century. Wiseman has said publicly Canada should eliminate all immigration screening and adopt an open-door policy Carney is not a neutral technocrat. He represents the calculated continuation of a political order built on control and centralization of power. He is Trudeau 2.0. unquote A Catholic’s caution about Mark Carney | The Catholic Register Sounds like the Catholic religion is very flexible. It accept anybody with any beliefs. They don't have to hold traditional Catholic values. Obviously the beliefs of Liberals are completely contrary to traditional teachings in many ways. In other ways, Catholic values appear to be kind of globalist or Socialist. Several things stand out: 1. Mass immigrations appears to be on the agenda. 2. Preference for global elites over Canadian citizens. After all what have ordinary Canadians got to contribute to global elites or their agenda? Nothing really. We the citizens are just a convenient tool for a global elitist to gain more political power on the world stage and push their global elitist agenda. 3. Continuation of the Trudeau era’s economic failures: Reckless spending, heavy taxation, and inflationary policies disguised with buzzwords like “green transformation”

You obviously don't believe the King James Bible or believe in the God of the Bible. Yet God sent his Son to die for the sins of mankind and was raised from the dead and seen after the resurrection by many people. Many of the Apostles who saw Jesus after the resurrection became martyrs. People don't die for a lie. "Philippians 4:6 - Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. Colossians 4:2 - Continue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving; Acts 2:42 - And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 1 Thessalonians 5:17 - Pray without ceasing. Psalms 145:18 - The LORD is nigh unto all them that call upon him, to all that call upon him in truth. John 17:1-26 - These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: (Read More...) Romans 1:9-10 - For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers; (Read More...) Ephesians 6:18 - Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; 2 Timothy 3:1-7 - This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. (Read More...) James 5:13 - Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms. John 15:1-3 - I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. (Read More...) Luke 18:1 - And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;

In a Confederation, one province does not get to dictate how everything will be for the whole country. There are ten provinces and each one has one vote out of ten or possibly twelve if you count the territories. You seem to think everything in the Constitution must be approved by one province, Quebec. That's not how democracy works. Of course democracy is not perfect. Eight million people in Canada voted for the Conservatives in the last election, yet they lost and the party that won the most seats gets to form the government and implement their policies. Millions of Canadians disagree with many of the Liberals policies and ideas, but that is how democracy works. It's not perfect. There is no perfect system in the world. I understand Quebec did not sign on to accept the Constitution as a whole because there were some things in it they disagreed with. That doesn't make a lot of sense. As I said, Quebec is only one province out of ten. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Quebec was given jurisdiction over many departments that other provinces do not have. So it seems Quebec governs itself in more ways than other provinces do. So your claim that the constitution was made without Quebec is false. They had the same input as every other province. Just that the general consensus was not always agreeable to Quebec. One province doesn't get to dictate things that the majority of provinces do not agree with. They likely agreed on most things. That's what a Confederation means. Some provinces in western Canada do not agree with how the Federal government is interpreting the Constitution and imposing laws on them that they feel is an intrusion into provincial jurisdiction. I am speaking particularly about the oil and gas industry. The feds are interfering with that and they should not be. I am not an expert on French schools outside Quebec, but we know Quebec has language laws within Quebec than restrict when or where English is used in Quebec. I would think generally, one cannot expect a French school in some other province unless there is a sufficient number of French speaking students to attend it. If the number is too small, then why would you expect a French school should be provided? It all depends on the numbers. Canada has spent a fortune and it seems to me unreasonable to demand that there be services in English and French everywhere in Canada when many areas hardly have anybody whose mother tongue is French. If people are going to places with little or no French, they should learn to speak English. Same situation exists in Quebec. People who move to French areas must learn to speak French. I am not a fan of forcing people to speak a language that very few people speak in a certain area or city. I understand Quebec is trying to protect the use of French in Quebec, but that should not be something forced on everyone in the rest of the country, unless a particular area speaks French. Then accommodations should be made. Each case must be looked at on its own. I don't know anything about those issues. But if you want to be totally independent, you would have to convince enough people in your province to vote to be independent. I don't think you can expect the Confederation to give your province complete independence while your province is still part of a Confederation and you have representatives in a federal government. You can't have it both ways. You seem to think you can and demand you be treated as totally independent and still be part of the federal Parliament and Confederation and making decisions on how every other province is governed. That is false. I believe you have the same rights as every other Canadian. Just don't expect to impose French on people in other provinces or areas where they do not speak it. That would be unreasonable. Other than that, I am not sure what you are referring to. I think you mean a minority in Quebec want to separate, not a significant number. Such a step should require more than 50% plus 1 vote because many people are fickle and do not understand the ramifications of things sometimes. Separating in a serious way should require a large proportion of the population understanding the implications when making such a decision. You dismiss the consequences, but I don't think you really understand. Quebec is largely a Roman Catholic province. Look at central and south America. Those are largely RC countries and are among the poorest and most crime-ridden countries in the world. Spain has had a very tumultuous history as well with civil wars and dictatorships. France had a lot troubles in its history as well. Germany has been a disaster with the Nazis and the Papacy signing a Concordat with the Nazis around 1933. But if enough people feel like you in Quebec at some point, Quebec could separate completely. That is how the world seems to go. It would not necessarily be a good thing for Quebec people, but that is their choice. I don't think Quebec is poorly treated now. That is your narrative but it is false in my opinion. Being part of a larger Confederation definitely has its advantages. Things like national security is greater, sharing in helping each other when needs arise, sharing intelligence and technology, interprovincial trade, easy movement of manpower between provinces, and just providing help to each other when various needs arise. Being independent so that one can say they are sovereign is not necessarily a good thing.

CTV News just announced they will have a special report this evening. They said the housing affordability problem is worsening at an alarming rate. This is all on the Liberal government (with NDP backing). Liberals have been in power for ten years and now have a new mandate. They are totally responsible for this mess. What exactly are they doing? What have they been doing the past year? Why is the problem getting worse if they have been doing something about it? Obviously they are not doing anything to seriously solve the problem. Where was the CTV before the election when Canadians needed to know about this?

Carney is a slave of the Pope. The previous Pope was a Jesuit Socialist. That means leftist, globalist. Keep sending billions of dollars around the globe and continue the war on climate change.

As I said, the Acadian matter happened about 250 years ago. That is ancient history. It sounds like it was a very unfair deportations and seizure of lands, but as I said, many bad things happened in the past. That was a very long time ago and things are not done like that now and won't be. Don't forget we have a Constitution and a Charter of Rights, and all kinds of laws that must be followed in Canada. Nothing is done the way it was several hundred years ago. It looks like you are looking for an excuse to be unhappy with being associated with Canada. It is pointless to debate ancient history. As I said, many things happened in history that were unfair. But we can't govern the country and make decisions based on historic scenarios that no longer happen. We can't change history. People today would not agree with many things that happened centuries ago. So why dwell on them and try to use them for an excuse to demand something different today? It is not a legitimate argument today. The country has already changed drastically from the way things were long ago. Everyone has rights that never existed back in history. We also have various government services, pensions, etc. that never existed even 70 years ago. In fact, some people think we now have far too much government at various levels with increasing taxes and control. Canada was created long after the Acadian events. Nobody today would agree with what happened at that time. But if you are so convinced Quebec would be better off separate, I guess there is not much I can say. If enough of you vote to separate, then I assume it would be negotiated and done. I don't believe in forcing a majority of people in a province to remain part of Canada if they don't wish to be in it. Just remember cutting yourself off from a large country could have serious consequences in your own smaller country. You would have less influence in the world and possibly a serious affect on the standard of living, health care, and the level of law and order and other things. There are many small countries in central and south America that are real messes with lots of poverty and crime.

It would be interesting to see how they do the recounts and how they determine there are hundreds of spoiled ballots. What the criteria is for declaring a spoiled ballot should be examined. Since every vote counts and in this case one vote may be or is the deciding factor, how ballots are designated spoiled could be something that needs to be looked at very carefully. One vote could decide whether a majority or minority government is formed in the this election.

Yes, that was a sad event. However, that occurred 250 years ago around 1755 in a certain situation and is certainly no guide or factor on how anyone should behave today. Many bad, unjust things happened in history in many countries in the world. We cannot dig up the past and rectify all the injustices that happened long ago. Neither can we use historic wrongs for political arguments today. It only leads to endless, unsolvable debates. Don't forget the French Revolution took place 35 years after that in France in 1789. That was nothing to be proud of either. There have been wars between countries and civil wars all through history. That is the story of mankind. Mankind has a corrupt, fallen heart and is in enmity with God. The Bible says every person must be born again to enter into eternal life. Rome does not teach the truth from the Bible. Better start reading the King James Bible, which is based on the majority text and Received Text. The only way out of this mess the world is in is for each individual to be reconciled to God by the new birth described in the gospel of John. There is no other solution and life in this world will never be perfect. There will always be problems. One needs to become a child of God by faith in Jesus Christ and his perfect sacrifice that atoned for our sins and the sins of mankind. "10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; 13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. " Hebrews 10:10-13 KJV

I doubt there is any truth in those claims. We live in a world where people invent lies for their own agenda you know. You should know we live in an imperfect world and things happened in history that nobody would agree with today. But those things don't prove anything about the situation today. British North America and Canada from 1867 on were far more peaceful than the Indian wars in the U.S. You probably know something about that. I strongly dispute there was a genocide against the French or natives in Canada. Although the area of Quebec which was a small area hundreds of years ago, it was taken from the rule of France by the British. However, Quebec was given pretty well everything and governs itself by and large. I would have to spend some time digging into some of your claims, but they sound wild. Louis Riel executed someone they should not have for one thing. The natives in Canada have received a lot and there have been very few violent conflicts. In recent years in fact, Canada has paid billions of dollars to FNs. I don't know where the money went or if it even reached the common folk. Canada has bent over backwards to help Quebec and FN. Quebec receives billions of dollars in equalization payments. Let's look at recent history too and not try to skew the discussion with frivolous events that might have happened in the distant past. It does sound like you are twisting history., I never heard anything on the media about Quebec being "kicked out". What we know is Quebec refused to sign onto the 1982 Constitution repatriation. I am not sure why or what they were asking for. Maybe you can tell me what they wanted. Of course I am aware of it. But I don't think Canada would benefit from something like that. We have a good system now with the Constitutional Monarchy. I wouldn't worry too much about what wealth or property the monarchy owns. It is in the UK. Canada probably contributes something annually as it should. But a King or Queen basically can only eat the same as anyone else. Money spent on staff for various purposes creates jobs. I think we get good value with the Monarchy. We can discuss what functions it serves, but that is another long discussion. A republic means the elected leader, such as a President, is the head of state. That doesn't give as much security as our system. He could simply declare himself as the dictator and abolish elections and Parliament. Our system prevents that from happening because the armed forces and RCMP swear allegiance to the King. There is no evidence or proof that a Republican system is any better than the Constitutional Monarchy that we have now. No system is perfect because human nature is not perfect. Why try to change a system that is working fairly well? It doesn't make sense.

I suspect a large percentage of the anti-monarchists in Canada are immigrants or descendants of immigrants from the third world. Liberals are largely controlled from Quebec and they brought in millions of immigrants from third world countries, most of whom are probably uneducated about our Constitutional Monarchy system of government. So they come in and become anti-monarchists right away. I thought a condition of Canadian citizenship was to swear allegiance to the monarchy. All they need to do is take a look at the mess in the third world countries. Is that what they want to create here?