blackbird

It's simple for you because you read nothing, and know nothing.

Nothing to do with ability. You weren't paying attention.

" 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. {wither: Heb. fade} 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 1:1-6 All heathen.

"16 Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples. 17 And I will wait upon the LORD, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him. 18 Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion. 19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? 20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. {no…: Heb. no morning} 21 And they shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward. 22 And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness. " Isaiah 8:20 KJV You need to study this closely and learn if you do not believe the Bible, study it, and be born again, you are in darkness and won't know the truth. Seeking unto wizards that peep (liberal, left political leaders and pundits) will not lead you into truth, but further into darkness. I met a man in McDs that seemed near madness from seeking unto wizards. He believed money was a bad thing and all his ideas were bizarre. That is where the world system can lead one.

That is a simpleton view. The subject is far more complex than that. Creation scientists look at things from a scientific point of view as well as a Biblical view. The two actually fit together if you understand what real science is. I assume you have not been raised from a Christian family or background and perhaps have been evolutionized in school. So it is understandable why you would be skeptical of the creationist viewpoint. You need to read a few things in the Bible and learn there is a spiritual realm outside the material universe. The universe did not create itself. Everything that exists had a cause. The universe is an effect. Every effect (the universe) had a cause. That cause was an intelligent creator we call God. I assume you are familiar with evolutionist's claims of the earth being hundreds of millions or billions of years old. Perhaps you could read some articles from the Creationist's point of view and at least understand where they are coming from. " 3) Many fossils indicate that they must have formed quickly, and could not have taken long time-spans. a) Common fossils. There are billions of fossil fish in rock layers around the world which are incredibly well-preserved. They frequently show intact fins and often scales, indicating that they were buried rapidly and the rock hardened quickly. In the real world, dead fish are scavenged within 24 hours. Even in some idealized cold, sterile, predator-free and oxygen-free water, they will become soggy and fall apart within weeks.3 A fish buried quickly in sediment that does not harden within a few weeks at the most will still be subject to decay by oxygen and bacteria, such that the delicate features like fins, scales, etc. would not preserve their form. Rapid burial in the many underwater landslides (turbidity currents) and other sedimentary processes accompanying Noah’s Flood would explain not only their excellent preservation, but their existence in huge deposits, often covering thousands of square kilometres." The earth: how old does it look? (creation.com) This article was written by Dr Carl Wieland M.B., B.S.

It is not misogynist to believe in men and women as God created them. They are each unique and each have their own roles. It is you who want to ignore that reality and treat them as if there is no difference. I didn't say they need to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. That is a worn out phrase used by liberals and woke. It shows your true colours. There is nothing dishonourable about having children, raising a family and looking after them in the home. Marriage is honourable. It is foolishness to mock the most important role of women in raising a family. They should be honoured and respected for that role as should men for loving and taking care of their family.

I would agree it started in the second half of the 20th century in the 1960s and 1970s. It started as part of the sexual revolution. Women's lib was part of it. quote The sexual revolution in the 1960s United States was a social and cultural movement that resulted in liberalized attitudes toward sex and morality. In the 1960s, social norms were changing as sex became more widely discussed in society. Erotic media, such as films, magazines, and books, became more popular and gained widespread attention across the country. These changes reveal that sex was entering the public domain, and sex rates, especially among young people, could no longer be ignored.[1] With the introduction of the pill and second-wave feminism, women gained more control over their bodies and sexuality during the 1960s. Women could engage in sex without the risk of pregnancy.[2] At the same time, many women involved in the feminist movement questioned the traditional gender and sex roles ascribed to them. Women's liberation movements sought to free women from social and moral confines.[3] Developments in the gay rights movement occurred during the same period, such as public demonstrations and protests to challenge discrimination against sexuality. Some activists began celebrating homosexuality, but the movement did not really take off until the Stonewall riots of 1969.[4] unquote Sexual revolution in 1960s United States - Wikipedia This is why we have the government, Liberal and NDP parties ignoring biology and the reality of the differences between men and women. This is all part of the women's lib movement and progressive movement that rejects the historic role of men and women and the family structure. It is a societal rejection of the historic Judeo-Christian culture and civilization. Today we use the word woke to describe it, but that word doesn't really explain anything. We have to dig deeper to see it is all part of a heathen society that rejects God and his written revelation. When a society rejects the God of the Bible, it has to fill the gap with it's own man-made secular humanist ideologies. That is what we have today. We see if everyday in many areas. The new premier of Manitoba just talked about how the Legislature is changing the opening prayer to accommodate more belief systems or religions. Presumably they will include "Mother Earth" as that is part of heathen, aboriginal belief systems. We are getting closer to the truth on this topic.

You fail to read articles from scientists and highly educated scholars that I refer to and dismiss it all. So how do you expect to have a reasonable discussion? You only accept a completely biased, one-sided view. If you can't accept there are some scientists, who disagree with Darwinists from a scientific point of view, then that doesn't leave much leeway for reasonable discussion.

I don't think so. This idea of women on the front lines in battle groups is a fairly recent phenomena. It comes from women's libbers and woke people, which have taken over the liberal and NDP parties. When we see documentaries or videos of WW1 and WW2, we don't see women in combat roles or out in battle. No, we see them working in factories producing armaments and taking men's jobs while men are away at war. This is a fairly new women's lib thing.

Canada is slowly being destroyed by liberals. Liberals and NDP don't reveal their real agenda to turn Canada into some kind of "progressive" liberal Marxist state. The first thing on the agenda has been to diminish the Canadian Forces. This goes back to Pierre Trudeau's time when he established diplomatic relations with Chairman Mao in about 1970. One of the most murderous Communists that ever existed. Then in his time in office he reduced Canada's participation in NATO in Europe. Cozied up to Castro. So did his son. We see how things are going now with foreign interference and Trudeau denying the seriousness of it. You wonder why they don't support the military. There's the answer, pacifism, liberalism, and Marxism.

The simple fact that the theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory are unproven and unobservable should be enough to prove to you that you're dealing with pure fiction or speculation, whichever suits you. Calling it sound science is false. You can't observe or repeat something that supposedly happened millions of years ago. It's not science. It is an atheist brainwashing tool.

Your argument is false from the start. The theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory are pure speculation, not science to begin with. There is no "observable evidence that's tested and re-tested". You have bought into the great lie. It is impossible to observe something that supposedly happened millions of years ago. It's not science. I rest my case.

No, it doesn't work both ways. There is no equality when dealing with atheists. When dealing with atheists, you always lose because atheism is not a fair playing field. Anything the creationist or creation scientist says or writes is dismissed or declared invalid from the start. In fact, creation scientists would not even be likely allowed to speak or present their view in so-called science periodicals. And like Michael claims, only peer-reviewed material should be read or accepted, proving it is not a level playing field.

Down through history, isn't it only men who actually fought in armies? Women stayed home and looked after the family and did jobs that supported the nation's armed forces. I can see women in supportive roles but not on the actual combat ranks. There is a psychological and physical difference between men and women. Does the military try to downplay or deny the differences between men and women? I assume politicians made the decision to put women there as part of the new ideology of inclusion and equity. Just seems improper.

Quite true, but human nature being what it is, many men are strongly attracted to women and so putting males and females in that situation does not work. It has eliminated a huge number of applicants. Just saying men should not do those things does not solve the problem. That is the problem with liberals and leftists. They won't accept some realties and think they can change human nature by just telling them to behave a certain way. How well has that worked so far in the Canadian Forces? Women cannot be treated as if they are the same as men. That is just plain stupid.

I don't think so Dougie. I lived in different places, on an island where there was a village. Lots of vacant land there. I also lived in northwest B.C. There are vast amounts of wilderness that would be perfect to live on. For some reason it is not made available to ordinary people. I don't know the procedure to buy crown land outside the villages and towns, but there is a blockage somewhere in the system. I don't think that crown land is normally available for the ordinary person to purchase. Possibly land developers have more rights to purchase crown land. The BC government gave a logging company vast areas of land and the company has gates and signs everywhere keeping people out. Somehow the land that is for sale ends up costing a fortune and there is not much for sale. But a large part of the province is perfectly habitable except the really mountainous areas. Many valleys with rivers and lakes are perfect paradises to live. Some of the obstacles are resource companies who don't want anybody to live in some areas, aboriginals who are trying to claim the land as their traditional territories and oppose anyone living there, and of course environmentalists who oppose humans living anywhere as they worship mother earth and think humans have no rights.

No, not true. I don't believe that. You are making stuff up of course just to be contrary. That is your thing. Nice try. Government should only be doing the minimal things for law and order. Not providing all the social services. If people don't want to make an effort themselves, too bad. Those who can't work for legitimate reasons should be taken care of as should seniors and mentally ill in mental institutions. If we had a proper system, we would have private health care with good medical insurance. Then we would have good, professional and quick medical care. But we have been conned into the mess we are in by Socialist-minded people who want everything handed to them on a silver platter. That's why the country is in the mess it is in.

One reason few want to join the Canadian Forces is because of their DEI and LGBTQ policies. Mixing women with men in the CAF was a mistake. Men and women should be in separate branches of the armed forces. I think that is the way it was in WW2. It is unnatural to mix men and women together and not expect sexual abuse and other problems.

Could this be one reason real estate prices are so high in Canada and citizens cannot easily purchase land surrounding a town or city? Why is government at all levels making it almost impossible for ordinary people to purchase land around municipalities? We have one of the largest land masses in the world yet most of the population is concentrated in a few major centres. Is the fact that about 90% of the land is owned by the crown contributing to the housing crisis? " So, Who Owns Canada? The land of Canada is solely owned by Queen Elizabeth II who is also the head of state. Only 9.7% of the total land is privately owned while the rest is Crown Land. The land is administered on behalf of the Crown by various agencies or departments of the government of Canada. The Canadian Act has no provision for any Canadian to own physical land in Canada. Canadians can only own an interest in an estate. Of the land owned by the Queen, 50% is administered by the provincial governments and the rest by the federal government. The Crown Land administered by the federal and provincial governments can be defined as land not assigned in freehold tenure. The land in Canada is mainly used as national parks, forests, private homes, and agriculture." " British Columbia[edit] 94% of the land in British Columbia is provincial Crown land, 2% of which is covered by fresh water. Federal Crown land makes up a further 1% of the province, including Indian reserves, defence lands and federal harbours, while 5% is privately owned. The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations issues Crown land tenures and sells Crown land on behalf of the Crown in Right of British Columbia.[13]" Who Owns All The Land In Canada? - WorldAtlas

Nonsense. Of course everyone wants everything they can get. It is definitely not government's job to "give its citizens what they want". Where did you come from? How did you get that idea? Governments duty is to maintain law and order, not provide every citizen with a comfortable, prosperous life. It is up to each individual to get educated, work, and earn his or her own requirements for a good life. That is what individual freedom means. Marxism is the fairy tale ideology you believe in whereby government must provide it all as if money grows on a tree and government just doles it out. That is the liberal and NDP ideology. That is why we have a housing crisis and food cost crisis for many people. Government intervention, locking up the land, imposing onerous regulations, fees, and control of everything has led to the situation we are in now where houses are out reach for the average citizen. NO, I was not gung ho. I don't think I supported that idea. If I did make a comment supporting it, I regret it and it would be against my basic beliefs. I know probably many people would have supported government intervention because half of Canada is Socialist-minded. Maybe you are mistaking me for someone else on here. I basically am against government intervention and intrusion into private business. That is Socialist and destructive of a free society and is on the path toward Marxism.

No, they have no right to drag CEOs before Parliament and grill and insult them. They broke no law and are simply operating legally within a free enterprise system. It seems many MPs, and people like yourself forgot all that and think because some companies accepted some grants, they are now beholden to and under the control of left wing Socialist politicians and government. These companies broke no laws. They are still operating legally within the free enterprise system. It is unfortunate that some people sometimes lose their jobs when a company has to lay people off, but that is the price a nation has to pay to have freedom and overall prosperity. It is still far superior to Socialism and government control. Not all businesses are successful either. A certain percentage will go bankrupt and have to close. That is part of the freedom of being able to start and run your own business. It is the same with big companies. They are not always able to keep the company with the same number of employees or they will go bankrupt. They must make business decisions because the there are many factors that change over time that affects their profit. Today, we are living in the age of the internet and internet media is increasing. Traditional old media companies cannot compete with that in the same way and must change in order to survive. That is how free enterprise works. Socialism is not the answer either because governments cannot run businesses as efficiently as private investors and entrepreneurs who put their personal finances and everything they have on the line to make it a success. Governments are inefficient, wasteful, and don't have the same motivation to succeed as private enterprise. So-called democratic Socialism is a failure too because politicians cannot successfully run government and corporations at the same time. There are conflicts of interest. They are under pressure from demands for money and support from all sectors and services and there just is not enough money to go around. We see that happening with the public health care system that is failing in many ways. They also end up with bloated inefficient bureaucracies that waste vast sums of taxpayer money. Dragging CEOs into Parliament to grill and insult them is a direct intervention in how private enterprise works. That is the beginning of Socialist control. If governments are giving them grants, that does not guarantee that a company will not need to make changes and lay people off as circumstances change. Giving them grants is government's choice. It does not mean companies lose their rights to run the company in the best way they see to be successful. The company does not exist for the purpose of providing jobs to everyone at any cost or at the cost of going bankrupt. That is not how free enterprise operates. We are supposed to still live in a free enterprise system.

Michael Hardner said: Blackbird posting in the dead of night. Why me? Why not let the word of God be our guide? "1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. " Genesis 1:1 KJV "19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? 20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. 21 And they shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward. 22 And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness. " Isaiah 8:19-22 KJV This is further explained in Matthew Henry's Bible commentary: "Isaiah 8:17 Vs. 17-22: The prophet foresaw that the Lord would hide his face; but he would look for his return in favor to them again. Though not miraculous signs, the children’s names were memorials from God, suited to excite attention. The unbelieving Jews were prone to seek counsel in difficulties, from diviners of different descriptions, whose foolish and sinful ceremonies are alluded to. Would we know how we may seek to our God, and come to the knowledge of his mind? To the law and to the testimony; for there you will see what is good, and what the Lord requires. We must speak of the things of God in the words which the Holy Ghost teaches, and be ruled by them. To those that seek to familiar spirits, and regard not God’s law and testimony, there shall be horror and misery. Those that go away from God, go out of the way of all good; for fretfulness is a sin that is its own punishment. They shall despair, and see no way of relief, when they curse God. And their fears will represent every thing as frightful. Those that shut their eyes against the light of God’s word, will justly be left to darkness. All the miseries that ever were felt or witnessed on earth, are as nothing, compared with what will overwhelm those who leave the words of Christ, to follow delusions." Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary (sermon-online.com)

I think I know what the Republican's reasoning on that is although I think it is a mistake. They know the Dems are strong on supporting Ukraine, but weak on stopping the millions of illegal migrants from crossing the border into the U.S. So the Republicans are using it as a tool to try to force the Dems into closing the border before they will support the Ukraine. There is no real connection between the two issues except politics. There is only one Democratic Party in power in the White House and Republicans are using whatever tool they think they can to try to get the border shut down. The problem with the Republicans using that is it may hurt the west by giving an advantage to Putin and Russia in the war in the Ukraine. I would not do that if I were an American. I would 100% support the Ukraine. If Ukraine goes down, what country is next?

" OTTAWA — As members of Parliament accuse Bell Canada of corporate greed, the head of the company is defending its decision to cut thousands of jobs, citing a shift in Canadians' viewing habits away from traditional TV. Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats grilled CEO Mirko Bibic during often combative exchanges at a meeting of the House of Commons heritage committee on Thursday afternoon. Parliamentarians had ordered him to appear and answer for the cuts, which affect nine per cent of BCE Inc.'s workforce. Several MPs flung colourfully worded accusations at Bibic, including NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who appeared briefly to scold the CEO for "choosing greed" over giving consumers "a break" on cellphone fees. Bibic defended his company, blaming factors like productivity, inflation and delays in the implementation of the federal Online Streaming Act — a new law meant to level the playing field between traditional broadcasters and streaming companies, under which Bell is benefiting from significant regulatory relief. He told MPs that the media ecosystem in Canada "is in crisis." "The industry is in flux due to technological disruption, changing viewer habits, shifting advertiser demand and vigorous competition from foreign web giants who are not subject to the same costly regulations as Canadian broadcasters," Bibic said. " Bell Canada CEO Mirko Bibic defends job cuts in Commons committee testimony (msn.com) It seems strange, in a free enterprise system, to drag CEOs of large corporations before members of Parliament and be grilling and rebuking them for the decisions they make on the prices they charge or the number of people they lay off as business factors change. I would ask do these members of Parliament believe we now live in some kind of Socialist or Marxist country whereby the MPs and government dictate to companies how they are to operate their businesses? Herein lies the difference between Socialism and Free Enterprise. A Socialist or Marxist system owns and runs everything. There is no free enterprise or right to determine how a business is run. Big brother does it all. The people have to accept the consequences as it was in the Soviet Union after the Communist revolution. There were massive shortages of goods and services. Government ran everything. Is this the direction Canada is heading. Does anyone not see how we are heading in that direction now? Freedom has a price. Not everything is perfect in a imperfect world. But free enterprise has made the west the most prosperous nations on earth. We need to stand up for freedom and reject authoritarianism, Socialism, and Marxism.

Some cities in BC are trying to solve the housing crisis by trying to solve the homelessness problem by putting up tents in an orderly fashion in a designated space and running them in an orderly way. Some places have put up a group of wooden one room sheds with a washroom building, presumably with showers. That is a better idea than tents. But tents and little wooden sheds are not the solution to the housing crisis. They may work for homeless people who refuse to follow rules in an apartment building. But it's not a practical solution to the massive shortage of housing for normal people and families. City councils need to get their act together to make housing affordable by cutting red tape, excessive regulations, cutting fees, and working to make land available for more housing developments at a low cost. Maybe postpone paved roads and sidewalks until sometime in the future when it is more affordable. Just provide basic infrastructure like sewer, water, and electricity for now. The costs have to be reduced somehow.