scribblet

Really? I thought it was fueled by some christians' all-consuming hatred of gay people. Wrong, with the exception of Phelps and his crew. Most people who are against SSM and prostelyzing in schools do not 'hate' homosexuals, they believe in equal rights, but not in SSM. That does not equate to hate. The disinformation I refer to is putting forward a theory that these so called 'dominionists' or people who believe in the Rapture, are actually working towards bringing down the gov't and destroying the earth so they than be 'raptured'. Only a very small segment believe in the rapture, it is not part of most Church teachings, or it never was when I was young. I'm not a church goer now so maybe I've missed something, have the Anglicans for instance taken to believing in it these days? And here all along I thought it was some secret Skull & Bones fraternity which has been stage managing world event for the last couple of hundred years, and if its not them its the Bavarian Illumaniti.

Exactly, some of them are huxters, and if they pray for some things to happen, so what, it doesn't affect anything. I didn't say it was a sign of mental illness to believe in the bible, you know full well I was referring in particular to Fred Phelps and his group, who in no way reflect main stream Christianity, they are a very small group of winguts. Most of his congregation are whacked out relatives. I'm not familiar with any of Benny Hinn's speeches but I bet he didn't call for executing the "jews" or supports turning kids into human bombs. Dominionists is a new term, coined by the left to spread disinformation to discredit a whole group of people, some of whom I'm sure do believe in the rapture and whatever it entails. Lehayes books are fiction, nothing more, he probably believes in it, but so what, he's not harming anyone. These days it seems the hatred towards Christians is reaching a fever pitch, IMO fuelled by an all consuming hatred of Bush, who has support from some Christians. Rational argument seems to go out the window, which results in a mindless cacophony of hate against religion. Funny thing is, secular humanist or atheism, is a religion in itself. In the Torcaso Opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court declared secular humanism to be a religion. Nhttp://members.aol.com/Patriarchy/definitions/humanism_religion.htm Never mind, it won't be long and Bush will be gone, and life will go on.

The British Empire had a lot to with helping end slavery, William Wilberforce, a Christian btw, comes to mind. Portugal was the first country to abolish slavery in its European territory. Britain passed the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act in 1807. The Slavery Abolition Act, passed in 1833, outlawing slavery in all British colonies.

Pretty much like the posters on here who go on about 'dominionism' etc. Unless religious fundamentalism has taken hold while I wasn't looking, I'm pretty sure that we are pretty well free of becoming anywhere near a theocracy, not to mention constitutions of both countries. I get a sense that the secular humanism cult doesn't want Christians to have a voice in democracy or a vote, don't know about othe religions as they don't seem to have a problem with other fundamentalist faiths and violent actions.

If anyone has been dismantling anything it is the ACLU and not Christians. While some Christians may want some changes e.g. no abortions and SSM, they are not calling for a total theocracy, and are not committing violence to that end. (except for the odd one who goes after abortion docs.) Fred Phelps and his merry band of relatives are beyond contempt - and probably mentally ill. As far as I'm concerned all this 'dominionist' crap is left wing hypberbole meant to discredit Christians of any kind, but the hypberbole and ranting of the left on this, does have a purpose, maybe one we should be more afraid of. The secular humanists are dedicated to re-shaping the country in their image of a social 'utopia' but we should we accept their prostelyzing, they are no different than any group with an agenda. They all have a say in a democracy.

According to some people on here, who never say a word against this type of extremism - its the Christians we have to worry about, although I havn't read of any of them calling for the 'Extermination of Jews' or anyone else.

Really, what about Lenin for one. Don't know what preverse means in this context. As for 'dominionists' do these people you call that know they are 'dominionists' I always thought it was something to do with the Dominion of Canada, which I believe in so does that make me one. Either way, if a minority of people wish to see a return of North America to a completely Christian nation, there is nothing at all to lead us to believe that want to eliminate anyone. What is a lunatic fringe, is the original article about an eco-extremist who has said mankind is a 'virus' and we need to 're-wild the planet.' He doesn't as far as I know suggest how we get rid of a few billion people. Maybe they should do us all a favour and be the first to lower the population.

It passed with unanimous upport from all three parties! A big thank you to all who wrote and called your MP’s office in support of this critical child protection bill over the years! You made a difference! After four tense weeks Bill C-22 passed third reading in the House of Commons on Friday, May 4. Although some MPs were opposed to the bill, the three parties were able to reach an agreement on the bill behind the scenes prior to Friday afternoon’s vote which allowed it to pass quickly, at that point. Thus, there was no debate at third reading or a need for a recorded vote on the bill. http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/P...41#SOB-2057902) The bill will now go before the Senate for final consideration and hopefully passage before summer. II) Highlights of the Age of Protection Bill Read the full text of the bill here as passed at third reading: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/P...nguage=e&Mode=1 1) Consent No Longer an Excuse – The accused can no longer use the excuse that the victim consented to the act. 2) Mistaken Age No Longer an Excuse – The accused can no longer use the defence that he was mistaken about the victim’s age (unless the accused took all reasonable steps to ascertain the age of the complainant.). 3) Only Age 16, Not 18 - The United Nations defines a child as anyone under the age of 18. it is a significant step. If the bill passes the Senate and receives royal assent Canada will no longer have the lowest age of protection in the Western world. 4) Close-In-Age Exemption Loophole - The bill contains a “close-in-age” exemption so that consensual teenage relations will not be criminalized, provided that the older partner is not in a position of trust or authority over the younger teen and the relationship is not exploitative. For 12 and 13 year olds the close in age exemption is less than 2 years. For 14 and 15 year olds, the close in age exemption is less than 5 years. This means that a 13 year old could have relations with a 12 year old, and that a 19 year old could have relations with a 15 year old without being criminally charged. 5) Marriage & Common-Law Loop-hole – The Justice Committee approved one amendment regarding common-law and marriage relationships for “transitional purposes” between the previous age of consent law (14) and the new law (16). This amendment was approved by the House at third reading. The bill creates “an exception for transitional purposes in respect of an accused who engages in sexual activity with a 14- or 15-year-old youth and who is five or more years older than the youth if, on the day on which this Act comes into force, the accused is married to the youth. The exception also applies to the accused if, on the day on which this Act comes into force, he or she is the common-law partner of the youth or has been cohabiting with the youth in a conjugal relationship for less than one year and they have had or are expecting to have a child as a result of the relationship, and the sexual activity was not otherwise prohibited before that day.” http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/P...&Mode=1&File=19 (SUMMARY) “In those cases, the close-in-age exception does not apply and the relationship is legal regardless of the age of the older partner. Statistics Canada figures showed that in 2001 there were about 316 15-year-olds who were legally married or in common-law relationships. Most provinces ban marriage under age 16, but make exceptions when the girl is pregnant.” http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...11-eb06d01b6954

Pretty radical, but there's only one religion out there now using violence to bring about a theocratic state, and its not Christianty.

You have a point, and I'm sure they will be much better prepared next time. I wonder how well prepared we are if we were to start getting frequent tornados and hurricanes, I suspect they don't have a lot in place for that right now. If the followers of Gore believe him, then we should be getting ready for disasters.

It is funny I agree, wonder the Beeb has anything similar -

I noticed there's nothing about these dominionists in the MSM, in fact its the first I've heard of it, maybe polynewbie could enlighten us - over a Timmies LOL

People who aren't even worthy of Normie's contempt. Sheez, and here I thought Norma and I might go for a Timmies one day

Wonder if these 'dominionists' know they are 'dominionists' scary scary LOL I don't think I've seen so much you know what in all my life. I think there's an infection here.... maybe its part of the tinfoil hate brigade. I think I need a Timmies

Facts - don't bother them with facts -

Tories miss an important aspect of the PM's taxpayer-paid hair primper. Harper's handlers had carefully nurtured the "hockey dad" image but the moment suburbia learned this macho profile was supplemented with a wardrobe steward/coif teaser, well, let's just say it's made the Tim Horton crowd a bit queasy. Who is the Tim Horton crowd - enquiring minds would like to know.

What do you mean by 'our' enemies - who are/is 'our' and who are 'our' enemies?

What on earth is a dominionist do I need a tinfoil hat for this one ?

I guess this ads to the debt-challenged Liberal problems http://www.recorder.ca/cp/National/070507/n0507139A.html Rae goes to court to get $50,000 Liberal leadership deposit back OTTAWA (CP) - As former Liberal leadership contenders scrounge for money to pay off up to $3 million in cumulative campaign debts, Bob Rae has gone to court to recoup the $50,000 deposit each candidate was required to plunk down. The money is desperately needed by some candidates. At least two of them are finding it so difficult to raise money that they're urging the party to take over all campaign debts for all 11 contenders. Those with knowledge of the discussions say that's highly unlikely to happen. The party found itself flush with cash after last December's profitable leadership convention and promises were made to refund the deposits as a way of helping candidates reduce their onerous debts. But Elections Canada vetoed the move as an illegal cash transfer. The watchdog agency considered the deposits to be entry fees, not refundable deposits. And while the law allows candidates to pay for services from the party, Elections Canada ruled that it does not allow the party to transfer cash to candidates.

Yes, guess I should have put in quotes. Yes, the link she provided supports my theory that all this malarky about the rapture is part of the blogosphere's demonziation of Bush. Not that he's any angel, but you get my drift.

According to the CBC's official blog, May is "Pinko Commie Leftoid" month at the CBC, now I'm a tad confused, I thought every month was "Pinko Commie Leftoid" month over there. Strange though, that they are now admitting they are leftoids, even if its in fun. http://www.insidethecbc.com/fun/pinkomonth/

I came across this today, and am absolutely blown away by the rhetoric and what I see as mostly fabrications and a smear campaign against Christians. Personally I don't know evangelicals but years ago I had some neighbours who would fit that category,and I worked with two, but they sure didn't fit the stereotype pictured on some left wing sites. They believe that these Christians are actually seeking the destruction of the planet in order to facilitate the return of Christ e.g. the Rapture What I see presented as suppposedly a wide group of Christians in the USA and Canada has virtually nothing to do with the Christianity I grew up with and people I know now. According to these 'progressives' they all read Tim LaHaye and have one goal: to facilitate God's hand to waft them up to heaven from where they will watch Armageddon and the destruction of Planet Earth. Apparantly it is the fastest growing religious movement in Christianity today and we should all be very afraid. - To my mind this view has become a left wing mantra because of Bush and his beliefs which they pushin it in order to instill fear into the masses. While these people can stereotype this group of people apparantly we are not allowed to say anything similar about other religions. Not sure I've got my point across and don't want to be too wordy, but I guess I am just flabbergasted at the hyprocrysy of the left. I don't doubt a number of people do believe in the Rapture, but I do not believe that they wish to facilitate the end of earth. http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/38/8664 One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington. Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a worldview despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. The offspring of ideology and theology are not always bad but they are always blind. And that is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts. One-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup Poll is accurate, believes the Bible is literally true. This past November, several million good and decent citizens went to the polls believing in what is known as the "rapture index." These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in the 19th century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captivated the imagination of millions of Americans. Its outline is rather simple, if bizarre: Once Israel has occupied the rest of its "bibli-cal lands," legions of the Antichrist will attack it, triggering a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. As the Jews who have not been converted are burned, the messiah will return for the rapture. True believers will be lifted out of their clothes and transported to heaven, where, seated next to the right hand of God, they will watch their political and religious opponents suffer plagues of boils, sores, locusts and frogs during the several years of tribulation that follow.

Me too, I didn't vote.

You don't like the results so now its a waste of time LOL

Not sure how old this is but http://www.readersdigest.ca/debate.html?a=v&di=74 it says here A report last year by Liberal MPs investigating the gasoline industry failed to demonstrate any illegal gas price fixing among Canadian oil companies. The government's "price collusion" bloodhounds met with hundreds of people, turning over every stone..... http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/192040 an interesting article here an this part might have legs He wants to see the burden of proof lowered so that it has a civil component, with damages, rather than proving criminal intent to fix prices. This might give an investigation some legs.