Religious Right in Canada

[ToadBrother]

If there weren't lefty do gooder christians standing in the way I am sure there wouldn't be a death row wasting tax dollars. The judge would render his judgment and the prisoner would be escorted to the rope and hung for all to see.

Well, yes, if you're prepared to sacrifice every notion of civil liberties that our civilization has spent centuries building, then executions are easy.

Bullets are cheap. Rope and a tree is environmentally friendly; Can be re-used over and over.

No taxpayer in the world should be allowing human trash to continue on. As they say, kill them all and let God sort them out.

I wonder if you would be thinking that way if you were falsely accused of a capital offense. It's easy to sit on the sidelines and demand blood vengeance.

[Molly]

...perhaps we could eqaully summarily execute the judges, police, prosecutors etc. involved in the wrongful conviction.....

.....then they'd be mighty carefuly never ,never, never to railroad anyone else ever again....

[Mr.Canada]

Well, yes, if you're prepared to sacrifice every notion of civil liberties that our civilization has spent centuries building, then executions are easy.

I wonder if you would be thinking that way if you were falsely accused of a capital offense. It's easy to sit on the sidelines and demand blood vengeance.

I'm advocating the death penalty to be only used in the most heinous of crimes and only where there is DNA evidence or more than one eye witness to the crime. The Jury would decide who gets the death penalty of coarse. A jury of the convict's peers. I find it hard to believe that the victims families of Bernardo's victims or Olsen's victims would object. We should hold a referendum on the matter and see what the people want.

[ToadBrother]

I'm advocating the death penalty to be only used in the most heinous of crimes and only where there is DNA evidence or more than one eye witness to the crime. The Jury would decide who gets the death penalty of coarse. A jury of the convict's peers. I find it hard to believe that the victims families of Bernardo's victims or Olsen's victims would object. We should hold a referendum on the matter and see what the people want.

It's always easy to win an argument by picking the most extreme cases. No one would shed a tear of Olsen or Bernado were swinging from the gallows, but most convicted murderers do not fall so easily into those categories.

[CANADIEN]

I don't wish to coddle criminals like you people do. I'm an advocate of harsh punishment and much longer jail sentences. I understand that you people feel that murderers are just misunderstood nice kind people, not me, sorry. Unless you've been effected by violent crime you'll never understand the impact it has on your family. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is what I believe CANADIEN.

I know you wouldn't mind living next door to a murderer and rapist who serves little time for his crimes and let your kids play with him alone but not everyone has your level of forgiveness, I certainly don't. If that's my sin, then it's mine to bare and confess.

I don't forgive murderers and rapists and won't let my kids play at his house unsupervised like a fellow I met CANADIEN. I'll confess exactly that this Saturday and I'll try to forgive murderers and rapists as you do. Thank you for that.

Being Catholic doesn't mean I live without sin because I choose to live my life by a higher authority.

Death penalty for people who are proven without a doubt by DNA or 2+ eye witnesses murderers otherwise life in prison. That means life, not 25 years. Life without parole.

I don't really care what a murderer felt before, during or after he killed someone. He gave up that right when he killed a fellow citizen.

You don't know my position on how we should treat criminals. Apparently, your knowledge of Catholic teaching on the death penalty seem to be a bit lacking. Let me refresh your memory. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."

Care to comment?

[SocDem]

I'm advocating the death penalty to be only used in the most heinous of crimes and only where there is DNA evidence or more than one eye witness to the crime. The Jury would decide who gets the death penalty of coarse. A jury of the convict's peers. I find it hard to believe that the victims families of Bernardo's victims or Olsen's victims would object. We should hold a referendum on the matter and see what the people want.

A Referendum on the matter? That would just be a waste of tax payer money, as it would overwhelmingly be shot down. Face it, capital punishment is a way of the past not because we are immoral, but because it doesnt work and industrial progressive societies are above a vindictive vengeful justice system

Edited January 29, 2009 by SocDem

[Mr.Canada]

You don't know my position on how we should treat criminals. Apparently, your knowledge of Catholic teaching on the death penalty seem to be a bit lacking. Let me refresh your memory. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Care to comment?

What's your problem? I support the death sentence for people like Bernardo or Olsen. So what. You want to care about people like this, be my guest. I'm Catholic, I'm not a Saint. Perhaps you live a perfect life, I do not. Why are you always on my ass with all this Catholic stuff all the time? Trying to make me look like a hypocrite? Yes, as soon as someone claims to be a Christian they need to live a perfect life? Do you live a perfect life CANADIEN?

Furthermore I have a copy of the Catechism sitting right here beside my bed.

Edited January 29, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[Smallc]

sorry, misread.

Edited January 29, 2009 by Smallc

[Mr.Canada]

Earlier today, you said that you live a life free of sin. Are you now admitting to being a hypocrite?

I never said any such thing. No one can live without sin. Quote me here or rescind what you just said.

[Smallc]

I never said any such thing. No one can live without sin. Quote me here or rescind what you just said.

Sorry, misread your earlier post.

Edited January 29, 2009 by Smallc

[Mr.Canada]

Sorry, misread your earlier post.

Thank you.

[Smallc]

Thank you.

No problem. When I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

[CANADIEN]

What's your problem? I support the death sentence for people like Bernardo or Olsen. So what. You want to care about people like this, be my guest. I'm Catholic, I'm not a Saint. Perhaps you live a perfect life, I do not. Why are you always on my ass with all this Catholic stuff all the time? Trying to make me look like a hypocrite? Yes, as soon as someone claims to be a Christian they need to live a perfect life? Do you live a perfect life CANADIEN?

Furthermore I have a copy of the Catechism sitting right here beside my bed.

My problem? It's with people who spend their time saying that one must follow to the letter all the teachings of the Church to be deemed to be a Catholic, while they themselves depart from it whenever it suits their prejudice.

BTW, you don't know what my position is regarding scum like Bernardo and Olsen (it's "them rot in prison", in case you wondered). And no, I am not perfect.

Edited January 29, 2009 by CANADIEN

[Mr.Canada]

My problem? It's with people who spend their time saying that one must follow to the letter all the teachings of the Church to be deemed to be a Catholic, while they themselves depart from it whenever it suits their prejudice.

BTW, you don't know what my position is regarding scum like Bernardo and Olsen (it's "them rot in prison", in case you wondered). And no, I am not perfect.

For the record the current Pope and the one before that were against the death penalty but their isn't any teaching saying we cannot support it.

[CANADIEN]

For the record the current Pope and the one before that were against the death penalty but their isn't any teaching saying we cannot support it.

There is no teaching saying that people supporting gay marriage will be excommunicated either, which didn't prevent you from saying thatthose holding that position should be excommunicated.

The teaching of the Church regarding the death penalty is clear. You are of course free not to follow it.

Edited February 1, 2009 by CANADIEN

[normanchateau]

For the record the current Pope and the one before that were against the death penalty

I didn't know Popes could choose to ignore Church teachings. Must be nice.

[Oleg Bach]

For the record the current Pope and the one before that were against the death penalty but their isn't any teaching saying we cannot support it.

Those that support the death penalty are the same types that are capable of murder. It's the same sort of spirit that inhabits the death penalty advocate and the common killer - only differnce is that the common killer has the courage to murder - where as the death penalty person ...does not want anyone to know he is a killer ...and a coward - so he instists that the state to it on his behalf.

[Who's Doing What?]

Those that support the death penalty are the same types that are capable of murder. It's the same sort of spirit that inhabits the death penalty advocate and the common killer - only differnce is that the common killer has the courage to murder - where as the death penalty person ...does not want anyone to know he is a killer ...and a coward - so he instists that the state to it on his behalf.

Horse pucks!

[whowhere]

Those that support the death penalty are the same types that are capable of murder. It's the same sort of spirit that inhabits the death penalty advocate and the common killer - only differnce is that the common killer has the courage to murder - where as the death penalty person ...does not want anyone to know he is a killer ...and a coward - so he instists that the state to it on his behalf.

I wonder what platform of thought you are operating from? The old testament is clear, eye for an Eye. If you kill you run the risk of being killed. That said, if it is established you are of no value and are a danger to society in General why keep you around? Why should hard working people support trash with their tax dollars. This axiom should also apply to over zelous police and prosecutors who exagerate evidence in order to win their charge or case. We need to bring back the rope and tree.

I support the death penalty and the only reason I don't inflict justice upon the corrupt is because I would be arrested for doing so. Is it cowardice to not want to go to Jail to rid the earth of scum? You are confused, the state insists on inflicting justice on our behalf not we who insist the state do it for us. If the state will stand aside I am more than willing and able.

[Oleg Bach]

If you are going to bring back the rope and the tree you had better line up the judges and lawyers first. I am still astounded by the fact that I presented a bundle of affidavits to the Chief Justice...and a transcript plus endorsement that was hidden for a full five years by the government and their henchmen - causing the loss of what should have been a successful litigation. The documents belatedly presented clearly showed that the three people who supposedly granted consent --- were not even in the court room or ever aware of the hearing - Yet the judge - and all the lawyers - plus a few social workers...state in the lost and mysterious transcript that people are present and they are granting consent ----\

THE TRUTH WAS THEY WERE NOT PRESENT AND THIS TRAVESTY BECAME A COVER UP THAT LASTED FOR ALMOST SIX YEARS --- AT GREAT EXPENSE AND STRESS TO THE PLAINTIFF...AND THE SUPREME COURT DID NOTHING - THEY PROTECTED THEIR OWN CORRUPT CREEPS.....What a horrible learning experience - to lose faith and fully understand that the court are corrupt form the lowest to the highest in the land.

The attitude of the high court can be summed up as - so you caught us being crooks - so what and what can you do about it? When the courts and officers of the court commit common fraud you would think that her Chief Justice would at least reprimand the culprits..but no. Evil tacit policy rules.

[scorpio]

I wonder what platform of thought you are operating from? The old testament is clear, eye for an Eye.

Oh please that old chestnut? Better read Levitucus again for all the crimes one could die for. I especially like the one where unruly children can be taken to the city gates and stoned.

Just for the record, you do realize that God has killed either directly or indirectly over 2 million people, some for as little as complaining. link

Edited February 3, 2009 by scorpio

[WIP]

Oh please that old chestnut? Better read Levitucus again for all the crimes one could die for. I especially like the one where unruly children can be taken to the city gates and stoned.

Almost every law in the Old Testament carried a death penalty for breaking it, except surprisingly enough, God is pro choice when it comes to abortion..........or at least he didn't call for the death of a man who causes a woman to have a miscarriage, so the loss of her pregnancy apparently is not "killing the unborn":

EXODUS 21

21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

Just for the record, you do realize that God has killed either directly or indirectly over 2 million people, some for as little as complaining. link

I noticed on that site, the author's 2 million figure represents the deaths where numbers are given. He estimates approximately 30 million would have died in a worldwide flood, but fortunately these deaths are mythical. Even the slaughters claimed during the conquest of Canaan likely never happened according to modern archaeologists. But those literalists who believe these events were real, are justifying genocide on a massive scale.

[whowhere]

Oh please that old chestnut? Better read Levitucus again for all the crimes one could die for. I especially like the one where unruly children can be taken to the city gates and stoned.

Just for the record, you do realize that God has killed either directly or indirectly over 2 million people, some for as little as complaining. link

You are right and you are actually nailing the sin conundrum on the head. To live up to Leviticus would be a mighty feat and quite impossible. What I think happened over time is Synogogues became an imposing presence on the minds of Man that Christianity/Jesus dieing on the Cross was a move create a yin yang paradox to Sin. Really, Jesus in fact represented Freedom but unfortunatly where their is "freedom" their are those who will twist and exploit people for their own vanity.

Because of the state of the world dynamic one must draw upon what will psychologically sustain you and really what makes sense. If you have read the Old Testament then you know God also forgives your sins as well. I would have to to Say God of the Old Testament is about instructions and your compliance to those instructions. God killed alot of people for carelessness and frowardness. I would have to say the God of the Old Testament has successfully carved out his characteristics. Of course to many people that is unacceptable so they elevate their vain Jesus believing in their man idol thinking he will deliver them into the Heaven he preached about.

However, the Jesus fallacy is that Jesus was likely a product of emotional and psychological brainwashing carried out by his twisted family. It is fact the Greeks and Greek Society had the Septuagint a greek translation of the Old Testament 300 Before Christ. 300 Years is alot of time to digest those stories and for a "christian" movement to mobalize a polarizing messages to those old testament stories.

It is also Historical Fact it took 300 more Years for Christianity to pick up momentum as a religion. Think about that, 600 years! It took another 1400 years to get the Christian Monkey off the worlds back, so to speak.

Jesus has said some somethings that I think could be legitimate but that is something each every person must sort through. What I do find in reading some of the posts is that they don't believe there really, really is a God or there is a jesus but they want to use the concept of God, Jesus to herd the people so to speak.

On that, I say people, WAKE UP to effers..

[guyser]

Hmmm......

"Atheists Supply Less Than 1% of the Prison Population

In "The New Criminology", Max D. Schlapp and Edward E. Smith say that two

generations of statisticians found that the ratio of convicts without

religious training is about 1/10 of 1%. W. T. Root, professor of

psychology at the Univ. of Pittsburgh, examined 1,916 prisoners and said

"Indifference to religion, due to thought, strengthens character," adding

that Unitarians, Agnostics, Atheists and Free-Thinkers are absent from

penitentiariers or nearly so.

During 10 years in Sing-Sing, those executed for murder were 65% Catholics,

26% Protestants, 6% Hebrew, 2% Pagan, and less than 1/3 of 1% non-religious.

Steiner and Swancara surveyed Canadian prisons and found 1,294 Catholics,

435 Anglicans, 241 Methodists, 135 Baptists, and 1 Unitarian.

Dr. Christian, Superintendant of the NY State Reformatories, checked

22,000 prison inmates and found only 4 college graduates. In "Who's Who"

91% were college graduates, and he commented that "intelligence and

knowledge produce right living" and that "crime is the offspring of

superstition and ignorance."

Surveyed Massachusetts reformatories found every inmate religious, carefully

herded by chaplins.

In Joliet, there were 2,888 Catholics, 1,020 Baptists, 617 Methodists and

0 non-religious.

Michigan had 82,000 Baptists and 83,000 Jews in their state population.

But in the prisons, there were 22 times as many Baptists as Jews, and 18 times

as many Methodists as Jews. In Sing-Sing, there were 1,553 total inmates with

855 of them Catholics (over half), 518 Protestants, 177 Jews and 8 non-

religious. There's a very interesting qualified statistic.

Steiner first surveyed 27 states, and found 19,400 Christians, 5,000 with

no preference, and only 3 Agnostics (one each in Connecticut, New Hampshire,

and Illinois). A later, more complete survey found 60,605 Christians, 5,000

Jews, 131 Pagans, 4,000 no preference, and only 3 Agnostics.

In one 29-state survey, Steiner found 15 unbelievers, Spirtualists,

Theosophists, Deists, Pantheists and 1 Agnostic among nearly 83,000 inmates.

Calling all 15 "anti-christians" made it one half person to each state.

Elmira reformatory overshadowed all, with nearly 31,000 inmates, including

15,694 Catholics (half), and 10,968 Protestants, 4,000 Jews, 325 refusing

to answer, and 0 unbelievers.

In the East, over 64% of inmates are Catholics. In the national prison

population they average 50%. A national census found Catholics 15%. They

count from the diaper up. Hardly 12% are old enough to commit a crime.

Half of these are women. That leaves an adult Catholic population of 6%

supplying 50% of the prison population.

Liverpool, England produces three percent as many young criminals as

Birmingham, a larger city, 28% coming from Catholic schools.

http://www.skepticfiles.org/american/prison.htm

[Froro]

First Post here after finally finding a Canadian forum on political topics.

How very entertaining!!! I have just spent the better part of 3 hours reading all 59 pages of diatribe and have a few comments.

First off. Mr. Canada.... My Dearest Sister Shirley from my blessed girls Catholic School would certainly be calling you into her office for a chat on Catholic Charity and a lesson on how we are to treat others.

You obviously have not been listening in Church. To address a few of your points.

Capital Punishment is murder, and a mortal sin by ANY definition.

Jesus forgave the prostitutes (hmmm...Mary Magdalene was proclaimed a Saint remember??), perhaps you should lighten up on your condemnation of sinners, as Jesus taught forgiveness of the sinners)

With regards to your comments about Catholic Schools being superior to Public schools? You obviously don't have any children in the system who require any kind of special needs. I have pulled all four of my children from the so called Christian Catholic system due to lack of supervision, out of control bullying, and an administration who would rather see a child with a reading disablity pushed through the system as opposed to actually trying to help said child to Learn. The public school system in this province is far superior for any kind of special needs and or enrichment programs. (You can call any number of groups within the province dedicated to children with special needs and they will all tell you the same thing). Through these programs my child has overcome his disability and is now above grade level and is taking "gifted" programs. So much for the dumb kid that was constantly being put down by his Catholic teachers.

This opened my eyes to a new understanding of what it means to be a practising Catholic. I have found the secular multi denominational public system to be so much kinder, and in fact more Christian in their treatment of our children than our old Catholic schools. They have learned tolerance, religious differences and respect thereof, and kindness to all. Hmmmm....isn't that what Jesus was trying to teach us? I am proud to know that my children celebrate and/or respect every holiday and religious observation of ALL faiths from the school's population. Contrary to what you think, the majority of Ontarians overwhelmingly voted against the Conservative platform of seperate religious schools for all.

MY Roman Catholic Church taught me tolerance, kindness and forgiveness of all, empathy, understanding, and encouraged us to help anyone in need regardless of whether they were sinners or not, without judgement or condemnation. What a shame those beautiful lessons have been slowly changing to lessons of intolerance, judgement, and hate. What a shame the Catholic Church has slowly been driving those of us who were raised in a different more tolerant Church that did not teach fire and brimstone religion to leave the Church. I do miss the Church but will not return. The Church of today is not what it was, it is filled with even more hyprocrisy, and intolerance all in the name of the POPE, not Jesus. What a shame that those wonderful priests I grew up with have mostly left the Church.

If defining myself as a Catholic means accepting the values and morals you hold....I'm walking out the door faster than Sister Helen could write us up for not adhering to uniform policies!! Feel free to judge me any way you choose as I will reject any notion that I am going to hell for being a good person.

I'm trying to keep all the names straight along this thread but the only one that really stood out was poor Mr. Canada and his dilusional concept of how the world should be defined, so forgive me for not using any further names.

This thread has been both humourous and exceedingly educational, and some excellent arguements made (noting the above comments).

Regarding being secular. I suppose after reading this thread I should consider myself secular. Is it a belief? No...it's more of a philosophy. I consider our school (as mentioned above) secular. No actual religious viewpoint taught but all are taught, no discrimination because all holidays are observed/respected, and the children learn of all cultures and basics of all religions. If this is a bad thing, I must be an idiot as I can not see how teaching children about each others backgrounds and customs can do anything but foster understanding. We are given a notice at the beginning of each month and parents have the option of having their children sit out if they feel strongly about it. It's no big deal. OH...btw, the Christmas Tree is a Christmas Tree, not a holiday tree at our school, the Menorah, is a Menorah, etc etc...It is called RESPECT.

Equating a secular government with communism is a stretch at best. (and don't come back with North Korea, or Russia, I've already read those arguements). Religious and cultural backgrounds (as well as socio-economic) will always play a role in how we make decisions and members of Parliament are not immune from such influence. The ultimate goal is to see legislators who can seperate their religious values when making decisions of laws that will influence the greater masses, at the same time serve the greater good, and protect ALL citizens from any kind of persecution. I would have much greater respect for a member of Parliament who withheld his vote due to his/her own moral stance than for one who voted for or against simply because it followed their religious doctrine.

I will now take off my rose coloured glasses and look at the real world.....sigh.....

(For the record and for all to see, I have voted Conservative, and Liberal, and even NDP (once) throughout my life. Until the current conservatives can show one bit of any kind of real fiscal conservativism as opposed to vote buying irresponsibility, and unnessary games (making every vote a confidence vote) they shall not have my vote again).

Looking forward to delving into the rest of these threads tonight and tomorrow.....so far these are much more thought out than the typical nonsense I see on the CBC/CTV and newpaper websites.....