Religious Right in Canada

[KeyStone]

Who is ignoring Christians? The NDP is filled with Christians, hell it was founded by one.

What real change? Making it a more religious country? Turning back the clock a few hundred years?

Sure, but the Tommy Douglas days are long gone.

Instead the loudest NDP voices deride anyone associated with religion - and assume that they are anti-woman, anti-choice, homophobic etc.

You've provided a great example by equating a more religious country with turning back the clock.

Essentially, you're saying that the eradication of religion is progress.

[WIP]

Hmm, I don't think it's anyone waking up. I think the Left is repeatedly making the mistake of ostracizing the religious, particularly Christians.

They really need to decide if they want to make real change in this country, or just sit on their high moral, intolerant horses.

The Left hasn't been ostracizing religious people; they have only expected the same thing the Right used to before they discovered the benefits of having dedicated religious fanatics on their side -- keep your religion in church and out of the political arena!

Those NDP founders you have mentioned, such as Tommy Douglas, may have used what they understood as Christian principles to craft their version of socialism (or social democracy), but they didn't wrap it in God talk and use their Christian values to determine social issues like abortion, birth control and gay rights, for example. If they start flirting with moderate or left wing evangelicals and Catholics, like Barack Obama started to do in the presidential election, then it will be a conflict between Christian socialism and right wing Dominionism over economic issues, since all of these lefty evangelicals like Rick Warren, believe pretty much the same social gospel as the Pat Robertson and James Dobson. The Canadian versions may agree with NDP economic and environmental policy, but they will certainly be working against their laisez-faire social policy.

Everyone in favour of keeping church and state separate, will have to try to form a new party, as the Left and the Right start swinging their crosses at each other to decide who gets to form "Christian government"

[ToadBrother]

Sure, but the Tommy Douglas days are long gone.

Instead the loudest NDP voices deride anyone associated with religion - and assume that they are anti-woman, anti-choice, homophobic etc.

You've provided a great example by equating a more religious country with turning back the clock.

Essentially, you're saying that the eradication of religion is progress.

As an atheist, I look upon increasing religiosity as a direct attack on my freedoms. I have the right to expect my government not to force a religion down my throat. I have the right to expect equality before the law, no religious tests, no state church, as is guaranteed to me by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I don't want to be bound by laws whose only justification is "God tells us so".

None of should. The Enlightenment was all about removing the often dangerous combination of politics and religion which had fueled so much evil in Europe during the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, and the wars and atrocities that stemmed from them. Do you actually think secularism simply arose at the whim of anti-religious bigots? I mean, have you no sense of just how vile and repugnant the mix of religion and politics can be, even the "milder" forms like the Elizabethan Compromise?

[KeyStone]

As an atheist, I look upon increasing religiosity as a direct attack on my freedoms. I have the right to expect my government not to force a religion down my throat. I have the right to expect equality before the law, no religious tests, no state church, as is guaranteed to me by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I don't want to be bound by laws whose only justification is "God tells us so".

None of should. The Enlightenment was all about removing the often dangerous combination of politics and religion which had fueled so much evil in Europe during the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, and the wars and atrocities that stemmed from them. Do you actually think secularism simply arose at the whim of anti-religious bigots? I mean, have you no sense of just how vile and repugnant the mix of religion and politics can be, even the "milder" forms like the Elizabethan Compromise?

There is a difference between creating laws based on religion and creating laws that allow for the freedom of religion.

For instance:

Should the children of Jehovah witnesses be forced to accept blood?

Should pharmacists be forced to distribute the Morning after pill?

Should women be allowed to wear a hijab when playing soccer?

Should RCMP officers be allowed to wear turbans?

Should employers be forced to let Jewish people off on Jewish holidays?

It is one thing to seperate church and state. It is quite another to make atheism the official religion of the state, by only accepting the practice of religion, so long as it does not inconvenience anyone.

[guyser]

For instance:

Should the children of Jehovah witnesses be forced to accept blood?

Should pharmacists be forced to distribute the Morning after pill?

Should women be allowed to wear a hijab when playing soccer?

Should RCMP officers be allowed to wear turbans?

Should employers be forced to let Jewish people off on Jewish holidays?

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

[ToadBrother]

There is a difference between creating laws based on religion and creating laws that allow for the freedom of religion.

For instance:

Should the children of Jehovah witnesses be forced to accept blood?

Should pharmacists be forced to distribute the Morning after pill?

Should women be allowed to wear a hijab when playing soccer?

Should RCMP officers be allowed to wear turbans?

Should employers be forced to let Jewish people off on Jewish holidays?

Which has what exactly to do with what you're saying?

It is one thing to seperate church and state. It is quite another to make atheism the official religion of the state, by only accepting the practice of religion, so long as it does not inconvenience anyone.

Secularism is not atheism. Secular government is a government which does not promote a specific religion, does not require or at least make conditions more favorable for a specific religion. That means an atheist or a Wiccan would be equal in the eyes of the government to a Christian.

[Oleg Bach]

Which has what exactly to do with what you're saying?

Secularism is not atheism. Secular government is a government which does not promote a specific religion, does not require or at least make conditions more favorable for a specific religion. That means an atheist or a Wiccan would be equal in the eyes of the government to a Christian.

Secularism does have an agenda. That agenda is to slowly erode all religions our of existance..as commonly known, those that believe in God will not be fully compliant to the all mighty earthly state...so the state seeks to have total domination over the population - and destroying religion and the tribal family is a primary goal...Secularism may not be atheism - but it sure strives to generate atheism where god is the state.

[guyser]

Secularism does have an agenda. That agenda is to slowly erode all religions our of existance..as commonly known, those that believe in God will not be fully compliant to the all mighty earthly state...so the state seeks to have total domination over the population - and destroying religion and the tribal family is a primary goal...Secularism may not be atheism - but it sure strives to generate atheism where god is the state.

Somewhere a clock is missing its cuckoo.

Has the govt revoked tax breaks for churches?

Made laws against the practice of religion?

Outlawed religious holidays? (...in fact they have expanded religious days off for many.)

Vodka or whiskey?

[ToadBrother]

Secularism does have an agenda. That agenda is to slowly erode all religions our of existance..as commonly known, those that believe in God will not be fully compliant to the all mighty earthly state...so the state seeks to have total domination over the population - and destroying religion and the tribal family is a primary goal...Secularism may not be atheism - but it sure strives to generate atheism where god is the state.

Well, your religious faith seems to have turned you into an ugly little racist, so I can't see the problem with eroding your particular beliefs, although I prefer to hold them up as examples of the pathetic nature of some folks' and their beliefs.

[normanchateau]

Christians who are regular church goers are more socially conservative then those that do not.

I think you are equating Christianity with regimented, dogmatic religiosity. I suspect that Muslims who are regular mosque goers are more socially conservative as are Sikhs who are regular temple goers and Jews who attend synagogues regularly. Harper appeals to social conservatives of many religions, not just Christians. Those who believe that Canada in the twenty-first century has something of value to learn from what was written thousands of years ago by primitive, malodorous, tent-dwelling, Bronze Age Middle Eastern men whose life span was less than 30 years are probably more socially conservative than those who do not.

There is a political party for Christians who actually are social conservatives and have no use for a hypocrite like Harper who opposes same sex marriage, abortion and embryonic stem cell research yet governs as though he does not. It's called the Christian Heritage Party (CHP). Here's how CHP and CPC differ:

http://www.chp.ca/en/policy_comparison.html

[Molly]

Interesting point, Keystone- though I'd say Toadbrother answered you well in saying that secularism is not atheism.

Let's flip-flop the questions: Should children be at the mercy of life-endangering opinions of their parents? Are Pharmacists under any obligation to accommodate the religious views of their customers? When you join a league, should you be expected to abide by the safety rules that are in place when you join? Etc.

Every uncomfortable accommodation abrogates the priorities of someone else. (Not just in terms of religios belief, but in every negotiation.)

Religion, frankly, isn't that special. We all have our phobias, and our dislikes, our opinions and priorities. If religion is to have a special place among priorities, it is only because it is earmarked as being absolute, and irrational.

There's no reason to suppress religious practice on ones own time, and plenty of reason to accommodate it publicly, but the reason boils down to 'Whatever floats your boat, so long as it is no skin off my nose.' , because we'd all like our quirks accommodated - and nice folks would.

So: Yes, children must be protected from their parents life-threatening notions. No, but their potential employers might just fire their butts if they refuse. That's up to the individual leagues, but they might want to revisit their rule books to see if there is a way to maintain safety while not having the unintended effect of disinclusion. Why the heck not? and Encouraged, but not required. Sometimes the work needs to be done when it needs to be done.

[MontyBurns]

Well, your religious faith seems to have turned you into an ugly little racist, so I can't see the problem with eroding your particular beliefs, although I prefer to hold them up as examples of the pathetic nature of some folks' and their beliefs.

Do all you secularists/atheists really want a country stripped of all religion like North Korea or the USSR?

[Smallc]

Do all you secularists/atheists really want a country stripped of all religion like North Korea or the USSR?

Nobody is suggesting removing religion from the country. This is the defense of the secular state, one that allows the practice of all religions.

[whowhere]

Do all you secularists/atheists really want a country stripped of all religion like North Korea or the USSR?

What are you talking about? Russia has many Christian churches. Russia is as much a Christian Based Country as the United States. The United States in its constitution has a separation between church and state. The United States is founded on Roman principles of freedom of Beleif. Obviously Russia lso has separated church from state but this took a communist country to accomplish that feat.

As for Canada, how is it, we still have a christian queen as our sovereign Immigrants have to pledge allegiance to the queen? In the United States the Citizens have to pledge to defend the US constitution.

Interesting though Canada has used that pour excuse of a 1982 constitution and charter to rebrand Canada as a multi culture, multi religion nation. Tough to do, when these immigrants have sell their souls by pledging allegiance to a christian Queen.

To all you immigrants who have pledge your allegiance: Dress light because you and your queen will be going to nice warm spot. The God of Jacob is a jelous God and doen's like anyone stealing his stories. Doing so is copyright infringement and against North American Law!

[MontyBurns]

Nobody is suggesting removing religion from the country.

But that is what atheists/secularists are slowly doing.

Secularists dont want someone preaching to them but have no problem preaching themselves.

[Smallc]

But that is what atheists/secularists are slowly doing.

Secularists dont want someone preaching to them but have no problem preaching themselves.

No one is preaching to you. What secular people want is freedom and equality within the boundaries of a just society. We are not slowly removing religion, we are protecting it in conjunction with other things.

[CANADIEN]

What are you talking about? Russia has many Christian churches. Russia is as much a Christian Based Country as the United States. The United States in its constitution has a separation between church and state. The United States is founded on Roman principles of freedom of Beleif. Obviously Russia lso has separated church from state but this took a communist country to accomplish that feat.

The USSR was officially an atheist state, and the goal of the Sooviet government for most of its existence was not the separation of Church and State, but the elimination of religion. No such thing in the US.

The God of Jacob is a jelous God and doen's like anyone stealing his stories. Doing so is copyright infringement and against North American Law!

:lol:

[whowhere]

The USSR was officially an atheist state, and the goal of the Sooviet government for most of its existence was not the separation of Church and State, but the elimination of religion. No such thing in the US.

:lol:

You should watch Amazing Race, they had to go to an orthadox christian church for one of their tasks. Wow???? Amazing, Christian churches in russia. Who would have thunk it. If what you say is true about the soviets there has to be holocaust stories out there that would rival hitler. Odd, no stories have bubbled out of the Soviets persecuting those who follow religion.

Canadien you would be better served to embrace what is accurate and true rather than trying to project a bias to accomplish your dr evil agenda. The Fact is the Roman Alphabet and the Judeo Christian Roman story is a steep mountain to climb and you are likely to break your neck trying to unravel it.

[gordiecanuk]

Jesus would probably have voted NDP, he was after all something of a radical. I doubt he'd vote with the establishement parties, the Libs or Cons.

[CANADIEN]

You should watch Amazing Race, they had to go to an orthadox christian church for one of their tasks. Wow???? Amazing, Christian churches in russia. Who would have thunk it. If what you say is true about the soviets there has to be holocaust stories out there that would rival hitler. Odd, no stories have bubbled out of the Soviets persecuting those who follow religion.

At least 3 to 9 million people, and maybe uo to 20 million, were murdered by the Stalin regime alone, not counting at around 5-8 million during the famine of 1931-1933, which was at beast the unentended consequence of an attempt to break indivudal farm ownership and at worse a genocide.

Most of the hierarchy and lower clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church were murdered during the Revolution of 1917-1922. That Church was the victim of murders, deportations and other forms of persecution during most of the existence of the Soviet regime; so where, among others, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Goergian Orthodox Church the Wastern Catholic Church in Western Ukraine, the Catholic Church in Lithuania and the Western USSR. By the end of the Soviet regime, almost none of the Jews remaining in the country practiced Judaism. The only group that remained relatively unscathed was the Muslims, most because the regime wanted to maintain good relations with the Arab world. On top of that, most religious buildings were confiscated and converted into museums, government offices, factories, or just plained demolished. At the best of times, all that religious authorities could expect was to be exploited for propagenda purposes and to not have their services disrupted as long as they remained discreet and didn't protest.

In Russia TODAY there is separation of Church and State and some level of religious freedoms. But tthere is NO denying that there was indeed a high level of persecution of religions under the Soviet regime.

Edited January 11, 2009 by CANADIEN

[Mr.Canada]

Jesus would probably have voted NDP, he was after all something of a radical. I doubt he'd vote with the establishement parties, the Libs or Cons.

You seem to think Jesus as some sort of benevolent person. He was anything but. He had compassion but little patience for those who don't follow His rules.

[Smallc]

You seem to think Jesus as some sort of benevolent person. He was anything but.

But don't you believe he was god on earth? Isn't God supposed to be benevolent?

[Mr.Canada]

The religious right will take more control the Tories at some point and have more power to shape policy. Thank God. More and more religious folks are realizing that the other parties are Godless and secularism pushers which is too far away from God. The pendulum is starting to swing back to the right now as it cannot go any further left. Our time is coming.

[BubberMiley]

Praise Jeebis!

[Smallc]

The religious right will take more control the Tories at some point and have more power to shape policy. Thank God.

I agree. If you are right, the tories will be removed from power and never again return.