Army Guy Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Meh, several denominations have accepted it and even perform SSM ceremonies. Even if religion had any place in politics (which it doesn't), CPC is still way late getting on board. Good for them, so has most Christian religious groups learned to accept it, or rather learned to live with it would be a better term. That does not mean they have to jump on the band wagon, and start performing ceremonies...like that is some huge indicator of acceptance.... Religion touches everything in this nation, including politics....all one has to do is watch the news every night....Lets not forget that this nation and most of our values, morals and constitutional rights are based on the Christian religion....And I don't think that will change any time soon...It may not be perfect in fact it has a lot of warts and a very ugly side, but I rather live here than say any where else.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 ....Lets not forget that this nation and most of our values, morals and constitutional rights are based on the Christian religion....And I don't think that will change any time soon...It may not be perfect in fact it has a lot of warts and a very ugly side, but I rather live here than say any where else.... Which of our Charter Rights come from Christianity? What "values and morals" are you saying come from Christianity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 The stance itself isn't a disgrace. The disgraceful part is that it took 10 f-ing years after it became law for them to finally a bellow out a meagre ok. Th Conservatives voted to take the "opposition to same sex marriage" out of their platform. They did not endorse same sex marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Meh, several denominations have accepted it and even perform SSM ceremonies. Even if religion had any place in politics (which it doesn't), CPC is still way late getting on board. Several minor denominations. Meanwhile all major religions are opposed to it, including our growing Muslim, Hindu and Sikh populations. It's called democracy. When substantial numbers of people are opposed to something parties tend to act slower, especially when those in opposition are party supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Several minor denominations. Meanwhile all major religions are opposed to it, including our growing Muslim, Hindu and Sikh populations. It's called democracy. When substantial numbers of people are opposed to something parties tend to act slower, especially when those in opposition are party supporters. That doesn't sound like democracy as we know it in Canada... sounds like the definition of tyranny of the majority.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Which of our Charter Rights come from Christianity? What "values and morals" are you saying come from Christianity? Good question, how about we start with the opening sentence. of the CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982. found here ://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: The above statement is a huge indicator that religion plays a role in our guiding principles, and given that not that long ago the majority of Canadians were Christians, and took their religion a lot more serious than we do today. It is bound to have an impact in our policies , Morals and values that are still reflected today. Some scholars have said that Canada was built by Christians but not built to be Christian only. For example freedom of religion, All Canadians are free to practice any recognized religion they want, what I mean by that is one can not just make up a religion that would provide benefits to an individual or small group, like the guy in Ontario that wanted to wear a colander on his head for a drivers lic picture... And yet we still have Christian national holidays, we do not have any other religious national holidays, just Christian...Citizens are free to celebrate any other religious holidays providing they take time off...Now this Christian holidays have become more of just a day off for most Canadians than a religious day of worship, I get that but this is an example of Christian influence in our country...there are plenty more all one has to do is look... I did not say all of our policies are directly tied to Christianity, as a nation we are slowly moving away from our religion, but on the other hand one can not simple say, they do not exist. God is mentioned in our national anthem, Not that long ago, the lords prayer was recited every morning after the national anthem, many children went to Sunday school...and did so for many years, stores were not open on sunday a day of rest, which is still law in some areas... but like I have said we as a nation are moving on, and religion is taking a lessor role on our society....but the Christian influence is still there.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 That doesn't sound like democracy as we know it in Canada... sounds like the definition of tyranny of the majority.... What do you think democracy is, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law: The above statement is a huge indicator that religion plays a role in our guiding principles, and given that not that long ago the majority of Canadians were Christians, and took their religion a lot more serious than we do today. It is bound to have an impact in our policies , Morals and values that are still reflected today. Some scholars have said that Canada was built by Christians but not built to be Christian only. I don't deny the founders of the Constitution were Christian. How is God supreme in Canada? For example freedom of religion, Freedom of religion is a very secular value, not a Christian one. And yet we still have Christian national holidays, I never said we weren't influenced by Christianity. You were very specific... morals, values and Constitution. Holidays are none of those things. Maybe you'll answer the question further in your post... I did not say all of our policies are directly tied to Christianity, as a nation we are slowly moving away from our religion, but on the other hand one can not simple say, they do not exist. God is mentioned in our national anthem, Not that long ago, the lords prayer was recited every morning after the national anthem, many children went to Sunday school...and did so for many years, stores were not open on sunday a day of rest, which is still law in some areas... but like I have said we as a nation are moving on, and religion is taking a lessor role on our society....but the Christian influence is still there... . hmmm... no you didn't answer the question. Bummer. I'll ask it again... morals, values, Constitution... I know about the holidays, the anthem and other cultural remnants of Christianity by Canada's founders... but I specifically want to know about the morals, values and Constitution and how those are based upon Christian principles, as you claim they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted May 31, 2016 Report Share Posted May 31, 2016 I don't deny the founders of the Constitution were Christian. And yet you refused to believe that our policies then and today are not influenced by the Christian religion.....and yet we have had laws and policies on topics that are based or have a direct line drawn from Christian religious beliefs.... Such as abortion laws, are you denying we as a nation never had laws or policies that restricted abortions ? Laws that were also held as important morals and created some of values that surround that topic.... Here is a few more.... Capital punishment, went again'st Christian beliefs and was over turned to reflect those values among other reasons..... Polygamy , is still again'st the law, also happens to be against Christian values.... Other values and morals Canadian have that have a direct link to the Christian religion.....Marriage in a church.... Baptisms of children..... You want more try goggle , it's easy.... How is God supreme in Canada? I don't recall saying God is supreme in Canada, it is however written in the first sentence of our constitution why is that.....if it is not an influence on our values and morals.....and how is it not reflected in our constitution ? Freedom of religion is a very secular value, not a Christian one. Yes only secular nations or individuals can have freedom of religion, and yet the Vatican has supported this concept before it became popular with the UN it was also one of the many institutions to support it with in the UN making it a basic human right.....How can they support it if it is not a value they hold near and dear....You don't have to invent the concept to hold those values....Unless you can prove or source it is not a Christian value ? I never said we weren't influenced by Christianity. You were very specific... morals, values and Constitution. Holidays are none of those things. Maybe you'll answer the question further in your post... Your right none of our policies ,laws, or rights are based on anything from the Christian religion.....and yet those holidays are religious holidays we forgot that, one not shared with any other religion....but yet is is impossible to draw a line between the Christian religion and Canadian policies, morals and values....I thinking your just not trying.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 Th Conservatives voted to take the "opposition to same sex marriage" out of their platform. They did not endorse same sex marriage. Yes that's the 'meagre ok' I was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 Several minor denominations. Meanwhile all major religions are opposed to it, including our growing Muslim, Hindu and Sikh populations. It's called democracy. When substantial numbers of people are opposed to something parties tend to act slower, especially when those in opposition are party supporters. What's your point? Religion should not play a role in politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G Huxley Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 Nice icon BC_chick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G Huxley Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) That doesn't sound like democracy as we know it in Canada... sounds like the definition of tyranny of the majority.... Hehehe, I knew you'd figure out how bringing in a bunch of religious fundamentalist immigrants can backfire into a tyranny against Canadian citizens. Edited June 1, 2016 by G Huxley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) What's your point? Religion should not play a role in politics. PEOPLE play a role in politics, and PEOPLE have a variety of motivations for their beliefs and preferences. You cannot discard one group of people simply because you don't approve of the motivation behind their beliefs. Edited June 1, 2016 by Argus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 PEOPLE play a role in politics, and PEOPLE have a variety of motivations for their beliefs and preferences. You cannot discard one group of people simply because you don't approve of the motivation behind their beliefs. This is so lacking in reflexivity that it's practically a punchline unto itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 You're really sure you can't do that? Hah, you learn something new every day around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 Nice icon BC_chick. Thanks, yes it certainly is, Mr. Huxley! The NDP is leaderless so it was time to take down my old avatar and what better way to celebrate the new exciting 'sunny ways' than showing my support for what I consider the best platform of the Liberal campaign (for the economy of course ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 PEOPLE play a role in politics, and PEOPLE have a variety of motivations for their beliefs and preferences. You cannot discard one group of people simply because you don't approve of the motivation behind their beliefs. Peoples' rights and freedoms should not be subject to the prevailing preferences of a majority. As you've written a number of times about the danger of pandering to mass hysteria regarding certain types of crimes, I'd have expected you to grasp that better than most. -k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 (edited) Peoples' rights and freedoms should not be subject to the prevailing preferences of a majority.The definition of what is a protected 'right or freedom' can only be decided by the majority. For example, the majority has decided that no one has a right to property in this country yet that is something that academically could be a 'fundamental right'. Furthermore, the Constitution has as a couple provisions that say the majority can stomp all over minority rights if they think they have a good reason (All they need are a few judges with biases that are shared with majority). So your so called principal is simply not true and it is more a rhetorical device you use to rationalize rejecting majority opinion which you happen to disagree with. Edited June 2, 2016 by TimG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted June 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 best platform of the Liberal campaign Hence the red? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 Couldn't many of the debates be settled by giving Canadians the Freedom to CHOSE? Be it gays rights, the right to die, etc. and not letting the process get slowed down over debate in the House or in the Senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 (edited) Peoples' rights and freedoms should not be subject to the prevailing preferences of a majority. As you've written a number of times about the danger of pandering to mass hysteria regarding certain types of crimes, I'd have expected you to grasp that better than most. -k We're not talking about mass hysteria, but voters and their deeply held beliefs. Look, I may not be a right-to-lifer but there are millions of them in Canada, probably a third or so of the population. How does anyone get off calling them 'extremists' or saying their views are unacceptable and should be ignored? We're talking about a third of the electorate here. The same goes for those opposed to gay marriage. And it doesn't matter if those views arise out of religious beliefs or something else altogether. Edited June 2, 2016 by Argus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 (edited) We're not talking about mass hysteria, but voters and their deeply held beliefs. Look, I may not be a right-to-lifer but there are millions of them in Canada, probably a third or so of the population. How does anyone get off calling them 'extremists' or saying their views are unacceptable and should be ignored? We're talking about a third of the electorate here. The same goes for those opposed to gay marriage. And it doesn't matter if those views arise out of religious beliefs or something else altogether. One third? That's incorrect. The number of Canadians who want to ban abortion, except when the mother would die is a mere 6% of Canadians. The rest agree with some sort of access to abortion. The strictest of those (ie, people who think it should only exist in "special circumstances") is another 10%. At best, we're talking a fifth of the population, not a third and over half of those people support abortion in "special circumstances." (source) Edited June 2, 2016 by cybercoma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 3, 2016 Report Share Posted June 3, 2016 Hence the red? No, it's the full Canadian flag. It doesn't show in my avatar but it does on my profile. Hmmm, maybe the Conservatives had a point about the Liberal brand looking too much like the Canadian flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted June 3, 2016 Report Share Posted June 3, 2016 No respect for our flag? But then when weed is your most important policy................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts