Jump to content

B.C. NDP creating a separate First Nations Justice Council in B.C.


Recommended Posts

The BC NDP is setting up a First Nations Justice Council in B.C.

Any FN person that is arrested and comes before a judge in B.C. must now be treated according to the Gladue report:

"What are Gladue factors?

Judges have a duty to apply Gladue principles, irrespective of the charge and regardless of which court the offender appears in. 

This is not an exhaustive list but covers many of the most common Gladue factors:

Impacts of colonialism

Feelings of loneliness, abandonment, dislocation from culture, community, and family

Loss of access to ceremonies and healing practices

Racism and systemic discrimination

Lack of opportunity and isolation of community

Housing shortages and homelessness

Foster care, adoption, 60s scoop

Victimization/offenders of violence

Missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls

High rates of incarceration

Lower education levels or irrelevance of education

Lower-level employment, unemployment, and poverty

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD)

Substance misuse

Mental health"

Information for the Public - BC First Nations Justice Council (bcfnjc.com)

Everything must be considered except the crime and danger to the public.  The question is how does that address the larger per capita number of FN offenders in the justice system?  Supposedly offenders will not receive the same sentences as non-native offenders and instead be referred to some kind of FN cultural or aboriginal healing system.  Why has the NDP not released any studies on how this will work?  Where is the evidence that offenders will be rehabilitated and be able to return to society without danger or harm to others?  What kind of alternate treatment will they actually receive?  What about the concept of punishment for crime?  Is the idea of punishment for crime totally non-existent in left wing thinking?  How is this kind of system going to be just and more importantly what kind of message will this send to young people who may be potential offenders?  How is it going to protect society?  What exactly will they be doing with offenders that will make society safer?  We have already seen years of repeat offenders committing crimes, assaulting people, breaking into businesses, being arrested, and immediately being released by the courts and going out to repeat their offences again.  Is this the NDP solution to stop crime?

In addition are NDP and Liberals bent on creating two different systems in every department of government, one for aboriginals, and one for everyone else?  That is how it is beginning to look.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Treatment is effective at changing peoples lives. Locking people up does not decrease recidivism or make the world safer. A lot of people make friends and form strong anti-social  ideas in prison, and it's important to intercept and challenge harmful ideas.  I would much rather people get 2 years of therapy then 5 years of hard time. I just don't understand how a criminal is going to change if their ideas are not challenged. Their needs to be a separation of the sociopaths and other criminals. The Gladue report needs work, but so does the justice system, the political party system, voting, and how we handle industry and corporations.

On the other hand, I think there is a colonial intent by some people in government to make everything fail for others if it doesn't fit there narrative. We have the greatest professionals in the world in Canada, but Canada keeps failing. There is no accountability in our government. Left to Right.

 

With the housing crisis many more people will be homeless, or living in financial uncertainty. A study says that poverty has been linked to ensuring greater violence in the male offspring of single mothers (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0044118X211017612?journalCode=yasa). Angry young men that have decided to change their moral compass in an attempt to make things better could possibly fill the streets in the coming years. Perfect for gangs and political organizations to recruit or scapegoat. The future seems grim to me. Paul Fromm couldn't have social engineered this better. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2023 at 11:33 AM, blackbird said:

Is the idea of punishment for crime totally non-existent in left wing thinking?

No it's just that right-wing thinking is almost entirely devoid of any kind of empathy for people who might be affected by the things you listed. I know you'd prefer to simply beat the fear of God into these folks but you tried that and look where things are now.

It took a couple centuries of mistreatment and injustice to create these problems and it'll probably take a couple to put it behind them.

But why the heck should you give fig, you'll be smug and happy and living in style on your new planet soon enough and all this'll be burning in hell.  Why worry, be happy! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

I know you'd prefer to simply beat the fear of God into these folks but you tried that and look where things are now.

actually things were going pretty good until we STOPPED doing that. NOW things are getting worse, and that's why we've had the recent calls to revisit that stuff. Letting them out just means they kill cops for no good reason or slaughter people with knives. If we went BACK to just locking them up there'd  be less crime.

the problem is the current left wing and many first nations leaders have no empathy for the people that these criminals rape, kill, injure, etc.  Like zero.  And the sad thing is - most of the victims are first nations.

And that's fine i guess, if they're happy kililng and raping their own people i guess we can't argue that but when it affects others then there's a problem.

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

It took a couple centuries of mistreatment and injustice to create these problems and it'll probably take a couple to put it behind them.

That's a pretty common lie told by various left wing sources - but it's not true. In fact right up till the mid 1800's the relationship between the europeans and the first nations was quite good and mutually beneficial. The hudsons bay company radically improved first nations life and the first nations worked hand in glove with them to scout and map new areas.

Things went bad for about 100 years max. roughly the 1860's to the end of the 1960's. During that time we saw the res schools at their worst, laws limiting first nations culture, the removal of their right to vote, and their right to hire a lawyer, etc. And then we saw that all returned.

SO no - there were no 'centuries' of mistreatment.  And honestly people will get fed up waiting and give up on them if it takes 'centuries' for them to get their shit together.  Compared to what happened to other cultures they had it pretty damn good, there's no reason in the universe they can't get their act together within a generation.

Well - no reason other than they're being trained to be professional permanent victims currently.  And that has to stop.

In any case - people don't break the law and hurt others because of the 'impacts of colonialism'.  These are grown ass adults, they know what's right and wrong, they make their choices.

If what you're saying is it's impossible for them to live in civil society ... well i guess then they have to be removed from it. There's no universe where it's ok to let them go around hurting people because their daddy learned to read at a residential school. that's not ok,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, eyeball said:

No it's just that right-wing thinking is almost entirely devoid of any kind of empathy for people who might be affected by the things you listed.

That's not actually true.  I have empathy for the kind of problems these people face.  The problem is the left or NDP are not capable of dealing with the problems in a realistic way.  The solution is not to simply let dangerous, violent offenders out into society.  I am sure judge hear all about those problems put forward by the defence.  That is how the legal system works.  But the solution is not to just release people on bail or parole that still represent a danger to everyone.  What is your solution.  You are claiming to have empathy.  Do you have empathy for the victims and for society at large who should be protected?  Therein lies the conundrum.  How do you take into consideration the past life of an offender and still protect society from a repeat or potential repeat offender, especially if the person is a violent offender?  

We hear a lot of talk about aboriginal justice or returning to their customs and justice, but many of the websites or aboriginal leaders, politicians that mention that word do not define exactly what that entails.  Likely most of them do not even know themselves what aboriginal justice would mean.

This is all part of the clash of civilizations when Europeans colonized north America.  There are no easy solutions.  If you have the solution, please tell us what it is.  Federal liberals like to talk a lot about reconciliation and giving aboriginals more control but they seldom explain exactly what that entails and what it would mean in the justice system.  I am trying to find out exactly what aboriginal justice would entail and how it would work.  

The first and basic purpose of the justice system has to be to protect society from dangerous offenders such as rapists, assault, murderers, etc.  It is unfortunate that many offenders had bad lives in the past.  Unfortunately that is usually what led them to commit crimes.  We can't change the past, but we do have a responsibility to protect the citizens which they might come in contact with if they are release.  We have seen terrible examples of people being murdered by aboriginals who were released by the parole board or let out on bail and they were released simply because they were aboriginal.  This is not a viable solution at all and is a serious threat to society.    

14 hours ago, eyeball said:

I know you'd prefer to simply beat the fear of God into these folks but you tried that and look where things are now.

No, I don't believe anyone can "beat" the fear of God into anyone else.  That is a false assumption of how Christian or Biblical teaching works.  Nobody should try to beat or force anyone to believe anything.  I don't think that was a common way of teaching the Bible in history, although there were probably a few bad teachers around.   We have bad teachers today in the public system and in government.  Society is far from perfect.  Not everyone is loving as they should be.  Humans are not infallible and often make mistakes in the way they talk and act.  But most people teaching the Bible are simply teaching what is in it and not beating it over anyone's head as you seem to think.  I have listened to Bible teaching in many different places and ways over the years and never heard anyone come close to "beating" it into a person.  One of the basic teachings of Jesus is to love thy neighbour.  You don't demonstrate love to anyone by beating them with a subject.  I hope I am not beating you when I talk about the Bible and will keep that in mind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Do unto others yadda yadda.

Why you need to ask this is why this will take a couple of centuries to run its course.

This is what one website says which seems to support the concept of "aboriginal law"'.

"The Meaning of Justice: At the most basic level of understanding, justice is understood differently by Aboriginal people. The dominant society tries to control actions it considers potentially or actually harmful to society as a whole, to individuals or to the wrongdoers themselves by interdiction, enforcement or apprehension, in order to prevent or punish harmful or deviant behaviour. The emphasis is on the punishment of the deviant as a means of making that person conform, or as a means of protecting other members of society.

The purpose of a justice system in an Aboriginal society is to restore the peace and equilibrium within the community, and to reconcile the accused with his or her own conscience and with the individual or family who has been wronged. This is a primary difference.

It is a difference that significantly challenges the appropriateness of the present legal and justice system for Aboriginal people in the resolution of conflict, the reconciliation and the maintenance of community harmony and good order. Aboriginal Concepts of Law: There were and are Aboriginal laws. There were and continue to be Aboriginal governments with lawmaking powers and with provisions to enforce those laws. There were and are Aboriginal constitutions that are the supreme "law of laws" for some Aboriginal peoples and their nations…. Laws grow from the customs, traditions and rules of a society of people. They exist to inform people what that particular society considers to be acceptable and unacceptable. ― Aboriginal Concepts of Justice, Report of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry Commission of Manitoba (1999):"

Microsoft Word - 923g Aboriginal Perspectives on Justice.doc (gov.mb.ca)

The main problem I see in all this is the so-called aboriginal law is not described.  They like to talk about such a concept but are very careful to avoid telling us what it actually means in practice.  Let them tell us exactly how they would treat a dangerous offender and how would he be rehabilitated and how would their system protect society.

That naturally leads one to wonder if they are talking about using smudging ceremonies to chase the evil spirits out of a criminal or some kind of elders wisdom to change the thinking of criminals.  Perhaps some aboriginal dancing and wearing face masks to drive the evil spirits away.  This kind of thing is actually still practiced.  This is not making light of it because they actually do practice these kinds of things today.  So what are they proposing?

Since they can't give a detailed explanation of what it is they are talking about when they say aboriginal law and justice, I will have to withhold any agreement with it and stand by my belief that the primary purpose of the justice system is to protect innocent people from further harm.  If that requires keeping offenders locked up, I would rather see that than letting them out to go to healing lodges and some kind of system which is being kept secret from us.  If they have some real solutions that are better than what the existing non-native justice system is, then they should put all the details out there to be examined and judged.

If anyone doubts what I am saying, I would suggest writing to anyone in the B.C. NDP government and ask them if they can describe in detail how the aboriginal justice council will work.  See if you can get a straight answer with details on how aboriginal justice will work in practice.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

C,mon who do you think you're fooling here?  Even of you could wrap your head around this you would reject it out of hand because it's not biblical.

I have to admit it is really next to impossible to discuss the subject of justice with someone who rejects God and the Bible.  The Bible is really the only basis of truth and justice.  So how would it be possible to reach any agreement or understanding without that? 

It would be impossible to accept an aboriginal justice system.  It would not be based on the Bible or Jesus' teachings but would be tied to heathen religion and ideas contrary to the Bible.  But without knowing the full details and a thorough study, we are somewhat limited.  That is likely why the government will not want you to know what exactly they are doing.

"Justice flows from God's heart and character. As true and good, God seeks to make the object of his holy love whole. This is what motivates God throughout the Old and New Testaments in his judgments on sin and injustice. These judgments are both individual and corporate in scope.

One of the greatest injustices we succumb to individually is self-righteousness—the belief that we do not need Jesus but are just and good and right apart from him. We can fail to see that Jesus is the righteous "judge judged in our place" (Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics) for our own acts of injustice, including our marginalizing him by refusing to sense our need for him to remove our sin and make us whole."

What is Biblical Justice? | CT Pastors | Christianity Today

I would say that the starting point of any discussion on justice has to be Jesus and his written revelation, the Bible.  Without that we are just barking in the wind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justice is a difficult topic.  The Bible has lots to say about it because justice is one of the central characteristics of God.  There is no one simple formula.

"Proverbs 21:15 - It is joy to the just to do judgment: but destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity.

Amos 5:24 - But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream.

Romans 12:19 - Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Isaiah 30:18 - And therefore will the LORD wait, that he may be gracious unto you, and therefore will he be exalted, that he may have mercy upon you: for the LORD is a God of judgment: blessed are all they that wait for him.

Isaiah 1:17 - Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.

Micah 6:8 - He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

Psalms 37:27-29 - Depart from evil, and do good; and dwell for evermore.   (Read More...)

Isaiah 61:8 - For I the LORD love judgment, I hate robbery for burnt offering; and I will direct their work in truth, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them.

Proverbs 24:24-25 - He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him: ..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

C,mon who do you think you're fooling here? 

I am not trying to fool anyone. 

I don't claim to be anything other than a sinner saved by  God's grace.  I sinned through my life I admit.  But God spoke to me through the gospel message on the radio one night 42 years ago and said whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:13 KJV)  I realized I was a sinner who needed to be saved.  I believe God in his mercy saved me in spite of my sins.   I realize the Bible teaches everyone deserves to go to hell unless they are saved.

I am no better than the natives who follow in heathen religions.  Christ paid for my sins by shedding his blood on the cross.  I believe he was raised from the dead and because of his grace, I am forgiven by God.  I still think about my past sometimes with regret, but I can't change the past.  I realize I should not be looking back and should be looking forward.  I praise God that he gave me this gift of faith and salvation.  I am only telling you this in hopes you will know where I am coming from.  I am not trying to fool you.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

I have to admit it is really next to impossible to discuss the subject of justice with someone who rejects God and the Bible. 

That works both ways. Given how much justice depends on evidence that often needs to be scientifically derived and validated I fail to see where there is even room for a religious viewpoint in the scheme of things.  Religion has no more place in our justice systems than it does any other aspect of our governance when it insists on placing faith in the supernatural ahead of reason and science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, eyeball said:

Religion has no more place in our justice systems than it does any other aspect of our governance when it insists on placing faith in the supernatural ahead of reason and science.

This is where you completely misunderstand what the Bible and the God of the Bible is all about and claim you are following science and reason.   Following the Bible is actually following reason and has been for ions.

If you support the use of sending aboriginal criminals to healing circles, smudging ceremonies, and other unbiblical, aboriginal practices that involve their concept of driving out evil spirits as a legitimate solution, you are supporting heathen religious practices instead of a civilized justice system.  That is what we are talking about here.  Do you seriously think an aboriginal justice system is following reason and science?  I have told you that principles of the justice system in non-native society are more aligned with the principles in the Bible.  Non-native society does not try to use aboriginal spiritual practices.  Also the protection of society is a non-native priority or has been except with the liberals and left who have been constantly releasing dangerous offenders.  Priority for the protection of society is a Biblical principle.  Protect the innocent.  Would you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

Given how much justice depends on evidence that often needs to be scientifically derived and validated

You misunderstand what the principles of the Bible would be as it relates to what a justice system is all about.  Of course justice depends on evidence that is scientifically derived and validated.  That is a Biblical principle.  That is what I am saying.  In setting up a FN justice council, we don't know exactly what the NDP plan is or where this is heading.  

I am not claiming there should be some kind of religious exercises involved in justice.   I am talking about the basic principles in the Bible that have existed through history that we should be continuing to follow.  That does not include releasing dangerous offenders if they are a risk to society or sending convicts to healing lodges, which the justice system is known to have done. 

The problem is not just that aboriginals may use their heathen spiritual practices to try to rehabilitate a criminal, it is the fact that the list of the claimed causes for an aboriginal person committing offences seems to show that the FN justice council's main interest is focused on a person's past life and how bad it was.  That would seem to indicate they would reject the major principles of justice system, that is, the protection of society and punishment for the crime.  That would be a major problem.  We have already seen the consequences of that including loss of life of innocent people and police officers.

"God’s desire for justice extends to crime prevention and the punishment of evildoers:
 

• “For I the Lord love justice; I hate robbery and wrong” (Isaiah 61:8, ESV).
• “When justice is done, it is a joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers” (Proverbs 21:15, ESV).
• “Whoever says to the wicked, ‘You are in the right,’ will be cursed by peoples, abhorred by nations, but those who rebuke the wicked will have delight, and a good blessing will come upon them” (Proverbs 24:24–25, ESV).
 

The Mosaic Law specifically forbade unjust weights and measures (Leviticus 19:35–36) and condemned the taking of bribes (Exodus 23:8). God places a special responsibility on judges and other authorities to provide justice, warning them in Psalm 82 that they will themselves face judgment. Every human tribunal is under God’s order to do what is right:
 

• “You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor” (Leviticus 19:15, ESV).
• “Thus says the Lord of hosts, Render true judgments, show kindness and mercy to one another” (Zechariah 7:9, ESV).
• “Do not show partiality in judging; hear both small and great alike. Do not be afraid of anyone, for judgment belongs to God” (Deuteronomy 1:17).
• “In a lawsuit, you must not deny justice to the poor” (Exodus 23:6, NLT).
• “Justice, and only justice, you shall follow” (Deuteronomy 16:20).

Justice is linked to a right relationship with God, and those who know God will act justly:
• “The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern” (Proverbs 29:7).
• “Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely” (Proverbs 28:5, ESV).
• “The wicked accept bribes in secret to pervert the course of justice” (Proverbs 17:23).
• “Blessed are they who observe justice, who do righteousness at all times!” (Psalm 106:3, ESV)."

What does the Bible say about justice? | GotQuestions.org

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

You misunderstand what the principles of the Bible would be as it relates to what a justice system is all about.

I simply don't care how the Bible interprets simple human values that go back to times when Neanderthals still walked the Earth.

How can anyone reason with someone who actually thinks the world is only 4000 - 6000 years old?  There are 1st Nations villages around here that are at least that old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I simply don't care how the Bible interprets simple human values that go back to times when Neanderthals still walked the Earth.

The human values we use in society didn't come from the Neanderthals.  It came from God.  That's the point.  God inspired men to write the Holy Scriptures (Bible).   God gave certain values to humans thousands of years ago.  Why wouldn't he?  Man lived back then and God gave man those values that are described in the Bible.  God wished and still wishes man to have a good relationship with his Creator and Savior Jesus Christ.  

Here is one viewpoint about Neanderthal man.

"Who were the Neanderthals? Sub-human cave-dwelling brutes, or descendants of Adam and Eve, made in God’s image? The evidence from Neanderthal anatomy, culture, and DNA is consistent with a biblical worldview. Neanderthals were a fully-human post-Flood people group, not an evolutionary side branch."

There is a 21 minute video that you might find interesting on the subject of Neanderthal man on the same website I quoted from.

  Neanderthals & Cavemen? - Media Center (creation.com)

"Neandertal Man was the name given to bones found in 1856 in Germany’s Neander Valley (‘tal’, or ‘thal’ in old German spelling). The name Neander was a pseudonym of the 17th-century minister Joachim Neumann, the Greek translation of his name (‘new man’). A major PBS-TV series on evolution1 depicted Neandertal Man as only half human and not very intelligent, one who lived a very inferior life compared to the alleged first humans, the Cro-Magnon people. Some scientists today believe he was ‘lacking the language skills, foresight, creativity, and other cognitive abilities of modern humans’.2 Neandertal Man is considered to be either a link leading to modern man or a dead end in human evolution from the supposed ape-like ancestor.

Recreating the faces of our Neandertal cousins

Researchers at the University of Zürich used computer-assisted paleoanthropology to reconstruct this Neandertal child, based on the Gibraltar 2 skull (ifi.uzh.ch). Neandertal DNA decoding now reinforces this clear humanness. (Image de.wikipedia.org)

From their skeletons, we know that the average Neandertal person had bony differences from the average person alive today, including a bigger braincase. So what did they look like?

Bones cannot tell you about things like hairiness, nor the shape of the fleshy parts, like nose or ears. But computerized forensic science has come a long way in making educated ‘guesses’ at a person’s appearance from the shape of a skull. As reported in January 1996 National Geographic, researchers at the University of Illinois used computer morphing techniques to fit pictures of living people onto Neandertal skulls.

Unlike the artistic reconstructions of earlier times, this time nothing was imaginatively added based on evolutionary assumptions of ‘primitivity’. The results indicate that the bones of the skull would not preclude Neandertals from looking like people you would not greatly comment on (apart from hair and dress style) if they moved in next door to you today.

Biblical creationists, on the other hand, believe that there were no ‘subhumans’ at any time. Neandertal fossils are all post-Flood, so these bones are believed to represent just one more group of people which split off from other groups following the Babel dispersion."

Neandertal Man - the changing picture (creation.com)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There are 1st Nations villages around here that are at least that old.

Oh, is that a fact?  What proof do you have?  Any evidence?  Why do you assume that?

Yes, I have heard that claim, but how can they know?  What evidence is there of how long they were here?  It serves their political interests of course to make that claim and also serves them on their land claims.   But I think most anthropologists say they came across the Bering sea from Asia at some point.  They likely were not here nearly as long as some of them claim.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, eyeball said:

How can anyone reason with someone who actually thinks the world is only 4000 - 6000 years old?

How can anyone reason with someone who believes man evolved from the slime in a pond?  How can anyone reason with anyone who dismissed the fact that God created the complex universe or believes everyone evolved from some random chemicals in a sludge?   Or someone who thinks the universe just created itself out of nothing?   Irrational much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I simply don't care how the Bible interprets simple human values that go back to times when Neanderthals still walked the Earth.

"The evolutionary assumptions concerning Neandertal Man began early this century. The first Neandertal was reconstructed as a ‘missing link’ by famous paleontologist Marcellin Boule (1861–1942).3 He was called Homo neanderthalensis, implying a primitive evolutionary link to modern man, Homo sapiens. Forty-four years later, a reanalysis of Boule’s work showed his extreme evolutionary bias in the reconstruction of Neandertal Man. After the reanalysis, some scientists stated that if you dressed him up, gave him a shave and bath, and sent him into society, he would attract no more attention than some of the subway’s other denizens (see box). Neandertal Man was then reclassified as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, just a particular type of modern man."

Neandertal Man - the changing picture (creation.com)

The following picture of a girl is interesting because she was a computer reconstruction of a Neanderthal.

"Researchers at the University of Zürich used computer-assisted paleoanthropology to reconstruct this Neandertal child, based on the Gibraltar 2 skull (ifi.uzh.ch). Neandertal DNA decoding now reinforces this clear humanness. (Image de.wikipedia.org)"

"27  So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28  And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. "  Genesis 1:27, 28 KJV

 

 

6951neandertals.jpg

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...