But, how can this be…
In the U.S., religious people who say they devote “a great deal of effort” to their spiritual lives are 42 percentage points more likely to contribute to charity than secularists who have little or no religious faith. Moreover, religious Americans do not just give to their churches: They are also significantly more likely than secular Americans to donate money and time to non-religious charities such as the United Way.
Brooks also found a strong and specific correlation between political ideology and charity. In both the United States and Europe, conservatives who believe in limited government are far more likely to make charitable contributions than are liberals who think government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality.
cross-posted: Cjunk
I am not sure how reliable this study is except for the raw numbers.
I am pretty sure I donate a good amount of money to the Government of Canada in the form of taxes that is approximately 42% of my total income. I am not sure what the average American’s tax rate is but I believe it would be much lower than 42%.
Our social programs are better than US programs in general. The Canadian government (at all levels) transfers tax money to not for profits frequently and in huge amounts.
Perhaps if this was factored in, you would see a more realistic number.
The religious arguments bore me.
paul – I don’t know that I’d define a secularist as materialist, ie, as the way that WLMR does – with his view that secularists ‘worship’ (?!) themselves, money, sex, etc.
If secularism is understood in its ‘classical’ sense as the separation of church and state, then, I’m completely in favour.
If secularism is understood in its ‘humanist’ sense as the primacy of the human species in nature, then, I’m against it.
If secularism is understood in its ‘religious’ sense as the indifference to revealed truths, then, I’m in favor – as I reject revelation, for that suggests that truth exists a priori- and I’m not a Platonist or utopian.
Materialist? hmmm. Depends what you mean by that. I’m in favor of an entangled quantum and classical world, and I happen to think that ‘logic’ or ‘mind’, ie. the rational ordering of matter – exists.
Gary, you’re a hoot…seriously.
Since I’m a ‘baked’ Christian, may I say that the majority of evangelical Christians give 10 to 20% of the income – and many of their gross, not their net.
If you match that, then go ahead and slag them/us off. If you don’t, then get out your cheque (books.
There are wealthy Christians who give 70%.
And,not out of guilt but because what we do is “unto God”.
And, of course, Geoff, Christians also contribute to the public coffers – give unto Caesar etc.
Natch, since we’re humans, we have the same human flaws. So look for perfection somewhere else – and let me know when you find it – regardless of colour, creed, and sexual orientation.
(Amazing how we have to add the s.o. to everything we say nowadays. Wonder why? Sort of like the other group that are always being offended.)
ET,
The original article was about the fact that the U.S. is the most charitable and tried to tie that to the fact that it is because it is mostly Christian. Did you even read the article? That is why I responded as I did to mock the said article the way I did. Only after the thin skinned ones on the list labeled me anti-Christian, did I expand on the fact that I lumped all religion in the same pile of dung. Please try to keep up.
ad hom·i·nem
attacking an opponent’s character rather than answering his argument
Right off the bat Shamrock called me a bigot. Then Lookout asked me to grab a brain. You dismissed my opinion as hogwash and later called me a bigot as well. Three attacks on me right off the bat without even trying to disprove my claims about members of the KKK, opposition to SSM and Bush’s now famous claim. I’m still waiting for an answer to how YOU are affected by this ruling. Then you wonder why I label you a homophobe. But all I get are more name calling and red herrings such as: the Muslims are worse than we are na, na, na. Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it ET.
Spike1,
Sweden works for me thanks. Oh, and beastiality and incest are still frowned upon here in Canada. But hey, whatever floats your boat!
wow 1 positive and relatively true comment about Christian conservatives and charity. What do we get? The bigots from the left immediately crawling out of their European deploring; man hating; Christianity bashing hovels to attack.
Ah, just a typical day of hypocrisy in Canada.
Paul,
I never argued otherwise. Hitler and Stalin were both asses. Just making the point that religious sects should be above this hate, with all the lovey dovey stuff written in their holy books.
As far as separation of church and state, some frightening developments are taking place in the US as Christians are introducing crap like Creation science in classrooms for one. The Flintstones was a cartoon, not a documentary!
Wow Gellen, I’m impressed!! Should get you a seat front and center. And no, I don’t need to donate just to be able to voice my opinion of myths, thanks.
The Bear,
What makes you think I’m a “bigots from the left”? Can’t a Consevative be in favor of SSM or a non-believer in fairy tales? How about you, did you beat any gays or bomb an abortion clinic lately?
gary – your ‘argument’ is weak. The point is, you first ‘bashed’ Christianity and to try to blame your stance on the article, and your switch to ‘all religions’ to ‘other people’ means that you aren’t taking responsibility for what you say.
The fact that people called you bigoted is not ad hominem, but a statement of fact about you. Your opinions seems very bigoted – ie, your hostility to christianity and other religions is without evidence or logic – it’s just your opinion.
Your statements about Christian Conservatives were completely without evidence. You were asked repeatedly to provide evidence and all you could come up with was their membership in the KKK – which is not only invalid, but, isn’t evidence fo the claims you were making about Christian Conservatives.
Equally, you aren’t taking responsibility for your ad hominems; you are stating that all you are doing is ‘tu quoque’ – doing what others are doing. If you don’t think it’s right – and you’ve stated that you don’t, then, don’t use ad hominem. And don’t try to fob off responsibility for your behavior on other people.
I continue to conclude that your statements are hogwash, ie, spurious and totally unfounded. Now, you are saying that ‘Christians’ are in control of the mightiest nation in the world and causing immense suffering’. Wow – that’s quite a statement.
First – provide proof that the authorities in the US are causing ‘immense suffering’. You’ll have to provide some evidence for that – otherwise, it goes into the hogwash bucket.
In my view, the US is doing the opposite – in freeing people from totalitarian dictatorships and enabling democracy.
Are you in favor of the Taliban? Yes? Why?
Are you in favor of Hussein’s regime? Yes? Why?
Do you reject democracy and prefer totalitarian regimes? Why?
Second, provide proof that Christianity is directly linked to this assumed ‘immense suffering’. Provide proof that this ‘immense suffering’ is being done ‘in the name of Christianity’.
My conclusion about you isn’t ad hominem, but, a conclusion based on your lack of evidence, your spurious generalizations, your ignorance of what is really going on in the ME, and your name-calling.
ET: Agreed!
I guess it all comes to definitions. Using yours, I’m completely of one mind with you on this.
Gary wrote “What makes you think I’m a “bigots from the left”?
Personally from the evidence you presented I would reach the same conclusion. Your child like inability to present a cogent argument, your inmature resorting to ad hominem attack and your complete lack of historical perspective all indicate that you come from a leftist point of view.
Coupling that with your lefitist talking points about SSM and equating evangelical Christianity with the KKK further entrenches that conclusion.
If nothing else come up with an original insult not some tripe you picked up off a dipper blog.
Cheap shot from the cheap seats ,…Hahahaha!
Gary,
I think you’re out of your league. Best to shut up now. You’re a liar and a bigot… we don’t take kindly to your folk around here.
Jon
PS You’re the dumbest _kid_ in the world if you think that things were better before the ouster of Saddam. Go back to Rabble you dumbass
This is old news, and it doesn’t amount to much. Progressives in progressive countries (eg Sweden, Canada) almost certainly give up more of their income in total tax + charity than do American Christian conservatives. Okay, they may get back some of it in universal benefits, but on a net basis it is probable than “Progressia” is actually less stingy than Jesusland.
Progressives believe that the way to do good is through government and tax. They certainly have a point in that fund-raising via taxes generally generates more money than by private contribution. Most progressives I know are in support of high taxes, or even tax increases, and are generally quite willing to pay for them, even if they are well-to-do. They may be misguided, but by and large they walk the walk.
Finally, the charity that progressives (at least atheist progressives) do contribute would appear to be more purely charitable in the sense of being disinterested and not a kind of down payment on a reward in the afterlife.
This non-believer ordinarily stays away from religious “debate”, but haters like Gary upset me because they give a bad smell to secularism. Get a life Gary. People believe all sorts of odd things, and belief in a divine Christ is one of the more benign. Some of the most decent and charitable folks that I know are Christians, as are a few of the most hypocrytical and unpleasant.
Barring any evidence to the contrary, I see no reason to doubt Brooks’ statistical outcomes. Rejecting his conclusions out of hand is pure bigotry – nothing more, nothing less.
Gary, take a look around; I don’t care how many times the world spins, it still won’t create a forest, birds, mankind, oceans, rivers, mountains,…..not to mention the entire universe.
Just remember, that those who profess to be Christians and commit evil, unChristian acts in the name of God are not Christians, do not be deceived, because those of you who state that Christians are responsible for wars and the like are not deceiving anyone, but yourselves.
“not a kind of down payment on a reward in the afterlife”. R A do you really believe that nonsense? I have ministered for almost 30 years and have never told or been told by any serious Christian that giving now is a way to obtain reward in the future. There are lots of nutbars out there who use that ‘incentive’ to fleece the flock but mature Christians don’t look for material reward in the world to come. The streets are said to be paved with gold in heaven. That means what we most treasure in this world we shall trample in the next.
“not a kind of down payment on a reward in the afterlife”
It’s not hard to see why there is so much hatred regarding Christianity – posters like this reflect a shallow and ignorant view. Please note, I’m an agnostic, but I am sufficiently aware of Christian theology to know that giving is judged by motive, not by amount. If the giver is motivated dishonestly, it’s worthless.
BTW, the comment about “progressives” walking the walk is ludicrous. Most progressives are motivated by the envy and hatred reflected by terms like “jesusland”.
And i haven’t been inside a church in decades – although my morning run will take me past a few on Sunday morning. Nice folks, they smile and wave.
Just for you ET,
The KKK
http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/KKK.htm
From the article
“Demographic studies have shown that two of the prominent professions in the Klan were Protestant minister and police officer.”
Survivor benefit discrimination
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/09/08/pensions09008.html
Creation Science
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleid=B62BDBCF-E7F2-99DF-3718877F2D961B59&chanId=sa022
From the article
“Under pressure from these kinds of groups, the Kansas State Board of Education in 2005 approved a curriculum that allowed the public schools to include completely unfounded challenges to the theory of evolution.”
Bush & God
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml
From the article
“Nabil Shaath says: “President Bush said to all of us: ‘I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, “George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.” And I did, and then God would tell me, “George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …” And I did. And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, “Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.” And by God I’m gonna do it.'”
SOME PEACE!
Bush’s Iraq adventure
http://images.google.ca/images?svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&q=iraq+war+casualties
Pictures speak volumes!
I could go on with FACTS but why bother. The rest of you have provided none, just YOUR OPINION.
Do you think we have the right to tell other countries HOW to live their lives? I don’t think so. If they want live in a hell hole with no human rights, who are we to argue? It’s not our country to decide. America’s forays into foreign policy is frought with failures like Nicaragua. However, as far as Afghanistan goes, I was/am on side. Canadians were killed on 911, and I don’t take that lightly, but Iraq was NO danger to the US. Now that I’ve posted some talking points to flesh out my opinions, I’m still waiting for your answer to HOW SSM AFFECTS YOU!!
Jon,
Thanks for the welcome to this blog. Are you the posting police? My point of view doesn’t jive with yours so I am not welcome here? How facist/Christian of you,. I rest my case!!
Gary,
I’ve been shouted down at this blog too. I am not the police… I just find your opinions to be disgusting and hate filled.
I have no belief in a god but at the same time I do not hate those who do, unlike your bigoted self.
2nd, the gassing of Kurdish people is not what I call “good times in Iraq”. If you were in the room right now I would be seriously considering punching you in the face.
As I said: Go back to rabble.
Now Gary just because Sister Delores slapped your little pee pee in grade two is no reason to be so bitter towards that which you know not. Maybe you should try a little something Someone once offered me, its called forgiveness. If you should accept it and practice it you will find balm for your soul. Peace
Seems to me that our progressive, high tax state simply replaced the the church. Complete with tithing (taxes), commandments (Charter of Human Rights/Constitution) and morality courts (The Human Rights Commission).
The only difference is your denomination – Catholic (Progressive/Lib), Protestant (Conservative), Non-Believer (Libertarian), Pagan (All other religions) or Completely Lost (NDP)
Jon,
I Hate Religion, not those who practice it. I just feel for them. So you find my opinion on Religion “disgusting”, like I care! I never said the gassing of Kurds was the “good times”. I said it was NONE OF OUR BUSINESS! Not only am I being shouted down, but threatened by violence as well. What a nice group. Makes me proud to be a Conservative!!
Jon,
Yes, Sister Delores slapped my pee pee. And I forgave her a long time ago for the abuse she handed out to me and the rest of my classmates! And also to father Lacomb for the Alter Boys he abused!
Sorry Jon, the last note was to Joe.
Gary,
You’re not a Conservative, not even close. Just another lie from your idiot mouth. You also can’t read or comprehend well enough to be a Conservative. It was Joe who reminded you that you’ve been molested (at least in the head).
“If you were in the room right now I would be seriously considering punching you in the face.” Is that the violence? I guess you don’t understand the “seriously considering” part of that sentence… at least that explains everything else you’ve written so far.
As I said before: Go back to rabble
gary – your links are not evidence; they are opinions. You’ll have to provide a lot more than other people’s opinions as proof.
The KKK was not a Christian sect; at no time was it ever affiliated with any Christian group. As you know, it was racist, and anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, anti-communist. Since KKK membership was secret, then, an accurate demographic statistic is impossible. Since the members were anti-the various religions I’ve mentioned, then, IF they were members of a religious set, they were Protestant, BUT – it is a logical fallacy to claim that the Klan members were acting as Protestants. That’s a ‘modus ponens’ fallacy to claim such a link.
Nabil Shaath’s claims about ‘what Bush said’ remain with Nabil Shaath. He was the one who claimed there was a ‘Jenin massacre’ as well. Equally false.
What’s your point about ‘Creation Science’ in Kansas? What does that have to do with your claim that Christianity is running the US gov’t? Darwinian Evolution is, as a science, not dogma but open to debate. It has to be or it has moved out of science.
I bet you don’t know that there is great dissent among biologists about neodarwinism and its reliance on randomness and natural selection – and a great deal of research being done to analyze how biological species perform ‘intelligent’ modeling to provide themselves with robust adaptive capacities.
So far, gary, you haven’t provided any facts. Just opinions of others. You haven’t proven anything.
American’s foreign policy is also filled with success, such as the post WWII generation long reconstruction of Europe.
No, you are quite wrong – people don’t want to live under a dictatorship, and for you to arrogantly assume that people SELECT totalitarian regimes, that they VOTE FOR military dictatorships, that they CHOOSE murderous regimes such as those of the Taliban, of Hussein, etc – is an arrogance beyond belief. Therefore, the free countries have a moral duty to help them from these tyrannies. Ever heard of moral duty?
I’ve posted before about the cause of Islamic fascism – and Iraq was a prime cause of it, and therefore, it was right to free the people from Saddam’s rule – and help disable islamic fascism.
How does SSM affect me? I don’t live within a narrow world where I act only on issues that directly affect me. After all, the tsunami didn’t directly affect me, but I sent money to the American Red Cross and elsewhere. The Iraqi children don’t directly affect me, but I sent boxes of school and other supplies to them via the US military. So, SSM doesn’t directly affect me. But, it indirectly affects me because of how it changes the social infrastructure.
We are a sexual species; our reproduction requires a binary sexuality. We are also a social species in that our knowledge base is almost completely learned rather than genetically stored. Therefore, with regard to the continuity of our species, we require Opposite Sex reproduction, and, since our species requires social learning – and a LONG nurturance period, I think that it requires a family-based nurturance.
With this nurturance requirement, and this two-sex reproductive requirement, I think that the best family structure for continuity of our species, is a two-sex marriage. Men and women are psychologically different; children need both nurturances in their lives.
So- in my view, marriage, which is a social structure geared to the reproduction of the species, and to the nurturance of these children, ought to be opposite sex. I think that the family is the best place for this nurturance and I think that the society ought to support this family.
I disagree, eg, with Plato – and various socialists – who want to do away with the family.
As far as civil unions, which are for private short term relations – they can be of the same sex; they can refer to older couples who can’t have children, etc. But a robust society, I think, has to focus around the primacy of the nuclear family.
The importance of two opposite sex genders in the robust psychological raising of our species, can’t be underestimated. So- I oppose SSM for that reason.
Pictures speak volumes but often, the verbiage is hogwash, gary. Pictures can be fallacious, but I’m sure you are aware of that. So, pictures aren’t facts.
Cheers – and do some research rather than rant at people.
Gary,
I’m sorry. I didn’t realise I was hurting your feelings. Maybe I should think twice next time… Does anyone have a tissue?
Don’cha just feel for Gary? He keeps lobbing slo-pitch and everyone else is playing hardball.
Don’t worry Gary the top of the first inning is almost over. You just need three more outs and it will be your turn to swing the stick thingy.
Remember Gary your mother might be pulling for ya. She does know about that SSM thing doesn’t she?
man , I wuzzn’t gonna wad through all that now
but, because statistics show that kristians tent to be more generous (with which I personally agree)it does not mean that it is the kristian aspect of these people that is the motivator to greater generosity, it just shows that these two aspects of people tend to show up simaltaniously frequently
Et,
I guess I’ll just have to hold my opinions to myself, and you can hold your’s to yourself as well. We won’t agree with each other so there’s no need for me to wade into your verbal diarhea above. Just like Harpers form of Conservatism, progressive views on society won’t fly here. I suppose that’s why he’s mired just above a weak Dion as opposed to killing the Liberals with their record. Canadians have little tolerance for the views of Fundies like Stock Day, and will never give a mandate to the likes of them. This must chagrin you to no end! Good thing! As far as your hero Bush, history will show that this was a terrible mistake! The people of Iraq and the Middle East in general are not amused! I suggest you go over and show them some of this democracy you want to impose on them. Anyhoo, time to go, I’m not welcome in this club, so I guess Garth was right.
Later
Jon,
When my position on a belief system is twisted into a hatered for the practitioners, and then to be called a lier by some anonymous a$$h0le, because a Conservative must be defined by your narrow view, well ya, I guess I would get a bit cross.
Joe,
Wow your a real Jay Leno!! Cheerleading on the sidelines for your heros ET and Jon but offering nothing but comedy is so…you!! Go save some old lady and take her pension check for “The Church” for a bit of superstition! OUT!
“You are assuming of course that all religious people are right wingers and all secularists are “progressive”. Frankly, that is a silly assumption.”
I assume your telling me blacks vote Republican right!
Dang I think we just lost another one. Seems that anti-Christian, pro ssm Gary has decided we hurt his feelings and I wanted to ask him to come to church tomorrow. Don’t worry Gary we Christians will be praying for you.
I am utterly disgusted at the tired old religious stereotypes flying around this thread as if they were laws of nature.
If you’re a conservative then you must be christian.
If your a leftist then you must be against christians.
If you’re not a christian,you must be a leftist.
If you’re an athiest,then you must hate christians.
If you disagree with SSM,you must be a homophobe.
And on and on it goes…
I’ve discovered that,for the most part,people are people are people.
Find me an average group of christians and I’ll find you a group made up of a cross-section of our society.Rich or poor,polite or assinine,smart or stupid,generous or cheap,thoughtful or selfish,quiet or loud,liberal or conservative,honest or untrustworthy,etc,etc.
Show me any group of athiests or Jews or Sikhs,or whatever and I’ll bet a similar assortment applies.
As a matter of fact,a lot of christians are ex-athiests,or ex-something else.And through personal experience,I know a helluva lot of athiests are ex-christians or ex-something else.
So whatever happened to a quiet respect for one another’s spiritual beliefs?
I have the utmost respect for my religious friends and family members,especially the ones who I witness practicing what they preach.
But I also have great respect for those who have rejected faith and live with the sobering realities that decision creates.
Man….is there no topic we can discuss at this site that does not become confrontational and degrade into exchanges of “I’m right…..you’re f*cked”?
Man….is there no topic we can discuss at this site that does not become confrontational and degrade into exchanges of “I’m right…..you’re f*cked”?
Sure, but it would take all the fun out of the comment section wouldn’t it? Sharp minds debating human life – discussions can’t get much better than that.
Gary, it’s late and possibly past your bedtime, but grow-up and get out of diapers, and off the bottle.
I spend hours every day researching the young men who died in the two world wars, and then come on to sda for some relaxation, and find a twat like you.
You’re a mbr of the Young Liberals, right?? I think you rise to their level.
I have one short formula on this entire debate which has served me well over the years.
Science = knowledge.
Religion = wisdom.
There is no conflict between religion and science.
Yet, a person can have all the knowledge in the world, but without wisdom, what good is all that knowledge?
Religion allows me my free will, enforces the idea I have the ability to make choices and gives me an ability to distinguish what is good for me and what is bad for me.
That is my belief and nobody can take it from me.
“Sharp minds debating human life…”
Joe…
Maybe you would be so kind as to direct me to the thread that is occurring on.
Gary…
I actually had a wee bit of sympathy for the treatment you were getting here….until I saw that your very first post had no purpose other than to slander all christians as being inclined to racism and war-mongering.
You deserve every lick you got…and more.
syf…
Thanks for your thoughts….maybe you could further define two statements that,on the surface,seem to be contradictory to me….
“There is no conflict between religion and science”
“Religion allows me my free will…”
“Religion allows me my free will…” No but….
Christianity allows me my free will absolutely. Without Christ I have no choice except to obey the sin nature that I was born with. In Christ I became born from above with a new nature that allows me to choose which nature I shall follow, sin or divine.
CO:
The entire human race has the capability to accumulate knowledge to varying degrees.
As Joe suggests, human snare themselves into traps by mistaking their knowledge for wisdom.
A person can be intelligent, but that does not make that person smart.
It is the freedom to discern between right and wrong, a moral compass if you will, which takes human beings to a different level than animals, who do have instinctive knowledge.
Science does not guarantee freedom.
Wisdom makes free choice less intimidating.
syf…
I would agree with you completely if free will allows one the freedom of choosing where one searched for that wisdom.
In other words,it seems to be a formula that would apply to any sincere belief system.
CO:
You are free to search for the universal truths at your own pace.
The choices are many but the true path is narrow.
Use caution where you look.
ET: We are a sexual species; our reproduction requires a binary sexuality…Therefore, with regard to the continuity of our species, we require Opposite Sex reproduction.
Help me understand, ET. How is this part of your argument relevant to your opposition to SSM? Allowing SSM does not preclude the continuation of opposite sex reproduction, nor does opposing SSM strengthen it. These are two separate groups you’re conflating — gays/lesbians wanting to get hitched, and heterosexuals wanting to get preggers. In what way does frustrating the achievement of the former influence the rate of the later? The legalization of SSM in Canada and elsewhere has not caused the decline in heterosexual’s making babies.
We are also a social species in that our knowledge base is almost completely learned rather than genetically stored…Since our species requires social learning – and a LONG nurturance period, I think that it requires a family-based nurturance…Men and women are psychologically different; children need both nurturances in their lives. The importance of two opposite sex genders in the robust psychological raising of our species, can’t be underestimated.
But biological sex (male/female) and psychological gender (masculine/feminine) are not tied together in lockstep — some men are rather feminine (take Kingstonlad — kidding!!), some women are rather masculine. Indeed, now that queer couples are the subject of more and better in-depth longitudinal research, emerging evidence suggests that in many same-sex parental households, one partner tends to adopt a more feminine role while the other, a more masculine role. The kids growing up in these homes are proving quite normal, psychologically and socially. Rates of heterosexual orientation are around the baseline., i.e., they are no more likely to “become gay” for being raised by two dads as someone raised in a opposite sex household. So, even accepting your claim that healthy child development requires masculine and feminine parental dimensions (which I’m not sure is as simplistic as you suggest), fulfilling such a need does not necessarily require opposite sexed parents, only differentially gendered ones.
In any case, your arguments still don’t quite jive with your conclusions. If you’re worried about how children will develop in queer households, you should be opposed to same-sex adoption, not SSM.
Canadian Observer: Man….is there no topic we can discuss at this site that does not become confrontational and degrade into exchanges of “I’m right…..you’re f*cked”?
SDA is not the place for discussion and debate, CO. It’s where people go to hear and say the things that they dare not say out loud in public. Even on those threads where us “trolls” don’t show up, it’s more echo-chambering and self-indulgent recycling of tired insults about “leftards,” liberals, socialists, Trudeau, environmentalists, etc.
Glad to see that there is a number of like minded atheists here.
I abhor the religious domination of right wing politics.
Please read the Bible and Koran objectively, both these books are totally absurd.
For thousands of years the Egyptian civilization worshiped the sun god Ra, the Greeks believed in Zeus and Apollo. What gives you the right to say that these gods don’t exist but that your Jehwah does ?
Why do think of this entity as god not by his true name Jehwah, the god of the jews ?
God bless you, Joe. Thanks for your voice of reason here.
A’dam, instead of behaving like a cheese eating surrender monkey, why don’t you work for a just Canada, where our freedoms are truly respected and people are allowed to speak out without fear of reprisal? (See my post at the HRC thread.) Would you belittle a Jewish person in Nazi Germany for staying beneath the ramparts? (And find out what samizdat means.)
From your presumably safe, collaborator, appeaser, PC position (are you French, by any chance?), your smug taunts at people whose lives could be seriously jeopardized by exercising their apparent rights of freedom of religion and expression ring very hollow.
Smarten up.