(This is the concluding portion of a two-part post that began with “Everybody Expects…the Liberal Inquisition!” Click here to read Part 1 first)
On April 29th, 2004, Canada’s governor general signed into law a measure that criminalized public expression in opposition to homosexual behavior, officially categorizing some orthodox Christian beliefs, when verbalized publically, as “hate speech”.
Welcome to the hopey, changey world of tolerance and inclusiveness, Perez Hilton style.
Dr. Albert Mohler Jr. addressed this seismic legal and cultural shift in an opinion piece titled The End of Religious Liberty in Canada:
“It’s all over but the funeral. Free speech and religious liberty are now effectively dead in Canada, and recent developments across our northern border should awaken Americans to the peril of political correctness and its restrictions on freedom.
On April 28, the Canadian Senate passed bill C-250 by a vote of 59 to 11. In passing this legislation, the Canadian Parliament added “sexual orientation” to the nation’s laws criminalizing “hate speech.” The end result is that the Bible may now be considered a form of criminalized hate literature and Christians who teach that homosexuality is sinful may face criminal charges.”
This reality is worthy of our pause and careful consideration. The categorization of biblical content as hate speech deserving of punishment constitutes state-sponsored persecution of Christians. This is what Canada has become. This is what America is becoming.
Dr. Mohler concluded his warning to Christendom with the following:
“The pattern of criminalizing speech about homosexuals is spreading across liberal societies. In Sweden, pastors are explicitly warned that any sermons critical of homosexuality can lead to criminal charges. The same logic is spreading through the courts and legislatures of many European countries–and now has jumped the Atlantic to Canada.
The truly threatening character of the Canadian legislation is further demonstrated in the fact that police do not have to charge persons with breaking a law. Any Canadian citizen can file a complaint against any other citizen, resulting in charges. At that point, the defendant is simply left to the dangerous whims of the liberal judiciary and governmental human rights commissions. The potential legal costs would alone intimidate some persons from talking about homosexuality.
The most important part of the newly-revised criminal code reads: “Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of . . . an indictable offense and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.”
During a recent debate, the Canadian attorney general refused to comment on whether or not the Bible is, in itself, hate speech. That matter, we are now warned, will be left for the courts to determine.
We are fooling ourselves if we believe this threat to religious liberty will stay on the Canadian side of the border. This same logic is already accepted by many law professors and judges in the United States. The passage of C-250 is a warning to us all. When free speech is denied and the preachers are told what they can and cannot say, religious liberty is effectively dead.”
Man has spoken. The spirit of the “progressive” left has spoken. The Canadian thought police have spoken: God’s perfect Word on homosexuality is evil and its public proclamation can therefore result in punishment by law.
Liberal fascism is on the march on both sides of the US/Canadian border. The Liberal Inquisition is hardly confined by national boundaries. It is a global ideology simultaneously consumed and fueled by its overt hatred of truth and its author. The thought police are on a mission. As they march forward, they aim for nothing less than the total subjugation of our nation to their politically correct code…one suppressed individual at a time.
So as we wonder what the American branch of the Liberal Inquisition might have in mind for us, we need only look north.
Now, while there is still time, what are we going to do about it?
If you know of anyone who might be interested in this post, please share it.
Please “like” us on Facebook (using the convenient button in the upper left corner) Thank you for your support!
.
See also:
Problem>Reaction>Solution: Why we will beg to have our freedoms taken away and go to war forever.
The America Idol (Or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love The Almighty State)
US raises terror threat level to “Orwellian”: Citizens line up to hand over more freedoms
Singing Sweet, Sweet Lies in the “Land of the Free” and the Home of the NSA
Why Americans don’t do repentance.
7 Empowering Truths for Politically Active Christians
Politics, Religion, and the Threat of Spontaneous Combustion
The (church built) Zombie Apocalypse is upon us…
.
© 2009, 2014 Scott Alan Buss – All Rights Reserved.
Part 2
And don't worry, we'll meet our Maker, but then so will you. Are you ready?
Ezekiel 3:18-21 (KJV) When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; >>>> but his blood will I require at thine hand <<<>>> but thou hast delivered thy soul <<<>>> but his blood will I require at thine hand.<<<>>> also thou hast delivered thy soul <<<>>> but woe to that person through whom they come <<<<. (2) It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. (Matthew 18:5-9, Mark 9:41-48)
Not one drop of your blood is on my hands.
Dear Mr. Christian:
No one is suggesting that your faith is inappropriate. Please understand that those of us who do not believe as you do generally don't care what you believe. It is only your actions that we comment on. When you or your co-religionists seek to impose your beliefs on our conductd, or to limit our ability to live our lives free of your moralizing restrictions, we react. We would far rather live by your savior's words "let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."
You live your life and suffer the judgment of the god, if any, you encounter thereafter, and we will do likewise. But again, as your savior has said, "do not judge lest you be judged".
amateurpol,
Finish the context:
Matthew 7:1-5 Judge not, that ye be not judged. (2) For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (3) And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (4) Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
(5) >>>> Thou hypocrite <<<>>> first <<<>>> then <<<>>> but his blood will I require at thine hand <<<>>> but thou hast delivered thy soul <<<>>> but his blood will I require at thine hand.<<<>>> also thou hast delivered thy soul <<<>>> but woe to that person through whom they come <<<<. (2) It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. (Matthew 18:5-9, Mark 9:41-48)
Not one drop of your blood is on my hands.
Reposted because something happent to the middle of the post
amateurpol,
Finish the context:
Matthew 7:1-5 Judge not, that ye be not judged. (2) For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (3) And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (4) Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
(5) >>>> Thou hypocrite <<<>>> first <<<>>> then <<<< shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Matthew 7:1 isn't a condemnation of judgment; it's a condemnation of hypocrisy or do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do. Clearly God intend us to judge others, but only when we are either not guilty of the sin or have first "removed the beam" from our own life by repentance and continued contrition.
1 Corinthians 6:2-3 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? (3) Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
Sorry for another repeat, the greater than/less thans are dropping part of the post….
amateurpol,
Finish the context:
Matthew 7:1-5 Judge not, that ye be not judged. (2) For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (3) And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (4) Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
(5) ====) Thou hypocrite (====, >>>> first (==== cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and >>>> then <<<>>> but woe to that person through whom they come (====. (2) It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. (Matthew 18:5-9, Mark 9:41-48)
Not one drop of your blood is on my hands.
One more time === need and edit or preview option!!!
amateurpol,
Finish the context:
Matthew 7:1-5 Judge not, that ye be not judged. (2) For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (3) And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (4) Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
(5) ====) Thou hypocrite (====, ====) first (==== cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and ====) then (==== shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Matthew 7:1 isn't a condemnation of judgment; it's a condemnation of hypocrisy or do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do. Clearly God intend us to judge others, but only when we are either not guilty of the sin or have first "removed the beam" from our own life by repentance and continued contrition.
1 Corinthians 6:2-3 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? (3) Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
And don't worry, we'll meet our Maker, but then so will you. Are you ready?
Ezekiel 3:18-21 (KJV) When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; ====) but his blood will I require at thine hand (====. (19) Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; ====) but thou hast delivered thy soul (====. (20) Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumbling-block before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; ====) but his blood will I require at thine hand.(==== (21) Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; ====) also thou hast delivered thy soul (====.
Luke 17:1-2 (NIV) Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, ====) but woe to that person through whom they come (====. (2) It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. (Matthew 18:5-9, Mark 9:41-48)
Not one drop of your blood is on my hands.
Phantome6294, you missed the mark in asking why the "savings" provision of the law wasn't mentioned. The real issue in this post is "God’s perfect Word on homosexuality". The hypocracy here is that a religion, any religion, that views all of its texts to be the perfect and infallible word of its supreme being is, by definition, an intolerant religion. And here is a practicing member of that religion preaching the need for tolerance of its perfect texts? If his god's word is so perfect, why does he need to ask for tolerance?
I am curious why you did not cover the part of the bill which explicitly excludes such speed based on religious texts?
"(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)
…
(b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;"
Don't get me wrong… I do strongly believe these types of laws dangerously encroach on free speech. Further, I do not think one should even have to face the possibility of prosecution and the requirement to defend one's religious beliefs, but the C-250 law did explicitly exclude speech based on religious texts. I am curious why you didn't mention this in your article?
Let us make the distinction, however, on a couple of things. There's a difference between having homosexual tendencies, and being a practicing homosexual. Also, to God, sin is sin. So fornication=adultery=homosexuality. Yes, this same type of legislation will come here. The so-called progressives are more intolerant than most. They can't tolerate any thought that doesn't match up with their own.