Remember....if the gun bans didn't come first, this "thought-police" insanity wouldn't be possible....
Sure it would.
Nobody is interested in standing trial for murdering a politician over a breech of liberties. If this came to pass in the US, you wouldn't see some glorious revolution - you'd see a bunch of people complain about it on the internet, and day-to-day life would go on.
The basic threat that the second amendment seeks to uphold, that ultimate personal power is given to each and every capable individual - the ultimate safeguard from tyranny; is in my opinion invalid. The threat of a weapon can only be measured by the opponents willingness to use it, and the US population most assuredly *isn't* willing to use small arms to defend the constitution against the govenment.
If firearms were deemed a collective right tomorrow, only to be exercised by state militias, and private ownership were banned in the near future; you'd see quiet compliance from 99% of the population. The angry shots fired by that 1% - the true patriots, defending the constitution - would be ripped apart by the media, and turned into fuel for the fire. Video of shootouts with officers would show that the ends justify the means; that the violence inherent with private arms ownership is being turned against American law enforcement officers. And your fellow American's would watch the nightly news and eat it up.
This is the country we live in. Canada is representative of the future, socialist America. Don't ever think that it can't happen here.
[/rant]
Wow. This is beyond the pale. It's one thing for individual A or even group B to sue publisher X under the slander / libel laws if they feel disparaged, but letting busybody Z complain about publisher X maybe, possibly having slandered group B and then getting an award from it is another thing entirely.
I hope there's an appeal.
The site canadianpastor.blogspot.com alleges that the below letter touched off the whole thing. I don't think he crosses the line into hatred. He sounds more like some ultra-right person who doesn't grasp the same reality I do is all. He's not calling for the mob to rise up with pitchforks and torches, just suggesting a change in the pattern of legislation / ranting against the recently passed legislation.
Maybe he crossed the line in other writings, but not this one. I definitely don't agree with what he wrote, but I see nothing objectionable. At worst, one could argue that he is right at the line of acceptable, non-hateful speech, but he is still on the correct side of that line.
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
The Letter that Started It All
The Following is the actual letter written by Rev. Stephen Boissoin who was at the time National Chairman of the Concerned Christian Coalition (now Concerned Christians Canada Inc.) It is this letter that has the Rev. Stephen Boissoin and Concerned Christians Canada Inc., (CCC) appearing before The Alberta Human Rights Commission.
The letter is hard hitting and direct, but is written in love and needed to be said in this time of homosexual activism. What is interesting is that when this letter is read in context is not hateful or untrue like the Chief Commissioner of the Alberta Human Rights Commission says they are.
Homosexual Agenda Wicked
June 17, 2002
The following is not intended for those who are suffering from an unwanted sexual identity crisis. For you, I have understanding, care, compassion and tolerance. I sympathize with you and offer you my love and fellowship. I prayerfully beseech you to seek help, and I assure you that your present enslavement to homosexuality can be remedied. Many outspoken, former homosexuals are free today.
Instead, this is aimed precisely at every individual that in any way supports the homosexual machine that has been mercilessly gaining ground in our society since the 1960s. I cannot pity you any longer and remain inactive. You have caused far too much damage.
My banner has now been raised and war has been declared so as to defend the precious sanctity of our innocent children and youth, that you so eagerly toil, day and night, to consume. With me stand the greatest weapons that you have encountered to date - God and the "Moral Majority." Know this, we will defeat you, then heal the damage that you have caused. Modern society has become dispassionate to the cause of righteousness. Many people are so apathetic and desensitized today that they cannot even accurately define the term "morality."
The masses have dug in and continue to excuse their failure to stand against horrendous atrocities such as the aggressive propagation of homo- and bisexuality. Inexcusable justifications such as, "I'm just not sure where the truth lies," or "If they don't affect me then I don't care what they do," abound from the lips of the quantifiable majority.
Face the facts, it is affecting you. Like it or not, every professing heterosexual is have their future aggressively chopped at the roots.
Edmund Burke's observation that, "All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing," has been confirmed time and time again. From kindergarten class on, our children, your grandchildren are being strategically targeted, psychologically abused and brainwashed by homosexual and pro-homosexual educators.
Our children are being victimized by repugnant and premeditated strategies, aimed at desensitizing and eventually recruiting our young into their camps. Think about it, children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.
Your children are being warped into believing that same-sex families are acceptable; that men kissing men is appropriate.
Your teenagers are being instructed on how to perform so-called safe same gender oral and anal sex and at the same time being told that it is normal, natural and even productive. Will your child be the next victim that tests homosexuality positive?
Come on people, wake up! It's time to stand together and take whatever steps are necessary to reverse the wickedness that our lethargy has authorized to spawn. Where homosexuality flourishes, all manner of wickedness abounds.
Regardless of what you hear, the militant homosexual agenda isn't rooted in protecting homosexuals from "gay bashing." The agenda is clearly about homosexual activists that include, teachers, politicians, lawyers, Supreme Court judges, and God forbid, even so-called ministers, who are all determined to gain complete equality in our nation and even worse, our world.
Don't allow yourself to be deceived any longer. These activists are not morally upright citizens, concerned about the best interests of our society. They are perverse, self-centered and morally deprived individuals who are spreading their psychological disease into every area of our lives. Homosexual rights activists and those that defend them, are just as immoral as the pedophiles, drug dealers and pimps that plague our communities.
The homosexual agenda is not gaining ground because it is morally backed. It is gaining ground simply because you, Mr. and Mrs. Heterosexual, do nothing to stop it. It is only a matter of time before some of these morally bankrupt individuals such as those involved with NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Lovers Association, will achieve their goal to have sexual relations with children and assert that it is a matter of free choice and claim that we are intolerant bigots not to accept it.
If you are reading this and think that this is alarmist, then I simply ask you this: how bad do things have to become before you will get involved? It's time to start taking back what the enemy has taken from you. The safety and future of our children is at stake.
Rev Stephen Boissoin
posted by stan at 12:29 PM | 23 comments
If you are reading this and think that this is alarmist, then I simply ask you this: how bad do things have to become before you will get involved? It's time to start taking back what the enemy has taken from you. The safety and future of our children is at stake.
How bad do things have to become? A lot worse than taking away freedom of speech. Taking away cable television, now, or beer...
Remember....if the gun bans didn't come first, this "thought-police" insanity wouldn't be possible....
Sure it would.
Nobody is interested in standing trial for murdering a politician over a breech of liberties. If this came to pass in the US, you wouldn't see some glorious revolution - you'd see a bunch of people complain about it on the internet, and day-to-day life would go on.
The basic threat that the second amendment seeks to uphold, that ultimate personal power is given to each and every capable individual - the ultimate safeguard from tyranny; is in my opinion invalid. The threat of a weapon can only be measured by the opponents willingness to use it, and the US population most assuredly *isn't* willing to use small arms to defend the constitution against the govenment.
If firearms were deemed a collective right tomorrow, only to be exercised by state militias, and private ownership were banned in the near future; you'd see quiet compliance from 99% of the population. The angry shots fired by that 1% - the true patriots, defending the constitution - would be ripped apart by the media, and turned into fuel for the fire. Video of shootouts with officers would show that the ends justify the means; that the violence inherent with private arms ownership is being turned against American law enforcement officers. And your fellow American's would watch the nightly news and eat it up.
This is the country we live in. Canada is representative of the future, socialist America. Don't ever think that it can't happen here.
[/rant]
You are sadly and utterly, correct. All the "Cold Dead Hands" and "Molon Labe" talk is mostly just that, talk.
I too am guilty, as I am not willing to kill a police officer, or murder a politician (as much as I sometimes feel I'd like too) and just become fodder for for the gun grabbers on the 24 hour news, which would bombard the country with images of crazy rednecks with "assault weapons", raising the general public into a frightful frenzy, demanding the government "do something".
Remember....if the gun bans didn't come first, this "thought-police" insanity wouldn't be possible....
Sure it would.
Nobody is interested in standing trial for murdering a politician over a breech of liberties. If this came to pass in the US, you wouldn't see some glorious revolution - you'd see a bunch of people complain about it on the internet, and day-to-day life would go on.
The basic threat that the second amendment seeks to uphold, that ultimate personal power is given to each and every capable individual - the ultimate safeguard from tyranny; is in my opinion invalid. The threat of a weapon can only be measured by the opponents willingness to use it, and the US population most assuredly *isn't* willing to use small arms to defend the constitution against the govenment.
If firearms were deemed a collective right tomorrow, only to be exercised by state militias, and private ownership were banned in the near future; you'd see quiet compliance from 99% of the population. The angry shots fired by that 1% - the true patriots, defending the constitution - would be ripped apart by the media, and turned into fuel for the fire. Video of shootouts with officers would show that the ends justify the means; that the violence inherent with private arms ownership is being turned against American law enforcement officers. And your fellow American's would watch the nightly news and eat it up.
This is the country we live in. Canada is representative of the future, socialist America. Don't ever think that it can't happen here.
[/rant]
You are sadly and utterly, correct. All the "Cold Dead Hands" and "Molon Labe" talk is mostly just that, talk.
I too am guilty, as I am not willing to kill a police officer, or murder a politician (as much as I sometimes feel I'd like too) and just become fodder for for the gun grabbers on the 24 hour news, which would bombard the country with images of crazy rednecks with "assault weapons", raising the general public into a frightful frenzy, demanding the government "do something".
In many parts of the US, I have to admit you'd be right.....hopefully, enough of the other parts will exist to put up a good fight....
Remember....if the gun bans didn't come first, this "thought-police" insanity wouldn't be possible....
Sure it would.
Nobody is interested in standing trial for murdering a politician over a breech of liberties. If this came to pass in the US, you wouldn't see some glorious revolution - you'd see a bunch of people complain about it on the internet, and day-to-day life would go on.
The basic threat that the second amendment seeks to uphold, that ultimate personal power is given to each and every capable individual - the ultimate safeguard from tyranny; is in my opinion invalid. The threat of a weapon can only be measured by the opponents willingness to use it, and the US population most assuredly *isn't* willing to use small arms to defend the constitution against the govenment.
If firearms were deemed a collective right tomorrow, only to be exercised by state militias, and private ownership were banned in the near future; you'd see quiet compliance from 99% of the population. The angry shots fired by that 1% - the true patriots, defending the constitution - would be ripped apart by the media, and turned into fuel for the fire. Video of shootouts with officers would show that the ends justify the means; that the violence inherent with private arms ownership is being turned against American law enforcement officers. And your fellow American's would watch the nightly news and eat it up.
This is the country we live in. Canada is representative of the future, socialist America. Don't ever think that it can't happen here.
[/rant]
You are sadly and utterly, correct. All the "Cold Dead Hands" and "Molon Labe" talk is mostly just that, talk.
I too am guilty, as I am not willing to kill a police officer, or murder a politician (as much as I sometimes feel I'd like too) and just become fodder for for the gun grabbers on the 24 hour news, which would bombard the country with images of crazy rednecks with "assault weapons", raising the general public into a frightful frenzy, demanding the government "do something".
So - in your opinion there are no men or women left in the US that value freedom and liberty enough to fight - even at risk to their own lives - to retain it.
Maybe you are right. BUT! If you are then the USA, the last bastion of real freedom on Earth, is dead; it just doesn't know it yet. The great experiment has failed and the world is about to enter a dark age of oppression.
If you are right - then the people deserve what they get.
So - in your opinion there are no men or women left in the US that value freedom and liberty enough to fight - even at risk to their own lives - to retain it.
Did not say that.
So - in your opinion there are no men or women left in the US that value freedom and liberty enough to fight - even at risk to their own lives - to retain it.
Did not say
that.
Then what exactly did you say or mean because that's exactly what this sounds like:
You are sadly and utterly, correct. All the "Cold Dead Hands" and "Molon Labe" talk is mostly just that, talk.
During the war of revolution when the British Colonies of North America fought to become a separate nation, what percentage of the population supported the revolution, and what percentage participated in the fighting? I have always thought that the revolution was carried out by a minority of the people. The victors declared the new rules by which the country would operate as a new nation known as the United States of America, and the majority of the population (those who had no will to become part of the dispute with the King of England) went along with the new rules because they had no choice (unless they also took up arms in order to subjugate themselves to the King all over again).
It took several years before the new government was actually complete and a Constitution and the Federal Government came into being.
"Colonist support for the revolution is difficult to gauge. However, historians have estimated that approximately 40-45 percent of the colonists actively supported the rebellion while 15-20 percent of the population of the thirteen colonies remained loyal to the British Crown. The remaining 35-45 percent attempted to remain neutral[3]"
From wikipedia, so it's automatically wrong. (), but it gives us a starting point for discussion. Many British loyalists moved north to Canada so that they could remain subjects of the crown.
Much of the time spent forming fed.gov was trying to resolve problems that plague us to this day...
During the war of revolution when the British Colonies of North America fought to become a separate nation, what percentage of the population supported the revolution, and what percentage participated in the fighting? I have always thought that the revolution was carried out by a minority of the people. The victors declared the new rules by which the country would operate as a new nation known as the United States of America, and the majority of the population (those who had no will to become part of the dispute with the King of England) went along with the new rules because they had no choice (unless they also took up arms in order to subjugate themselves to the King all over again).
It took several years before the new government was actually complete and a Constitution and the Federal Government came into being.
"Colonist support for the revolution is difficult to gauge. However, historians have estimated that approximately 40-45 percent of the colonists actively supported the rebellion while 15-20 percent of the population of the thirteen colonies remained loyal to the British Crown. The remaining 35-45 percent attempted to remain neutral[3]"
I don't recall any of the estimates I've heard, but numbers are only part of the story. I think the Revolution depended, partly, on the fact that the Patriots were not simply rebelling against authority. They already had a group of men they regarded as their legitimate government(s), who had in fact been leaders in their communities and in their colonies for years. Not just the Continental Congress, but divers leaders at various levels of government, both local and colonial. I don't know if freedom-loving Americans have that kind of thing going on right now.
People in this country have comfortable lives and relatively happy lives. They may resent some government actions, but it will take some effort to get those comfortable people risk that lifestyle or give it up entirely to rise up in revolution. I think it will take a bit more than just a few court rulings.
Very true. Mere rulings are ethereal. Confiscations and prosecutions tho......
However, there are, what, 80 million or so gun owners? If even 1/10 of 1% resist.......