Sunday, January 17, 2010

They're Telling Christians To 'Shut Up'

Deliberately targeting Christians for discrimination.

"Too noisy in worship"?  What's "too noisy"?  How many decibels?  And when is it too noisy?

I'd like those questions answered.

Amplification of worship service forbidden.  Hard of hearing worshippers not accommodated by state apparatus, who could care less for them as long as they're Christians, obviously.

No warning, no discussion, preceded the ban.  Ban instituted following advertisement of worship services.  Funny how the "noise" suddenly, then, became unacceptable, isn't it?
"What is really going on here is action by secularists to try and restrict Christian freedom and expression in this country. We will do all we can at the Christian Legal Centre to oppose such discrimination,"


Kind of like banning gay parades and other sexual-extremist public celebrations for whatever reason... including "noise" and "inconveniencing others due to blocking-off of public streets".  Or just because somebody complained that they're "offended".

Already the state apparatus has been backing off under legal-action pressure.
"The church believes that the council's withdrawal is an attempt to conceal what happened and which has been ongoing for some time, not only in Lambeth but nationally. The leaders of the church maintained from the very outset that the notice had nothing to do with noise,"
Clearly, there's something illegal about targeting one group and no others.  Something unconstitutional.  Something... hatefully intolerant!

Islamic Supremacism and Dhimmitude behind it all?

ONE Muslim complained.  Just ONE. Nothing can please that bigot!
The legal organization said another church, Immanuel House of Worship in London, also has been "silenced" by the government because the sound of its worship drew a complaint from a single Muslim neighbor.

(...)

Ade Ajike, a church trustee, reported that after a visit from a government environmental health officer, the officer warned, "the church had to keep the noise down so as not to offend the Muslims living in the area."

"He told us 'this is a Muslim borough, you have to tread carefully,'" Ajike reported about the 2009 dispute.
"Have to tread carefully"?  OR ELSE WHAT?

Here we go again.  Submission to the Muslims.  Can't dare offend the precious, fragile, ultra-superiorly special... Muslims!  Discrimination against Christians must obviously happen in order to appease Islamic Supremacists.  Deja-vu all over again!  In Britain.  It's happening so much... is it any wonder that staunchly anti-Dhimmitude political parties are skyrocketing in popularity?

Ok to offend and bash Christians.  But... must appease the Muslims! 

(Appeasement, however, does NOT work, as we well know, so this appeasement is for naught!)

Why, those bigoted bastards of the state apparatus!  They're so much like the Sturmabteilungen brownshirts, though a little more sophisticated and subtle...


San Francisco discrimination example
The Alliance Defense Fund earlier had battled in San Francisco over orders there that a team of Christians turn down their volume. The issue was the message from Christian evangelists who were preaching along the streets and in the parks of the city. They were cited for their noise even though authorities refused to address officials with another group that was using an 80-watt amplifier only 15 feet away from the Christians. 
If that's not proof of discrimination on the basis of religion, in violation of the Bill of Rights, then I guess the state apparatus doesn't give a feck about the Bill of Rights and is so hateful towards Christians that they'll openly, blatantly discriminate against them exclusively!

Well, read the whole thing to get all the info and make your analysis.


So people are suddenly, after centuries, offended by hearing evidence of Christianity?

And the state apparatus acts upon this "offence taken" by obviously hateful bigots?

Well, then, how about we start complaining about noise and visual evidence of ideological stuff being created by homosexuals and Muslims in public?  Can we have those people forced to shut up and go behind silent closed doors too?  Fair's fair!

Next thing you know... Christ-allnacht!

One thing's for sure... the Christian People will not submit.

The state apparati have brought upon themselves... a LEGAL CRUSADE.

Even Christians, calm, tolerant and patient as they are, have a breaking point.

After all, we're human, too...

Oh, and by the way... I won't "shut up", either.


Some don't like what I say, or how I say it.  Too bad.  Because I have the same rights as everyone else, so says the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms!

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Say it while you still can!

Canadian Sentinel said...

I just did. Your turn...

joe six-pack said...

Everyone has a breaking point. The question is, when will enough people reach it?

History has shown that it can be long wait.

Canadian Sentinel said...

It took the Christians four centuries to reach theirs, whilst the Muslims were invading their lands, occupying them, forcibly converting, slaughtering and enslaving their people...

But the breaking point, we know very well, DID come.

And it will come again. When? Hard to say...

Balbulican said...

"whilst the Muslims were invading their lands, occupying them, forcibly converting, slaughtering and enslaving their people..."

Was that around the same time that Christians were invading the lands of Aboriginal people in the Americas, occupying them, forcibly converting them, slaughtering and enslaving their people, expelling the Jews from Spain, and so on? Around that time?

Canadian Sentinel said...

So you're saying that Islam is no worse than Christianity?

What are Christians doing today that's so bad, that's as bad as what Muslims are doing today? Where's all the evidence of contemporary slaughters and genocides commited in the name of Christianity? Of forced conversion? Of terrorism in the name of Christianty? Got any?

Compared to what the Muslims are doing today? Why don't you ask why the Islamic World doesn't allow the "Palestinians" to migrate to Islamic nations? Hmm?

You really do believe that Christianity is equally dangerous and horrifying as is Islam?

Only a complete imbecile would believe that Christianity today is as bad as Islam. A complete, ignorant, delusional imbecile.

Hope that's not you.

Balbulican said...

Oh, dear, oh dear. I keep trying to help, but you just won't actually read what I've written.

Now Scenty. Look at the part of your message that I quoted. Okay? Now...what historical period does it refer to? Got it?

Now. What historical period am I referencing when I describe the Christian occupation and enslavement of native people in the new world?

Clearer?

Canadian Sentinel said...

I thought you were being merely rhetorical.

The treatment by the "White Man" of the Indians in North America over two centuries ago is another story entirely.

We're talking about Christianity and Islam, not what happened about a quarter-century ago by the White Man (need you necessarily label 'em all as "Christian"??).

Now...

http://books.google.ca/books?id=K7ZLmc66OdwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=crusades&source=bl&ots=fs6b_ACrGz&sig=Yu45atN1QOrN2s-jfnDglVatsRI&hl=en&ei=c5pTS8WlE9_k8AbQi8CkBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=14&ved=0CDoQ6AEwDQ#v=onepage&q=crusades&f=false

Chapter 1: The Reign of the AntiChrist...

Yes, a bit of a read, but it all began in the AD 600s, roughly four centuries prior to the beginning of the Crusades.

Christians had had enough of the attacks, invasions and occupations, enough of the inferior status compared to their Islamic occupiers. How dare the supremacist Muslims?! Like, Dhimmitude wasn't something they really wanted, ok? If Christians weren't allowed to be equal, and had to submit to being inferior, well, like, forget it, ok? Besides, it was their lands, and they were being subjugated in their own lands!

And the Muslims today are so hypocritical to bash Israel for doing a nicer job of "occupying" the lands she won fair and square from Egypt and Transjordan in 1967 in a war that the Muslim nations started against Israel simply because she existed and was Jewish.

So there you've got the time period. Assumed you knew...

Then there's the Democratic Party's enslavement of the Blacks they imported for that purpose. And their begeting the KKK, and their Segregation Laws, and their long-running, continuing genocie against Blacks via "Planned Parenthood"... There's the contemporary Left, atheist Left, for you. Obama? C'mon... a TOKEN. He doesn't even care about racism!

Balbulican said...

"We're talking about Christianity and Islam, not what happened about a quarter-century ago by the White Man (need you necessarily label 'em all as "Christian"??)."

Uhh...they were Spanish and Portuguese, Scenty. Two Catholic nations, both of whom claimed the new world in Christ's name...

And..."a quarter century ago", Scenty? You do know that Columbus arrived in the new world FIVE centuries ago, right?

You really need to get a bit more familiar with REAL history before you start lecturing other folks.

Canadian Sentinel said...

Oh, re. the more-or-less quarter-century-ago: Apparently I was thinking of Canada. Duh... 'course I'm aware of the 1492 voyage to the New World and all that. Lesson there: Just 'cause everyone else says one thing's so, doesn't mean it's so, and one man can come along and say, no, they're all wrong and that something else is the truth... And it's possible for him to be right (as we know now, the world is NOT flat!).

Seems you have a convenient way of reading history to suit your worldview and your desire to demonize your former faith, in favor of your current one (Atheism)...

Oh, yeah. There were no atheists at all participating in the subjugation of aboriginal North Americans centuries and centuries ago... sure. Right. Nobody was atheist back then. All the bad people in the world were Christians. Suuuure.

And don't blame Christianity, either. Though it's fine to blame those who would misread the Bible to justify wrongdoing and immorality, for, yes, such people have always existed. As for the Muslims, well, they don't have to misread the Koran, for the Koran is conveniently self-abrogatory and permits all kinds of unethical, immoral, horrible, inhuman stuff...

And don't forget that Islam was made up, allegedly by a guy named "Mohammed", long after Jesus walked the earth and sacrificed himself for humanity. One must ask whether, therefore, Islam isn't a fraudulent "religion" fabricated by people who hated Christianity and morality, finding it inconvenient to the pursuit of what they wanted, as what they wanted was against the Bible, against Christianity, against God. So they decided to do a big rewrite to suit themselves and their immorality.

Regardless, your sticking up for Aboriginals today is admirable, to a point. But I still want to know what exactly it is you want for them. What exactly do you want Canada to give to them just because they're genetic descendants of people who lived centuries ago? How do you justify this racism? Surely you know that they've got every opportunity and then some to be equal, should they so choose. Problem is that the Liberal White Man and the greedy, unscrupulous Aboriginal politicians are using ordinary hereditary Aboriginals, keeping them down in poverty (regardless of the billions of dollars per year allocated to raise them up) so as to profit themselves and the rich White Liberal Men... the Aboriginal politicians (not all of them, of course, but you and I know for sure that many are corrupt and don't care about ordinary, poor folks at all) apparently are more interested in self-enrichment than in helping the poor. Can't you see the racism and corruption? Can't you see what White Liberal Men are doing today that continues what they began centuries ago?

And can't you see that the Conservatives are the only folks who dare to try to ensure equality for hereditary Aboriginals who are currently, by their corrupt political overlords and by White Liberal Men, denied their equal rights, particularly the women?

I do worry about your way of looking at the contemporary world, too. I look at the evidence and use logic and reason, and you use something else. Standing up for ordinary hereditary Aboriginals, are you? Nah. You don't know what you're doing... or do you? Are you one of those White Liberal Men?

Do you support the Conservatives' attempts to ensure equal rights for all hereditary Aboriginals, particularly Aboriginal women, who still, forced to remain on the dilapidated (despite the billions of dollars allocated for their raising-up every year) old reservations, don't enjoy rights equal to those of non-Aboriginal women, thanks, precisely, to White Liberal Men and corrupt Aboriginal politicians?

Balbulican said...

"Standing up for ordinary hereditary Aboriginals, are you? Nah. You don't know what you're doing."

I've lived and worked on reserve, my wife is Ojibway, three of my business partners are Cree or Inuit."

Who the hell do you think you are to tell me I don't know what I'm doing?

Canadian Sentinel said...

Read my comment again. All of it.

I don't care if you're an Indian, if your wife's an Indian, if you live on a reservation.

The truth is the truth is the truth.

Probably makes you rich to deny the truth, like the White Liberal Man and the corrupt Indian politician who appears to be ridiculously well-off whilst his people live in the dirt, despite all the money that keeps on pouring and pouring and pouring in, money meant to lift the Indians on reservations up out of poverty, but which, on many reservations, obviously, never has, not even after decades and decades...

I go by the EVIDENCE. And use LOGIC.

You? You just say, "I lived with 'em, so I'm right and you're wrong".

Illogical. Doesn't impress me.

Like, I could have lived on a reservation, have an Indian wife and a hundred Indian buddies. Does that make me just as right as you are? No, it cannot, because we can't both be right if we disagree oppositely, which I assume you do with respect to the things I've pointed out that are clearly, indubitably obvious.

Again, read the whole thing, every time. You never seem to. Seems you scan for something you want to read, and read just that.

The rest seems to have just blown by you like a fart in a windstorm. Sometimes you'll be lucky and smell it, but you won't know the nature, the provenance of the smell.

Canadian Sentinel said...

Well, I was forced to delete Balbulican's response due to his use of the f-word and 'cause he called me a "little prick".

Apparently I broke him, overwhelmed his brain, making it go tilt.

Poor guy, one of the most formidable leftists of the Canadian blogosphere, has broken down, come unhinged, due to being unable or unwilling to do what's necessary to understand.

And he thinks that race or, at least, genetic heritage and special, government-granted "status" matters more than real-world evidence, logic and reason.

Frankly, I was surprised at his behavior. But then again, ALL leftists, pretty much, reach the unhingedness state quite easily and needlessly.

Guess he couldn't stand that I was being curtly resolute rather than submissive and sweetly cocker-spanielly.