The Shotgun Blog
« Do you buy it? | Main | Column of the Year: John Robson on Steyn, Macleans, Human Rights, and Islamic Radicals »
Friday, December 14, 2007
Public facility honours religious figure
My op-ed in today's National Post explores a subject that none of the mainstream media in B.C. thought interesting enough to cover. But judging by the high number of emails I've already received this morning in response to the column, it's clearly an issue of public interest.
Posted by Terry O'Neill on December 14, 2007 in Religion | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e54fa432628833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Public facility honours religious figure:
Comments
"Canada has no U.S.-style "wall" separating church and state."
. . . and neither does the US, despite all the phony raving and babbling of Leftoids on both sides of the border!
I renew my $1,000 reward offer for anyone who can find it in the US Constitution.
Good luck wasting your time trying to locate it.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 9:57:04 AM
The foundation of Sikhism is independence at any cost. Terrorism has been a big part of their strategy. The assasination of 2 Prime Ministers, the Air India bombing, what more does it take to convince us?
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 10:00:15 AM
I'm no expert on Sikhism - not even close - but I believe that Sikhs believe that Guru Nanak Dev Ji was a man, not a god. Christians, by contrast, believe that Jesus is not merely a man, but divine. In fact, calling him Jesus "Christ" is an indication of one's belief that he is divine. So your analogy fails because each named individual has quite a different status.
It would be analogous if you talked about naming a hospital after, say, the apostle Peter. And not only is there an entrance named for him, there is an entire hospital in Hamilton named for him ( http://www.stpetes.ca/ ). So if we can have a St. Peter's Hospital, why not a Guru Nanak Dev Ji entrance?
Posted by: Fact Check | 2007-12-14 10:21:52 AM
because
This is Canada, not the Punjab.
He was a terrorist
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 10:31:09 AM
The intent of separation of Church and State was meant to mean that there would be no ONE STATE
RELIGION so that the church (whatever domination)
would hold no sway over matters of government.
This was probably brought about because of the Church of England's influence in Britain at the time of the American revolution. I believe many European Countries still have a State religion, Italy being the first one to come to mind.
Both St. Peter's and Saint Joseph's hospitals in hamilton were formed and still under the ownership of the local Roman Catholic Diocese, and as such can call their hospitals any friggin' name they wish.
Check your facts FC.
Posted by: atric | 2007-12-14 10:31:23 AM
By the way, am I not seeing things or what?
Where did that Muzzie post go from yesterday that contained many lively and thought-provoking comments??
Posted by: atric | 2007-12-14 10:36:46 AM
atric- I think the comments got too nasty. 'm I bad.
Why not name a burn wing after Michael Collins?
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 10:40:57 AM
There is an Oral Roberts University in Oklahoma, Brigham Young University in Utah, and a Jesus College at each of Cambridge and Oxford, so it's not like Christian figures are not present.
Don't forget that the Easterners keep naming things after their (false) god, Trudeau (may he burn in hell.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-12-14 10:50:54 AM
Pike- The only one that comes to mind is the former Dorval Airport in Montreal, and it caused a lot of uproar when it's name was changed to whats-his-name.
Posted by: atric | 2007-12-14 10:55:48 AM
So you're all agreed then? BC is the new sikh homeland? That's fine with me.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 11:06:48 AM
If you're feeling a bit down about the whole thing, you can check yourself into the psych ward at St. Paul's in downtown Vancouver, or any of the many publicly funded Catholic hospitals (run by the church, not just in name) in British Columbia.
Fortunately the rate of lion maulings and crucifixions has gone down in the Christian community since the fall of Rome, so the hospital will have plenty of time to look after your martyr complex.
Posted by: Voice of Reason | 2007-12-14 11:10:15 AM
The one comfort is Sikhs mostly kill Hindus, or each other. I can live with that as long as it stays over the mountains.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 11:16:37 AM
VOR: "If you're feeling a bit down about the whole thing, you can check yourself into the psych ward at St. Paul's in downtown Vancouver, or any of the many publicly funded Catholic hospitals (run by the church, not just in name) in British Columbia."
Yes indeed. In fact, Terry could have avoided this whole silly tempest in a teapot if he had only gone to one of the many public elementary schools, high schools, or universities in Canada named for saints. He could probably have done so in one of the many Canadian cities named for saints, too. Education first, Terry. It can help prevent a needless persecution complex.
Posted by: Fact Check | 2007-12-14 11:27:42 AM
Speaking of schools, a lot of regular kids are getting a complex looking at the big knives that the sikh kids are allowed to wear.
We wear crosses, they wear knives. Hope you feel comfortable with your multicultural correctness.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 11:34:20 AM
Terry, as an atheist, but not a moral relativist, and recovering politician, I will venture a little opinion. I sympathize with your frustration but I think the issue is not so much separation of church and state but politics and church. Taking two examples: Vanderzalm, provincially killing the Socreds by wearing his religion on his sleeve, while Stockwell Day, federally for acting-out the left-lib MSM wet dream of "man walking with dinosaurs" belief became toxic for any leadership role. Whatever Harper's religion, if any, is not part of the political landscape that surrounds him. That helps him politically.
Gordo is not stupid, he recognizes this phenomena, he's just another political whore.
You and I likely agree on the fact that Western civilization is a product of mostly Christian-Judaeo foundation and we like it that way. And, obviously there are other religions which clash significantly with that culture and deserve full civil censure. Where we differ is that you may want to codify those (Christian-Judaeo) traditions within state institutions and I would remove those institutions from the state and limit any codification to the minimally necessary legal framework to protect and advance our civilization.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2007-12-14 12:26:37 PM
whoop-de-do. I sure respect your opinion, John.
I once watched 2 sikhs fighting over a real estate deal in Grande Prairie. It was in the parking lot of the realty office, and the combatants were just a couple of regular looking guys.
The first guy pulled a piece of logging chain out of his car, and the other responded by trying to slash him with a "ceremonial" dagger. Contrary to what a lot of you try to sell, those puppies are sharp!
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 12:45:26 PM
atric: I think there are some schools named for him too, one inexplicably in Calgary. Why not name a school in Israel after Adolf Eichmann?
I wish Harper would change the name of Dorval airport back to its original name. It's like naming the Santiago, Chile airport after Pinochet.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-12-14 1:32:40 PM
"I think there are some schools named for him too, one inexplicably in Calgary"
Inexplicably? The school system is run by Leftoids. Of course they will name one after their "hero".
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 1:37:42 PM
I renew my $1,000 reward offer for anyone who can find it in the US Constitution.
Good luck wasting your time trying to locate it.
Posted by: obc | 14-Dec-07 9:57:04 AM
How about the treaty of Tripoli? Said treaty was signed in 1797, unanimously the Senate voted for it and John Adams signed it into law. It clearly reads:
"The United States of America is in no sense founded on the Christian Religion."
How much clearer would you like it?
Another juicy John Adams Quote:
"In the formation of the American government ... it will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with gods, or were in any degree under the influence of heaven."
How about George Washington?
"The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of the clergy."
There are probably more, but that's all I am going to do for you for 1000 bucks. Let me know how you'll get it to me.
As this is a price winning it's even tax free!
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2007-12-14 1:52:15 PM
Used to be when a School was named after a person that was one who contributed a great deal to either the country or the School itself in some big way. Looks like that idea has taken a hike, doesn't mean f*ck all like so many of our customs.
It seems ridiculous to name schools after Politicians as well, too partisan in a democracy.
Name the schools for the districts they serve, what they are and nothing more.
The renaming of Dorval was highly opposed to no avail as usual. Chretien listened to nobody,well, aside from talking to his imaginary friend from the street people designation.
Posted by: Liz J | 2007-12-14 1:52:20 PM
Snowy is obviously unclear as to what the US Constitution is.
He thinks letters and quotations constitute part of the body of that document.
Then again, he was likely "edjumicated" in the public school system - so no one should be surprised.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 1:57:49 PM
All this multiculturalism stuff sure makes you wish for the good old days, when Christians got along like they did in Ireland and England...
Oh, wait.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubles
Or maybe like they did in the U.S. after the Establishment Clause...
Oh, wait.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_religion_in_the_United_States#Anti-Catholicism
Well, at least the Christians in the U.S. didn't persecute Jewish people...
Oh, wait.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_religion_in_the_United_States#Anti-semitism
Posted by: Voice of Reason | 2007-12-14 2:00:47 PM
Naivists like Venom of Raisins always seek out the isolated and irrelevant to back up their faulty logic and conveniently ignore the overwhelming mountain of Truth that casts a shadow over their cowardly and maggot ridden carcasses.
Epsi
Posted by: epsilon | 2007-12-14 2:06:10 PM
Then again, he was likely "edjumicated" in the public school system - so no one should be surprised.
Posted by: obc | 14-Dec-07 1:57:49 PM
Oh, obc is trying to make funny again.
You know obc, just admit it, you don't even have the 1K you offered as a bounty, you probably haven't even SEEN this much money in your life all in one place.
Now, keep posting, nobody can make a fool out of you as quickly as you can do it to yourself (and you're much more thorough too).
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2007-12-14 2:08:20 PM
epsi ~
George Washington’s letter to the Jews of Newport, Rhode Island after his visit to their Synagogue
and their original letter to him:
August 21st, 1790
To the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island
Gentleman:
While I receive, with much satisfaction, your Address replete with expressions of affection and esteem; I rejoice in the opportunity of assuring you, that I shall always retain a grateful remembrance of the cordial welcome I experienced in my visit to Newport, from all classes of Citizens.
The reflection on the days of difficulty and danger which are past is rendered the more sweet, from a consciousness that they are succeeded by days of uncommon prosperity and security. If we have wisdom to make the best use of the advantages with which we are now favored, we cannot fail, under the just administration of a good Government, to become a great and happy people.
The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
It would be inconsistent with the frankness of my character not to avow that I am pleased with your favorable opinion of my Administration, and fervent wishes for my felicity. May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy.
G. Washington
THIS PRETTY much sums up the attitude of Americans towards Jews - even from the time of the Revolution.
And then there's President John Adams:
"For I really wish the Jews again in Judea an independent nation."
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 2:11:11 PM
In other words, Snowy, you have to admit defeat, couched of course in flowery verbiage that allows you to hide among the pansies & daffodils.
Typical Leftoid response. :)
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 2:13:48 PM
I didn't bother to read the links posted by Voice of Treason. Wikipedia? So what?
Separation of church and state/politics doesn't apply here at all. Sikhism is all things rolled into one. It's a religion, a political movement, and a fledgling state. The leaders are all powerful within the organization, and use any form of strongarm tactics to control its members.
Naming a Canadian institution after the founder of this far east mafia isn't just an insult to Christians, it's an insult to this country.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 2:18:53 PM
BTW, obc, here's one more quote for you, written by James Madison, the original drafter of the first amendment to the United States Constitution:
"The appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, [is] contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment.'"
Thomas Jefferson on numerous occasions made it also clear what the 1st amendment ment, in an 1808 letter he wrote:
"We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries."
But I am sure you are going to tell me soon that neither Madison nor Jefferson knew what they were talking about, I mean heck, you're obc and those two guys just wrote the Constitution, what could they know after all.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2007-12-14 2:23:24 PM
But like a typical Leftoid, Snowy is at the trough - sticking his hand out for his entitlements.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 2:24:01 PM
They may have written the Constitution, Leftoid, but they did NOT include Separation of Church & State in it.
If you learned history (which I'm sure you didn't)
you'd know:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
That means, Snowy, no ONE religion would be the official religion of the US - like The Church of England is in G.B. or Catholicism is in Italy or Islam is in 57 Muslim countries around the world.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 2:29:13 PM
Posted by: obc | 14-Dec-07 2:29:13 PM
Funny obc, you read the second amendment to mean that you can carry a gun because you want to, the whole idea that it was reserved for State Militia is one of these "leftoid" things.
But when it comes to the first amendment, where not only we do have the text but even the LEGAL interpretation by the people who WROTE it and where they even STATE that they see this as a seperation of Church and State you stick your fingers in your ear and your feet in your mouth and behave like a little kid throwing a tantrum.
Grow up, and maybe take some basic reading courses so that in the future you make less a fool of yourself.
And I still wait to hear how you plan on giving me the 1K that you have promised.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2007-12-14 2:33:33 PM
Just the one thousand - that's all that interests this Leftoid.
Not the facts of course - he ignores them with his gibberish about the SECOND amendment.
He probably thinks the Constitution allows for the right of abortion also.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 2:36:10 PM
Since we're offering historical quotes, how about three from obc's heroes (obc = Oswald, Booth, Czolgosz):
"I don't know why you are treating me like this. The only thing I have done is carry a pistol into a movie." - Lee Harvey Oswald
"This country was formed for the white not for the black man. And looking upon African slavery from the same stand-point, as held by those noble framers of our Constitution, I for one, have ever considered it, one of the greatest blessings (both for themselves and us) that God ever bestowed upon a favored nation." - John Wilkes Booth
"I killed the President because he was the enemy of the good people, the good working people." - Leon Czolgosz
Snowrunner, the guy is so demented he takes his nickname from three presidential assassins. Don't waste your time with this loon.
Posted by: Fact Check | 2007-12-14 2:39:02 PM
This from FC - who has been caught by our moderator posting messages while using other people's nics.
Trolls are useless creatures - except for cannon fodder, I suppose.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 2:41:39 PM
Admit it FC, if it weren't for OBC, you'd have a lot of gaps in you periods of self-rightious indignation.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 2:50:14 PM
En français...?
http://www.canoe.com/infos/quebeccanada/archives/2007/12/20071214-105407.html
Posted by: Marc | 2007-12-14 3:05:51 PM
James Madison:
"The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
"The belief in a God All Powerful, wise and good, is essential to the moral order of the world and to the happiness of man."
John Adams:
"Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self-defense."
"If we make religion our business, God will make it our blessedness."
Thomas Jefferson:
"Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks."
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-14 3:06:41 PM
Marc, my French is rusty. I know the theme of the article, but did she mention the head dress for women?
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 3:10:05 PM
You know the theme ? Good.
Now learn some words...they gonna be useful.
"la prédominance de la langue française, la protection et la promotion de la culture québécoise, l'égalité entre les sexes et la laïcité des institutions publiques."
Posted by: Marc | 2007-12-14 3:13:17 PM
Is there a point to this Marc?
I admire Quebec's resolve in standing up to a group that wants to hijack our way of life. Is there anything new in this link?
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-14 3:55:36 PM
Make it clear that religion and the State will never mix again in Quebec. It's in regards of everybody - not only one group.
That was my point.
Posted by: Marc | 2007-12-14 4:01:39 PM
"The foundation of Sikhism is independence at any cost. Terrorism has been a big part of their strategy. The assasination of 2 Prime Ministers, the Air India bombing, what more does it take to convince us?"
This has got to be the most ignorant, racist and generalized statement I've ever read.
I guess that should lead us to conclude that all Roman Catholics are terrorists because of the dreaded terrorist Timothy McVeigh, responsible for the terrorist attack of the Oklahoma City Bombing.
Posted by: Singh | 2007-12-16 6:58:54 PM
"This has got to be the most ignorant, racist and generalized statement I've ever read."
Then you must have missed our resident racist - DJ - and his many posts. :)
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-16 7:03:18 PM
There is a difference between a Catholic who kills - and a terrorist who kills in the name of his religion or nationality.
MacVeigh did not kill in the name of his religion.
Nice try! I've heard this argument umpteen times. Come up with something original next time.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-16 7:29:26 PM
Holy cow! You people have thin skins!
Hey Singh, why not invite me to your temple and educate me on the positive aspects of Sikhism? I'm willing to look closer, and try to stop being an ignorant racist.
Oh, I forgot, I'm not allowed inside your temple. In fact, I'd probably be shot dead before I got 3 steps inside the door.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-17 2:29:15 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.