To understand the full implications of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on Canada’s Christian foundation, order your copy of Leaving God Behind from ChristianGovernance.
~ ~ ~
CHP Communiqué – Vol 19, No 45 * Nov. 6, 2012
Oligarchy
By Jim Hnatiuk, Leader of the Christian Heritage Party
From ChristianGovernance eletter – October 9, 2012
Humanism is a tyrannical ideology
Humanism is a cancer on society, a blight on the human heart. When it is in control, It does not allow any dissent from it’s huge propaganda circus, the government school. Check out the following comments from a Hamilton Spectator article last week:
ChristianGovernance eletter – August 9, 2012
Below is a brief excerpt from Leaving God Behind. We expect to be able to send the final proof to the printer next week so they can prepare a draft version of the book for us to approve. It is exciting to be able to make this important work available to Canadians. When we see what God has done in this nation in the past, we will hopefully be inspired to believe God for great things in the future.
Leaving God Behind: The Charter of Rights and Canada’s Official Rejection of Christianity
By Dr. Michael Wagner
Contact ChristianGovernance for pre-publication pricing: [email protected] or 613-496-0091.
ChristianGovernance eletter – April 24, 2012
Canadian liberals really do believe that Canada was a barbarian outpost before Pierre Trudeau and the Premiers of the day brought us the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982. There was no compassion or fairness in Canada before that. No equality! That’s when we “came of age.” Shoppers Drug Mart almost went out of business due to plummeting sales of diapers and soothers!!! We were barbarian hordes. The mythology is so entrenched, that even our politicians embrace this nonsense without batting an eye. A case in point follows:
Received via email…
Subject: PRAYER REQUEST: B.C. HEARING BEGINS MONDAY
For Immediate Release from the CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP
November 18, 2010
B.C. hearing on constitutionality of polygamy begins Monday
Do you want more proof that Canada’s – and particularly Ontario’s – human rights industry is a realm of tyranny, or arbitrary rule? A few weeks ago, a decision came down from the province’s human rights tribunal that they had the right to make the final decision on who can be the dean of a university’s law school. The case in question involves the university of Windsor. In this more recent decision, covered in the article below, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario had decided that it’s jurisdiction does not extend to the editorial pages of newspaper. But if it believed this, why did Ontario Human Rights Commission Czar Barbara Hall express such strong opinions against Maclean’s magazine and its Mark Steyn content that put these agencies in the news across Canada for a couple of years?
Manitoba’s facing the scandal of their “porn pic” judge Lori Douglas, and now the Ontario Superior Court decides to throw out laws against prostitution because the practice is such a valuable contribution to the best of Canadian culture.
Christian Legal Fellowship – September 28, 2010
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT DECIDES PROSTITUTION CHALLENGE
CHP Canada Communiqué – Vol 17, No 35 * September 7, 2010
God’s Law or Total Statism
By Jim Hnatiuk, Leader of the Christian Heritage Party
“You can’t legislate morality,” is a sentiment commonly expressed in our pluralistic society. “I’m not bound by your rules; I have my own way of looking at things,” is the accepted belief.
Last week, the National Post reported on some atheists who want the “Supremacy of God” clause taken out of the Preamble of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These atheists got uppity because a Quebec judge referenced the clause in a decision accusing the Quebec government of totalitarianism in its implementation of its new religion and ethics curriculum, imposing it even on private schools. I submitted a column to the National Post in response to the article. They didn’t print it so I have reprinted it below. The National Post itself produced an editorial on the subject in their Saturday paper. The argumentation in favour of the clause in my column vs. the Post’s illustrates the difference between a clear Christian apologetic and a much weaker attempt to defend it on more generic grounds.