[HyperionTheEvil]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

As i said im all for withdrawing charter rights protection for religion, all relgions from the charter. Question is what's more importnat to you religion or child abuse. As i said, you have a choice, religous protection or child abuse

you openly admit child abuse has taken place but nevertheless go on defending them, makes one wonder where your morals land in terms of religion. I'm not the one saying they have a defence, you are

Dude, you are completely missing where I'm saying that there are non-religious polygamists in BC! Ban religion if you want, you'll still have practicing secular polygamists in BC.

That said, the topic is polygamy. And if Canada restricts polygamy for the weirdo Mormons then you'll have to do it to the atheists and the Muslims, too.

And you totally missed where i said i don't care if people have one or 30 wives. Only religion holds that a marriage has to be btween one man and a woman. fortunately in this country we cam to our senses and recognized that gay people have a right to get married as well As long as people are consensual , of the majority, who cares as long as mutual respect. This man is for all intents claiming a religous exemption from the law, if we want to make ploygamy legal im all for it, but this man says his god told him it just fine.

That as well the well known FDLS penchant for abusing sexually children.....



Do you get it now?

[Zipperfish]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

As i said im all for withdrawing charter rights protection for religion, all relgions from the charter[/u].

I'm completely with you on that one. Freedom of religion just adds a special, additional freedom to those who happen to be a member of Big Religion. Freedom of thought, conscience and belief already exist, so one wonders why the need to include freedom of religion?

[Gunnair]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

Gunnair Gunnair:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

Read the thread header...."religous persecution". And again for the record i dont care how many wives he has, it's about the children which the FDLS has a record of abusing.

The best thing to do is remove charter rights protectin "Religion" since religion itself preaches hatred in any number of ways. Why protect a myth that says it's okay to hate a sub-group or other when the whole point of the charter is to protect everyone?

$1:

God told me to stick my penis in that little boy- honest.

Smoke and mirrors doesn't hide your original example - which sets the idiotic tone of your argument.

$1:

Picutres are amusing, try addresing the question that the leader of this 'religion' is using the charter to defend himself on charges of polygamy and child abuse.

Warren jeffs tried the same thing with, oddly enough he was FDLS too.


You lose

Yes, he is using the Charter - that's his right. To determine once and for all if polygamy fall under freedom of religion.

So what?

However, back to your original idiotic assertion...

[Gunnair]

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

HyperionTheEvil HyperionTheEvil:

As i said im all for withdrawing charter rights protection for religion, all relgions from the charter. Question is what's more importnat to you religion or child abuse. As i said, you have a choice, religous protection or child abuse

you openly admit child abuse has taken place but nevertheless go on defending them, makes one wonder where your morals land in terms of religion. I'm not the one saying they have a defence, you are

Dude, you are completely missing where I'm saying that there are non-religious polygamists in BC! Ban religion if you want, you'll still have practicing secular polygamists in BC.

That said, the topic is polygamy. And if Canada restricts polygamy for the weirdo Mormons then you'll have to do it to the atheists and the Muslims, too.

And you totally missed where i said i don't care if people have one or 30 wives. Only religion holds that a marriage has to be btween one man and a woman. fortunately in this country we cam to our senses and recognized that gay people have a right to get married as well As long as people are consensual , of the majority, who cares as long as mutual respect. This man is for all intents claiming a religous exemption from the law, if we want to make ploygamy legal im all for it, but this man says his god told him it just fine.

That as well the well known FDLS penchant for abusing sexually children.....



Do you get it now?

You seem to be going out of your way to be thick here.

The issue AT THIS POINT is about polygamy NOT CHILD ABUSE. He is using the Charter to support freedom of religion NOT CHILD ABUSE. Once the issue of POLYGAMY has been sorted out, one can focus on CHILD ABUSE. Or they could have gone vice versa, but the AG chose not to.

Get it this time or do I need to haul out crayons and draw you pictures?