April 23, 2015

MPs who want to abolish House of Commons prayer should be honest about their reasons

Brian LilleyArchive

Three party leaders have decided that the prayer said in the House of Commons has to go.

This is in the wake of the Supreme Court decision that ruled city council meetings cannot start with a prayer.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May wants the prayer changed to take out the word God. Well, at that point, why have the prayer at all?

Meanwhile NDP Leader Tom Mulcair and Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau say they want to switch from a prayer to a moment of reflection instead.

They all want to make these changes in the name of diversity, inclusion.

And they say they want to respect the Supreme Court.

But they aren't being honest. I explain why.

Do you agree? Tell us in the comments!

 

JOIN TheRebel.media for more news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

READ Brian Lilley's book CBC Exposed -- It's been called "the political book of the year."

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-04-23 22:23:41 -0400
If prayer was actually shown to work, we should allow it to continue. Unfortunately, there are millions of dying children and there parents who would disagree.
commented 2015-04-23 21:57:01 -0400
The Supreme Court ruling is a sham. It’s a completely fabricated and baseless unconstitutional law. That aside, it doesn’t apply. But it didn’t take the disingenuous ‘progressives’ (code word for communists) very long to jump on and push to trample another fundamental Canadian tradition. Why are they so keen to commit cultural suicide? Do these godless, empty suits not even respect their own heritage or hate this country? This is exactly what the Bolsheviks did where the State is god and you become a serf. If you want to end up living in a third world hell-hole should work fine. What’s next with these ingrates? That we become multilingual? If you think this is all innocuous then you might as well run out and buy a prayer rug while their on sale. This country is in the process of being wrecked before our eyes from within by ‘peaceful’ totalitarians.

Maybe Christianity needs to go through another Reformation so it should have an element of being politicized like Islam, a militant Christianity for it to survive (no more turning the other cheek). Seems to work at the supposedly secular institute Webber Academy, in Alberta, where the Inhuman Rights Commissars dictate it’s OK for Muslims to commandeer the cafeteria and turn it into a mosque. Unbelievable duplicity and no word from the commies in Parliament about this incredible indignity. Disgraceful.

This is not about equality but is a blatant assault on Christianity. Tolerance, cultural diversity, and pluralism, apply to anything but Christianity. Why do you think the birth rate is dying everywhere but in Africa and in Islamic countries? People have accepted being selfish and all that’s going on with the attack on the Church. Islam, at it’s core, is on a collision course with every other religion on the planet and they are helped to grow exponentially in the West by those that are passive or overt operatives. Islam will takeover the world unless they are stopped. All societies and cultures are not the same. If we are simply so-called ‘diverse’ we have no culture, laws that are apparently not applied equally, and no real country to stand for. It devolves to be just a charade run by carpetbaggers.
commented 2015-04-23 21:55:12 -0400
That would be fine Chad, except that in a vacuum something will fill. We have a responsibility to celebrate our Judeo -Christian prayers, traditions because if we do not, we will be assimilated into some one elses , and it might not be so accommodating as Christianity.
commented 2015-04-23 21:30:27 -0400
Maurice – You seem to miss the point of prayer, or even the difference between prayer and preaching.

Even in Christianity’s Bible, it is mentioned that prayer is a private communion between yourself and God, so you are pushing a private activity on other people, who either a) do not share your beliefs, or b) do not hold religious beliefs at all, and you want to do this in a space that is for the public, or rather, for the people, which has not been just Christians for some time now.

Now as a Christian, in a place “for the people” you have the right to preach based on your beliefs, but preaching is your element of sharing, not praying. Again, praying is your personal communication with God, a more private affair. I’m not saying you have to “be behind locked doors in a sound proof room”, but rather a space of your own creating/borrowing, for you to include those of your belief, for prayer. You can not “borrow” the house of commons.

If you really want to call yourself Christian, try actually practicing your own faith a little better.
commented 2015-04-23 21:01:26 -0400
I am with you 110% on that Brian!
commented 2015-04-23 20:54:34 -0400
MPs must have the right to pray that God, as they understand God, guide them in their decisions. They must be allowed to pray collectively with like-minded MPs from all parties across the floor; Christians with Christians, Jews with Jews, Sikhs with Sikhs, Atheists with Atheists, or collectively or not at all…. whatever they feel helps them in being all they can and should be as MPs. The Supreme Court Ruling was wrong in their ruling, and should be ignored buy ALL government bodies across the land, be they Municipal, Provincial, Territorial or Federal. Religious Freedom is guaranteed in the Charter, and there is no such thing as religious freedom without the freedom of public religious expression. If religious freedom means that we only have the right to express our religious beliefs and prayers in a darkened, sound-proof room behind locked doors, so as not to “offend”, well then we have the same religious freedom they have in North Korea. Such a ruling by the Supreme Court changes Canada in practice from a democracy to an Atheistic Theocracy ruled by the Supreme Court, rather than Parliament. So MPs, pray if you want to, pray to whom you want to and don’t pray if you don’t want to, and, don’t let ANYONE tell you that you’re not allowed to!!!
commented 2015-04-23 20:27:21 -0400
The three loser leaders are just complaining about this to get attention. They have no power.

Brian, I found the fluorescent-clad worker moving around over your right shoulder as distracting and annoying as the sound effects. They are unnecessary. You can stand alone with no gimmicky props.
commented 2015-04-23 20:20:35 -0400
They will do anything to make their Muslim friends happy. It is called, Buying Votes.
commented 2015-04-23 20:05:07 -0400
The only problem I have ever had….this from a Buddhist who was once a candidate for Christian ministry…with religious reference in government procedures (particularly the law courts) is the notion that ANYONE who is not duly ordained clergy of the religion being invoked…has any legitimate claim of authority to invoke it.

Nobody, but nobody , becomes a special friend of God by virtue of reading ink on paper. Satan can cite scripture.

Every religion has a “mantra” a recitation invoked to protect the mind from wandering usually chanted in a monotone in A flat. (60 cycles per second like the buzzing of a bee) . The Jews chant “hear O Israel the Lord is one” …the Roman Catholics chant “hail Mary full of grace” etc etc…whenever I have heard the recitation of “The Lord’s Prayer” it has always made me cringe when the voice inflection of some of those chanting it changes to assertion of imperative on the phrase “THY WILL BE DONE” …..I always knew that if I had become a minister that those were the people I would need to teach that they had missed the point.
commented 2015-04-23 20:03:35 -0400
So sad…
commented 2015-04-23 20:01:20 -0400
So, the 3 ‘Leaders’, Cough, are using the words “Diversity and Inclusion”; but are not those of the Judeo-Christian Faiths INCLUDED, in said descriptive labels??
commented 2015-04-23 19:49:08 -0400
Diversity? Seems like they want everyone the same,similar to the Borgs. Assimilate or be destroyed
commented 2015-04-23 19:45:45 -0400
“MPs who want to abolish House of Commons prayer should be honest about their reasons” Are you serious? These are politicians — what do you mean, “honest”?
commented 2015-04-23 19:35:25 -0400
“Justin Trudeau and Thomas Mulcair say they want to switch the prayer to a moment of reflection instead”. Geez don’t they spend enough time gazing in the mirror already?
commented 2015-04-23 19:27:56 -0400
VLAD – I agree with you on the “National Memorial to Victims of Communism”, for as it stands, Canada is already “communist” enough as it is, you know, education, health care, transportation, pensions, one of which could actually stand to be removed. (pensions, cause yeah… its dependencies were set up badly in the first place.)

I will even acknowledge the “running wild”, but I’m not so sure about having to shoot people to get things done, as that sounds like dictatorship behaviour to me. Just saying.
commented 2015-04-23 19:23:17 -0400
I think they should get rid of the prayer. It obviously doesn’t affect their behaviour.
commented 2015-04-23 19:15:31 -0400
Keep building that “National Memorial to Victims of Communism” Mr Prime Minister. The communist/socialist pigs are running wild. Use an shotgun if you have to – one that isn’t on a registry.
commented 2015-04-23 19:05:07 -0400
So I understand that Christians want to retain prayer, and respect that, and all due respect to the comments about “if we change that then we have to change this too!” as it applies to the national anthem, I want you to remember two things:

Government is held as an inclusive space of dialogue to ALL religious choices, and rather than using a prayer to say we should be dependent on God for our actions, and rely on him should we screw up, I would rather a statement instead, a re-swearing of an oath, as it were, every day before the house starts anything else, to remind everyone there, that they are responsible for the words and decisions they make.

The National Anthem is a symbol of heritage, as is the cross being present on flags and crests. Now, this is where I say some of the “inclusive” people that you are more directly arguing against, do need to also keep in mind that “Inclusive” and “Heritage” need to be in some way separated. Please accept our heritage, as someone down your family tree was also religious at some point.

Please keep separate “Inclusive Places of Dialogue” and “Symbols of Heritage”, as they are not exactly far, but they aren’t as close to the same thing as you just tried to place them. Sorry Brian Lilly.
commented 2015-04-23 19:02:26 -0400
Hear hear!
commented 2015-04-23 19:00:22 -0400
Secularism/humanism needs to be fully recognized as a religion, one which also should receive no special consideration or respect, if it’s really equality we’re after.