Dear reader, If you doubt me, if you think that I exaggerate, if you think that I am being immoderate, if you think that I am being unfair, then simply read the following lines from Andreachuk’s ruling convicting Rev. Boissoin which you can read in full here.222. The Attorney General argues that freedom of expression is subject to a limitation. Further, that if people were allowed to simply hide behind the rubric of political and religious opinion, they would defeat the entire purpose of the human rights legislation.
Stop for a moment to take that in. Political and religious opinion is just a cover; just a “rubric” — and one that stands in the way of “the entire purpose” of human rights legislation. Well, we can’t have that. The Progressive Conservative government of Alberta, through their lawyer David Kamal, says we have a choice: political and religious opinion or human rights legislation. Premier Ed Stelmach chooses human rights legislation. (EzraLevant.com).
I see Ezra was in fine form this morning, peeling back the obscene and duplicitous nature of the Star Chambers in their outrageous ruling against a Christian pastor.
You’ll notice above the semantically silly games the Star Chamber Appointees make. Notice how Ms. Andreachuk, for instance, arrogates to herself the distinction of being permitted to judge the political and religious thoughts of Canadian citizens. That is offensive enough. What is worse, however, is that Ms. Andreachuck, the Human Rights Commissions, the Province of Alberta and the Canadian State all fail to appreciate that they themselves are constructing their own religion, their own dogmas, and their own priestly hierarchy to propagate the multi-cult and offend-not gospel.
Here’s the rub, though. Instead of calling it a new “religion” – the religion of State or “Emperor worship”, so to speak – they instead call it “human rights”.
It sounds so egalitarian and just, doesn’t it? Who would object to “human rights”, after all? Human Rights vs. Big Meany Religion. How can they lose? But the truth, of course, is the exact reverse. It is conventional religion, in particular Christianity, which sustains authentic human rights in the face of the manufactured, artificial ones by the Star Chamber tribunals. Religion also helps curb the encroachment of the State on its citizens since it insists on absolute principles of morality and inalienable human rights whose propagation is not subject to the encroachments of athiestic and perverse government bureaucracies.
The great irony in our Alice-in-Wonderland, secularized State where religion is marginalized and pushed into the closet is that, far from banishing “intolerance” and “dogmatic ideas” to oblivion, the State has merely stepped into the void and erected its own Tower of Babylon instead.
And we all know what happened to the Tower in Babylon, don’t we?