Thursday, June 14, 2007

The wingnuts are coming! The wingnuts are coming!


This sounds like a peachy idea. What could possibly go wrong?

(Wag of the tail to Dave over at TGB.)

14 comments:

Grog said...

They're already here.

In Alberta, Ted Morton demonstrated that, and his minions are trying to take over the bloated corpse of the PC party...

Ti-Guy said...

Hoo boy...Another one whose looks bear testimony to a life bereft of carnal pleasure.

mikmik said...

ti-guy, LMFAO!

Anonymous said...

We have a state religion in Canada. Our Queen (Elizabeth II, in case you don't remember) is also "Defender of the Faith". Which Faith you may ask? Well, the Anglican Church, of course. These people seem to be Dissenters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Dissenters) come all the way round, or perhaps Baptists, which all acknowledge are not part of the true faith. I propose, if these people insist on a state religion, that we enforce what we have, and in the process declare any Married or Buried in any other religion have not been properly "processed" and their offspring are bastards. (Catholisim will be allowed in Quebec only.) Can't have it both ways, Religious Wingnuts. We will have state religion, but not yours.
Let the pogroms begin

Mike said...

Dear ChristianGovernement -

No. Not as long as I still own a gun, mo-fo.

The Seer said...

1. ti-guy: I that a picture of your smiling face?

2. anonymous: that is the best comment you have ever made on this site.

Ti-Guy said...

ti-guy: I that a picture of your smiling face?

Are you having such a bad day, Seer, that you had to anti-climax my bons mots with that bit of witless juvenilia?

Try a tobacco clyster. I've heard that works.

Grog said...

Anonymous apparently didn't read the Wikipedia article on the style "Defender of the Faith":

Canada chose to include the title not because the Sovereign is regarded as the protector of the state religion (Canada has none), but as a defender of faith in general

So much for the assertion that Canada has an official religion. (Oh yes, you might try to claim such from the preamble of the Constitution and Charter documents, but it merely refers to God, not to a specific notion of God)

Chester N. Scoville said...

As I said over at TGB, thank God they're stupid or we might actually be in trouble. But I really doubt this is going anywhere.

Ti-Guy said...

Yes...the Dominionists have nowhere to go in the Dominion that recognises the supremacy of God.

Ha...hoist by their own petard. Take that, Churchies!

Anonymous said...

grog, I actually chose to ignore it :)
Shall we discus how many Anabaptists can dance on the head of a Constitutional Lawyer?
If I must belabour my POINT, when these Good Christian Gentlemen (and they are none of the three) speak of Xtian Government, they all see THEIR OWN Xtian Government. The Dissenters (and later the Puritans) realized the only way they could survive without constant strife was (gasp) separate Church and State. Otherwise it is always a question of big enders vs. little enders. Those that want to now amalgamate (become antidisestablishmentanterianists) the two, see a monolithic chuch leading a monolithic state. Mike? Do you have an extra?

Grog said...

Those that want to now amalgamate the two, see a monolithic church leading a monolithic state.

More specifically they all see their particular notion of "Christian" (or whatever) as driving the mores of state. They assume that there is one, singular "correct" faith and all others are erroneous.

Personally, I think if one of them can prove the correctness of their faith with the same mathematical rigor required to declare a computer program "provably correct", then we might start considering their proposals about things beyond their particular faith system.

Anonymous said...

Dood - just imagine if it was "Vista" Xtianity!
Who would be the hackers?

mikmik said...

Our Queen (Elizabeth II, in case you don't remember) is also "Defender of the Faith". Which Faith you may ask? Well, the Anglican Church, of course.

Now wait a minute. Is this the Anglican side that allows homosexual priests, or not? Personally, I hope it is the former, and then little old atheist me will insist that we carry out what you suggest.
LMFAO!