The art of distraction is a vital component when it comes to politics. As our attention is turned to what is happening between Ukraine and Russia, a troubling bill is making its way through the Senate. Bill S-233, entitled "An Act to develop a national framework for a guaranteed livable basic income," is currently in its second reading.
This bill, along with its twin sister bill C-223, is based on the following premises: 1) poverty is our greatest issue and shame in Canada and 2) poverty is preventable by effective government policy and assistance. The goal of this bill is to:
With this bill, they seek to facilitate "the transition to an economy that responds to the climate crisis and other current major challenges". Implied in these words is something Trudeau has already been indicating – climate change will be the next crisis. And what has been implemented in our current crisis will be brought into that one. Restrictions on businesses being one carryover. So how do they plan on eradicating and preventing poverty stemming from such activity? By providing everyone over 17, including temporary workers, permanent residents and refugee claimants, access to a guaranteed livable income whether you work or not. This had already been implemented in part with such programs as CERB. Yet, a guaranteed basic livable income (GBLI) would go further. CERB was given only to those who made more than $5000. In Senator Pate's estimation, this didn't go far enough. The framework proposed by Pate, the sponsor of this bill, would include all people over the age of 17 regardless of whether they made $5000 or not. How would you sustain this? More taxation on those who are working. There is a lot to write about concerning this bill. Too much for a single blog. So along with my wife, we will be tackling a couple of different aspects that we find concerning. As a Christian, and a former pastor, my mind typically goes first to one question – what does the Bible have to say about this topic? I believe that God's Word addresses all issues in life – and this one is no exception. So as we shine a light on this bill, I want to start first with what God's Word says about poverty and how to deal with it. In her speech, Senator Pate said, "Poverty is not inevitable, nor is it an individual failing. It is the result of government policy choices that fail to provide viable pathways out of poverty that abandon and leave people behind". Pate presupposes two things: poverty is preventable, and the government is the solution to poverty. But how does this stack up to what God says? "For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, 'You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.'" (Deuteronomy 15:11) Poverty is inevitable in this life. Jesus affirmed, "The poor you will always have among you" (Mt. 26:11). His words stand in stark contrast to what Senator Pate claims. Her world is one in which poverty can be eradicated. But the utopian world of Star Trek, one in which money doesn't exist, and everyone's needs are met, is a fantasy world. Poverty exists because sin exists. Such things as war, theft, greed, pride, apathy and even laziness contribute to poverty. To eradicate poverty, sin must be eradicated. And this will not happen until Jesus' return. Man's Solutions Exasperates Poverty Senator Pate's solution to poverty is government intervention and the provision of GBLI. GBLI may sound like a great idea to some. The promise of wealth without having to work is satisfying to our fallen nature, prone to instant gratification and laziness. On top of this, the thought of the poor being taken care of without us having to go out and help them assuages our apathy. Strictly from an economic viewpoint, though, who would pay for a GBLI? The government doesn't make money; they take and spend money. Your money! And currently, they are failing massively with handling your money. Canada is currently 1.2 trillion dollars in debt. For there to be a GBLI, there would have to be an increase in taxation. In Senator Pate's speech, the focus was put on the rich. She believes it is wrong for the rich to profit off the poor, and so she seeks to redistribute it through taxation to those in need. It's a socialist ideology, not a Christian principle. It's very Robin Hood-esque. Robin Hood is praised as the people's hero. But taking from the rich to give to the poor is still theft. Taxation is not the solution to poverty. It typically tends to have the exact opposite effect. Higher taxes increase prices, which then increases the cost of living, resulting in the need for higher taxes to provide people with more financial assistance. It's unsustainable. Taxation puts a strain on a nation that is often unbearable (1 Sam. 8:10-18). Solomon taxed his people so that he could do certain projects. This put a strain on his nation (1 Kings 12:4). After his death, representatives of the nation asked for a reprieve. Solomon's son Rehoboam, instead of listening to the people, increased taxation (1 Kings 12:14). The result is the nation that was already experiencing strain and division, split in two (1 Kings 12:16-20). Will this be repeated in Canada? Taxation is not the solution, and the government is not the appointed vehicle responsible for alleviating poverty. A government engaged in social welfare is a government that has trespassed its sphere of authority. This responsibility is given to the individual (Deut. 15:11; Isa. 58:6-9; Heb. 13:16; 1 Jn. 3:14), the family (1 Tim. 5:8), and the church (1 Tim. 5:3-16; Mt. 25:35-40). God's Solution Alleviates Poverty Man looks at government to solve poverty; God directs individuals to alleviate poverty. After stating that there would always be the poor in the land, God says, 'Therefore I command you, 'You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land'" (Deut. 15:11). Notice the responsibility lays on individuals giving personally ("you shall") and generously ("open wide your hand"); not on a governing body providing a GBLI. Government handouts usurp personal responsibility and create apathetic people. We don't need to care for the poor if someone simply grabs money from our pockets and hands it to them. There's a reason why God commands us as individuals to give personally. It brings us face to face with the person who needs help, moves us to care for them and gives us a measure of gratitude when we assist that person in getting back on their feet. Personal giving leads to further acts of charity, for we learn that "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35). The government desires forced giving through taxation; God desires free giving through charity. A principle runs throughout the Bible – giving generously out of the surplus that we are given. This is the principle of gleaning. Landowners were to leave the edges of their crops and the grain that fell as they gathered it so that the poor and foreigner could gather it (Lev. 19:9-10). We are to care for the needy, but we were never intended to give free handouts without a measure of effort attached to it. Paul reminded the church, "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" (2 Thess. 3:10). He would also warn about idleness when it came to giving to younger widows in need (1 Tim. 5:13). Idleness is something we must avoid, yet if this bill it passed it will force the Finance minister to make a framework for GBLI which would lead our nation toward a greater propensity to being idle. We were created to work (Gen. 2). Work gives dignity; handouts do not. Whereas we are to give freely without interest (Lk. 6:35), we are to do so to enable the needy to get back on their feet, so they can also contribute to helping others. This is the cycle that alleviates poverty. Personal charity, not forced taxation, which leads to further acts of charity enabling the needy to work and become contributing members of society. That's a cycle that won't break the bank! There is so much more that I can say regarding giving, but I believe I have made my case. Senator Pate's two presuppositions does not stack up to what God says. Poverty is inevitable due to sin and the solution to alleviating poverty is personal charity not government intervention and assistance. The responsibility lies on the individual, not the government, to help the poor. This is our duty, especially as the church. We are to be active in feeding the poor, clothing the naked, giving shelter to the homeless, and caring for the widow and orphan. These activities demand work. Are you up to the task?
0 Comments
Unprecedented. That’s a word I’m growing tired of. It implies that we have not been here before in history. Yet, we have - haven’t we? There have been protests in our recent history: protests which were actually violent and a threat to Canada. I’ll mention those a bit later. What’s unprecedented is for our Prime Minister to invoke the Emergency Measures Act on a PEACEFUL protest.
The Act On February 14th, Trudeau invoked the EMA, which in my opinion, has eerie parallels to the Enabling Act enacted during Hitler’s rise to power. I guess it was Trudeau’s way of saying how much he loved Canada. But I digress. For the past week, I’ve been studying the EMA. It is a statutory act intended to give certain temporary powers to the Governor in Council when there is a severe threat to Canada’s safety, security, sovereignty, or territorial integrity that cannot be resolved by other laws already available. There are four different emergencies in the Act – public welfare, public order, international and war. The section invoked under the EMA is the Public Order Emergency. According to section 19 (1) of the EMA, the powers given to the Governor in Council under the Public Order Emergency include:
One additional power granted was the freezing of bank accounts of those involved in the protest or who supported the protest. I have read that this power is not retrospective and would only apply to those who gave or were involved in the protest after the EMA was invoked. These powers are limited to a specific geographical area and are subject to the Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Here's the UN Act). I’m not sure this means too much. Why? Well, under Section 1 of the Charter, our protected rights can already be limited by law “as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”. Our rights have always been restricted – it is just more exasperated now. Forcing The Act Through If we understood our laws better as Canadians, perhaps many more would have quickly understood the unlawful use of the EMA. The threshold wasn’t met. According to the EMA, a Public Order Emergency can only be enacted when there is a threat to the security of Canada so severe to be a national emergency. The definition of a threat to Canada is given by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and must conform to it. You can find it for yourself here. The definition contains four components. The bottom two are most likely in view by Trudeau. Think critically about whether this applies to what was happening in Ottawa. Take note of the word violence. “Threats to the security of Canada means (a) espionage or sabotage that is against Canada or is detrimental to the interests of Canada or activities directed toward or in support of such espionage or sabotage, (b) foreign influenced activities within or relating to Canada that are detrimental to the interests of Canada and are clandestine or deceptive or involve a threat to any person, (c) activities within or relating to Canada directed toward or in support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political, religious or ideological objective within Canada or a foreign state, and (d) activities directed toward undermining by covert unlawful acts, or directed toward or intended ultimately to lead to the destruction or overthrow by violence of, the constitutionally established system of government in Canada, but does not include lawful advocacy, protest or dissent, unless carried on in conjunction with any of the activities referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d).” The threshold was not met. There was no violence at the peaceful protest. And there were laws already in the books that had the power to deal with the situation. And yet, Trudeau invoked the EMA, and it was voted in. How was that possible? Well, there has been a calculated approach leading up to this.
Setting The Precedent The unprecedented enactment of the EMA has set a precedent – suppression of any protest with “unacceptable views.” This can be especially seen when compared to the other protests over the last couple of years. Two years ago, environmentalist protesters throughout Canada set fires along railway tracks, blockaded the tracks, and managed to force the Canadian Railway to close its eastern network. That same year BLM protestors defaced several statutes in an aggressive response against racism and police brutality. Last year nearly 50 churches throughout Canada were burned to the ground or vandalized in response to the unmarked graves that were discovered. At no point was the EMA ever considered in response to these actual threats to the economic stability of Canada and the safety of Canadians. However, the three-week PEACEFUL protest in Ottawa, filled with love, dancing, and bouncy castles, was deemed such a threat to the security and safety of Canada that the EMA had to be invoked. What makes the Freedom Convoy a threat? It isn’t that they are a threat to the security of Canada; rather, they hold an ideology that threatens Trudeau’s tyrannical control. They are asking for something he believes is unacceptable – the freedom to make their own medical choice. For them to be granted that Trudeau would have to relinquish control of bodily autonomy to Canadians. That’s why Trudeau did everything he could to stop the protest, except the two things that would have stopped it – meeting with the organizers and ending the mandates. By invoking the EMA, the precedent was set – ideologies that are voiced against Trudeau’s plan will not be heard. Under the Public Order Emergency, any protest suspected to breach the peace can now be ended by whatever force is deemed necessary. The Public Order Emergency is temporary – only 30 days – but we know what temporary mean’s in today’s world. The provincial states of emergencies were only supposed to be two weeks to flatten the curve – it’s now been two years with no real end in sight. Currently, another reported variant has appeared, which will slow down the ending of the mandates. No surprise really! This is how it’s been — the ever-moving goalposts. Under the EMA, these 30 days can be extended multiple times. I’m no prophet, but I assume that it will be extended numerous times until Trudeau gets what he wants. 100% vaccination. Violence is not to be tolerated. I think we can all agree on that. However, the EMA was called to stop a PEACEFUL protest. One where people came across Canada to be heard by their Prime Minister. Yet, they were silenced. Silence the people, and you silence democracy. Silence democracy, and what are you left with? A totalitarian government that leads according to the agenda of the leader. Democracy is dying the death of a thousand paper cuts - and so is Canada. Light In The Darkness It’s dark times for Canadians that hold views that go contrary to Trudeau’s regime. But it's in the darkness that the church shines the brightest. We have a hope more incredible than anything the world has. God is in control. His kingdom cannot be stopped (Matthew 16:18; Romans 16:20). The unrighteous will be judged (Ecclesiastes 3:17). The heart of the ruler can be changed (Proverbs 21:1). God will use these troubles to shape, strengthen and advance His kingdom (Rom. 8:28). And we have already been freed from the greatest tyranny of all – sin and death (Romans 8:12) So church, as the darkness surrounds us, arise. Stand by faith in the full armour of God. Keep your eyes trained on Jesus, who, for the joy before Him endured much suffering. Consider that these times are for our good. And then, live your life to the glory of God. Raise your family. Go to work. Wash the dishes. Gather as the church. Make disciples. Shine like lights in a dark world. And as you go, share the hope that you have in Jesus. For it is only in times such as these that men become free to hope in God. Guest Blog by Aimee Hanson
After the Emergency Measures Act was invoked, I was discouraged. I was discouraged because of two reasons: (1) many prayers have been answered not the way I like, and (2) the constant lack of accountability for the Prime Minister with very little opposition for years now. There were only four Premiers who were against invoking the Emergency Measures Act. That is less than half. I was healed from this discouragement by reading scripture. When I spent time reading scripture and talking about scripture with people, my soul was at peace. When I began to think about the cares of this world, I got discouraged again. We need to be constantly reading God’s word and be praying. If you are unsure what to pray, pray God’s word back to God. Reading Isaiah 40 reminded me that God is in control of the world, and it is He “who brings princes to nothing, and makes the rulers of the earth as emptiness” (Isa. 40:23). Praise God that He is in control! Then Psalm 37 reminded me not to fear the evil people in power but to trust God. Ask God to help us trust Him and not to fear man. Are you one of those evil people in power in your household? Repent and thank God for His mercy. Then Exodus 1 reminded me that God fulfilled His promise to multiply the Israelites under oppression. In the same way, the church grows under persecution. As Christians, we need to think big picture like Joseph, who saw the suffering that came to Him as God’s sovereignty. He used oppression for the good of many. A few weeks ago I prayed that God’s will would be done – whether that was the end of the mandates if God willed to give our freedoms back or the continuation of the mandates if God’s plan was for the church in Canada to grow under tyranny. I very much want all these unjust mandates to end and will continue to speak up against them because God wants us to speak for the rights of the poor and needy (Prov. 31:8-9). Yet we need to understand God’s kingdom will advance as He has determined. God uses all things, including tyranny and freedom, for the good of those who love Him. Our battle is a spiritual battle, and God is using ALL things for our sanctification and bringing about His kingdom (Romans 8:28). I have read the book of Job recently. When God said to Job, “where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me if you have understanding” (Job 38:4). God created the whole world and is holding it in place. Do you trust Him to do that? If you are discouraged, like I was, about world events, where does your hope lie? Is your hope in your freedoms here on earth coming back or God’s plan, whatever that may be? Is your hope in God’s justice reigning on earth in all circumstances? I repented of not trusting God to control the world. Perhaps you need to as well. On February 7th, Justin Trudeau accused the freedom protestors of trying to blockade our democracy. The ludicrousness of this accusation reveals a continued insensitivity towards charter rights, a continued suppression of the people's concerns, and confusion on how democracy works. The one who is actually blockading democracy is Justin Trudeau and any other leader maligning and suppressing peaceful protest.
In a democratic country, there are certain avenues through which we can lawfully voice our concerns – and one of those ways is through PEACEFUL protests. The charter, which is the highest law of the land in Canada, protects this right under sections 2b (Freedom of expression) and 2c (Freedom of peaceful assembly). 2c hasn't truly been tested in court, so there aren't clear lines on what is allowed and prohibited under this right. Of what I can find, riots and "gatherings that seriously disturb the peace" (super vague!) are not permitted, along with physically impeding or blockading lawful activities. You can find a list of potential offences from the Criminal Code here that would limit actions while protesting. Our right to protest only goes so far as it does not infringe upon another person's charter rights (eg. mobility rights). This is important to understand, especially when there are protests along the US/Canada border prohibiting people from crossing the border. Interesting enough, that is a right that Trudeau has been suppressing to certain people by the restrictions imposed on travel since November 2021. Unlike what Trudeau has said, peaceful protests do not blockade democracy; instead, it protects it. Democracy is a system of government that is governed by the consensus of the people. Or, as Abraham Lincoln put it, it is "of the people, for the people and by the people." It is one where the elected representatives hear the concerns of the people, bring them to parliament, present laws and vote accordingly. In a democracy, you need to hear the voice of the people – and peaceful protests are a visible demonstration of the people's grievances. It gives a voice for the minority, which corrects the tyranny of the majority. It grabs the attention of our elected representatives and encourages debate in parliament – which is what we see happening as a result of the protests in Ottawa and throughout the country. To stop peaceful protests is to silence the people. To silence the people is to blockade democracy. Though Trudeau claims to hear the people, he refuses to meet with the organizers of the protest. So, which one is truly blockading democracy? Democracy is a system of government you don't see mentioned in the Bible. This doesn't mean that it is unbiblical; it simply means that we can't be dogmatic about how we should operate within this system. Should we employ our right to protest, or should we simply continue to live life quietly in subjection to God's law (1 Thess. 4:11)? Though there are no instructions regarding protests in the Bible, we do have some working principles.
Some Christians have difficulty when it comes to claiming and using our rights. Paul never did. There are two recorded times that he used his rights as a Roman citizen. The first was in Acts 16 after his unlawful arrest in Philippi. He used his rights, very much how many protestors are today, to confront the government's misuse of power over its citizenry. The second occurrence is in Acts 22 in Jerusalem, where he was nearly unlawfully scourged and beaten. He claims his right to due process as a Roman Citizen and was spared from the whip. However, the more significant intention in asserting this right seems to be his conviction to go to Rome, appeal to Caesar, and advance the gospel. If Paul used his rights, why do we shy away from using ours? Of course, using them needs to be done in a responsible manner. There are two aims in the Christian life. Aim #1 – to glorify God. Aim #2 – to make disciples. These two aims need to inform everything in our lives, even what protests we support and join. We need to ask whether it will glorify God and give us opportunities to share and advance the gospel. It's easy to get behind the protests that are happening in Canada. The cause is worthy. They are standing and fighting for the freedom of bodily autonomy (I've written about that freedom here). I am amazed at how peaceful all the protests have been throughout Canada. There has been an intentional effort on the organizers' part to work with the police to maintain a peaceful environment. They have respectfully responded to the police and given in to certain demands even when they were at times unfairly treated. On top of this, they have calmly handled the media and certain governing parities maligning them (no doubt to intentionally stir them into a frenzy). They have stood their ground in a very Canadian way. What other protests have you heard of where people shovel sidewalks, pick up garbage, sing the national anthem, pray, sing hymns, and have bouncy castles! It's clear that the truckers aren't there for violent and malicious reasons. They are there to make their voice heard – end the mandates! However, though all the protests throughout Canada have been peaceful, not all the protests are constitutionally lawful. Protests which block traffic are not legal. And so, we need to use discretion and prudence as we practice our democratic rights. Allow me to clarify something here. Whether these peaceful protests in Canada are entirely covered by the law (which can be altered by the government, e.g. Nova Scotia's new directive) should not eclipse their struggle, message, and intention. These truckers, and their supporters, have experienced and are experiencing the effects that the unjust federal and provincial mandates have brought. For the past two years their lives have been disrupted and restricted. Some have lost jobs because of their medical choice. Others are worried that they will not be able to keep their business afloat. They simply want to be heard - to be given the freedom back to make choices for themselves. And affecting commerce is an effective strategy to grab Parliament's attention. This does not make their actions lawful, but they are reasonable. Yet what is the reaction that we see by our government? There is a precedent that is being set - protests with "unacceptable" views are being discouraged whether they are lawful or not. The protestors were first maligned, then their financial support was frozen, then injunctions were written up to silence their expression, and now they are forcefully being told to go home or face severe charges and consequences. Trudeau has invoked the Emergency Measures Act (aka the War Measures Act). This act, which hasn't been issued since the FLQ crisis by his father in 1970, will grant him temporary powers to disband any protests they believe will "breach the peace". If the protests have been largely peaceful, what is the need to invoke this act? If peaceful protests are discouraged by this measure of suppression, how does this encourage democracy? Trudeau claims that the protestors are blockading democracy when the fact of the matter is that the current actions of our federal and provincial governments are discouraging dissenters, silencing their voice, and ultimately blockading democracy. Democracy listens to the people; totalitarian governments do not. Introduction
Welcome to Chinada, where what happens in Canada reflects the communist regime in China. Last week, I wrote about controlling the narrative and our need to discern what is genuinely taking place. In that article, I mentioned that controlling the narrative is critical to controlling a nation. There are three ways they do this in China – propaganda, censorship, and centralization of content. All three are becoming more prevalent in our country. As the truckers stand up against the tyranny of the federal government mandates, keep your eyes on parliament. Not simply to see how things are being shaken up, but more specifically, what bills are being reintroduced. Bill C-10, now called Bill C-11, has been revived – and Bill C-36 (which will soon go by a different name) is right on its heels. What is the potential harm present in these bills, and how should we think of them as the church? Let’s look at each one individually. Bill C-11 Bill C-10, a hotly debated bill when it was first introduced, was revived on February 2 as Bill C-11 (now called the Online Streaming Act). This bill is an amendment to the 1991 Broadcasting Act, which seeks to regulate, support and promote Canadian content (ie. content made in and by Canadians which promotes Canadian culture) on social media platforms. This bill has in view commercialized social media platforms (e.g. YouTube, Netflix, Tik Tok, etc.); however, there is ambiguity in the law which potentially makes the scope broader than that. It requires these platforms, which are to be licensed, to contribute to the creation and availability of Canadian stories and music and contribute finically to support Canadian artists. Those platforms that don’t abide by these requirements will be finically penalized. This bill doesn’t seek to remove non-Canadian content; however, a higher priority is given to Canadian content over others, consequently burying non-Canadian content. This is problematic to freedom of expression since it suppresses content that is not deemed Canadian. Which begs the question – what will be the determining factor of what is considered Canadian content? In the bill the content must “serve the needs and interests of all Canadians.” Who gets to make that judgement call? The Canadian Radio-Television Commission will be given the authority to regulate online platforms. Therefore, the details are largely up to them - of course with policy direction from the government. The same government which deems the Bible as a myth, Christianity as the worst part of Canada, and the Freedom Convoy’s stand for freedom as unacceptable. For me, this bill reflects a communist ideology and tactic – the control of the media in the name of promoting nationalism in order to hinder and suppress dissenters (such as the church). With this bill we are put onto a road that leads to China. China regulates the internet and media in order to keep their Chinese nationality intact. An identity that is shaped by the communist party and guarded by prohibiting western ideologies that don’t adhere to their vision of China. Bill C-36 Whereas Bill C-10 regulates Canadian content, Bill C-36 seeks to monitor, regulate, and remove hate speech (especially targeting race, religion, and sexual identity) from online platforms. It is an amendment to the Criminal Code, making the activity and the thought punishable by jail time. The bill proposes creating a peace bond to help prevent hate propaganda offences and hate crimes from happening. To prevent something is to stop something before it happens. Therefore, this bill also covers thought crimes. On top of this, the accuser can make a complaint and remain anonymous if they feel threatened. Those found guilty will be required to be under surveillance for up to 12 months. How does this not sound like China? The regulation, suppression and prohibition of speech is literally the textbook definition of censorship – a tactic used by communist countries to suppress freedom of speech and expression. Because God has written His law on our hearts (Rom. 2:15), we should all agree that hatred is wrong. The crux of the matter though is twofold.
We can’t lose sight of when this bill is attempting to be reintroduced. The governing authorities are using the Freedom Convoy protest as justification as to why this bill is needed. Think about that for a moment. They are using a protest (which is covered by our charter rights of freedom of expression and assembly), which they have deemed unacceptable, as a cover to pass a bill that suppresses freedom of expression. That should make your head spin! This bill poses a great threat to our freedom of expression, not simply as a nation but especially for the church. A liberal interpretation of hatred will penalize the church’s message, which is already deemed unacceptable, hateful and bigoted. A LARGER TREND These two bills are simply part of a larger trend of the suppression of freedom of expression. Just consider the following things:
Yes, compared to other countries such as China, we still have mainly open access to social media with very few restrictions. Yet this is rapidly changing. Why? Some may see it as the government protecting us from ourselves. There is a risk when it comes to unhindered freedom of expressions – such as vulgarity, immorality, and hatred. That’s because our heart is deceitfully wicked, and from our heart stems our words. However, if you search the scriptures, you will not find the government as the one given the role to suppress speech. Each individual is responsible for practicing self-governance over their own words. The government is not the thought police, and censorship is not the solution (read my article on that here). There is something bigger happening here. The government is suppressing our freedom of expression to control the narrative. If you control the narrative, you shape a person’s worldview causing them to see the world as you want them to. This is how a government hinders dissenters and controls a nation. Strategically it is smart – morally, it is evil. On paper, we have a charter right for freedom of expression. Yet, functionally this right only exists for those who hold acceptable views (ie. views that align with the mainstream narrative). Those who do not follow the narrative are suppressed and censored. When you step back and observe what is taking place, its not that hard to know that the liberal government is leading us more and more into a socialist society – one which reflects communist China. Not really a surprise when you consider that Trudeau looks up to the leader of China. |
AuthorHello! I'm glad you found my blog. My name is David Hanson, and I am a concerned Christian who desires for the church of North America to become aware and begin to think biblically of what is happening around them in society. It's time for the church to awake and speak into the current events of the day. We alone have the truth to navigate life effectively. That truth is the Word of God. Archives
May 2022
Categories |