Home | Cover | America | World

Religon: Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor:
Re: The Raging Battle for our Children
Thanks to Canada Free Press for publishing this article.› Would that there were more of them. ›

Claire Toews
Dear Editor:
Re: Government to churches: no right to speak out against same sex marriage
The Church should speak out on Homosexual Marriage. Freedom of Speech-or Dictatorship
Dear Editor:
Re: Government to churches: no right to speak out against same sex marriage
The Church should speak out on Homosexual Marriage. Freedom of Speech-or Dictatorship
Dear Editor:
Re: Government to churches: no right to speak out against same sex marriage
First of all, I do not believe a word Prime Minister Paul Martin is saying concerning the protection of religious groups in not having to perform marriage ceremonies for homosexuals and lesbians. He will stand back and let our courts deal with this and they will ultimately rule against the churches. Will the prime minister use the notwithstanding clause in the constitution to protect the rights of the majority? We all realize the answer is no.
Second I find it just a little more than curious that the PM would introduce his same-sex marriage bill into the House of Commons so quickly. My take on it is that he is rushing it through to deny the majority of Canadians the opportunity to express their opposition to and contempt for the Liberal's tactics in this case. We shall see how the results of his much touted almost free vote on the matter plays out. With most of the media (especially the CBC) on his side he might be misreading the mood of this country.
Bill McIntyre
White Rock, B.C.
Dear Editor:
Re: Government to churches: no right to speak out against same sex marriage
I enjoy reading your Canada Free Press column. Your articles are well thought through and I appreciate your stand that it is more important to be right than to be [politically] correct.
Please let me remark on separation of church and state.
Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States defines this separation by the (in the US) well-known clause "The Congress shall make no law ‰"
I believe it is important to notice that the separation of church and state was enacted to protect the church from the state, not the state from the church, in response to Robespierre's enactment of the Cult of the Supreme Being in May 1794 and the inevitable subsequent grab of the church property by the state.
Once again, thanks for your excellent column.
My best,
Jan Machat
Dear Editor:
Re: Government to churches: no right to speak out against same sex marriage
Hooray! At last a journalist with backbone and intelligence to go along with it! I've just finished your article "Government to Churches",etc., that appeared in NewsMax this a.m. and I've got to tell you I was cheering you out loud as I read it!
Here in the U.S., we're very nearly at the same place as you good Canadians are with regard to the same-sex marriage issue and expressed opposition to it by the clergy. The difference, however, is that it's more the mainstream media -- at least for today -- that's threatening our churches. However, had our presidential elections turned out differently, there's little doubt that we would be sharing the same boat, in short order.
I just wanted to send kudos your way, Mr. Weinreb, for a very well written and moving article.
Sincerely,
Jim Hudson