So is it true that a law was just passed in Canada that allows government to remove kids from homes if the parents don't accept certain Progressive views on identity and sexuality?
im seeing this on line, but not from what I would call a reputable source.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Ferd, you mean not everything we read on the internet is true?????? LOL
__________________ "I think some people love spiritual bondage just the way some people love physical bondage. It makes them feel secure. In the end though it is not healthy for the one who is lost over it or the one who is lives under the oppression even if by their own choice"
Titus2woman on AFF
"We did not wear uniforms. The lady workers dressed in the current fashions of the day, ...silks...satins...jewels or whatever they happened to possess. They were very smartly turned out, so that they made an impressive appearance on the streets where a large part of our work was conducted in the early years.
"It was not until long after, when former Holiness preachers had become part of us, that strict plainness of dress began to be taught.
"Although Entire Sanctification was preached at the beginning of the Movement, it was from a Wesleyan viewpoint, and had in it very little of the later Holiness Movement characteristics. Nothing was ever said about apparel, for everyone was so taken up with the Lord that mode of dress seemingly never occurred to any of us."
Quote from Ethel Goss (widow of 1st UPC Gen Supt. Howard Goss) book "The Winds of God"
So is it true that a law was just passed in Canada that allows government to remove kids from homes if the parents don't accept certain Progressive views on identity and sexuality?
im seeing this on line, but not from what I would call a reputable source.
It's not passed but the province of Ontario is trying to get it to pass. Just Ontario.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
If they absolutely have to pass a law on this kind of thing, they should pass a law requiring counseling for any minor who has some form of gender confusion.
The premier of Ontario is a lesbian, by the way. And the sexual education curriculum in that province was created involving a man who was later charged for pedophilia. Go figure.
Sick world.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
Ontario passed a law Thursday that gives the government the right to take away children from families that don’t accept their kid’s chosen “gender identity.”
Parents who oppose or criticize the LGBT agenda will be considered potential “child abusers” and may have their children taken away by the state, according to the new bill. If the parents are ruled to be abusers by failing to wholeheartedly support their child’s gender choice, that child “can be removed from that environment and placed into protection where the abuse stops.”
Bill 89, also known as “The Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017,” received Royal Assent and was passed in Ontario by a vote of 63 to 23.
The old law allowed parents to “direct the child’s education and religious upbringing” but now says a parent must influence a child’s education and upbringing “in accordance with the child’s or young person’s creed, community identity and cultural identity.”
The Bill replaces this old law that governed child protection, foster care, and adoption services. It instructs all child services agencies and judges to look at a child’s “race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression” when judging the fitness of the parents.
Do You Support This Bill?
Yes 25%
No 75%
Completing this poll entitles you to Daily Caller news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
“I would consider that a form of abuse, when a child identifies one way and a caregiver is saying no, you need to do this differently,” said Michael Coteau, the Bill’s founder.
Ontario children and youth advocate Irwin Elman celebrated the bill, saying it signals a paradigm shift and creates a child-centered system of service that displays a strong “commitment to anti-racism and children’s rights.”
Jack Fonseca, a political strategist for Campaign Life Coalition, criticized the new law: “With the passage of Bill 89, we’ve entered an era of totalitarian power by the state, such as never witnessed before in Canada’s history… Bill 89 is a grave threat to Christians and all people of faith who have children, or who hope to grow their family through adoption.”
Child services in Ontario, Canada received wide criticism in April when it removed two foster children from a Christian home because the parents refused to tell their girls that the Easter bunny was real, according to The Christian Post.
Pro-family advocates warn that Bill 89 allows the government to effectively ban couples who disagree with the LBGTQ agenda from fostering or adopting children.
“Liberals have for years been pursuing their anti-parent and anti-family agenda and Bill 89 is the latest installment, ” said Tanya Granic Allen, president of Parents As First Educators (PAFE).
Children’s Aid agencies now have “a type of police power to bust down your door, and seize your biological children if you are known to oppose LGBT ideology and the fraudulent theory of ‘gender identity,’” said Fonseca.
“Similar tyranny [is] happening in other jurisdictions, such as Norway” where the child protection services have seized children from traditionally-principled families, added Fonseca.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
The matters to be considered in determining the best interests of a child are changed. The child’s views and wishes, given due weight in accordance with the child’s age and maturity, unless they cannot be ascertained, and in the case of a First Nations, Inuk or Métis child, the importance of preserving the child’s cultural identity and connection to community must be taken into consideration. In addition, any other circumstances that are considered relevant, including a list of 11 circumstances similar to those listed in the current Act, are to be considered. Differences include: the current Act includes the child’s cultural background in this list while the new Act includes the child’s cultural and linguistic heritage; the current Act includes the religious faith in which the child is being raised while the new Act includes the child’s race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
__________________
If we ever forget that we're One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under - Ronald Reagan
If they absolutely have to pass a law on this kind of thing, they should pass a law requiring counseling for any minor who has some form of gender confusion.
This insanity is what you support, by supporting liberals.
(And, this insanity is what conservatives support, by supporting conservatives who play along with this garbage as if it were in any way legitimate.)
Linear Mode
