Tag Archives: Banned

News

McGill University student government votes to ban pro-life speaker

3 Comments

UPDATE: An update to this story following the event is here.

For Canadian pro-life debater Jose Ruba, it’s deja-vu all over again.

Here’s the story on Big Blue Wave.  (H/T Andrew)

Excerpt:

A controversial pro-life presentation will continue tomorrow at McGill University, despite the student union’s attempt to censor it.

The Students Society of McGill University (SSMU) voted 25-2-2 to censure an event entitled “Echoes of the Holocaust” at their meeting last Thursday, October 1st. The event, scheduled for tomorrow, October 6th, has been organized by Choose Life, a pro-life club on campus, and will carry on as planned.

The presentation, hosted by a university-sanctioned club, Choose Life, is to be given by Jose Ruba of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. His presentation, titled, “Echoes of the Holocaust” outlines how societies have justified and perpetuated great atrocities, including the Holocaust and abortion.

[…]Though the students’ society cannot directly stop the event, they have promised to punish the club for hosting the presentation. The motion passed was amended to include a resolution that by continuing with the event despite the censure, Choose Life will be automatically ineligible for funding from the SSMU for the remainder of its existence.

Ruba has given this talk at a variety of campuses including McMaster University, University of New Brunswick Saint John, St. Francis Xavier University and University of Prince Edward Island. When students tried to shut down the same lecture at St. Mary’s University in February 2009, it only resulted in the university being subject to embarrassment in the media for not upholding freedom of speech.

Here is the post in which I blogged about the St. Mary’s event.

The denial of rights is actually not uncommon in Canada, although the pubic is struggling against it.

Christians are especially victimized:

Here, you can read more about how speech is censored in Canada.

Share

Polemics

Choosing my religion: why I am not Roman Catholic

73 Comments

I’ve decided to spend some time writing extremely short explanations about why I am an evangelical Protestant Christian instead of anything else.

I have two aims.

First, I want show how an honest person can evaluate rival religions using the laws of logic, scientific evidence and historical evidence. Second, I want people who are not religious to understand that religions are either true or it is false. Religions should not be chosen based where you were born, what your parents believed, or what resonates with you. A religion should be embraced for the same reason as the theory of gravity is embraced: because it reflects the way the world really is.

Why I am not a Roman Catholic

  1. To be a Roman Catholic, you need to believe in Papal infallibility in matters of dogma.
  2. In 1950, the Pope pronounced the assumption of Mary to be infallible dogma.
  3. This pronouncement was solicited by a petition featuring over 8 million signatures.
  4. There is no historical record of this doctrine in the Bible.
  5. No early church father mentions the assumption until 590 AD.
  6. Documents dated 377 AD state that no one knows how Mary died.
  7. The assumption appears for the first time in an apocryphal gospel dated about 495 AD.

Data

I only cite Roman Catholic sources for my facts.

6. “But if some think us mistaken, let them search the Scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried … Scripture is absolutely silent [on the end of Mary] … For my own part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence … The fact is, Scripture has outstripped the human mind and left [this matter] uncertain … Did she die, we do not know … Either the holy Virgin died and was buried … Or she was killed … Or she remained alive, since nothing is impossible with God and He can do whatever He desires; for her end no-one knows.” (Epiphanius, Panarion, Haer. 78.10-11, 23. Cited by Juniper Carol, O.F.M. ed., Mariology, Vol. II (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1957), pp. 139-40).

7. “The idea of the bodily assumption of Mary is first expressed in certain transitus–narratives of the fifth and sixth centuries. Even though these are apocryphal they bear witness to the faith of the generation in which they were written despite their legendary clothing. The first Church author to speak of the bodily ascension of Mary, in association with an apocryphal transitus B.M.V., is St. Gregory of Tours.” (Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Rockford: Tan, 1974), pp. 209–210).

It should be noted that the apocryphal gospel in which the doctrine of the assumption of Mary first appeared was condemned as heretical by two Popes in the 5th and 6th centuries. However, I was not able to find a CATHOLIC source for this fact, so I deliberately chose not to use it in my case.

I am not saying that Roman Catholicism is necessarily WRONG, I am just explaining why I am not a Roman Catholic. I hope that my Roman Catholic readers will not be too angry with me for disagreeing with them on theology. I will try not to test your patience too often like this. I would encourage everyone to be as civil as you all have been so far, and I will be extra vigilant in filtering comments.