Comments by "June VanDerMark" (@junevandermark952) on "Jordan Peterson on Justin Trudeau | Lex Fridman Podcast Clips" video.

Jordan makes his big money from those on the right ... so it follows that he won't say a good word about any Prime minister on the left. I'm Canadian, and no matter which party is in office, I'm very thankful that we no longer live under the laws of what were once the supposed god-fearing Christians. From the book … Drop Dead: A Horrible History of Hanging in Canada, author … Lorna Poplak. Capital punishment, the execution of someone found guilty of a crime, dates back to arrival of the European explorers on our shores. In those days, if you were condemned to death, quite a wide range of methods could be used to punish you. You could be hanged, or face a firing squad, or be burned at the stake. Although Canada remained a collection of separate British colonies until Confederation in 1876, a Royal Proclamation in 1763 replaced the prevailing Canadian legal system with the laws of England. By the end of the 1700s in Britain, however, the litany of crimes regarded as sufficiently horrible to warrant the death penalty had swelled to 220, including nefarious acts as keeping company with gypsies or skulking in the dark with a blackened face. In 1828, Patrick Burgan of Saint John, New Brunswick, aged eighteen or nineteen, received the death penalty for the double offence of stealing a watch and some money from his former employer and clothing from a sailors’ boarding house. Given the power and pre-eminence of religion in Canada at that time, your very life would have been in jeopardy if you were caught scrawling slogans on the side of a church. You could also be hanged for stealing your neighbor’s cow, which was the fate of B. Clement of Montreal. And just in case you thought that the law protected the young as it does today, think again. Children were regarded as miniature adults and treated as such — Clement was only thirteen years old when executed.
1
And by the way, aren't Christians such as Jordan supposed to be happy and give thanks to Jesus for what you DO have ... rather than always complaining about what you don't have?
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 What is it that you find snarky and smug about the following question? And by the way, aren't Christians such as Jordan supposed to be happy and give thanks to Jesus for what you DO have ... rather than always complaining about what you don't have? Mother Teresa was probably smug, but not snarky, when she preached to a dying, suffering Hindu, that suffering was the "kiss of Jesus."
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 I don't know about you, but I relate to the words of Mark Twain … GOD … a God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave his angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice, and invented hell--mouths mercy, and invented hell--mouths Golden Rules and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people, and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites his poor abused slave to worship him!
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 Theologians also had and have a problem with their depictions of the supposed creator. Such idiocy. From the book … Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable by Ivor H. Evans … First published 1817. … Odium theologicum (o di um the o loj ikim) (Lat.). The bitter hatred of rival theologians. No wars so sanguinary as holy wars; no persecutions so relentless as religious persecutions; no hatred so bitter as theological hatred.
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 INDECENCY Each race determines for itself what indecencies are. Nature knows no indecencies; man invents them. - Notebook, 1896 Mark Twain
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 "Moreover -- if I may put another strain upon you -- he thinks he is the Creator's pet. He believes the Creator is proud of him; he even believes the Creator loves him; has a passion for him; sits up nights to admire him; yes, and watch over him and keep him out of trouble. He prays to Him, and thinks He listens. Isn't it a quaint idea? " 'Letters from Earth'- Mark Twain
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 "Moreover -- if I may put another strain upon you -- he thinks he is the Creator's pet. He believes the Creator is proud of him; he even believes the Creator loves him; has a passion for him; sits up nights to admire him; yes, and watch over him and keep him out of trouble. He prays to Him, and thinks He listens. Isn't it a quaint idea? " 'Letters from Earth'- Mark Twain
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 We all get our ideas from others. It's just that you approve of the ideas you take from others, more than the ideas that I take from others.
1
@soumyadipgoswami1721 I don't believe that any human is "enlightened." In order to believe self to be enlightened, one would have to believe that self could know "truth" rather than the more humble word ... opinion. Some of the ancient people were aware that they must hold that word "truth" ... at bay. From the book … Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable by Ivor H. Evans … First published 1817. Truth. Arcesilaus said that man’s understanding is not capable of knowing what truth is. Carneades maintained that not only our understanding could not comprehend it, but even our senses are wholly inadequate to help us in the investigation.
1