Quebec bans religion from public daycares

Prayer, religious leaders barred from subsidized facilities


Beginning next June, Quebec will no longer tolerate expressions of religion in government-subsidized daycares. Under the new rules, daycare administrators will no longer be permitted to make children recite prayers, though they will be able to recite their own, and religious leaders like rabbis, priests and imams will no longer be allowed to visit the centres. The province has in the past allowed religious organizations to run public daycares and government documents show about 20 subsidized daycares currently feature religious instruction as part of their programs.

CBC News

Filed under:

Quebec bans religion from public daycares

  1. Good move!

    Slowly we move forward.

    • "slowly we move forward"

      What, to replacing one form of bigotry with another?

  2. some of the liberal elite appear to be the new fundamentalists . kind of what Don Cherry calls left wing kooks

    • This has nothing to do with left or rightwing, so save the politics for a political thread.

      • yes it does, its the atheist left wing ideology is part of the political spectrum and most common in places like quebec certainly wouldn't go over very well in alberta

  3. I think its great that they're deciding that 3 year old babies should not be brainwashed to become fanatics of some religious group!

    • I don't think we're attempting to protect 3 year olds from "fanatics". I don't see any daycares run by the Taliban in Quebec. Do you?

  4. No more burkas in the daycares?

    • Lot of those were there?

    • or rosary beads

  5. A start. Now lets ban the disastrous manmade killing crap from the World.

  6. Indoctrinating young minds with bronze age myths should be a crime. Quebec is doing the proper thing by protecting these kids.

    • Absolutely agree.

  7. Gee, the religion haters are out in force today! What's wrong? Didn't follow through on your daily chore of spitting at a Catholic Church? Canada moving ever forward to become an anti-religion state. Don't want your kid learning religion? Simple, pick a daycare that has nothing to do with religion. The hatred for religion in this country is amazing. In fifty years, you sickos will probably be cheering as they carry out pogroms against any remaining Christians. Of course, that's after you eliminate Christmas and Easter. However, maybe the radical secularists will substitute one of these holidays with a national abortion appreciation day or something.

    • Ah yes, the poor 'victim', christianity. LOL

    • You hit the nail on the head, Joe. These anti-religion types are the same ones who would force little kids to read and view illustrations about same sex "marriage" and same sex sex. Twisted, and as intolerant as they come.

    • Eliminate Easter… maybe. And maybe ban all reference to Jesus at Christmas. But the merchants of all stripes are too heavily invested in the greed that wears red for the secular version of Christmas to go away.

      • You probably have notice that strange situation where all religions protect, use and encourage child sex abuse, along with female abuse. Every so called deliverer of the gods words were twisted for this patheticism and benefit of those who seemed to gain the leadership in religion, and we now see for what purpose. The power of the evil, is no mysticism. Does it seem comical, that the new sweep of Canada, after the bilingualism destroyer, is the sweep against, so called bullying, which, is led by the bullies and these same twisted children abusers?
        The weak, pandering to the presumed, "weak", who are powerful enough in their genetic evil, to engineer the whole plot. The benefits of illiteracy.

        • "The benefits of illiteracy." Are you promoting yourself as an example of one who benefitted? Because that's one illegible ramble. From the bit that I picked out of it, it doesn't seem to have any relation to my comment – so why did you link to it?

  8. Yes, and no doubt these same daycares will be preaching, quite literally, the benefits of same sex marriage and same sex sex, to these young children. Religion, at least the way Canadians used to be brought up (e.g., as Catholics or Protestants, etc.) teaches you MORALS. Something that these left wingers can't stand. All the people who are so dead set against the "fanaticism" and oppressiveness of religion are the same ones who would force their way of thinking down our throats. Very intolerant, and very unoriginal.

    • What does one thing have to do with the other?

      And apparently you're not aware there were always more religions in Canada than 2…and we've always had atheists as well.

      Leftwingers btw, the NDP…are loaded with ministers, so stop trying to make it political

      PS…when was the last time an atheist came to your door with brochures, trying to convert you?

      • Lots of 'em on the net, trashing believers, though.

        I more or less agree with you on the main issue – the government shouldn't be funding the inculcation of any one brand of religious beliefs. Though saying that is kind of like biting the hand that feeds, as my wife teaches at a government-funded Catholic school.

        • Well that's simple reaction to the 8 Bush years of BS…atheists finally got fed up.

    • Morals can be taught without bringing religion into it. There are plenty of moral athiests. Plus, ECEs aren't trained religious educators, so who knows how skewed the views might be.

      When our daughter was in day care, my wife once overheard the staff teaching the kids "Baa Baa white sheep". They were unaware that there really ARE black sheep; they thought it was a racial slur and were cleaning it up. Not the people I want teaching religion to my child (forcing their way of thinking down her throat)… and yes, I'm a church-goer.

      • Let the black celebrate their own sheep you pandering wimp! And admitting church going only enhances your ignorance of the well known facts available in the World of information. There is not one religion with a consistent coherent message, but a twisted bunch of writings reinterpreted for ever tom dick and harry religious leader that came along. With the information available and the growing weight of the Brain, there is NO reason for such stupidity. So, why is it continuing and getting worse? The thrill and enjoyment of child and female torture and abuse? According to history, it must be inbedded in a lot of us!

        • More idiotic rambling… just what HAVE you imbibed?

          First, re the black sheep issue: in the nursery rhyme, they probably just used "black" to get the right number of syllables for the line. Needing an extra syllable, they used an adjective that indicated a sheep different from most. The term "black sheep" to denote the undesirable member of the family probably stems from the fact that black wool can't be dyed and is thus of lesser value than wool from white sheep.

          God gave us free will and a brain; I use both quite extensively. My church is not at all fundamentalist,and even within my church I'd likely be considered anywhere from unorthodox to heretical for some of my views. Religion has indeed been used to encourage or justify many evil deeds, from earlest civilizations to today – but those are the acts of humans, not God. My aith is not absolute, and I don't believe any one religion has even close to a full understanding of what God is. I do know this, though: God has shown a remarkable sense of humour in creating the likes of us.

          • ……A CRUEL sense of humour…..

          • Free will as I understand it, does not come with a "go to hell" option. As for the black sheep being undesirable, the poem shows the "undesirable" sheep willing to give one bag of wool to the little boy living down the lane; no particular reason for this was mentioned but it does sound pretty decent of the sheep, eh!?

    • What morals?……treating gays as inferior and evil?…trying to eliminate a woman's right to choose to have an abortion? Your morals are warped and twisted…and based on fairytales

      • A key one would be "Love thy neighbour as thyself." You should try it.

        Assuming all Christians are the same and hating them all for the behaviour of some certainly leaves you in no position to claim moral superiotity.

        • Where did I say I hate all Christians and assume they are the same?…I was speaking directly to one who obviously did share those views…did I need to post a mandatory disclaimer that "Not all christians are like him"?
          I don't hate Christians…..I pity them…and i'm well aware that there are Christians and "Pick & Choose Christians" in the world…so what are your views on gay marriage and abortion Keith???

          • Since you asked…

            1) no problem with gay marriage. My church and I disagree on that one.

            2) I think life is sacred and we should do our best to preserve it. My peference would be for people to take precautions to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and, when they occur, to see the pregnancy through. I do NOT think we should legislate against abortion, however; I recognize that my morals and my religion's morals may differ from that of others on this issue. Moral suasion, not legislation, is the only effective way to reduce abortions (and no, by that I don't mean picketing clinics or attacking health care workers). Where a pregnancy jeopardizes the life or long-term health of the woman, then I agree with abortion.

          • continuing point 2…

            I DO think we need what I call a "primacy of rights" law, though; one that recognizes a woman's unfettered right to choose up to a given point (first trimester or so), but which then limits it to health emergencies afterward. At that point, too, the fetus would then gain certain rights that would protect it against acts of deliberate harm or of negligence. It is foolish to think that life is a question of geography (inside the womb or out), but that is the legal reality in this country at present.

          • How be we stop bombing women and children if life is so 'sacred'?

          • I assume from your comment you are referring to the extremists who try to prevent abortion through violence (and if you means something else, please clarify). You need to read the entire comment before responding, Emily. As I stated: "Moral suasion, not legislation, is the only effective way to reduce abortions (and no, by that I don't mean picketing clinics or attacking health care workers). " I thought that was a pretty clear statement. However, let me spell it out in greater detail:

            I have absolutely no time for those who engage in violence – or even verbal abuse – of those who choose abortion. Causing harm to others goes against core Christian principles, and those who engage in it are the worst kind of hypocrites.

            I also find astounding just how many anti-abortionists are also anti-contraception and anti-sex education. Education and contraception are key to lowering the number of unwanted pregnancies; if they want to lower the abortion rate, why do they also oppose the most efective means of prevention?

          • No, I said if life is sacred, how come 'christians' are so keen on war?

            Apparently bombing other people is just fine with them.

            Is it because they're brown? Are only white babies to be saved?

            Anti abortionists are also anti contraception and anti sex education because they want women back in the home raising 20 kids, and not out in the world competing with men.

          • No, I said if life is sacred, how come 'christians' are so keen on war?

            The reasons behind war are far too complex to go into here. Yes, sometimes people have gone to war in the name of their God, but by and large "holy" wars are driven by megalomaniacs taking advantage of ingnorance and religious fervour. I agree that in such instances it is appropriate to put "Christian" in quotes, as they are behaving in non-Christian fashion.

            And what's this BS about "only white babies to be saved"? What brown babies are white people bombing? I'm getting tired of your sweeping, bigoted generalizations… start using specific examples or clam up.

          • Religion has killed millions.

            Brown people are currently being bombed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and so on…pregnant people, babies, children….no 'life is sacred' for brown people I notice.

            The anti-abortion crowd is racist, that's all

            It's always been about colour.

          • Religion has also saved millions. You are determined to play up only the negative, but throughout history the religious have reached out to help others. But as you clearly would not be willing to listen to such arguments, I won't waste by breath.

            As to your other comments… Wow! Those are among the most blindingly stupid and bigoted of anything I've read on this site. Up to now I've enjoyed debating (and baiting) you – but I'm done. 'Bye Emily.

          • OK; that's slander of both me and of Christians generally. No racisim on my part – but a definite hate on for the religious on your part. I realize at this point that you're just trying to push my buttons, but I take slander seriously. I'm reporting your comment.

          • You are right Keith, religion has saved millions. The question is,"From what?" I see people who are happy to find god. I also see people who are happy to ignore accountability of their actions to god. I have seen people confused by the fact that there are other people who question something they themselves are willing to follow blindly. Helping others is wonderful, I do that myself sometimes. But I have never needed anyone to tell me to do so. I do so by choice and the fact the I see someone needing help that I am able to provide at that time. Do you really think you need religion to be helpful? Am I really "blindingly stupid and bigoted" if I choose to think for myself and not depend on fantasy?

      • Gays and Abortion are not moral issues. They are issues concerning the laws of Nature (NOT god). Procreation is a NATURAL function of ALL life. NO other creature on Earth aborts a growing life willingly. 2 males or 2 females can not produce life, it takes 1 male and 1 female combined to do so. Gays want to get married, that's perfectly fine. They want to bring up kids, that brings up the question of what the kids are going to learn about life itself.

    • So the morals that were taught…. Are you referring to the physical, mental and sexual abuse in the residential school system run by the government and Catholic, Anglican etc churches or something else? What morals were those exactly? Religion has it's place, teach it sure – all of them, it doesn't have a lock on morality though.

      While we're at it, let's keep it out of politics please.

      • Why is everyone going after Christianity and Church where education and morals are concerned? Are there no other religions here in Canada? Might I suggest one other religion – I shall not name it, because it's followers go psycho at any mention not involving absolute praise – which preaches destruction of everyone who does not follow their way of thought and life? Lots of evidence has been presented to make this point clear, and they are all over the world causing trouble.

        Christians, for all their faults in history and judgment have learnt their lessons and broken away from that past. Yes, they are still trying to convert people, but we have a choice to join or not. If you are not interested in talking, just say "No thank you."; not interested in listening, again say "No thank you. No interested" and walk away! They will not chase you down and tie you up and force you to listen. At least, the vast majority won't! I meet a few Christians on a regular basis and we discuss life, religion and everything else in between. I have not been converted yet after years of discussion and conversation and I will not be converted for ANY reason as long as I live, but I do sincerely enjoy those discussions. A hot cup of coffee, a good conversation – a great way to spend some time.

        With "the other guys", it is quite the opposite!! They are always trying to save my soul, which they claim I don't have, since I am an athiest (so what are they trying to save, I ask)!! They are unreasonable and can't see beyond their own noses!! They are the ones we should be protecting ourselves against, not Christians!!

        Btw, the 10 Commandments are a good set of rules to follow and they make life uncomplicated and simple.

  9. The underlying notion here is that government beureaucrats (and its Early Childhood Education "professionals") will do a better job of raising my child that I will.

    This program is coercive, not through guns but by the expedient of having private and non-profit daycares be forced to complete with heavily subsidized public ones.

    This communalization of kids, where responsibility for raising future citizens is devolved from parents to "everyone" … which also means "no one" has been tried, e.g. in the Israeli Kibutz movement, and several communist societies, with unfortunate results. I don't understand why Canada needs to repeat these failed experiments.

    • Day care isn't mandatory you know.

      It exists to provide care for children while their parents work, and is obviously a needed service.

    • I've no kids of my own, but pay taxes to educate and raise other folks kids.That is communalisation of kids on a financial scale. Tell me you'll pay for everything your kid needs and I'll let your rant stand. You want taxes to carry the load of parents then there will always be some stipulations.

    • The underlying notion here is that government beureaucrats will do a better job of raising my child that I will.


      That is not the underlying assumption of this article. Or of daycare.

  10. We atheists are growing in numbers and power every day and pretty soon were going to be feeding you christians to lions (just like in the old days). I've even been looking on ebay lately to buy my own lion just so I don't feel left out at the *Official Atheist Lion Eating Christians Convention*. I'm going to call my lion "Zimba" or maybe "Panthor"…of course if I call it "Panthor" I may as well just buy a panther as the name would be more fitting….and panthers can eat christians just as well as lions can. All the other atheists would be at the convention saying "Hey… our lions" and i'd be like "Ya…your lions are okay…BUT CHECK OUT MY PANTHER!!!"

    • salvia, anyone?

    • I am an athiest and you are insulting me and my beliefs…or lack thereof. And that lion you are planning to send to eat Christians will eat you just as happily. And just for your information, lions would not be bothered with the likes of you anyway.

  11. BFD.

    I suspect public daycares will be much like public schools: a place to store your kid during the day and pretend they are learning something.

    Public schools are run by unionized pooch screwers, empty headed leftists, "progressives", and other assorted idiots that think a child's self esteem and political correctness are more important than learning.

    Do your kids a favour: homeschool them or send them to a private school that has standards.

    • You must be blue from head to toe after soaking in all that kool-aid!

      The topic here is about removing religious teaching from publically funded daycare, not your fears your kids are going to learn something about life outside your commune.

      • Obviously you are a product of the public school system Emily. My condolences.

        Sorry, I thought the article was another indicator of slipping standards in public education. Heaven forbid your kid learn anything theological. Polish this turd as you see fit.

        • No, I'm not….sorry.

          Religion should be taught in school….all religions….comparative religion.

          Not just the brainwashing of your choice.

          • Yup – and by people who themselves have studied the subject.

          • No, taught the same way as everything else is. It's just another subject.

          • That's what I mean – by someone who has attended university and obtained a degree in comparative religions, and kows the subject. My wife teaches theology in a Catholic school; she has a degree in the subject. But the prevailing attitude in her school hs traditionally been that religion is a subject that just anyone can teach. Got a teacher who is teaching two of subject X and needs a third class? Give 'em religion. Got a crackpot teacher the union won't let us get rid of? Put 'em in the theology dept.

            One such teacher actually asked my wife: "does Good Friday always fall on a Friday?" And no, he wasn't joking around…

          • Oh, and yes – she teaches about world religions, including retreats to temples, mosques and gudwaras. Understanding is vital to tolerance and, ultimately, genuinely working and living together.

          • No, totally unnecessary. There are dozens of religions, and the idea isn't to preach or convert…just to learn that there is more than your own, and a general idea of what each of them believes.

            You can teach history without having lived through all the eras. You can teach geography without having visited every country in the world.

            Theology is equivalent to astrology in any case.

          • You're putting words in my mouth again, Emily. I said NOTHING about preaching and converting; in fact, quite the contrary. You are being deliberately obtuse.

            Regardless of your personal beliefs, a substantial portion of the population throughout the world believe in a God or gods. Many of them are migrating to Canada and living side by side. As Canadian history, laws and social structure are substantially influenced by Christian belief, it helps to know something of the religion that led to this – whether you believe in its teachings or not.

            Conversely, it is a good thing for the rest of us to have a better understanding of the beliefs of the newcomers, both cultural and religious, as this helps to replace hostility, suspicion and intolerance with understanding and sensitivity.

          • No, I'm saying you are making it more involved and complicated than it needs to be.

            It's a simple subject…teach it as such.

            Over a billion people in the world are atheist. And many people in Canada and elsewhere believe in something other than christianity.

            So it doesn't belong in govt or public schools.

            Keep it in church, and spare the rest of us the hypocrisy.

            Understanding and sensitivity?? Snort!

          • "So it doesn't belong in govt or public schools. " Interesting; you want to throw out a subject because you don't believe in the contents?

            Speaking of hypocrisy: You'd jump all over a fundamentalist who advocated tossing out science because a significant portion of the populace believed evolution to be wrong. How do you then justify throwing out religion?

            To varying degrees, both science and religon are based on faith. Theologians and scientists alike will tell you that what is known about their respective subjects is far less than everything on the subject. Scientific theories, while based on empirical observation, are still just theories.

            "It's a simple subject…teach it as such." That tells me just how unversed in the subject you really are – and how influenced you are by personal negative biases toward religion and faith.

          • Focus Keith…I was the one who said it should be taught in school.

            Just not your conversion idea.

            Fundies are crazy, simple as that. Muslim ones fly planes into buildings, christian ones kill doctors. Same thing.

            No significant portion of the population believes evolution to be 'wrong'.

            Religion is based on faith, science is based on fact.

            Gravity is a scientific theory. Jump off your roof sometime.

            I'm very versed in the subject…more so than you. And since I'm an atheist, of course I'm 'negative' on religion.

            Bronze age fairy tales.

          • You started out saying it should be taught, but then you said:

            "So it doesn't belong in govt or public schools.

            Keep it in church, and spare the rest of us the hypocrisy."

            Who is the one with the focus problem here? And what's this "conversion" nonsense? You keep insisting on reading what's not there, and putting words in my mouth.

            Gravity exists; they are still trying to figure out the exact principles under which it operates. It isn't as simple as Newton thought. While I believe in evolution, and all data extant backs the basic principles, it cannot be "proven" in an empirical sense. Quantum physics theories imply an observer effect – which in turn implies that we are in some degree creators of our own universe (puts an interesting spin on the Judeo-Christian belief that we are created in God's image, it you think about it).

          • I don't know why you have such a problem with English.

            Comparative religion should be taught in schools.

            Not YOUR religion specifically

            Gravity remains a theory…but it's easily proven to exist by jumping off your roof.

            Evolution is a theory, but we have the fossil record…and of course things evolve everyday.

            Yes, people create their own universes…full of fairies and elves and unicorns….but that has nothing to do with the real universe.

          • I NEVER EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS STRING suggested that we should teach ANYTHING other than comparative religion. My wife is the one teaching in a Catholic school (I myself am of a different denomination) and I stated early on that despite this I am not in favour of publicly funding religious schools. Learn to F***ing read.

          • Except you want ministers, priests, rabbis, imans etc doing a daily circuit of the schools, and a major theological discussion of everything on the subject.

            Which is waaaaay overdoing it.

            I can read just fine, thanks.

          • Continuing…

            I'm not saying ALL athiests are negative on religion – just those, like you, who go out of their way to try to tear it down.

            As for your claim that you are "very versed in the subject… more so than [me]" – please list your credentials. Or do you expect me to take that "on faith"?

            "Bronze age fairy tales." Except among the more fundamentalist branches, Western Christians don't take the Bible to be the literal truth. But there are core teachings that are of value even if there is no God (and yes, I'm willing to acknowledge that there may not be; in fact, I believe that if there IS a God, none of the religions will have come close to fully explaining what God is). My own belief is that God reveals itself to us in terms that we can comprehend. These days greater understanding is as likely to come from science as religion. No, my beliefs are not typical. But you seem determined to fit this square peg in a round hole.

          • LOL all atheists by definition are 'negative' on religion.

            I never mention religion…religious people do. I just comment on that.

            Keith baby…I don't care if you believe in pink unicorns. It's up to you.

            What you may NOT do is insist that everyone else believes in pink unicorns.

            Either through the machinery of the state, or through publically funded daycare…or anything else.

            I know you're anxious to sound as reasonable as possible, and get my atheist blessing that while other religions may be crazy, YOUR religion is okay.

            I've never understood that impulse in religious people, but I always expect it.

            No…all religions are nutz.

            And everyone is an atheist….I just believe in one less god than you do.

          • Holy Hell, you're words are pathetic.
            You should learn to shut the hell up. :)

        • polishing a turd has always been the province of the religious.
          From invisible sky daddies to apologetics, it's been buff buff buff

  12. Thank God, Emily' and her anti-christian cabal are limited to a real small minority down here. Heck, I have been reading some polling which shows that the religious right in America has actually growing in numbers since Obama's election. Obama"the socialist" (and believed closet atheist . A lot of people think going to Reverend Wright's church was more about getting black votes then believing in God). America has gotten to experience what life would be like if the pro-abortionist, anti-religious, big government socialists of the NDP and Liberal ilk had their way. The result is that the left is being outpolled on all fronts. Polling shows that most Americans now lean pro-life(49%-45% and morally disapprove of abortion by a 50%-38% margin), most support organized school prayer(61%-31%), bible instruction in schools((70%-28%), prayers at graduation ceremonies(about 80% support) They support the faith based social service initiatives(government funds going to religious social service organizations which have better track records of helping the downtrodden by a 2 to 1 margin) which Bush created by almost 2 to 1 margin. They support 10 commandment displays in government buildings by a 77%-19% margin.

    • all religion is evil the worst being islam and christianity

  13. The Obama presidency result so far:

    Republican Gains: 6 U.S. Senate seats
    64 U.S. House seats
    7 governorships
    about 750 state legislative seats(and about 21 legislative chambers)

    Polling shows that Americans want abortions much more restricted and state legislatures are doing such. Some states are passing fetal pain bills to outlaw all non-emergency abortions after 20 weeks(like Nebraska). Others are cutting back funding. Polls also show collapse of support for Obama policies like closing Guantanamo(opposed 63%-32%), Obama healthcare(60%-35% support repeal), and carbon tax.The left has lost the battle on guns, the death penalty, and corporal punishment down here. Now, they are beginning to collapse on all fronts. Obama's aides claimed that the U.S. would get more international support if we followed through on his policies. However, the American people have lived with the policies long enough.

    • Good heavens, it's time for tea!

      Sorry, not even Palin can save you any crumpets.

      Religion is dying everywhere…even in Podunk USA.

      • Religion dying in America, heh? Well, you don't seem to have read up on American history in the 1960's and 1970's. Religion was dropping almost as fast as the birthrate(back then it was 1.79 children per woman instead of current 2.05 per woman). Social liberals like yourselve were on the march. A backlash developed. People were outraged by the decline of faith, rise in abortion, increase in out of wedlock children, criminals run amok, a president Jimmy Carter who bowed to the communists, and a wasteful big government. The result was the rise of the religious right and its strengthening of the American conservative movement. This movement lined up behind a man called Ronald Reagan who easily won election in 1980(despite the rantings of the mainstream media that he was too right-wing to be elected). Despite temporary Democrat victories like Clinton and the brief vapor fumes of 2008(with its Obama is God moments), this right-leaning movement continues to dominate the American political landscape. I can prove issue after issue that by and large Americans have moved to the right over the last 30 years and that includes the issue of faith.

        • Roughly 82% of Americans are christian or jewish. ANother 3% or so are Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Shinto, Taoist, etc. Roughly 10% or so call themselves spiritualists. Depending on the poll, the number of atheist, agnostics, refused to answers, and unknowns ranges between 5%-10%. These numbers are virtually unchanged since 1980. The percentage of atheist and agnostics has risen from about 3% in 1940. However, it has remained stable over the last 30 years despite the wishes of the media elites.

          P.S. Palin is not my idea of the perfect candidate. My conservative female icons range from Margaret Thatcher to Jan Brewer. However, Palin is important in showing modern women(like modern men) that the conservative philosophy is the best fit for them. Also, she proves a point that has been confirmed since college which is that the conservatives have both the smarter and better looking women.To my left-wing feminist friends, I wish you a Merry Christmas and offer the present of mustache combs for all.

          • Ted…what ARE you thinking?

            Reagan was in for 8 years. Bush Sr for 4. Bush jr for 8. 20 years in all.

            And in all that time nothing whatever has happened to either stop abortion or gay marriage.

            It's a gimmick ….to shake money and votes out of people like YOU.

            Nobody else cares about all that sh*t.

            Jesus said nothing about either subject….not one word.

            He did however say to stop war, and live in peace.

            So which one are YOU doing?

            You are being played for a sucker….!

  14. Very strange. In Switzerland, we have never had a problem with religious instruction in a daycare. In school, we say prayers and have a small period of time during the week devoted to religious instruction. Most of our cantons even have state affiliated protestant or catholic churches. Yet, I don't think that anyone could accurately tag us as a fundamentalist christian state. I think many atheist operate under the view that can be only two types of countries. A theocracy like Iran or a hardcore secularist one like France. The truth is that there can be a middle ground between both. We are a democracy where people have freedom. However, we don't just throw aside our traditions and beliefs. I have heard many things about Canadians being a tolerant sort. I was unaware that this tolerance didn't extend to believers.

    • Switzerland is a tiny homogeneous white country, with few differences.

      Canada is a huge country with 200 languages, and all religions.

      Atheists don't believe in deities of any kind. Period.

      Believers are fine…as long as they keep it in church, not in govt.

      Separation of church and state.

      • maybe the government shouldn't be running daycares's bad enough they control the education system …it creates sort of a government indoctrination