Did I say I believed?

I received and email with the side picture attached along with following was statement:
A Nativity Scene was erected in a church yard.
During the night the folks came across this scene.
An abandoned dog was looking for a comfortable, protected place to sleep.
He chose baby Jesus as his comfort.
No one had the heart to send him away so he was there all night.
We should all have the good sense of this dog and curl up in Jesus' lap from time to time. This is too sweet not to share. No one mentioned that the dog breed is a "shepherd!”

There are a few things I found instantly wrong with this email but it wasn’t suppose to be an email I found anything wrong with and here are 3 reasons why

1) This is suppose to make me realize that Jesus, god and religion in general was something I should consider because this homeless abandoned dog found comfort in the arms of baby Jesus
2) That Christians are kind people who did not want to disturb this creature who sought out comfortable place to sleep
3) And that he chose baby Jesus to protect him from harm

Now anyone who knows me, knows I am not a religious person, my main belief is live your life right, don’t go out of your way to harm others intentionally and if, and I mean if there is such a place as heaven, then you should not be turned away. If there isn’t well not like we will be around afterwards to discuss/whine about it.

So this email brought many issues up as I happen to love animals and yes, I believe all animals have a soul, and feelings just as all humans do. Just watch your pet’s eyes sometimes when you talk to them, or listen to them when they feel sad, lonely or hurt. Then try and make me believe they don’t have a soul with feelings and they are just animals. But I am getting off topic here wanting to go into a rant about how people use and abuse animals because they think they have no feelings. This will be a conversation for another time. Back to why this email showed me just how much I disagree with the kind hearts of Christians.

For all purposes intended of these loving, caring Christians not one of them wanted to disturb this abandoned dog. Not one of them brought this dog food, nor water or a blanket. Not one of them picked this dog up and took it home. Oh sure these are slanders that cannot prove, some might say, anything as they might have not told anyone they did behind the email intended. Give me break; Christians all over are the first to brag their asses off at how helpful they are. I am sure that somewhere in this email they would have stated that that someone took this dog in, feed it, watered it and showed it human love. Instead they tried to show that god loved it and the dog knew he could seek shelter with the one being that he felt he could trust in (says alot for human kind if this was true, now doesn't it). I am not sure about you, but I cannot recall the last time God or Jesus fed and watered my dogs, I cannot recall when the last time either of them played even so much as fetch with them. Shrug
This dog wasn’t just abandoned by humans then turned into email photo opp for Christians to say "hey, see you should believe in Jesus, this dog does" because this dog in their point of view was not just simply abandoned in the world by a human and found a basket with some soft materials to keep it warm while sleeping for the night not caring what it represented, which happen to be a nativity scene. Instead this dog was abandoned and alone seeking comfort and protection in a nativity scene because this dog knew that Jesus would look out for it (even if human's wouldn't). No one cared that this same dog most likely slept in a back alley the night before or hasn’t had a real meal in most likely days except for garbage that could be scrounged up. This dog had most likely never had a human love it, since the day someone decided they didn’t want a dog anymore and disposed of like a candy wrapper out the window of a car.
If this same photo was of a dog sleeping on the streets and you knew it was abandoned would you think it was seeking out Jesus’ protection? You'd have to be christian to think that, then walk away believing that Jesus or God will take care of it.



See there is no difference except that one found a more comfortable place to sleep then the other one. Now considering that some catholic’s and Christens believe that animals have no souls makes me wonder just how desperate they are to use this image as a way to say that this German Sheppard actively sought out the nativity scene because he or she believed that they would be comforted and protected by Jesus and God? If so does that mean that animals might possibly have a soul after all and that maybe some religious people are wrong n their beliefs? Could this also mean that animals have a so called high level of thought like humans are suppose to have since don’t cha know this German Sheppard found comfort and protection in the glory of a plastic doll’s cradle? I thought not.

Opps!! I was a bit wrong. As after searching on catholic/Christian web sites I came across this insert where one poster asked the question right out do animals have souls? This was the reply:
“A soul is the life energy that animates the pile of chemicals that make up you, I, animals and any living thing. The human soul also happens to be a spirit. Our spirit was created when we were conceived and will continue forever. The souls of animals are not spirits so when they die they die forever. So the answer to your original questions is yes. With this definition even plants or bacteria have souls, but they are not spirits so are distinctly different from the human soul/spirit.”

Hmm what is the definition of a spirit and a soul I asked myself?
Soul:
1. The animating and vital principle in humans credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion and often conceived as an immaterial entity.
2. The spiritual nature of humans, regarded as immortal, separable from the body at death, and susceptible to happiness or misery in a future state.
3. The disembodied spirit of a dead human.

Spirit:
1.
a. The vital principle or animating force within living beings.
b. Incorporeal consciousness.
2. The soul, considered as departing from the body of a person at death.
5.
a. The part of a human associated with the mind, will, and feelings

After reading both definitions from http://www.thefreedictionary.com I find no real difference in either explanation.
Both the soul and the spirit are what we credit to control our mind; thoughts, actions, will and emotions; feelings, as well as the disembodiment after our death. So to mean this would mean that Yes, Animals do have souls. But do you think animals have thoughts such as an animal Jesus or of an animal God? If they do then we as a society really need to rethink our ideas. Again this is another discussion for another time so I will get back on track.

The facts still remain that this email was in no way suppose to open up all these other issues. It was an email filled with propaganda sent to me by someone who thought that I would see just what they wanted me to see and not what I ended up seeing in the email myself. It was an email that was suppose to show me the glorifying image of just how wonderful Jesus and God is, that even a abandoned dog would find comfort in it.

Well pardon my language but I call “bullshit”. So the next time someone in my life wants to send me religious propaganda, send me something with real proof. Wait better yet, have Jesus or God come visit in physical form because as far as I am concerned the players who speak of him aren’t doing such a great job convincing me he is the one I should be attending church for on my Sundays and giving money to the church plate for. Nor are they the saviours of my afterlife. Till then I will keep living my life to the best of my ability, in ways I know I should be living and save all the money I would have had to dish out on a plate in church to help dish out food I buy to the plates of my family and occasionally a friend or two.
But hey to each their own, if you believe then who am I to tell you different but it works both ways.


Ok I had to post this of a guy/gal who posted back to the people who tried to distinguish between animals having a soul or not... This guy or gal has to be one of my people in relation to how I think.
“I think some folks are really grasping for straws.
I can fully understand if you believe animals have souls.
I can also fully understand if you believe animals do not have souls.
But to see people saying 'Yes, animals have souls. Just not rational, eternal ones' is a little bit ridiculous.
You either have a soul, in the sense that when you die your consciousness continues in an afterlife or you do not have a soul and when you die your consciousness ends.”
I think those people are just trying to find an easy out for the inevitable 'well if animals don't have souls then why does it matter if we abuse them?' argument.

What do we have to Fear?

So we all have heard about this teenager called Omar Khadr (who is now 24 I believe) who on July 27, 2002 was involved in a four-hour firefight in a village called Ayub Kheyl, Afghanistan. He was 15 years old. Yes, 15 years old this kid was a child they termed as a child soldier. He was a trained one at that, since Khadr received "one-on-one" weapons training in June, 2002by Al Qaeda supporters. You have to keep in mind we are not talking about the sweet cherub faced kids we are talking about a well military trained teenager ready to die for his religious beliefs.

The question we seem to be asking is when does a child of any age know right from wrong? When does influence from parent become the reason that Canada should step in and save this kids’ ass from what he is apparently being put through by interrogators to extract information. Kid or not he is guilty. Canadian or not he is again clearly guilty. Does he deserve a fair trial as they say he will only get in the western culture such as Canada? Should he be “saved” by what his parents, as well as he believes is a country that has misguided and immoral influences? This kid deprived one unarmed medic of a life, Sergeant First Class Christopher Speer, a 28-year-old medic with the U.S. Special Forces, as well as another soldier, Sergeant First Class Layne Morris of South Jordan, Utah of his eye. He complains to his government paid lawyers that Americans, who revived him after the firefight that they deprive him of sleep. Deprive him of sleep?? He deprived and man of his life? He also deprived another man of his full vision. Yet he wants to complain or his lack of sleep. One could say he is a typical teenager since he only seems to be worried how he is being treated but not how he treated others, but I cannot find one teenager in the” hateful and dreaded Canadian culture” that wants to kill others over religious reasons. Then again I guess I haven’t gone door to door to ask. I also don’t know many Canadian teenagers who plant road side bombs to watch others die.

This kid knew what he was doing. He may have been 15 years old but he knew and worse yet he believed in what he was doing.
This is the guy who was born Canadian (September10, 1986) but his parents moved back and forth between Canada and Peshawar, Pakistan. His mother had an animosity towards Western influences as well as a father who had a supportive role in Al Qaeda operations, so Omar was enrolled in Peshawar. They took this child out of Canada in contempt of our flag and our beliefs because it was “We” as Canadians who were bad influences. In 1992 Omar’s father was severely injured and they returned to Toronto so he could recuperate. Since he was allowed to come back (not that we stopped him at the borders or anything) to Canada that would mean the he was entitled to our Canadian health benefits.

In 1995 Omar’s father was arrested following Ayman al-Zawahiri’s bombing of the Egyptian embassy in Pakistan and accused of financially aiding the conspirators’. Ok so they finally released him after they found no evidence that his father was guilty. (Really makes me wonder how well they looked, but hey they said they looked). But wait it gets better.

On September 17, Omar was questioned again he stated that he helped the militants because he had been told the United States was fighting a war against Islam. When asked if he knew of a $1500 bounty being offered for each American soldier killed in Afghanistan, he responded that he had heard the story, but didn't know who was offering the reward. When asked how that made him feel at the time, the 15-year old stated "I wanted to kill a lot of American[s] to get lots of money". Does this sound like a Canadian kid you know? You know being as immoral as we western cultured citizens are and all.

Then to add insult to injury the women who thought Canada was a bad influence on her children came back to Canada to seek medical attention for younger son Abdulkareem. Great! So we allowed this family who hates everything about our country to once again live and seek medical treatment at our expense. Best yet is this kid Omar Khadr is now suing our country for $10 million dollars, you have got to be kidding me, that we even take this shit seriously. His family should be thrown out of the country for one.

In April 2009, the Federal Court of Canada ruled once again that Khadr's rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms had been violated. When do we as Canadians say enough is enough? When do we revoke the charter of rights and freedoms from murders?

It concluded that Canada had a "duty to protect" Khadr and ordered the Canadian government to request that the U.S. return him to Canada as soon as possible. In August 2009, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld the decision in a 2–1 ruling. Finally, in January 2010, in a unanimous 9–0 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the participation of Canadian officials in Khadr's interrogations at Guantanamo clearly violated his rights under the Charter. In its sharply worded decision, the Supreme Court referred to the denial of Khadr's legal rights as well as to the use of sleep deprivation techniques to soften him up for interrogation: they stated
The deprivation of [Khadr's] right to liberty and security of the person is not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The interrogation of a youth detained without access to counsel, to elicit statements about serious criminal charges while knowing that the youth had been subjected to sleep deprivation and while knowing that the fruits of the interrogations would be shared with the prosecutors, offends the most basic Canadian standards about the treatment of detained youth suspects.

Come on!! He may have been born in Canada but he was not a citizen in the meaning of being a citizen. What is this shit about basic Canadian standards? We also have a standard that we don’t train our children to kill others and set road side bombs nor kill soldiers for $1500.00. Omar Khadr may have been born in Canada but he was NOT Canadian.

On October 25, 2010, Khadr pled guilty to murder in violation of the laws of war, attempted murder in violation of the laws of war, conspiracy, two counts of providing material support for terrorism and spying. It was agreed he would spend 1 year in Guantanamo Bay, and be returned to Canada. He will be returned to Canada, wtf!! Now we support this kid for how long in our cushy Canadian prisons. We feed him, cloth him, allow his family to have access to him, give him medical treatment when he needs it, educate him in prison, send him to programs to what “change his mind”. When did Canada really start harboring murders? When did Canada start saying that the one Canadian born, but not Canadian raised kid deserved better treatment then the 150 Canadian soldiers both men and women who died trying to help Afghanistan people, become less important. That those soldiers who gave their lives only to be betrayed by allowing this kid who clearly wanted to kill Canadians as well as American’s his basic rights as a citizen of Canada because he was born here but never lived here long enough to really see what our soldiers fight for every day of their lives. To allow his family to be protected under Canadian laws even though they have clearly stated that our culture was one that should be destroyed by any means even if that means was to send their child off to kill.

I hope to god (and i am not religious at all) and this country that we do not allow him back in Canada. I hope to god we do not let him have his so called fair western culture trial on our soil. I hope to god that we remove the family who hates our country enough to send in their child to murder our soldiers and our allies. I hope we give him a trail of our own if our government is so blind as to allow him back in with High treason. What is High treason you ask?

"High treason"
(1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,
(a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;
b levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or
c assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.
Treason
(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,
(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
b without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
c conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
(e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph b or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph b and manifests that intention by an overt act."
It is also illegal for a Canadian citizen to do any of the above outside Canada.
The penalty for high treason is life imprisonment. The penalty for treason is imprisonment up to a maximum of life, or up to 14 years for conduct under subsection (2) b or (e) in peacetime.

He clearly committed High treason when he took up arms again our Country and our allies. Remember if the law can work to bring him back to Canada the law can work to make sure he never live his life outside amongst the real citizens of Canada, even if our jails are not as harsh as some of the foreign countries.
But hey Canada you be the judge. You decide if we should allow Hypocrites such as Omar’s mother and family to stay in Canada or be deported to the very country they want to fight and die for. You be the judge if this young man should be brought back to Canada because it is his basic Canadian right as a citizen and allowed to walk the streets of your town or city, knowing he would rather kill you then have to talk to you. You also look your child in the eyes and tell them that we forgive the injustice of people who hate us and want to kill us because their culture and beliefs are different from our own. You also tell them that what our soldiers do every day to keep us safe means nothing if we allow this young man and his family to live under our basic rights.

Then you lock your doors, pull your blinds and hope that those same extremists that we allowed in to our country and even allowed to stay don’t bomb your homes, schools, churches, and kill your children. You pray you can drive your car down the street without being blown up. Pray that the extremists don’t take over your government and change the rules of freedom. One can argue that by letting one family stay in Canada who clearly opposes a threat won’t allow for all the rest to suffer, and then one has forgotten history of what one man can do if the will is strong enough in belief.