Christian Government: now with 44% less theocracy

Time sure flies when you’re having fun.  It’s hard to believe it’s been three years since I discovered the disturbing spectre of creeping Canadian theocracy, personified in an ominous-looking website banner and its equally creepy site:

{{{Shudder}}}  Brings to mind visions of door-to-door Morality Checks by the State Virtue & Vice Police.  Well, we had our fun with it and other than the occasional slap or poke of a stick through the cage, moved on.  But while researching another matter this morning, “Christian Government” popped up and I noticed it seems to have undergone a conversion of sorts:

The site is using two URLs, the original “Christian Government dot ca”, and the New Improved “Christian Governance dot ca”.  But the name of the site has apparently changed from “Government” to “Governance”.  (Although they’re still “Government” on Twitter.)

Things that make you go “Hmm”, hmm?

Tripping back to April 2008 in the turbo-charged Wayback Machine, we see that at that point the site was still called “Christian Government”. Sometime between then and now it was apparently decided that the word “Government” was horribly wrong and had to be changed.  According to the Whois data, that point may have been as recently as  May 25th:

Who knows?  Maybe they decided to jump aboard the Teabagger Train and realized they shouldn’t be perpetuating the well-known fact that the religious right cherishes Big Fat Greasy Government as much as any Socialist Swine, as long as it’s doing what they want — imposing sterility taxes and keeping a watchful eye on the bedrooms of the nation, that sort of thing.

On the other hand, didn’t Marci McDonald’s book “The Armageddon Factor” come out in May?  Oh my goodness, so it did… May 11… about 2 weeks before “Christian Government” adopted its new and improved, less aggressively theocratic name.

Probably just a coincidence.

31 Responses to “Christian Government: now with 44% less theocracy”


  1. 1 Brian Monday, July 12, 2010 at 8:26 am

    Well, yeah… I think you would have to say it is a coincidence unless and until you find a connection between the book and the name change. I mean, there is so much activity going on in the area of government and religion. It is a very active topic, and one activity in that arena matched up with another activity in that arena is probably not a well taken position until a specific link is found.

  2. 2 deBeauxOs Monday, July 12, 2010 at 8:34 am

    Why thank you Brian, for your sermonette.

    (A sermonette is similar to a serviette, except holier-than-thou).

  3. 3 Brian Monday, July 12, 2010 at 9:56 am

    deBeauxOs,

          Well, I had never heard this term “serviette,” so I looked it up.  I am told that this is a term for a napkin, primarily in homes in the UK.  A sermonette is like a napkin?  Curious, that.  In what way?

          How did my belief that finding a connection between The Armageddon Factor and this website/organization changing their name to be more than coincidence is premature address my holiness viz anyone else’s?!?

  4. 4 JJ Monday, July 12, 2010 at 10:28 am

    Brian – Just a hypothesis suggested by circumstantial evidence.

    But you’re right, in the end it’s just bullshit: why would anyone ever believe something that there was no sound and tangible evidence to support?

    Enter Mr.Carlin:

  5. 5 JJ Monday, July 12, 2010 at 10:29 am

    deBeauxOs – It was a pretty abbreviated sermonette as Brian’s sermonettes go. He must have had a rough weekend ;)

  6. 6 Bleatmop Monday, July 12, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    Ha! Sermonette!! I love it. I’m going to try and integrate that into my daily vocabulary.

  7. 7 Calgal Monday, July 12, 2010 at 2:24 pm

    Is serviette an old word, now out of use? Or is Brian an American?

  8. 8 deBeauxOs Monday, July 12, 2010 at 3:38 pm

    Brian is a clueless and humourless American christianist.

    Fortunately not all US residents share those attributes.

  9. 9 Brian Monday, July 12, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    CalGal,

    I am indeed an American, but am a really funny person with both a wry sense of humor, and am witty. (And a hard-charging rock n roll guitarist.)

    In my interactions here, I have been very serious, because the topics I have participated in have been those I find serous.

    deBeauxOs doesn’t share my point of view, giving rise to the only possible conclusion, that I am clueless. I wouldn’t give that much mind, if I were you.

          Also, I’m not a “Christianist,” I don’t go blowing things up and killing people as Islamists do.  I am just your average evangelical Christian, though Janus insists (without explaining herself) that I am not a Christian at all.  Actually she did say it was because her friends told her so…

     

    JJ,

          I’m worn out from my discussions with C.T. Zen, plus, we are getting ready to headline an outdoor festival, and that is making for more rehearsals (and practicing at home) than usual.  We played for aa farmer’s market last Saturday, as a sort of dress rehearsal, which meant setting up and tearing down the PA on a really hot day.  Fortunately the festival is providing the PA for us.

          By next Sunday I’ll have blisters on me fingers!

  10. 10 Janus Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 9:49 am

    ” Also, I’m not a “Christianist,” I don’t go blowing things up and killing people as Islamists do. I am just your average evangelical Christian, though Janus insists (without explaining herself) that I am not a Christian at all. Actually she did say it was because her friends told her so…”

    You need a course in reading comprehension. My friends didn’t tell me anything at all about you, and I never said they did.

    And yes, you are a Christianist. Blowing things up is not a requirement, but the attitude is, and boy, you got it!

  11. 11 Brian Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 12:37 pm

    I asked you why you said I was not a Christian, and you had told me that that was according to some friends whose opinions you trusted.

    You never gave any reason at all. I don’t know who these individuals were, what their story is, nor what they said, and you never said anything like, “Christians …, but you …”

    I was left to believe that you make arguments against others (“You are not a Christian”), without ever feeling that you need to explain yourself — even when specifically asked (many times). So it is left as just an insult hurled at me for your own satisfaction. There is no reason to take something like that seriously. One can always find others who disagree with them; there is no reason to take such seriously unless and until the reasoning behind the accusation is fleshed out.

    Here you are now calling me a Christianist, insisting that I have the attitude of one, without ever saying what a Christianist is, nor what part of my attitude qualifies me as one — in your opinion, at any rate.

  12. 12 Janus Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:30 pm

    “…you had told me that that was according to some friends whose opinions you trusted.”

    Yeah, trusted them as to what their definition of a Christian is, not about who you are. They are all Christians. They don’t have a clue that you even exist.

  13. 13 Janus Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:31 pm

    And a Christianist is someone who takes his Christianity way too seriously when other folks just want him to keep it to himself.

  14. 14 Peter Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:13 pm

    You may be rushing to judgement in assuming ChristianGovernance.ca and ChristianGovernment.ca are one and the same. Underneath an ostensible common cause, they may in fact be sworn, bitter enemies.

  15. 16 Bene D Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 5:23 pm

    pp. 278-76 Marci McDonald The Armageddon Factor

    “As Emmanuel stressed at his conference, the chief virtue of the Internet is that unlike the airwaves, it remains largely unregulated, beyond the scrutiny of the CRTC or any bureaucratic equivalent. No one appreciates that free-for-all more than Timothy Bloedow, the parliamentary aide who took over both the ECP Centre and the No Apologies news service in 2008, when complications in Tristan Emmanuel’s personal life forced him to step aside.
    As one of the country’s leading Christian nationalists, Bloedow runs his own website, Christiangovernment.ca where he promotes “the urgent need for a Christian theocracy” and hammers away at secular bureaucracies like human rights tribunals as “commie commissions.”
    Reading Bloedow’s online diatribes, it would by easy to dismiss him as a solitary extremist, but the chief backers of the ECP Centre and No Apologies include a Hamilton steel tycoon named Al Schutten and Rob Wildeboer, chairman of Martinra International, the country’s second largest auto-parts manufacturer, an enthusiastic supporter of Stephen Harper who won an appointment to the government’s new Science, Technology and Innovation Council. Neither financier has shown any interest in taming the rhetorical excesses of Bloedow or his like-minded brethren in the blogosphere.”

    p 340 Marci McDonald The Armageddon Factor

    “As the chief aide to Saskatchewan MP Maurice Vellacott, Bloedow has helped turn his boss’s office into a clearing house for Christian-right activity in the capital, and on his own website, christiangovernment.ca, he openly calls the the establishment of a “Christian theocracy.” Linking environmentalism with Nazism and daming human rights tribunals as instruments of Soviet-style repression, Bloedow could hardly be accused of moderation as he inists that “Christian government is an idea whose time has come.”

  16. 17 JJ Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 12:59 pm

    Peter :lol: I knew this situation reminded me of something!

  17. 18 JJ Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 1:02 pm

    Bleatmop – “Sermonette” is a real word — I think it originally referred to those old religious radio shows. Now that they have their own TV networks, the radio sermonettes have sort of gone by the board, but not entirely. Take a spin though your radio dial on Sunday morning :shock: :lol:

  18. 19 JJ Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 1:04 pm

    Calgal – Serviette is also a real word, but I guess it also has fallen out of use. My mom used it to refer to napkins (“That table’s not set, you forgot the serviettes!”)

  19. 20 JJ Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 1:07 pm

    deBeauxOs – Actually Brian has shown evidence of a sense of humour, and seems capable of critical thought. Jasper, on the other hand…

  20. 21 JJ Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    Brian – I wouldn’t consider you a “Christianist”. A Christianist would be the Christian version of an Islamist, who’d be cool with flying planes into buildings or shooting abortion doctors or governing by theocratic tyranny. The fact that you have some beliefs that differ from mine (ie. re abortion) does not dismay me in the least, that’s life.

  21. 22 Brian Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:05 pm

    Janus

    Yeah, trusted them as to what their definition of a Christian is, not about who you are. They are all Christians. They don’t have a clue that you even exist.

    Ahh.  Clearer.  Still, I am in the position of having been labeled with I-know-not-what.  I don’t know what they said, and I don’t know why — specifically — you hold (mistakenly) that I am not a Christian.  Functionally it is the same result.

      

    And a Christianist is someone who takes his Christianity way too seriously when other folks just want him to keep it to himself.

    So all pastors, all priests and all nuns are Christianists?  I mean, all of these classes have dedicated their lives to their vocation, whereas I still work in a regular type of job (when I am employed, that is).  Are rabbis then Judaists?

  22. 23 Brian Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    Actually Brian has shown evidence of a sense of humour, and seems capable of critical thought.

    Merci beaucoup, mon ami!

  23. 24 Brian Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:26 pm

    A Christianist would be the Christian version of an Islamist, who’d be cool with flying planes into buildings or shooting abortion doctors or governing by theocratic tyranny.

    Well, that would be my thinking, just from the apparent derivation of the term. 7nbsp;Or at least someone who would want to make not being a Christian illegal.

    Favoring making it compulsory to be a Christian would at the very least, require an opinion that a person actually could be compelled to be a Christian, a concept I categorically affirm to be completely impossible.  It would be on a par with compelling someone to like the color blue.  They do, or they do not.  If they do, compulsion accomplishes nothing.  If they don’t compulsion cannot cause them to.  I am only going in such detail to forestall someone contributing with, “Well, that’s exactly what you want.”

  24. 25 Brian Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:32 pm

    why would anyone ever believe something that there was no sound and tangible evidence to support?

    Exactly!  I mean, from time to time I, myself, have accepted what someone else has to say on a topic conditionally — until I can verify or falsify.  But beyond that?  No way!

    I actually had someone tell me last night that the direction of the whorl of hair on one’s crown is one direction if born East of the Rockies, the other if born West of the Rockies.  And she votes!  Argh!

  25. 26 Bleatmop Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 4:14 pm

    JJ – What’s a radio dial?? :D

    (joke, I kid I kid. I’ve actually saw a radio dial before)

    I live in Southern Alberta. On Sunaday mornings there is nigh but sermons on the radio. I’ve never heard the term sermonette before though. I’m thinking of working it into conversation I have to deal with workplace proselytizing from now on. Something along the lines of “Thanks for the sermonette, but … (I’m still working on this part, looking for something that sounds funny but utterly offensive when thought about).

  26. 27 Bruce Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 9:14 pm

    Might be coincidence, but if it isn’t, these people scare easily and betray themselves quickly.

    I just started reading The Armageddon Factor, I’m not far enough into it yet to get through the history, so far kind of reads like the book of Genesis in Canadian religious politics. But I’m starting to pick up a thread that I think will come down to interpretations of ideals in societal context. So far, I’m not terrified.

    Lots of interesting names and time frame references, her research is spot on as far as I can tell. In fact even I could add to it. I have to park my ass under a tree and see how far she goes with this. I’m still taking the hype under advisement.

    I’m kind of hoping to finish it off at Cherry Beach.

  27. 28 CanNurse Friday, July 16, 2010 at 9:27 pm

    There are no coincidences when Maurice the Creep is involved. It’s not an assumption – it’s an ASSUMPTION (Christian meaning) of the LORD! MauriceBaby, as we call him, is our local nutbar & a true Christianist. Anybody associated with him is bent on taking over the world for God. And hurrying the End Times too. I am not kidding!

  28. 29 Lindsay Wednesday, July 28, 2010 at 3:13 pm

    “A sermonette is like a napkin? Curious, that. In what way?”

    It serves those that slobber.


  1. 1 Timothy Bloedow’s Christian Governance | Religious Right Alert Trackback on Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 6:14 pm
  2. 2 PZ takes note of Canadian theocrats, does not approve (updated, with poll!) « unrepentant old hippie Trackback on Sunday, November 25, 2012 at 12:15 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Mac Security Portal
Rose's Place
Blogging Change

Incoming!

  • 618,309
[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers

%d bloggers like this: