Quebec Leader: The Crucifix Is Not Religious

Skwim said:

"François Legault won Quebec’s provincial elections last week and will soon become the next premier. He has already vowed to stop government workers — including cops and teachers — from wearing religious symbols like hijabs and yarmulkes and turbans “in order to protect Quebec’s secular society.” It’s a move that trounces on religious freedom in the name of religious neutrality and creates far more problems than it solves.

But if religious symbols have to go, then what about the large crucifix that hangs in Quebec’s National Assembly…?

​

Apparently that cross can stay right where it is because Legault claims there’s nothing religious about it.

The crucifix hanging in Quebec’s National Assembly is a historical symbol, not a religious one, even though it represents the Christian values of the province’s two colonial ancestors, premier-designate François Legault said Thursday.

The crucifix, he said, invokes the role of French Catholics and British Protestants in Quebec’s history. He made no mention of Indigenous people.

“In our past we had Protestants and Catholics. They built the values we have in Quebec. We have to recognize that and not mix that with religious signs.”

The crucifix was installed above the speaker’s chair in the National Assembly in 1936. A government-commissioned report into secularism and identity issues recommended in 2008 that it be removed, but no government has done so.

​

So it’s historic, not religious, but it represents Christian values, but we shouldn’t think of Christianity when we look at it.

Legault’s brain probably needs a breather after all those mental gymnastics."
source

.​

Click to expand...

Skwim said:

"François Legault won Quebec’s provincial elections last week and will soon become the next premier. He has already vowed to stop government workers — including cops and teachers — from wearing religious symbols like hijabs and yarmulkes and turbans “in order to protect Quebec’s secular society.” It’s a move that trounces on religious freedom in the name of religious neutrality and creates far more problems than it solves.
But if religious symbols have to go, then what about the large crucifix that hangs in Quebec’s National Assembly…?
Apparently that cross can stay right where it is because Legault claims there’s nothing religious about it.
So it’s historic, not religious, but it represents Christian values, but we shouldn’t think of Christianity when we look at it.
​

Click to expand...

Craig Sedok said:

To put a cross on a wall is no better than saying so long and thanks for all the fish.

Click to expand...

URAVIP2ME said:

Since there were No crosses in 'mass Roman executions' because to add a 'cross beam' would be a waste of time and manpower. An upright pole would have been all that was necessary.
People usually think of only three persons executed the day Jesus' died, but it seems as if Luke 23:32 implies there were more than just the two criminals with Jesus.​

Click to expand...

Clicking on the RF Bible verse link for Luke 23:32

"And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death."​

Seems to be only two others.

This viewpoint can be seen at a calvary to be seen at Ploubezere Near Lammion in the Cotes-du-Nord, Brittany known as Les Cing Croix (the 5 crosses).
There is a high cross in the center, with four smaller crosses. Two on each side.
But where did the idea of a pole with a cross beam come from.
I find, the ancient pagans wore a Tau around their necks, so especially at the time of Constantine the "T"s top was lowered creating the so-called now Christian cross. So, originally there was Nothing religious Christian about it, but pagan in origin. So, in that sense it is historic, and really does Not represent Christian values, so we should Not think of Christianity when we see or look at crosses or crucifixes.
Besides that, as 2 Corinthians 5:7 says Christians walk by faith and Not by sight (or sighted things).

Click to expand...

Interesting.

.​

Skwim said:

"François Legault won Quebec’s provincial elections last week and will soon become the next premier. He has already vowed to stop government workers — including cops and teachers — from wearing religious symbols like hijabs and yarmulkes and turbans “in order to protect Quebec’s secular society.” It’s a move that trounces on religious freedom in the name of religious neutrality and creates far more problems than it solves.

But if religious symbols have to go, then what about the large crucifix that hangs in Quebec’s National Assembly…?

​

Apparently that cross can stay right where it is because Legault claims there’s nothing religious about it.

The crucifix hanging in Quebec’s National Assembly is a historical symbol, not a religious one, even though it represents the Christian values of the province’s two colonial ancestors, premier-designate François Legault said Thursday.

The crucifix, he said, invokes the role of French Catholics and British Protestants in Quebec’s history. He made no mention of Indigenous people.

“In our past we had Protestants and Catholics. They built the values we have in Quebec. We have to recognize that and not mix that with religious signs.”

The crucifix was installed above the speaker’s chair in the National Assembly in 1936. A government-commissioned report into secularism and identity issues recommended in 2008 that it be removed, but no government has done so.

​

So it’s historic, not religious, but it represents Christian values, but we shouldn’t think of Christianity when we look at it.

Legault’s brain probably needs a breather after all those mental gymnastics."
source

.​

Click to expand...

Saint Frankenstein said:

Sadly, Quebec can be rather backwards and xenophobic.

Click to expand...

Skwim said:

Clicking on the RF Bible verse link for Luke 23:32

"And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death."​

Seems to be only two others.
Interesting.
​

Click to expand...

URAVIP2ME said:

I think the implication is that there were two (2) ' others ' besides the two (2) on each side of Jesus.
Thus, that accounts for at least five (5) executed at that day.​

Click to expand...

Skwim said:

I'd have to read the verses you have in mind to decide.
Where do you feel Luke implies there are two others so as to make the total five?

Click to expand...

illykitty said:

Some of the things that have always irked me about my birthplace. I always wanted to move from there.
And yeah, I'm facepalming really hard right now. This guy is an idiot right wing nationalist and I'm ashamed people voted him in.

Click to expand...

URAVIP2ME said:

Jesus with the two (2) on each side of Jesus would add up to three (3) persons.
Two (2) ' others ' ( besides those three (3) would equal five (5) persons.
So, at least five (5) persons could have been executed at that time. - Luke 23:32.

Click to expand...

Skwim said:

Luke 23:26-34
32 And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death. (2 additional male persons involved: Jesus + 2 malefactors = 3)
33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him (Jesus), and the malefactors (from verse 32), one on the right hand, and the other on the left. (still the 2 additional male persons involved: Jesus + 2 malefactors = 3)
34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots. (still 2 additional male persons involved: Jesus + 2 malefactors = 3)
.

Click to expand...