Who’s in charge here? A reply
It is surprising that people did not hear my jaw hit the floor after reading the incoherent, ludicrous nonsense written by Fred Ryan in the 7th February 2018 editorial. He seems to fail to understand the most basics of the legal system.
To a Christian, the concept of civil and criminal law is as follows: under St Paul's Letter to the Romans, one must obey those that God has put over us, for they are, de facto, merely running this land as a stand-in for God. We must, therefore, obey all governments, from town halls to federal, as a stand-in for God; however, as this power is derived and secondary, just like a municipal court is junior to the Supreme Court, so government, from town hall to federal, is of zero validity should it directly contradict the laws of God.
Without validity from God, no government has any justification in imposing upon our lives. Now the ruling by central government over so-called "rights" is not directly against Christians for it can be avoided by merely not offering those services, so there is no direct conflict, just inconvenience.
Likewise, if the Quebec Government forbids nurses to wear a crucifix, they could, in theory, just go and get another job. The fact remains, however, where a body mandates headlong directly against the law of God, then that body has no more validity to call itself "Government" than Trump would have to call himself President of Canada.
Robert L Thompsett