It IS inclusive. There is absolutely nothing sexist about the current anthem.
You don't think it violates my religious beliefs (or lack thereof) by referencing "god"?
I have never understood why the USA puts "in god we trust" on their money or why people are required to swear on a bible. I am respectful of other people's beliefs, but I personally believe that religion all hogwash and pie in the sky stuff for weak minded people.
I love this country, but I don't feel that the line about god keeping our land glorious and free should be in there. I should be able to be patriotic and respectful of our country and all it stands for without having to ask a "god" to keep our land glorious and free. Why not ask Don Cherry or Wayne Gretzky to keep our land glorious and free? At least they aren't imaginary.
You don't think it violates my religious beliefs (or lack thereof) by referencing "god"?
I have never understood why the USA puts "in god we trust" on their money or why people are required to swear on a bible. I am respectful of other people's beliefs, but I personally believe that religion all hogwash and pie in the sky stuff for weak minded people.
I love this country, but I don't feel that the line about god keeping our land glorious and free should be in there. I should be able to be patriotic and respectful of our country and all it stands for without having to ask a "god" to keep our land glorious and free. Why not ask Don Cherry or Wayne Gretzky to keep our land glorious and free? At least they aren't imaginary.
While I agree that religion is...unnecessary, you need to relax, man. Nobody is violating your religious beliefs (or lack thereof). You are choosing to be offended.
As for the bolded part, have you ever heard of...History? Well, history is this little thing that tells us about the past. In the past, the USA was founded by a bunch of people, many of whom, were religious. "God" was the name of their deity. And they wrote it on their money. And they haven't changed it lately. There, now you know.
So chill, returnee. It wont be long before someone figures out who you are, and you're banned again.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to 4X4 For This Useful Post:
While I agree that religion is...unnecessary, you need to relax, man. Nobody is violating your religious beliefs (or lack thereof). You are choosing to be offended.
As for the bolded part, have you ever heard of...History? Well, history is this little thing that tells us about the past. In the past, the USA was founded by a bunch of people, many of whom, were religious. "God" was the name of their deity. And they wrote it on their money. And they haven't changed it lately. There, now you know.
So chill, returnee. It wont be long before someone figures out who you are, and you're banned again.
So history is an excuse to allow things to keep going today, just because that's the way it once was?
There is a growing movement in Ireland to change the lyrics of their anthem, mostly because it is extremely militant in nature and encourages people to kill their British overlords. Is this acceptable purely on the basis of what was going on in Ireland at the time the anthem was established?
History should not always be held in such high regard. When Canada first came to be, women were not allowed the right to vote. Would you consider that acceptable today purely on the basis that way back when, when people got together to put this country together, women weren't considered equal?
I realise that you may feel I am blowing this out of proportion, and you are correct in thinking that a small lyric like the reference to god or the line about "son's command" is not anywhere near as big an injustice as denying women and native Canadians the right to vote. However, it is an issue that bugs me. I don't believe in this god character, and I wouldn't want my children to feel pressured into singing his praises and asking him to keep their country glorious and free for fear of appearing unpatriotic.
The reference to God was only added to the song in 1980 when it became Canada's official anthem. I remember there being a lot of upset oldtimers at the time because of the change. Of course, at that time, anything Trudeau's government did was hated in this part of the country.
Rather than trying to shoehorn in new lyrics, we should just swap out the first two lines with the first two lines of the rarely-heard second stanza. Then, replace "God" with "We" (which fits with the "we stand on guard for thee"), and there you have it, virtually the same song and it upsets no one:
Quote:
O Canada!
Where pines and maples grow.
Great prairies spread and lordly rivers flow.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
We keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following User Says Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
Good hell, what a stupid idea. Leave it be. If it must be changed, return to the original. I do think the whole god thing in there is stupid - god doesn't keep our land glorious and free, we do. But I don't care enough to make any fuss about changing it. Tempest in a teapot, this.
So history is an excuse to allow things to keep going today, just because that's the way it once was?
There is a growing movement in Ireland to change the lyrics of their anthem, mostly because it is extremely militant in nature and encourages people to kill their British overlords. Is this acceptable purely on the basis of what was going on in Ireland at the time the anthem was established?
History should not always be held in such high regard. When Canada first came to be, women were not allowed the right to vote. Would you consider that acceptable today purely on the basis that way back when, when people got together to put this country together, women weren't considered equal?
I realise that you may feel I am blowing this out of proportion, and you are correct in thinking that a small lyric like the reference to god or the line about "son's command" is not anywhere near as big an injustice as denying women and native Canadians the right to vote. However, it is an issue that bugs me. I don't believe in this god character, and I wouldn't want my children to feel pressured into singing his praises and asking him to keep their country glorious and free for fear of appearing unpatriotic.
You don't seem to grasp one key factor, actual impact. Words on a bill do not impact you. The right of over half the population to vote does. Even mentioning them in the same breath is absurd.
You've chosen to be offended. You've chosen to make an issue. You could very well have felt no impact, beyond of course having to actually talk to your kids about why God is on a piece of paper.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
The Following User Says Thank You to valo403 For This Useful Post:
You don't seem to grasp one key factor, actual impact. Words on a bill do not impact you. The right of over half the population to vote does. Even mentioning them in the same breath is absurd.
As for the bolded part, have you ever heard of...History? Well, history is this little thing that tells us about the past. In the past, the USA was founded by a bunch of people, many of whom, were religious. "God" was the name of their deity. And they wrote it on their money. And they haven't changed it lately. There, now you know.
So chill, returnee. It wont be long before someone figures out who you are, and you're banned again.
Actually, it's you that might want to study your history on this issue. The founders of the United States did not put "In God We Trust" on their money. The original national motto was the Latin phrase 'E pluribus unum', which translates to "Out of many, one". This was only changed to "In God We Trust" by an act of Congress in 1956 to contrast Americans to the "godless communists" during the Cold War.
The Following User Says Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
I think they should just scrap the whole song and start over. I know it has sentimental value and all that, but it is hard to listen that song objectively and think it is a good song. None of the lyrics are particularly meaningful or emotionally stirring. The melody seems like it was composed by a second grade music student. And really, we couldn't come up a more imaginative title than "O Canada"???
Those lyrics have not changed. Has anybody read them lately?
O Canada!
Land of our forefathers,
Thy brow is wreathed with a glorious garland of flowers.
As is thy arm ready to wield the sword,
So also is it ready to carry the cross.
Thy history is an epic
Of the most brilliant exploits.
Thy valour steeped in faith
Will protect our homes and our rights
Will protect our homes and our rights
It has a completely different tone and meaning to it. It sounds like a military anthem about defending one's home and glorious culture.
I don't see any particular urgency or need to change the "in all thy sons command" line. The one line I would prefer updated is:
"Our home and native land". There was a campaign 20 years ago that never really go off the ground to change this to "Our home and cherished land" because I think the last statistic was nearly 25% of all Canadians were immigrants to this country and this is their adopted and cherished home, not their native land.
While I agree that religion is...unnecessary, you need to relax, man. Nobody is violating your religious beliefs (or lack thereof). You are choosing to be offended.
As for the bolded part, have you ever heard of...History? Well, history is this little thing that tells us about the past. In the past, the USA was founded by a bunch of people, many of whom, were religious. "God" was the name of their deity. And they wrote it on their money. And they haven't changed it lately. There, now you know.
So chill, returnee. It wont be long before someone figures out who you are, and you're banned again.
Heh. Before lecturing someone on their understanding of history, you should make sure that you have a grasp on it. The truth is a google search away. No excuses.
Heh. Before lecturing someone on their understanding of history, you should make sure that you have a grasp on it. The truth is a google search away. No excuses.
I don't really care when they put it on their money, the point is that a good portion of the USA is religious, and they decided that they wanted that on their money. Sorry if it sounded like I'm claiming that they printed that on July 4 1776 (suppose I better google that date). No, I don't give a crap. It's around that year.
