- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: In Montreal, you can’t have a Christian singer have a worship service in a Church
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:21 pm to the808bass
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:21 pm to the808bass
quote:
Do I need a permit to play instruments in my basement with friends?
No
quote:
Sounds like I might based on your argument here.
Naw
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:I didn't mention it until you did
No y'all have
quote:
I keep telling y'all that isn't an issue
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:23 pm to Nevada_Tiger
quote:
What was the stated reason from the mayor for cancelling the original venue?
It promoted non-inclusivity.
They gave the same rationale for the fine of the church.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This is not true.
You're mis-stating the law.
If the government has to approve of the person you invite then you don't have a right.
I thought your whole point was that they needed a permit no matter who it was.
quote:
Religions and religious people don't get to break the laws everyone else must obey b/c of their religion.
Like in that Supreme Court (CA) case. If you want a driver's license, then you have to take a photo. If you don't, then you don't get to break the law and get one anyway.
Again, you are claiming you have better insight into Canadian law than Justice Renee Pomerance who declared that law had no bearing on religious gatherings.
You aren't a Canadian Lawyer, don't you usually mock people who pretend to know the law?
In this case we have Ontario Superior Court (made up of people who happen to know Canadian law) clearly deciding that it does not apply to church gatherings in the way it applies to drivers licenses, and clearly explaining their reasoning.
The judgement was appealed and was reviewed by the Canadian Supreme court and left standing.
You can be as argumentative as you want, but this is very cut and dry. you misread the claims of the government as the findings of the court when you skimmed it for about 30 seconds, and you've stuck with it ever since.
Of course your response will be ohh nooo let me repeat myself again, this is not what it looks like.
But seriously, you knew you were wrong pages and pages ago lol, At this point I'm quite convinced you aren't planning on adding any more information to this thread.
I've read through the whole thing.
I'll let Renee have the last word.

Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:26 pm to the808bass
quote:
Which law did they break?
The various local regs on large events.
As I look, as you'd expect with French, civilians, there isn't a single, easy process.
It's just a series of randomness you have to navigate
quote:
Capacity Management: Even within a private venue's allowed occupancy, for a concert, you need a plan for crowd management, ingress/egress, and emergency procedures.
quote:
Security: For larger concerts, you'll likely need to hire security personnel. While not a direct "permit" from the borough, it's a critical operational authorization and safety requirement.
You basically have to ask the locality and then they decide which things you have to do.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:27 pm to Harry Boutte
quote:
I don't know that they are
quote:All of the above. Take your pick
I don't even know if you're talking about Canada, Europe or the US
quote:Ah yes, the "permit" required. But that doesn't answer the question, now does it?
SFP posted the answer on page 1
quote:Where did you hear this?
It appeared to be a political concert
quote:I've asked SFP a question and it is still unanswered. You interjected the political aspect of it but that is unsubstantiated.
no one is really countering his argument rationally and supporting the assertion in the OP
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:They were. You just didn't get it
if OP and the social media posts had just been honest about all of this
quote:That only exists in your mind, like your 14th amendment language
Christains promoting lying
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:28 pm to Narax
quote:
If the government has to approve of the person you invite then you don't have a right.
I thought your whole point was that they needed a permit no matter who it was.
You frame an argument incorrectly and then claim my argument is absurd within that bad framing. News at 11
quote:
Again, you are claiming you have better insight into Canadian law than Justice Renee Pomerance who declared that law had no bearing on religious gatherings.
And unrelated Covid-era law. That ruling and the words you keep relying on ONLY apply to that law.
quote:
I'll let Renee have the last word.
Those words only apply to a law we're not discussing ITT, about a province that isn't even the province we're discussing
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:This is a real thing. There are COPIOUS examples of it, all over the world
supposed Christian persecution
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:30 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The various local regs on large events.
So 400 people in weekly church services is not a large event requiring a permit, but 400 people listening to Christian music on Wednesday night is a large event requiring a permit.
It's not like they expanded the church to hold the concert, right?
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:30 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The various local regs on large events.
I am asking for a very specific citation. It’s going to be impossible for you to provide because you don’t know the answer. I’m asking anyway because you’re certain that they broke the law even though you don’t know what law they broke. I’m doing this to highlight that you are believing this with blind faith.
quote:
Security: For larger concerts, you'll likely need to hire security personnel.
How large is “larger?” You don’t know. It hasn’t stopped you once from blithely asserting as if you know.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:31 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
There shouldn’t be a need for a permit for a church to host an event on its premises as long as all other regulations are upheld.
I know that, you know that, and SFP knows that.
Unfortunately, SFP thinks that singing about Jesus in church is insincere, because Christians lie.
Soooo…no permit for Christians.
However, SFP is probably down with the Imam giving a lecture on how the proper way to toss queers off of buildings, because at least that Imam is being sincere.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:31 pm to David_DJS
quote:
but 400 people listening to Christian music on Wednesday night is a large event requiring a permit.
There are pictures of the concert inside the church. It’s well under capacity of the venue. Maybe 200 people.
ETA: it’s probably closer to 100. And by “closer” I mean “under.”
This post was edited on 7/26/25 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:31 pm to Harry Boutte
quote:
It's their desperate need to validate their victimhood
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Capacity Management: Even within a private venue's allowed occupancy, for a concert, you need a plan for crowd management, ingress/egress, and emergency procedures.
So a church service.
Got it.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:So is this what the police are overlooking every week in churches? If so, can you provide some evidence that the police are intentionally overlooking this?
The type of event in OP would require the Special Events Permit
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:33 pm to Harry Boutte
You are a loon.
Just say that you want to shoot it a church and call it a day.
Just say that you want to shoot it a church and call it a day.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You frame an argument incorrectly and then claim my argument is absurd within that bad framing. News at 11
Absurd? I claim your argument is different. Are you saying that they only prevented the religious right because they disapproved of the person?
quote:
Those words only apply to a law we're not discussing ITT, about a province that isn't even the province we're discussing
It shows you haven't read the case, she very clearly outlines when a violation of religious guarantees occurs.
I mean you are the guy always yelling about precedent.
It's like for some reason you are acting the exact opposite of how you usually do...
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So the authorities claiming the event in the church required a permit were lying? Making shite up?
Posted on 7/26/25 at 4:34 pm to the808bass
quote:
I am asking for a very specific citation.
I just explained. I don't think they have a specific metropolitan code.
You call them, they think about it, and then tell you what they deem are required.
As I said, what you'd expect a French, civilian hell hole would be like.
quote:
It’s going to be impossible for you to provide because you don’t know the answer. I
I don't think there is an objective statute out there to reference, and there's a lot of local subjectify involved in deciding what they deem you need.
But there CLEARLY was some regulation, b/c all the reports state the locality did go over the venue and say that the venue lacked these approvals. Permits may not even be a good term.
quote:
I’m doing this to highlight that you are believing this with blind faith.
No. Not blind. We have the statements from the government from before the concert happened. That's direct evidence.
quote:
How large is “larger?” You don’t know.
The locality determines the answer to that question.
Popular
Back to top



0



