The President of Uganda has repented of past sins and dedicated his nation to Almighty God.
President Yoweri Museveni made history last month at the National Jubilee Prayers in Namboole, when he openly repented of his sins and the sins of Uganda, according to Moses Mulondo of New Vision.
Uganda has been targetted in recent years by wealthy Western homosexual activists, furious at that country’s opposition to pro-sodomy activism.
Both President Museveni and First Lady Janet Museveni have warned of the dangers posed to individuals and society by sodomy. But the subject did not warrant a mention in the President’s prayer, as he concentrated on repentance for sins and rededication of the nation to God.
President Museveni said:
Father God in heaven, today we stand here as Ugandans, to thank you for Uganda. We are proud that we are Ugandans and Africans. We thank you for all your goodness to us.
I stand here today to close the evil past and especially in the last 50 years of our national leadership history and at the threshold of a new dispensation in the life of this nation. I stand here on my own behalf and on behalf of my predecessors to repent. We ask for your forgiveness.
We confess these sins, which have greatly hampered our national cohesion and delayed our political, social and economic transformation.
We confess sins of idolatry and witchcraft which are rampant in our land. We confess sins of shedding innocent blood, sins of political hypocrisy, dishonesty, intrigue and betrayal.
Forgive us of sins of pride, tribalism and sectarianism; sins of laziness, indifference and irresponsibility; sins of corruption and bribery that have eroded our national resources; sins of sexual immorality, drunkenness and debauchery; sins of unforgiveness, bitterness, hatred and revenge; sins of injustice, oppression and exploitation; sins of rebellion, insubordination, strife and conflict.
These sins and many others have characterised our past leadership, especially the last 50 years of our history. Lord forgive us and give us a new beginning. Give us a heart to love you, to fear you and to seek you. Take away from us all the above sins.
We pray for national unity. Unite us as Ugandans and eliminate all forms of conflict, sectarianism and tribalism. Help us to see that we are all your children, children of the same Father. Help us to love and respect one another and to appreciate unity in diversity.
We pray for prosperity and transformation. Deliver us from ignorance, poverty and disease. As leaders, give us wisdom to help lead our people into political, social and economic transformation.
We want to dedicate this nation to you so that you will be our God and guide. We want Uganda to be known as a nation that fears God and as a nation whose foundations are firmly rooted in righteousness and justice to fulfil what the Bible says in Psalm 33:12: Blessed is the nation, whose God is the Lord. A people you have chosen as your own.
I renounce all the evil foundations and covenants that were laid in idolatry and witchcraft. I renounce all the satanic influence on this nation. And I hereby covenant Uganda to you, to walk in your ways and experience all your blessings forever.
I pray for all these in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Christian Leaders React
The Church of Uganda Archbishop elect, Stanley Ntagali said the prayer was a step in the right direction. That it was appropriate for the head of state to repent of his sins and the sins of Ugandans.
The leader of Pentecostal churches, Apostle Alex Mitala, said the prayer was the beginning of the healing of a nation. “All the nations we read about in the Bible were healed when their leaders repented and acknowledged God’s supremacy,” he said. Mitala urged Ugandans to turn away from their wicked ways.
Pastor Dr. Martin Kalibbala of New Testament Covenant Church warned that the fruits of repentance are what matter. “If you repent of stealing, God expects you to immediately stop stealing. If the President’s repentance is genuine, it will be measured on God’s yardstick of bearing the fruits of repentance,” he said.
Pastor Dr. Martin Ssempa of Makerere Community Church said it was a good thing for the President to repent on his behalf and on behalf of the nation. He commended those who encouraged and helped the President prepare the prayer, adding that God will answer it.
“We hope the President’s repentance will result into greater obedience to God by the executive, which he heads.”
Stephen Green of Christian Voice in the United Kingdom said: “President Museveni has set a standard which other national leaders would do well to emulate. All the sins which the President has identified in Uganda are present in Britain and America under different names. All governments need to root out corruption, wickedness and injustice and return to God.”
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Please note that persons wishing to comment on this story must enter a valid email address. Comments from persons leaving fictitious email addresses will be trashed.
In a live interview earlier this week, This Morning presenter Phillip Schofield handed the Prime Minister a card with a list of names on it drawn from the internet, saying that they were people Mr Cameron knew and asking whether he would be talking to them.
Mr Schofield was wrong to dignify gossip in such a way and no-one being interviewed appreciates an ambush. A furious Mr Cameron, who did not look at the names, replied:
“There is a danger, if we’re not careful, that this could turn into a sort of witch-hunt, particularly against people who are gay and I’m worried about the sort of thing you are doing right now – giving me a list of names that you’ve taken off the internet.”
Nobody in the world of media wants to talk even about the possibility of links between homosexuality and paedophilia, or to confuse the public by separating paedophiles into those attracted to adolescents (usually referred to as ‘pederasts’) and those attracted to pro-pubertal children (true paedophiles).
Uncomfortable as it is to admit, Mr Cameron was correct in his slip of the tongue. There is indeed a link between homosexuality and sexual attraction to children.
Those campaigning for the legalisation of paedophilia have always been male homosexuals. The founders of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), Paedophile Action for Liberation (PAL), the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) and the New Zealand based Aotearoa Man-Boy Love Association (AMBLA) were all adult male homosexuals. Ian Dunn, who helped set up PIE, was a leading light in the Scottish Minorities Group, an early homosexual activist group. The Campaign for Homosexual Equality had the abolition of all ages of consent as one of its aims.
It all seemed wonderfully sexually liberated to these activists in the 1970s and early 1980s. PIE even published a book in 1982 called ‘Betrayal of Youth’ (BOY) campaigning against ages of consent, and edited by their Vice-Chairman. Peter Tatchell contributed a chapter to Betrayal of Youth: ‘Questioning Ages of Majority and Ages of Consent’. There has never been any suggestion that Peter Tatchell was or is himself a paedophile, but he helped their cause with his expressed desire to abolish ages of consent.
But if paedophilia is a minority interest in the homosexual world, pederasty is widespread. A cult of youth is a mainstream part of homosexual culture, where magazines with names like ‘Boyz’ and websites are filled with pictures of attractive young men.
In their 1979 book ‘The Gay Report’, Jay and Young, two American homosexuals, revealed that 73% of their fellows had at some time had sex with boys 16-19 or younger. One reported “My lover and I are into many young boys 13-18 years old …” There is no reason to suppose that with lowering of ages of consent and generally more liberal attitudes to under-age sex that today’s homosexual men have suddenly become less inclined to adolescent boys.
The UK Home Office carried out research on cases of indecent assault in 1973, and were able to distinguish between ages of victim as follows. Out of 802 convictions for indecent assault on males, we find the following:
Age of victim: 0-4 5-9 10-11 12-15 16-17 18-20 21+ All 0-15
% of cases: 3.1 32.5 18.6 33.9 4.9 2.8 4.2 88.1%
It is quite common for apologists for homosexuality to assert that ‘heterosexual men are more likely to be paedophiles’, so we need briefly to examine this claim.
For the same year that the Home Office did their research into indecent assault, they also published the figures for assaults on females. There were 3,006, and the ages broke down as follows:
Age of victim: 0-4 5-9 10-12 13-15 16-17 18-20 21+ All 0-15
% of cases: 3.2 24.8 15.4 26.2 7.1 7.8 15. 5 69.6%
Leaving aside for a moment the paedophile/pederast distinction, the total assaults on under-16 males were 18.55% of all convictions (88.1 x 802 / 3808), and those on under-16 females were 54.94% of all convictions (69.6 x 3006 / 3808) . We must assume for the sake of the argument that all the assaults were carried out by men, and also assume, to be generous, that there are 1.5% of men in the UK population who are sadly homosexual.
Then we can say that the 1.5% who are homosexual were responsible for 18.5% of assaults, and the 98.5% who are heterosexual were responsible for 55%, meaning that a homosexual in the statistics was (18.55/1.5) / (54.94/98.5) = 22 times more likely to offend than a heterosexual.
But this is not the whole picture. If heterosexuality is the ability to enter into a complete loving and sexual relationship exclusively with an adult of the opposite sex, then the men convicted of the offences on girls under 16 were not up to the mark either. Jimmy Savile committed his staggering litany of abuse against pubescent girls because he was emotionally unable to form a normal relationship with a woman. He was not ‘heterosexual’ by any reasonable definition.
We must thank Messrs Schofield and Cameron for giving us the opportunity to talk about an issue which is too often kept under wraps, and which has implications wider than their immediate focus at a time when homosexual activists from groups like Stonewall are demanding ever more rights and acceptance.
A Roman Catholic cardinal has been named ‘Bigot of the Year’ by the publicly-funded Stonewall pro-sodomy lobby group.
Cardinal Keith O’Brien is the leader of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, and is said to have stated that same-sex relationships are “harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual well-being” and compared equal marriage to slavery and child abuse.
In a newspaper article earlier this year, the cardinal wrote that the proposal for same-sex marriage represented a “grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right”.
Under his leadership the Catholic Church in Scotland has pledged to “declare war” on marriage equality and committed an additional £100,000 for the fight.
Other nominees included Christian politician Alan Craig, who complained of the ‘Gaystapo’ and Simon Lokodohe, the Ugandan ethics and integrity minister, who ordered the disbanding of meetings of gay equality groups, the arrest of pro-sodomy activists, insisting that they ‘recruit children’ into homosexuality and supported David Bahati’s proposal of the death penalty for those convicted of sodomy.
‘By giving the award to Cardinal Keith O’Brien, Stonewall deem the free expression of religious conviction and Christian theological tradition to be more ‘bigoted’ than active persecution … Is any more evidence needed of Stonewall’s blind hypocrisy, perverse immorality and vicious bigotry? They don’t even permit the nominees of this award to attend the ceremony and make an acceptance speech in their own defence.’
Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson picked up ‘politician of the year’ at the £180-a-head bash last night in recognition of her being a lesbian. But she used her acceptance speech to criticise the bigot of the year category, saying it was “simply wrong” to use such terminology.
Ms Davidson, who attended the ceremony presented by broadcaster Gok Wan, said: “There are many voices in this debate and just as I respectfully express my sincerely held belief that we should extend marriage to same-sex couples, I will also respect those who hold a different view.”
She said: “But where I disagree with Stonewall in these awards is the need to call people names like ‘bigot’. It is simply wrong.
“The case for equality is far better made by demonstrating the sort of generosity, tolerance and love we would wish to see more of in this world.”
Christian Concern’s Andrea Minichiello Williams said she regarded Cardinal Keith O’Brien as “a courageous Christian leader who has stood for the truth”.
Coutts and Barclays, who were sponsoring categories at the awards dinner, have also strongly criticised the ‘Bigot of the Year’ award and will not longer fund the event if it contains the insulting nomination. The Coutts decision came just one working day after a Christian Voice witness outside their London HQ. (see our 31st October story below)
Their decision follows that of the Nationwide Building Society to drop their £65,000 sponsorship of the event after Christian Voice members prayed and wrote to them last year. (See our 21st July story below)
Christian Voice National Director Stephen Green handing out leaflets outside Coutts Bank HQ opposite London’s Charing Cross Station on Friday 26th October. Coutts condemned Stonewall’s ‘bigot’ award on Monday 29th.
It’s not often we are able to celebrate a victory, but the announcement from the Queen’s bankers that they will no longer support the Stonewall lobby group’s playground bullying is welcome news.
Coutts Bank have joined Barclays in condemning Stonewall’s insulting ‘Bigot of the year’ award. In an email sent to one of our members on Monday evening they said:
‘Thank you for your email. Coutts are sponsors only of Stonewall’s Writer of the Year Award and have in no way been involved in the judging or support of the Bigot of the Year category. We have advised Stonewall that we will be withdrawing our support of the awards unless they remove this category.’
Coutts remarkable decision comes just one working day after we gave out leaflets about the affair to Coutts employees in a street witness outside their London headquarters in The Strand last Friday afternoon.
We first encouraged our members to pray, write and email to the directors of Barclays, Coutts and Price Waterhouse Cooper (PWC) on 3rd October concerning their sponsorship of categories of the Stonewall awards and to draw their attention to the ‘bigot’ award.
Barclays immediately condemned the ‘bigot’ award in trenchant terms. Their ‘Head of Global Diversity’, Mark McLane, said the next day:
‘As part of what is a positive longstanding relationship with Stonewall we were approached to see if we would be willing to sponsor a category for the 2012 Awards, which we agreed to do – the Sports Personality of the Year – on the understanding that the awards are a celebration of diversity and positive impact in our communities.
‘I have recently been made aware of the inclusion of a ‘Bigot of the Year’ category in the awards. Let me be absolutely clear that Barclays does not support that award category either financially, or in principle and have informed Stonewall that should they decide to continue with this category we will not support this event in the future. To label any individual so subjectively and pejoratively runs contrary to our view on fair treatment, and detracts from what should be a wholly positively focused event.’
Going further, Mr McLane said: ‘We have been very clear with Stonewall that we regard the award in question to be beyond the pale and will not sponsor this event in the future should they decide to continue this award category.’
Despite that, Mr McLane continued:
‘This matter apart, it is our view that Stonewall do valuable work in the field of promoting equality, and provide outstanding resource to our communities in the pursuit of becoming more diverse and inclusive.’
Whether Barclays support Stonewall’s new demand for ‘gay marriage’ or not Mr McLane has failed to say.
However, Coutts and PWC, while distancing themselves from the ‘bigot’ award, failed to condemn it. The move by Coutts leaves PWC out on a limb.
Despite the Banks’ condemnation, Stonewall are intent on keeping the ‘bigot’ award, even if it means losing sponsorship for some of the categories. Awash with donations and public money, they are certainly wealthy enough to fund the whole event without the need for the odd £5,000 in prize money.
Ben Summerskill, Stonewall’s Chief Executive, told the Guardian: “We have never called anyone a bigot just because they disagreed with us.” He continued “All the nominees have gone well beyond what anyone normal would call a decent level of public discourse.”
Stonewall said goodbye to Nationwide Building Society’s sponsorship of the whole event this year thanks to a dogged campaign of prayer and action by Christian Voice members from November last year up to its AGM in July 2012.
We are grateful to Christian Concern for joining our campaign against these awards on Monday. Co-incidentally, Coutts were formulating their shift in position as Christian Concern were putting out an email encouraging their people to lobby the CEO’s of Barclays, Coutts and PWC. They were able to celebrate the Lord’s victory just one day later.
Pray: Praise the Lord for his victory. Pray for the directors at PWC that they too will condemn the ‘bigot’ award. Pray for the Lord to expose the bullying Stonewall group and for their support to fall away.
But not content with congratulating those who have advanced the homosexual cause, Stonewall also have a ‘bigot of the year’ award, just to insult and bully their opponents.
Christian Voice supporters started outside Coutts Bank at lunchtime, before moving to Barclays flagship branch in Piccadiily Circus and finishing at PWC for going-home time.
In fairness, our leaflets pointed out that Barclays have at least condemned the ‘bigot award’ as ‘beyond the pale’ which is more than Coutts or PWC have done. Nevertheless, all three institutions compliment Stonewall on their work.
PWC’s front entrance off Tooley Street, SE1. Do its directors agree with Stonewall’s demands for gay marriage or not?
Whether that means the directors of PWC, Coutts and Barclays support ‘gay marriage’, Stonewall’s big new demand, and the consequent redefinition of marriage and it key concept of ‘consummation’, none of them have yet addressed.
Last year, Nationwide Building Society sponsored the whole awards dinner, but after being made of the ‘bigot’ award by Christian Voice, pulled out of any more financial involvement with the dinner (see links below).
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, commented today:
‘This was a very blessed time for us, and we pray that some of the 250 leaflets we handed out to the well-dressed employees of Coutts opposite Charing Cross Station and the 100 at Barclays have made people think about whether these banks’ relationship with Stonewall is a bit too close.
‘The security staff at Coutts and Barclays were dignified enough to stay inside and allow our witness to proceed uninterrupted. The same could not be said of PWC, whose bouncers tried to have us moved on. PWC has a back entrance in the private ‘More London’ complex, and its main entrance is in Abbey Street off Tooley Street near London Bridge Station.
Don’t cross the line! The division between the public highway in Tooley St and More London’s diagonal paving in Abbey St.
‘They came out to remonstrate and even called the ‘More London’ staff when we were on the public highway in Tooley Street. Clearly we struck a nerve, but the PWC staff were more willing than the Coutts folk or the Barclays customers and passers-by to take our leaflets. Four hundred were given out at PWC, a total for the day of 750.
‘We also had an encounter with the police when someone complained that the leaflets were insulting, abusive or threatening, along the lines of Section 5 of the Public Order ACt 1986. However, the police office who attended told us he saw that we were calm and reasonable, not causing an obstruction, and that there was nothing in the leaflet that could cause a reasonable person alarm or distress.
‘The leaflets also nailed five key lies told by the sodomy lobby and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ. All in all it was a very worthwhile exercise and we pray that our gracious God will open someone’s mind to the sad truth about homosexuality and turn at least one heart to the truth that Jesus Christ died to release everyone who belives in him from both the stain of sin and the power of sin.
‘May God be praised and glorified in the Lord Jesus’
Text of the Leaflets (Coutts and PWC are similar):
The five lies told by homosexual activists nailed by the Christian Voice leaflets:
‘(1) Homosexuals claim to be 10% of the population on the basis of the dishonest Kinsey Report. The true figure from proper academic research is around 1.5%.
‘(2) They claim they were born that way, refusing to accept the evidence of ‘ex-gay’ men and women who have turned their backs on the gay lifestyle and been released from their homosexual desires.
‘(3) They insist they just want to live their lives in peace, yet they hold intimidating gay pride parades and their paid activists campaign for laws to silence dissenting voices and force all of us to respect their immorality.
‘(4) They do all they can to avoid discussing the reality of their abusive, dangerous sexual practices, framing their arguments instead in terms of ‘human rights’.
‘(5) They pretend their lives are just the same as everyone else’s, despite academic studies revealing promiscuity levels and associated ill-health in the gay world unheard of even in today’s sex-obsessed heterosexual society.’
How a DDOS attack works – The attacker recruits thousands of slave computers to send simultaneous requests to the target website.
Yesterday, the Christian Voice website was off-line most of the day after coming under a massive cyber-attack. We apologise to our members and readers but there was nothing we could do.
Our web host reported at 8:22 am: ‘A few moments ago the Christian Voice website began to come under a massive DDOS attack which quickly crippled the server.
‘You’ve probably upset some people! We see these from time to time – it’s usually outspoken Christians who get targetted.
‘I’ve had to temporarily suspend it, as the attackers had sufficient resources to bring down the whole shared-hosting machine – if you were paying for dedicated hosting, i.e. only your website on a single machine belonging to you, you’d still be brought down.
‘The scale of the attack was the largest we’ve ever seen. When people have enough resources, they can bring Amazon down.
‘Sadly, launching powerful attacks is very cheap these days. You can go onto the Internet’s “underground” and hire the computing capacity of thousands of virus infected computers for a few minutes for a few dollars, and that’s enough to bring down a few servers.’
In the Police and Justice Act 2006, the United Kingdom specifically outlawed denial-of-service attacks and set a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. But the attack was from faked IP addresses which cannot be traced.
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, said today:
‘This attack on our website is encouraging. I don’t know whether it was Secularirists or Islamists we have upset beyond measure, but clearly someone out there thinks Christian Voice is doing such a great job we have to be disrupted. So by the grace of God we’ll stand up for Jesus Christ and for righteousness all the more.’
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Lord Carey, addressed the event, sponsored by the Coalition for Marriage
On the opening day of the Conservative Party Conference, about 900 people gathered in Birmingham Town Hall to listen to speeches opposing Government plans to introduce same-sex ‘marriage.’
Addresses were given by former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey of Clifton, David Burrowes MP and former Home Office minister Ann Widdecombe, in addition to other high profile members of the party.
In his speech Lord Carey warned that “We can be sure any move away from our traditional understanding of marriage is to put our society on a slippery slope where the unintended consequences could be shocking.”
Former defence secretary Dr Fox was also at the gathering and has warned that
“To ask the majority to change how they define marriage because of what a smaller number want will not be socially acceptable and is likely to undo a great deal of the tolerance that has actually come to the fore in recent decades and that would be a great pity.”
Outside the building, gay activists gathered to protest against the protest and to accuse those inside of being ‘bigots.’
Yesterday, Culture Secretary Maria Miller defended ‘gay marriage’ in her speech to the Conservative Conference itself, arguing that being homosexual is not a good enough reason to stop someone from participating in the institution of marriage – any more than we would stop someone getting married because of their ethnicity or disability. (To learn why this argument is faulty, read this Salvo article ‘Apples, Oranges & Gay Marriage.’)
PRAY: thank the Lord that the Government’s wicked plans are meeting with such opposition. A survey of constituency party chairmen was published earlier this week showed that seven out of 10 are opposed to Mr Cameron’s plans to change the law.
Antony Jenkins, Chief Executive of Barclays, is giving cash to Stonewall as they call their opponents ‘bigots’
Two banks and a leading firm of accountants are sponsoring a homosexual group as it goes about its annual name-calling exercise.
Barclays Bank, Coutts Bank and Price Waterhouse Cooper (PWC) are named as sponsors of Stonewall, the ‘gay rights’ lobby group, on an advertisement for this year’s awards dinner, which includes an award for ‘Bigot of the Year’.
The homosexual group’s awards dinner takes place at the Victoria and Albert Museum on Thursday 1st November 2012 and is likely to be the focus of a street witness.
The Earl of Home, Chairman of Coutts, which is sponsoring the Stonewall awards
But Stonewall are not satisfied with congratulating those who have advanced their cause. They have to insult their opponents.
So among the awards is an anti-award called ‘Bigot of the Year’ intended to insult and vilify people particularly opposed to the gay rights agenda. Those shortlisted this year are Christian politician Alan Craig, the Ugandan Ethics and Integrity Minister, Simon Lokodo, Lord Maginnis, Cardinal Keith O’Brien and Archbishop Philip Tartaglia.
Previous ‘nominees’ and ‘winners’ have included the Bishop of Hereford, Rt Rev Anthony Priddis, Northern Ireland politician Iris Robinson, journalist Jan Moir, Chris Grayling MP, the Earl of Devon, Lillian Ladele, Frederick Forsyth, A.A. Gill of The Sunday Times, Rt Rev Arthur Roche, hotelier Susanne Wilkinson, Melanie Phillips, Scottish entrepreneur Sir Brian Souter, Bill Walker, MSP and Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice.
In response, Alan Craig said: “The Bigot of the Year Award is a vicious name-calling Stonewall annual event that reflects more on the donor than the recipient.
Philip Powell is Chairman and Senior Partner of Price Waterhouse Coopers, sponsors of the Stonewall awards.
“By attempting to bully, intimidate, humiliate and generate hatred of individuals through the award, Stonewall fully justifies the Gaystapo tag which I gave the organisation and for which apparently I have been nominated.”
Mr Craig continued: “Nonetheless if I win the award over the other candidates and if Stonewall invite me, and permit me without harassment to offer a proper acceptance speech, I plan to attend their awards dinner and ceremony”.
Alan Craig’s gauntlet is unlikely to be taken up. In previous years Stonewall have never found the courtesy or the courage to invite to their dinner any of those shortlisted for ‘Bigot of the Year’.
Stephen Green added: ‘Bullies never like it when someone stands up to them. Or perhaps social intercourse is just not one of Stonewall’s strong points.’
Last year, the Nationwide Building Socety gave £60,000 to Stonewall for the dinner (which did not stop the greedy lobby group from charging £180 a ticket) and they gave £5,000 as a prize to the ‘Community Group of the Year’. Nationwide have pulled out of sponsoring any more Stonewall events following adverse publicity.
In an email, Mark McLane, Barclays Director of Global Diversity and Inclusion, said:
‘As part of what is a positive longstanding relationship with Stonewall we were approached to see if we would be willing to sponsor a category for the 2012 Awards, which we agreed to do – the Sports Personality of the Year – on the understanding that the awards are a celebration of diversity and positive impact in our communities.
‘I have recently been made aware of the inclusion of a ‘Bigot of the Year’ category in the awards. Let me be absolutely clear that Barclays does not support that award category either financially, or in principle and have informed Stonewall that should they decide to continue with this category we will not support this event in the future. To label any individual so subjectively and pejoratively runs contrary to our view on fair treatment, and detracts from what should be a wholly positively focused event.’
To date, Coutts and PWC have refused to condemn the ‘bigot’ award’.
Stephen Green said: ‘Barclays have not yet pulled out of Stonewall’s event this year despite their welcome condemnation of the ‘bigot’ award. They are in our view still associated with Stonewall’s name-calling. But the refusal of Coutts and PWC to condemn the ‘bigot’ award is quite staggering.’
Gigi Chao Sze-tsung (right) and her civil partner Sean Eav (left) – we honestly thought at first that the one on the left was her father!
One of Hong Kong’s richest men has offered a reward of nearly £40 million to the man who can woo his lesbian daughter, reports the Daily Telegraph.
Cecil Chao Sze-tsung, a property magnate, announced the HK$500 million bounty this week after reports that his daughter Gigi Chao, 33, a University of Manchester graduate, entered a civil partnership in France with Sean Yeung, her girlfriend of seven years, who also uses the name Sean Eav, on April 4.
The Facebook profile of Miss Chao, an architecture graduate, reads: “Helicopter pilot. Social entrepreneur. Creator of expressions in colour and emotion.” It also describes her as an executive director at her father’s Hong Kong-based property firm, Cheuk Nang.
Miss Chao has yet to comment on her father’s offer but her Facebook and Twitter accounts have been bombarded by people keen to become her friend. “No longer accepting Facebook friend requests … sorry,” she wrote.
“My father took a hands-off approach in parenting,” Miss Chao said of her father in a 2007 interview for HK Magazine. “I see him as a friend more than a father. My parents never pressure me with high expectations.”
Mr Chao made headlines in 2003 when his Rolls-Royce caught fire while he and his girlfriend were inside. The tycoon has never married and once claimed to have had “intimate relations” with about 10,000 women.
Miss Chao is one of three daughters born to Mr Chao by three different women.
“I don’t mind whether he is rich or poor. The important thing is that he is generous and kind-hearted,” Mr Chao told the South China Morning Post, describing reports about his daughter’s civil partnership as “false”.
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice said today:
“An emotionally distant father, having loose relationships with women other than his daughter’s mother, is a classic theme in lesbian lifestories. According to reports, Miss Chao’s father has sadly not been the sort of fatherly male role model who would inspire his daughter’s emotional confidence in men as a group.
“There are many testimonies of people who have walked away from the homosexual lifestyle and been released from same-sex attraction through the power of Jesus Christ. As the Bible says: ‘Delight thyself also in the LORD; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart.’ (Psalm 37:4) But that person has to want to change, or if you prefer, the Lord has to place that desire on their heart, and they must fix their hopes in the Saviour of mankind.
“So there is no question that it is do-able, but it is something that even £40,000,000 cannot buy.”
PRAY: For Gigi Chao, and for her father. May he turn from his philandering and she turn from her lesbianism by the grace of God and through the saving, healing power of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Find out how to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings (clicking on the link below does not commit you to join)
Raj Bhachoo, a Christian Voice member, was arrested, kept in a police cell for hours and charged with “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” under Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 following a complaint by the manageress during a leafleting exercise outside the Tesco store in Gravesend, Kent in January 2012
The case was due to be heard by Dartford Magistrates this morning. But on reviewing the evidence and recent legal decisions including that involving Sandown Free Presbyterian Church, the prosecuting barrister offered no evidence.
The magistrates duly dismissed the case.
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, was asked by the defence to give evidence in the case, but, for the second time in a case involving Mr Bhachoo, his evidence was in the event not required.
Mr Green also prepared expert evidence for a case in March of this year when Raj Bhachoo was acquitted after sending a highly critical email to the Stonewall lobby group. A key Stonewall witness failed to turn up in court and the case collapsed.
Michael Phillips, solicitor, represented Raj Bhachoo on both occasions.
Just a week ago, Mr Phillips represented two Christians from the Abort67 group, seeing all charges against them thrown out by magistrates in Brighton. Last February, Michael Overd faced a trial in Taunton after two homosexuals objected to his preaching. Mr Overd, who subsequently joined Christian Voice, was also acquitted.
In September 2006, Stephen Green was himself arrested, locked in the cells for four hours and charged under the same Section 5 by the South Wales Police Minorities Support Unit for handing out evangelistic leaflets at the homosexual Cardiff Mardi Gras. At the subsequent hearing, an embarrassed prosecutor dropped all charges.
Stephen Green said today: ‘Christians just keep winning these Section 5 freedom of speech cases. It is not against the law to preach against sodomy, to tell the public the facts about homosexual lifestyles, nor to display graphic images of the effects of abortion. These things might upset people, but they are not threatening, they are not abusive, they are not insulting and they are not against the law.
‘We actually need no change in the law, but we do need police forces and the Crown Prosecution Service to provide training to officers and prosecutors on the law and on their duty to protect people exercising their freedom of expression.
‘In the abortion case, the police officer who attended admitted in court that the only training he had ever had on the implications of freedom of speech was ten years ago.’
The rainbow diversity flag has had a welcome setback.
In a landmark vote, Australian MPs have overwhelmingly rejected a bill which would have legalised ‘gay marriage’ reports Agence France Press.
The House of Representatives voted down the bill to legalise marriage between same sex couples by 98 to 42, with Labour Prime Minister Julia Gillard and opposition conservative leader Tony Abbott both voting against it.
During the days of debate on the bill, one senator lost his parliamentary post after referring to sex with animals.
Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi asked what the next step would be if the government redefined marriage so that two people of the same sex could ‘marry’.
“The next step, quite frankly, is having three people or four people that love each other being able to enter into a permanent union endorsed by society,” he told the Senate.
Cory Bernardi
“There are even some creepy people out there… (who) say it is okay to have consensual sexual relations between humans and animals. Will that be a future step?”
Former Liberal Party leader Malcolm Turnbull described Mr Bernardi’s comments as “hysterical, alarmist, offensive”.
The Liberal leader Tony Abbott said Mr Bernardi offered to resign his position as his parliamentary secretaryand he had accepted.
Mr Abbott is said to be a staunch Catholic and opinion polls suggest he could become prime minister when an election is held next year.
“I’ve known Cory for a long time. He’s a decent bloke with strong opinions,” said Mr Abbott, but he said his comments had been ill-judged.
“They are views that I don’t share,” Abbott told reporters. “They are views which I think many people will find repugnant.”
Australia does not permit gay marriage, though some states allow civil unions.
Gay rights activists called the decision a “slap on the face,” ABC News reported.
Astonishingly, in view of her vote against gay marriage, Aussie premier Julia Gillard is supporting an Australian bid to host the 2014 homosexual rugby world cup – if anyone can believe such an event actually takes place.
Almighty God appears to think there is a link between sodomy and bestiality, as the book of Leviticus states:
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Lev 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
A red-faced Nick Clegg has had to withdraw remarks he was going to make branding opponents of gay marriage “bigots”.
A draft of his speech, circulated to the press in advance of Mr Clegg’s speech to be given to a gathering of homosexual activists last night, had the atheist Deputy Prime Minister saying:
“Continued trouble in the economy gives the bigots a stick to beat use with, as they demand we ‘postpone’ the equalities agenda in order to deal with ‘the things people really care about’.”
An hour later, aides were scrambling around trying to recall the press release, and releasing a sanitised version in which ‘the bigots’ was replaced by ‘some people’
The row brings to mind Gordon Brown’s ‘Bigotgate’ when he described a lifelong Labour supporter, Mrs Gillian Duffy, who happened to mention Eastern Europeans in an exchange on the economy, as ‘just a bigoted woman’.
At the reception, Nick Clegg said:
Contempt for ordinary people – Gordon Brown was embroiled in his own ‘Bigotgate’ scandal after an exchange on the economy and immigration with Labour supporter Gillian Duffy.
‘I am a little bit surprised to see cameras outside the gates for the slightly obscure reason that they expect me to use a word about opponents of gay marriage that I had no intention of using, would never use. It is not the kind of word that I would use.’
Really? Mr Clegg’s speech writers would not write in a word which they knew he would never use. And homosexual rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, among the guests at last night’s reception in central London, said: ‘Quite clearly, some people who oppose same-sex marriage do so because of personal prejudice and intolerance.’
Lord Carey of Clifton said:
‘There will be many Christians and non-Christians who will be highly offended to be called bigots. People who oppose same-sex marriages are doing so on the basis of deeply-held beliefs and we should not be treated in such a way.
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, said:
‘In a sense, we should be encouraged that Nick Clegg has considered resorting to name-calling, because people normally do that when they realise they have lost the argument. Marriage is God’s holy institution and man may not change its definition. Marriage involves love and committment, but at its heart is its sexual expression, being ‘one flesh’ as the Bible puts it. At the moment, a marriage must be conusmmated to be valid in law, and consummation involves an complete act of ordinary sexual intercourse.
‘Between them, a pair of homosexuals lack the full set of necessary equipment for that act. Mr Clegg has so far failed to offer the necessary redefinition of the key concept of consummation in a homosexual context. And any such redefinition will affect marriage for everyone. The Government have received 228,000 responses to their consultation, the majority of them against it, and they are blindly pushing on regardless.
‘Those in favour of ‘gay marriage’ say that if two people love each other they should be allowed to get married. Does that apply to a brother and a sister, or a uncle and his niece?’ Nick Clegg has failed to address that point as well. He and David Cameron have lost the argument and lost their own consultation.
‘The fact that they are still stubbornly set on pushing ahead with the destruction of marriage and their proposed use of insulting language shows a contempt for ordinary people as deep as that held by their predecessors.
‘The dictionary definition of bigot is ‘One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.’ Without wishing in any way to insult him, that sounds a fair description of Nick Clegg.’
A No 10 source said: “The prime minister is committed to getting gay marriage through by 2015.”
READ: Matt 19:4 And (Jesus) answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
PRAY: That God continues to sow confusion amongst the Government on this issue. Pray also that David Cameron and Nick Clegg repent and pull back from their ungodly position.
Members of "Pussy Riot" staged a foul-mouthed tirade in a Moscow Cathedral. George Soros put up money for it.
Members of “Pussy Riot” in the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour
Three members of a so-called ‘punk band’ called ‘Pussy Riot’ have each been jailed for two years by a court in Moscow for hooliganism motivated by religious hatred, over a protest in a cathedral, reports the BBC.
The foul-mouthed rant included a mock prayer on the altar of the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour of the Russian Orthodox Church in Moscow. The BBC have a video here.
Judge Marina Syrova said Maria Alyokhina, 24, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, 22, and Yekaterina Samutsevich, 29, had “crudely undermined social order”, offended the feelings of Orthodox believers and shown a “complete lack of respect” during their action in February.
Tolokonnikova, Alyokhina and Samutsevich say their “punk prayer” was a political act in protest against the Russian Orthodox Church leader’s support of President Vladimir Putin.
But Judge Syrova said they “committed hooliganism – in other words, a grave violation of public order,” and quoted prosecution witnesses as saying the act had been one of blasphemy, not politics.
Western liberals have sprung to the women’s defence. ‘Pussy Riot’ have garnered support from Paul McCartney, Madonna, Kate Nash, the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Sting, Peter Gabriel, Faith No More, Neil Tennant of the Pet Shop Boys, Patti Smith, The Beastie Boys, Zola Jesus, Jarvis Cocker, Pete Townshend, Peaches, Genesis, Courtney Love, Yoko Ono and Stephen Fry.
Mr Fry and his friends will not be pleased with another court ruling handed down in Moscow today.
Russian homosexual activist Nikolai Alexeyev alongside Britain’s Peter Tatchell, who contributed in the 1980’s to a book edited by a leading paedophile defending paedophilia.
Moscow City Court has upheld a ban on ‘gay pride’ marches in the Russian capital for the next 100 years. Russia’s best-known gay rights campaigner, Nikolay Alexeyev, had gone to court hoping to overturn Moscow City Council’s ban on homosexual parades, asking for the right to stage such parades for the next 100 years. He also opposes St Petersburg’s ban on spreading “homosexual propaganda”.
The Moscow city government argues that the gay parade would risk causing public disorder and that most Muscovites do not support such an event.
Alexeyev now intends to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg to argue that Moscow’s ban on gay pride marches – past, present and future – is unjust. The European Court of Human Rights has already told Russia to pay Alexeyev damages, but that does not appear likely to happen any day soon.
Scottish Parliament buildings in Holyrood, Edinburgh
Yesterday morning the Scottish Government announced that they would be presenting legislation to legalize gay ‘marriage’, following news that 74 out of a total of 129 MSP’s are in favour of the plans.
The policies to change the definition of marriage are expected to hit Scotland as early as next year. (Read yesterday’s BBC news report, ‘Gay marriage to be introduced in Scotland.’)
The Scottish National Party (SNP) has been the main party pushing for these changes, although the measure is supported by all of Scotland’s main political organizations.
The Scottish parliament came under pressure to change the definition of marriage from The Faith in Marriage group, a coalition which includes the United Reformed Church, Buddhists and the Pagan Federation. Gay rights groups like Stonewall Scotland, the Equality Network and Amnesty International have also been focusing attention on Scotland, realizing that any act implemented by the Scottish parliament could have ramifications for the UK Parliament, forcing them to fast-track similar plans for England and Wales.
Scotland’s deputy first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, summed up the current mood when she commented: “We are committed to a Scotland that is fair and equal, and that is why we intend to proceed with plans to allow same-sex marriage and religious ceremonies for civil partnerships. We believe this is the right thing to do.”
Not everyone agrees that this will be best for Scotland. The Herald newspapersaid that redefining marriage is fraught with legal difficulties and accused the Government of failing to do “its homework on the legal consequences”.
The paper concluded: “Religious beliefs which are central to the lives of many must be protected, not least by those who support the legalising of marriage between same-sex couples in the name of liberty. We must not replace one form of discrimination with another.”
Unlike the legislation proposed by the UK Parliament for England and Wales, which would only affect civil weddings, Scotland’s legislation would allow same-sex couples be ‘married’ in religious ceremonies provided they have the consent of a religious body. Holyrood has insisted that no church organization would be forced to participate, and MSP are looking to amend the Equality Act 2010 to ensure religious groups opposed to homosexuality have an opt-out.
Not everyone has been reassured by Government’s promises. Cardinal Keith O’Brien, leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland, said it should be up to the Scottish people since it raises “serious implications for freedom of belief and expression.”
Christian Voice has raised similar concerns, suggesting that promises to protect religious liberty are not to be trusted. In a recent interview with Robin Phillips, Phillips commented “The promises Government has made in this area are worth less than the paper they’re printed on, as MPs with a legal background and Church of England lawyers have understood almost from the outset.”
Muslim Reaction
The proposals have come at a great political cost since it means that the SNP will lose the support of Muslims throughout Scotland.
Bashir Maan, a spokesperson for the Glasgow’s Muslim community, commented: “We have made it clear to Nicola Sturgeon that we have been very pro-nationalist but if they go ahead with this we will not be happy. There are about five or six thousand Muslims living in her constituency and we hope that she will listen to us.”
Mr. Maan’s coments were echoed by Saleem Aslam, chairman of Taleem ul Islam mosque in Pollokshields, South Glasgow, who said: “Another government could get elected and abolish the opt-out or it could be challenged under human rights laws and then we are back to square one.”
“Running Scared”
The public has asked the Scottish government to allow a referendum in order to find out what the people of Scotland actually want. When they refused, a spokesman for the organization Scotland for Marriage commented: “The Equality Network is running scared of a referendum because they know they could lose the argument. Which just shows they couldn’t care less about ordinary people. They want to force their view of marriage on everyone else, whether people like it or not.”
He continued:
If they believe their own hype, if they believe their own polls, they should have the guts to put it to a vote. Their rejection of a referendum shows that, for all their talk, they know most people don’t agree with them… Redefining marriage will have massive knock-on affect in Scotland. Schools will be pressurised to teach gay marriage to kids…. Legal experts say the Scottish Government doesn’t have the power to protect churches from being sued over their support for traditional marriage.
Prayer and Action:
Thank God for the strong resistance on this issue. Pray that the church will stand up and fight for God’s sacred institution of marriage.
If you are in Scotland, Email your MSP – Email address here – to ask him/her to oppose ‘Gay Marriage’.
The Book of Common prayer assumes that marriage is the voluntary union for life of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others.
Last May, Stephen Green and Robin Phillips co-authored a briefing paper titled The Trivialisation of Matrimony: A Response to the Government Consultation Paper. Since then a number of questions have been raised about Government’s proposals and the effect it could have on the church. Below Robin Phillips fields some of the most common questions.
Q: What is the general climate of opinion about this issue?
A: Most people in England and Wales (the areas to which the changes will apply) are still adamantly against changing the definition of marriage. A ComRes poll found that 70% of the public are against the changes. There is also strong opposition within Government. The Prime Minister could be facing the biggest revolt among Tory members since 1990. We also know that thousands are refusing to renew their subscriptions to the Conservative party while some major donors have withdrawn their financial support. Now that the Church of England has made such a decisive stand, the public opposition can only increase.
Q: Can you tell us a bit about the Church of England’s involvement in this issue?
A: Last month Government’s three month long consultation on this issue was punctuated with a dramatic submission from the Church of England, in which the church warned that Government’s actions could lead to a historic stand-off between church and state. The submission suggested that the proposed reforms for England and Wales “would alter the intrinsic nature of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, as enshrined in human institutions throughout history.”
The church’s submission also warned that the proposals could accelerate a schism between the church and the state, culminating in the complete disestablishment of the Church of England and the removal of the Queen as Supreme Governor of the Church.
The Church of England is not known for overstatement so these warnings should be taken seriously. They come after church officials spent months consulting with lawyers on the ramifications of Government’s proposals. One of the chief concerns that arose out of this analysis is that Government will almost certainly be powerless to keep its pledge to limit same-sex ‘marriages’ to civil rather than religious ceremonies. The legal advice given to the Church of England has confirmed that once these proposals are put in place, equality legislation from the EU will kick in to make it illegal for the Church to provide wedding services to heterosexual couples and not to homosexual couples. That is why there is such concern.
The stand-off between Government and the church on this issue is unprecedented since the time of the Reformation nearly 500 years ago. Legal scholars and journalists alike have warned that it could involve “snipping the threads” of the delicate balance between Church and state.
Q: So do you have any idea what is driving the Prime Minister to push ahead with these plans in the teeth of public opinion?
A: According to Cameron himself, he is being motivated by his Christian beliefs. He recently commented, “I have come at this issue of equal marriage principally because I’m a Christian.” But this is indeed a strange sort of Christianity that makes him so eager to overhaul thousands of years of Christian practice and to risk the disenfranchisement of our nation’s established church!
A more realistic assessment is that Cameron is being driven by the desire to appear progressive and modern, the same principles he appealed to when arguing that we need to change the rules for the crown’s succession. Initially Cameron seems to have thought this would help the party in the next election be shedding what is perceived to be the Tory’s ‘toxic’ image. I don’t think he anticipated the strong backlash he would receive.
We also have to remember that the Prime Minister is under a lot of pressure from the liberal democrat component of his government, pushing the party further to the left than it has ever gone before.
Q: Presumably Cameron also wants to shoulder up to the homosexual lobby?
A: Well, that’s the funny thing. You see, before the Coalition Government introduced these proposals, very few people in the homosexual community were even lobbying for same-sex ‘marriage.’ A poll conducted by Catholic Voice in February found that out of 550 homosexual men, only 40% identified a change in marriage law as being a priority.
Even the homosexual lobby group, Stonewall, was not calling for it, though they required little persuading to jump on board the bandwagon. Even now, many leading gay rights activists have remained among Government’s fiercest critics. Alan Duncan, the first Conservative MP to come out as openly homosexual, is opposed to any attempt to redefine marriage. So is Labour MP Ben Bradshaw, who was the first Cabinet minister to enter into a civil partnership. Bradshaw commented, ‘This isn’t a priority for the gay community, which has already won equal rights with civil partnerships. This is pure politics.’ Gay journalist Andrew Pierce recently argued similarly, noting:
Mr Cameron seems to have learned nothing from the follies of the Labour government when it comes to imposing an equalities agenda on Britain’s leading faiths….
Ministers have ruled out extending civil partnerships, which became law in December 2005, beyond the gay community. So we gays will enjoy rights denied to heterosexuals. What an absurd state of affairs.
The truth is that no one has been able to explain to me the difference between gay marriage and a civil partnership. I have asked ministers and friends. None has an answer.
But I do. We already have gay marriage — it’s called civil partnership. Why can’t Mr Cameron just leave it there?
Q: Can Government be trusted when it promises to protect religious liberty?
A: The promises Government has made in this area are worth less than the paper they’re printed on, as MPs with a legal background and Church of England lawyers have understood almost from the outset.
The trajectory of what will happen if these proposals pass is pretty clear, and will almost certainly go something like the following.
First, Government will restrict same-sex weddings to civil ceremonies, ostensibly to protect the freedom of the church. In fact, Government will even go so far as it make it illegal for same-sex weddings to occur on religious premises.
The second step is that almost immediately, a same-sex couple will apply to be ‘married’ in the Church of England and, when they are refused, they will claim that their human rights have been violated. With the assistance of a pressure group like Liberty the couple will then appeal to the European Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg.
Step three is that the European court will rule that British law breaches equality legislation, since it allows service providers (in this case, the established church) to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.
Step four is that the European court will then instruct the Church of England to offer its services to all couples who ask, regardless of their gender.
When the fourth step in this process is reached, the Church of England will face a situation comparable to the Catholic adoption agencies that had to either compromise their beliefs or shut down. As Dr Sharon James, spokesperson from the Coalition for Marriage, warned, “once gay marriage is introduced, it won’t be the Government’s remit to say whether it can happen on religious premises or not because it will be the courts who decide any cases brought against individuals and places of religion.” She added: “If this happens we can see people with good conscience being taken to court because of their deeply held beliefs.”
Now in one sense the Home Office is right when it says “We have been clear that no religious organisation will be forced to conduct same-sex marriages as a result of our proposals.” The Home Office is doing just enough so that the European Court of Human Rights can do the rest, but when that happens they can claim it’s been taken out of their hands. Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone let the cat out of the bag in a BBC Radio 5 Live interview when she said, “it may be that [the issue of same-sex marriage in a place of religious worship] comes back another day.”
Q: But we don’t know for sure that the European Court of Human Rights will rule like that, do we? They may decide to respect religious freedom.
A: Actually we do know. As of last March, it’s no longer even speculation. In the case Gas and Dubois v. France, European judges made a landmark ruling which stated that governments are not required to introduce same-sex ‘marriage.’ However, they also said that if a government chooses to extend the definition of marriage to same-sex couples, then it would be a violation of human rights for homosexual couples seeking ‘marriage’ to be denied rights and privileges offered heterosexual couples.
There is just no way the European Court is going to sit by and allow one of their countries to sustain a two-tier system in which same-sex couples are denied access to a service (i.e., religious weddings) available to heterosexual couples.
Q: If it comes to that, what options does the Church of England have?
A: At that point, the Church of England wouldn’t have very many options outside of simply complying. That is why the Church is working so hard right now to make sure it doesn’t come to that.
One possible solution (although it is uncertain that even this would work) would be for the Church of England to cease acting as an organ of the state and simply offer weddings as a private organization. That option is currently being discussed by senior Anglican officials, although it could open up a chain of unintended consequences leading to the total disestablishment of the Church of England.
Q: Why’s that?
A: Well, because offering wedding and funeral services is central to the Church of England’s existence as an established church. These functions are central to the preservation of the parish system which lies at the heart of the Church’s integration in society. If the Church of England began offering weddings as merely a private organization, it would de facto be a private organization and it would become increasingly difficult to justify subsidizing the church with tax payer’s money. Also, people could begin to ask why the Queen is head of this private organization and not other private organizations.
Q: Christian Voice has written before about the importance of common law. Do the proposals to change the definition of ‘marriage’ relate to that at all?
A: That’s a great question, but before I plunge into the answer, it may be helpful to briefly explain what we mean by common law. I always go back to the legal scholar William Blackstone (1723–1780) who, is magisterial Commentaries on the Laws of England, talked about common law as being the lex non scripta (unwritten laws). The reason he called them unwritten is because “their original institution and authority are not set down in writing, as acts of parliament are, but they receive their binding power, and the force of laws, by long and immemorial usage, and by their universal reception throughout the kingdom.” These traditions and precedents that make up common law form the backbone of the British constitution and are vital for the preservation of our nation’s legal integrity.
Now to call these laws “unwritten” may be misleading for, as Blackstone reminds his readers, such laws are indeed recorded “in the records of the several courts of justice, in books of reports and judicial decisions, and in the treatises of learned sages of the profession…” What the term ‘unwritten’ connotes (and this is central) is that the binding authority of common law does not depend specifically on Parliamentary statutes, even though much of it has been codified by Parliament or by the courts. Rather, the binding authority of common law derives from the authoritative role played by precedent within the British constitution.
The common law is not something that can be dismissed at a whim for the sake of political expediency. As Blackstone again pointed out, “precedents and rules must be followed, unless flatly absurd or unjust: for though their reason be not obvious at first view, yet we owe such a deference to former times as not to suppose they acted wholly without consideration.”
It seems strange even having to make such an obvious point, but the traditional understanding of marriage is a foundational pillar of common law. The common law understanding of marriage, assumed by the Book of Common Prayer, was expressed in the Church of England’s recent submission when it asserted that marriage is “essentially the voluntary union for life of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others.”
This understanding of marriage goes beyond merely being part of the common law; in an important sense, marriage is the very foundation of common law. This is because marriage keeps alive the insolvable between family, church and state. Once marriage goes, all of our common law becomes potentially compromised. This is precisely why the Church of England has argued that our entire system could begin unravelling if marriage is redefined. It could precipitate a chain of unintended consequences culminating in the removal of the Queen as the head of the Church of England.
The Anti-Christian Co-op Bank is taking over a large number of Lloyds TSB bank accounts and all Cheltenham & Gloucester customers, forcing Christian customers to look around for some of the alternatives listed in this article.
The branches that will be going over to the Co-op Bank will not be initially be branded as Co-op banks. Such branches will be called TSB Banks as opposed to Lloyds TSB Banks (and will not have the name Co-op included in the title). If the logos and branding and name are similar, the less observant could easily give their trade by mistake to the Co-op and not to Lloyds TSB. The Financial Times reports that the move is not good news for savers.
But the main concern about the Co-op bank itself is the way it discriminates strongly against those Christians who take their faith seriously. See: http://www.repentuk.com/coop.html
Despite their ‘fair trade’ policies, they are clearly not the bank for Christians, nor for that matter the bank for anyone who does not support ‘gay rights.’
Those who will be affected by the Lloyds TSB changes will receive letters through the post advising them if their branch is one of those to be transferred. Customers may then object to the changes and demand that their account is transferred to a Lloyds TSB branch rather than remain with the branch that will automatically become a Co-op owned bank and be called TSB bank. The branches concerned are listed here, (confusingly, in the main list, in order of address not town):
Christians disillusioned with the High Street banks in general have the option of the Reliance Bank for ordinary banking. They are owned by the Salvation Army and 75% of their profits go to the Army’s work among the poor and dispossessed. http://www.reliancebankltd.com/reliancebank.nsf/pghome?openpage
For savings, there is also the Kingdom Bank, owned by the Assemblies of God, Britain’s largest Pentecostal denomination. http://www.kingdombank.co.uk/Funds deposited by savers are lent to Christian projects for the advancement of the Gospel.
2Cor 6:17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
Gal 6:10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
Show the Co-op who’s boss! Join Christian Voice today!
The awards were mainly to applaud people who had advanced the homosexual cause in some way.
Among the awards was an anti-award called ‘Bigot of the Year’ intended to insult and vilify a number of people particularly opposed to the gay rights agenda. Those shortlisted were the respected Sir Brian Souter, Bishop Arthur Roche, Bill Walker MSP, journalist Melanie Phillips, who was the eventual ‘winner’, and Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice.
Stonewall did not even have the courtesy to invite any of those shortlisted for this ‘Bigot of the Year’ award to the dinner. Perhaps they were afraid someone might answer back – bullies never like it when someone stands up to them. Or perhaps social intercourse is just not one of their strong points.
Christian Voice members gave out leaflets about Nationwide’s involvement with Stonewall to the society’s members attending the AGM
The Nationwide’s position is that they are ‘not supportive of the vilification of individuals’ and that they ‘have made this clear to Stonewall’. They have pulled out of sponsoring future events of this kind. However, the Society remains as a member of Stonewall’s ‘Diversity Champions’ programme in which they go a lot further than merely treating all of their employees equally, to which no-one could object. Click ‘Sexual Orientation’ on the Nationwide link here.
Stephen Green is a Nationwide member and went along to the AGM in Manchester on 19th July 2012 to ask the Nationwide Board of Directors the following questions:
(1) How much of your members’ money did you vote to the Stonewall awards dinner?
(2) Did you know the nature of the event you were sponsoring, and were the names of all the awards disclosed to you in advance?
(3) Which Nationwide Board members attended the Stonewall awards dinner?
(4) Whether Nationwide support Stonewall’s aim of the redefinition of marriage?
(5) When will you apologise for bank-rolling an event which insulted and humiliated not just a humble Nationwide member like me, but respected public figures? and
(6) When will you be big enough simply to say sorry to the individuals concerned?
Graham Beale, Nationwide Chief Executive, supplied the answers:
(1) They gave £60,000 to Stonewall for the dinner (which did not stop the greedy lobby group from charging £180 a ticket) and they gave £5,000 as a prize to the ‘Community Group of the Year’ which turned out to be ‘UK Black Pride’.
(2) They didn’t find out the names of the awards until afterwards (which seems rather inept – and they must have known the name of the Community Group award in order to provide the prize).
(3) No Nationwide board members attended (very wise).
(4) Nationwide has no corporate position on the redefinition of marriage (unlike Starbucks and Ben & Jerry’s – but more of them at another time).
Gay ‘marriage’ supporter Ellen DeGeneres was made the spokesperson for JCP
J.C. Penney stock has crashed following news of gay ‘marriage’ support.
Since February when the company made homosexual activist Ellen DeGeneres its new spokesperson, their stock has dropped 50%, achieving what is known as ‘junk’ status.
In February stock was at $41.32/share, while this month it is selling at $20.02/share.
The destruction of the company is attributable both to prayer and to the boycott campaign among those who were offended by the company’s pro-homosexual posturing, particularly the American Family Association’s advocacy group OneMillionMoms.com.
In February Monica Cole, director of OneMillionMoms, predicted that Penney’s campaign might backfire since only an estimated 1.7 percent of the population is homosexual. (See ‘Family group challenges retailer’s use of lesbian icon.’)
“Rather than build on the faith-based traditions of founder James Cash Penney,” the AFA commented in a press release yesterday, “Johnson has abandoned family values and taken the company into a financial tailspin by embracing social activism. Families are the backbone of Penney’s existence. As long as it pushes homosexual marriage, families will go elsewhere.”
The AFA press release gave the following snapshot of the company since its same-sex ‘marriage’ crusade:
February 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
JCP announces Ellen DeGeneres as their new spokesperson.
JCP launches catalog ad featuring two “gay” moms.
JCP launches catalog ad featuring two “gay” dads.
JCP stock rated “junk” by S&P. JCP fires marketing exec.
Stock price: $41.32
Stock price falls to $35.67
Stock price falls to $25.83
Stock price falls to $20.02
Join Christian Voice today and stand up for righteousness in the land:
Christian Voice Press Release – 10.40 hrs 14th July 2012
The Nationwide Building Society is to be challenged over its association with the Stonewall ‘Bigot of the Year’ award at its AGM this coming Thursday.
Stephen Green, who was shortlisted for the award last November along with Sir Brian Souter, Bishop Arthur Roche, Bill Walker MSP and the eventual ‘winner’ journalist Melanie Phillips, plans to put down a question at the AGM, to be held in Manchester at 11am at the Bridgewater Hall in Lower Mosley Street, Manchester, M2 3WS. Doors open at 10am and any Nationwide member with at least £100 in savings or owed on a mortgage can attend.
‘Nationwide sponsored the 2011 Stonewall awards dinner, which did not stop the greedy lobby group charging £180 a ticket (£150 plus VAT). I intend to ask how much money Nationwide gave, whether they knew the nature of the event they were sponsoring, whether they support the redefinition of marriage, one of Stonewall’s key aims, and when they plan to apologise for bank-rolling an event which insulted and humiliated not just a humble Nationwide member like me, but respected public figures.
‘In particular, Sir Brian was awarded a knighthood by Her Majesty in June 2011, just months before he was vilified by Stonewall.
‘Nationwide have said they are “not supportive of the vilification of individuals” and that they “have made this clear to Stonewall”. They have pulled out of sponsoring future events, while remaining ‘members’ of Stonewall. No-one on the Nationwide Board of Directors has yet been man enough to apologise to any of the individuals concerned, and I think they should.
‘Of course, not one of those shortlisted was invited by Stonewall to attend, which was a grave discourtesy. But as “Bigot of the Year” is merely an attempt by Stonewall to bully and humiliate someone in public life, Stonewall won’t ever find the courage to invite those shortlisted for fear that the winner might tell the assembled gays a few home truths.
‘It seems homosexuality can only advance by insulting and browbeating its opponents. But I hope the Nationwide experience will send a message through the world of business that the Stonewall awards dinner is a toxic brand.’
ENDS
For further information, phone Stephen Green on 07931 490050.
Note: You can send an email to the Nationwide Chief Executive, Graham Beale:
The six-colour rainbow ‘diversity’ flag being carried in today’s London ‘Gay Pride’ parade.
A scaled-down version of Gay Pride, without the usual motorised floats, snaked through London earlier today, funded by Tesco and the Mayor of London. BBC Report here.
Homosexual employees of Tesco and KPMG took part in the parade, while bankers were represented by Barclays and Lloyds TSB. The prison service, the police, and the environment agency were among those representing Her Majesty’s Government. Amnesty International also took part.
The parade passes down Whitehall in central London, near to government offices and 10 Downing Street
The Stonewall lobby group is working overtime trying to present homosexuals as normal people whose love should be recognised by allowing them to ‘marry’, but even in today’s scaled-back event, sex and bizarre forms of sexual expression were to the fore as usual.
The parade featured drag queens, people with their backsides on show, men in what we understand is ‘bondage gear’, sexually-charged costumes, the hostility of Stonewall and Queer Resistance, under-age participants and people whose tee-shirts said: ‘I’ll bet you’re thinking about sex’.
It was an in-your-face offensive onslaught of aggression, intolerance, depravity and division designed to intimidate and assault the mind.
It comes as no surprise that people with such a slender hold on morality should also be incapable of financial stability.
Gay-friendly organisations and individuals failed to come up with money they had promised the organisers. Pride London admitted the funding shortfall which led to the scaling-back of the parade had arisen “not because we have a lack of pledged funds, but because we were unable to collect enough funds from those pledged to provide the strict financial assurances”.
Aggressive and intolerant: ‘Queer Resistance’ activists leave London’s Trafalgar Square in today’s ‘pride’ parade.
It was those financial shortages which led to a panic last month culminating in the Greater London Authority, the Metropolitan Police, Westminster Council, London Fire Brigade and Transport for London asking, for the first time, for “concrete assurances” that Pride London had the cash to pay the upfront costs associated with the event.
Despite £100,000 of public money from the Mayor of London’s office and £30,000 from Tesco and an offer of support from Diageo, the makers of Smirnoff vodka, the event in its original form became ‘unsalvageable’.
As a result, the parade was scaled down to a ‘protest’ march in which floats could not be allowed, the start time was brought forward by two hours and street parties were banned.
Participants in this year’s London ‘Gay Pride’. They and the children who saw them need our prayers.
Normal people will be shocked and saddened that fellow human beings, made in the image of God, could fall so low – and that certain of our politicians encourage them. Earlier in the day, our youth worker helped with the giving out of evangelistic leaflets near the start of the parade. Please pray for souls to be saved from hell through that witness.
Please pray also for the many children who took part in the parade and viewed it from the pavement. May the Lord heal and protect them and forgive their parents for assaulting young minds with such images as we have seen.
Join Christian Voice today and stand up for righteousness in the land:
