Christians in Iraq have been forced to flee Mosul with nothing but the clothes they wore after the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) issued this statement to Christians: convert to Islam, pay a tax, or die.
Zaid Qreqosh Ishaq, 27, fled from Mosul with his family after receiving ISIS’ ultimatum.
“We had to go through an area where they had set up a checkpoint,” he said. ISIS militants “asked us to get out of the car. We got out. They took…our things, our bags, our money, everything we had on us.”
They took refuge at the St. Joseph Church in the Kurdish city of Irbil, but they may be forced to move on as the violence follows them.
Nawzad Hadi, Irbil’s governor, pledged to protect Christians and other minority groups fleeing Isis. Around two million refugees from Iraq and Syria call Irbil home.
France offered refuge to Christians fleeing from Iraq and ISIS.
“We are providing aid to displaced people fleeing from the threats,” France’s foreign and interior ministers said in a joint statement. “We are ready, if they wish, to facilitate their asylum on our soil.”
Another Christian from Mosul, Noel Ibrahim, said that while he was fleeing with his family a group of ISIS members stopped them and stole cash and gold from the women.
“One of the gunmen told us, ‘You can leave now, but do not ever dream of returning to Mosul again,” Ibrahim said.
ISIS told Christians in a statement: “We offer them three choices: Islam; the dhimma contract—involving payment of the jizya; if they refuse this they will have nothing but the sword.”
The dhimma is a historic contract that says any non-Muslims living in a Muslim country who refuse to convert to Islam must pay the jizya tax if they wish to ensure their safety.
ISIS believes they have the right to make this demand because in June they declared a caliphate, an Islamic state ruled by one leader.
The Muslim jihadists have since converted churches into mosques and confiscated the homes and properties of Christians.
In order to know which properties they are confiscating, the jihadists have been marking Christians’ homes with the letter N for “Nassarah,” the term used for Christians in the Koran.
Muslims spray paint the houses of Christians in order to know which houses to confiscate.
Patriarch Louis Soko, one of the most senior Christian clerics in Iraq, said that “for the first time in the history of Iraq, Mosul is now empty of Christians.” Approximately 10,000 Christians have fled Mosul after Isis took control in early June.
Once home to a thriving Christian population, Iraq now has around 35,000 Christians as compared to the 60,000 that lived there before 2003. This number began to decline in 2003 when the U.S. invaded Iraq.
Pope Francis, along with the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki, have pleaded for help from the U.S. for these Christians, but President Barack Obama and other Western leaders have remained silent on the issue.
Among other travesties, ISIS destroyedthe Biblical prophet Jonah’s tomb, which is located in Mosul. They allegedly put dynamite around the tomb and detonated it by remote control.
By destroying Jonah’s tomb, one of the last physical traces of Iraq’s Christian heritage, the members of ISIS are directly attacking the Christian faith.
Mosul is the second-largest city in Iraq and partially rests on the site for the ancient city of Ninevah, the ancient capital of Assyria and the setting of Jonah’s story.
Isis issueda similar statement in February to the city of Raqqa in Syria. They told Christians to pay half an ounce (14g) of pure gold in order to secure their safety.
The Islamic State group says it will continue its offensive until it reaches Baghdad, although its progress seems to have slowed after taking over Iraq’s Sunni areas.
To learn more about ISIS, watch the brief video below
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.
The Government wants to compel all schools in England to ‘actively promote’ homosexual and transsexual rights, even in schools with a religious ethos.
The Proposed New Independent School Standards are a politically-correct response to the recent ‘Trojan Horse’ scandal. Officials at the Department for Education have taken the opportunity provided by extremism in some Birmingham schools to insist that sodomy and transgender rights should be actively promoted.
As the Proposal says: ‘independent schools are subject to the Equality Act 2010, the only remedy directly provided by that Act is through the Courts; the new standards would allow the Department to take regulatory action against the school for failing to meet them.’
The consultation on The Proposed New Independent School Standards, which would apply to private schools, academies and free schools, closes on Monday 4th August.
For schools run by local education authorities the Government say they will change OFSTED inspection standards to reflect the same position.
The Proposal (at paragraph 1.1c, speaks of ‘fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance for those with different faiths and beliefs; and encourage students to respect other people, with particular regard to the protected characteristics set out in the Equality Act 2010;’
But of course the Equality Act 2010 includes ‘gender reassignment’ and ‘sexual orientation’ alongside age, sex, disability, race, religion or belief. A better way of encouraging extremism than forcing Muslim schools to promote transsexuality, sodomy and lesbianism can hardly be imagined.
The Proposal states, at paragraph 3.2.2::
‘The proposed changes to Part 2 are aimed at making it clear to independent schools that the proprietor must actively promote the fundamental British values that are set out in section 1.1(c) above and that schools must actively promote the specified principles, including furthering tolerance and harmony between different cultural traditions and encouraging respect for democracy. A minimum approach, for example putting up posters on a notice board and organising an occasional visit to places of worship would fall short of ‘actively promoting’. Schools will be expected to focus on, and be able to show how their work with pupils is effective in embedding fundamental British values. ‘Actively promote’ also means challenging pupils, staff or parents expressing opinions contrary to fundamental British values.’
It goes on to say
‘The new requirement for schools to actively promote principles which encourage respect for persons with protected characteristics (as set out in the Equality Act 2010) is intended to allow the Secretary of State to take regulatory action in various situations: for example … failure to address homophobia…’
Schools will be obliged to challenge the views of parents if they are against “British values” as defined to include the promotion of politically correct groups.
There are stringent new rules on religious tolerance which will mean Christian children being forced to visit mosques, Muslim children to visit Hindu temples, and so on.
Independent schools will have to show Stonewall propaganda videos.
U.S. President Barack Obama signed an executive order last week preventing all federal contractors from discriminating against employees based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
Two chairman from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have denouncedan executive order from President Barack Obama, saying that the order “is unprecedented and should be opposed.”
President Obama’s 21 July executive order prevents federal government contractors from discriminating against people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. This order offers no exemption for religious organizations, despite many religious groups asking Obama to include one in the order.
Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore, Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty, and Bishop Richard J. Malone of Buffalo, Chairman of the Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth, said the following in an official statement:
“In the name of forbidding discrimination, this order implements discrimination. With the stroke of a pen, it lends the economic power of the federal government to a deeply flawed understanding of human sexuality, to which faithful Catholics and many other people of faith will not assent. As a result, the order will exclude federal contractors precisely on the basis of their religious beliefs.”
The bishops’ concern is that this order “ignores the inclination/conduct distinction in the undefined term ‘sexual orientation.’” Because of this, employers could be turned away from receiving a federal contract if their religious beliefs object to any extra-marital sexual activity.
This order could preventChristian organizations from applying for federal contracts to fund their charity and relief programs.
“If you hold that certain sexual practices are immoral, there is a good chance you probably will be disqualified from contracts,” said Melissa Swearingen, adviser and spokeswoman for the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).
Swearingen, who said that the President’s lack of religious exemption was “very disappointing and hurtful,” also sees this as evidence of the Obama administration’s lack of regard for the concerns of his religious supporters.
“We definitely think the administration is on the wrong side of history. It seems they are intentionally discriminating against people of religious faith in the name of nondiscrimination.”
This Executive Order, which will go into effect early next year, comes after months of lobbying by homosexual groups.
President Obama called the order “extraordinary progress” for LGBT rights and hailed it as a bringer of fairness to America’s citizens. He told a White House gathering: “Thanks to your passion and advocacy and the irrefutable rightness of your cause, our government – the government of the people, by the people and for the people – will become just a little bit fairer.”
At a White House signing ceremony, Obama told advocates that he believed in the “irrefutable rightness of [their] cause” and declared that “America’s federal contracts should not subsidize discrimination against the American people.”
Vice President Joe Biden essentially said that gay rights override the beliefs of everyone else. In remarks to the Associated Press, Biden declared, “I don’t care what your culture is…Inhumanity is inhumanity. Prejudice is prejudice is prejudice.”
Rev Barry Lynn, Executive Director for American United for Separation of Church and State, said that Obama made the “right call” by not allowing religious exemption to his Executive Order. Lynn said in a statement:
“Faith-based groups that tap the public purse should play by the same rules as everyone else and not expect special treatment…No forms of discrimination should be supported with the taxpayer dime, period.”
Obama might have published this order sooner, but he was waiting to see if Congress would pass the more comprehensive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would have prevented discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity for people that work for private businesses, nonprofits, and government agencies.
ENDA cleared the U. S. Senate in November, but could not get past the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. So Obama took matters into his own hands, sayingthat it was “time to address this injustice for every American.”
The ENDA legislation contained a religious exemption, but the USCCB declaredit too limiting. However, a group of 14 faith leaders asked for a similar provision in the executive order. They said in a letter to Obama that an executive order without a religious exemption could “significantly and substantively hamper the work of some religious organizations that are best equipped to serve in common purpose with the federal government.”
Vice President and Senior Counsel of the Thomas More Society, Peter Breen, believes that Obama’s executive order should have been decided by Congress. While directly applying to federal employers and contractors, this order, according to Breen, could become a “slippery slope.”
“This does appear to be laying the foundation for further regulation on the issue of homosexual employees and on transgendered employees,” Breen said.
Eric Kniffin, an attorney with Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP who has litigated religious-liberty cases, believes that the recent Hobby Lobby case ruling instigated Obama’s not providing a religious exemption.
“There is a huge blow-back to Hobby Lobby, and I think this was one way of President Obama being able to show his supporters, ‘I’m going to deliver despite the court’s ruling,’” Kniffin said.
Kniffen also said that the Executive Order “continues the Obama administration’s efforts of narrowing religious liberty to internal ecclesial matters: freedom to worship, but not to practice and express ideas in the public square.”
“Basically, if you employ and you serve people of your own faith, then you can preserve your rights,” Kniffin asserted. “But when you engage in the public square, then you have to play by the same rules that govern everyone else. Wherever the administration thinks it can narrow religious liberty, it does so. Obviously, this is a First Amendment right, and people are accustomed to this right.”
Obama’s Executive Order adds to President Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1965 directive that prohibits employers and contractors from discriminating based on “race, color, religion, sex or national origin.” In 2002, George W. Bush made the amendment that allowed religious employers to favor members of their own religion for employment, which Obama’s order retained.
24,000 companies with 28 million workers, or one-fifth of the U.S. workforce, will be affected by this order, despite many federal contractors already having provisions that prohibit anti-gay discrimination.
Approximately 14 million workers will now get protection from employers who currently do not have nondiscrimination policies, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA School.
The fundamental issue in this case is that the Obama administration is equating race, something a person cannot change, to sexual lifestyle choices.
It would appear that the Obama administration wants to tell America’s Christian citizens who they are allowed to hire and how they must run their business. Americans who want to live our lives according to Biblical beliefs now have one more obstacle put in their way.
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.
The terrible Malaysian airline disaster has focused attention on the 20th International AIDS Conference in Melbourne, Australia. After reports that over a hundred activists were on the tragic plane bound for the Conference, it turns out that there were just six.
But what of the conference, which is running as we go to press? Is it merely a symposium for good-hearted people who want to develop medicines to combat HIV and AIDS? Well, no, it isn’t. It is also a grindingly right-on campaigning forum advancing special rights for homosexuals, drug abusers and prostitutes.
Aung San Suu Kyi has allowed her name to be attached to the amoral Melbourne Declaration
The Declaration opens with a pretentious nod to the Animist Australian Aborigines:
‘We gather in Melbourne, the traditional meeting place of the Wurundjeri, Boonerwrung, Taungurong, Djajawurrung and the Wathaurung people, the original and enduring custodians of the lands that make up the Kulin Nation, to assess progress on the global HIV response and its future direction, at the 20th International AIDS Conference, AIDS 2014.’
The Declaration begins by claiming ‘that non-discrimination is fundamental to an evidence-based, rights-based and gender transformative response to HIV and effective public health programmes’. If it going to be ‘rights-based’ and to mess around with gender roles, one supposes that the elimination of discrimination, or of making any moral judgments at all, must be fundamental.
It then states that ‘nobody should be criminalized or discriminated against because of their gender, age, race, ethnicity, disability, religious or spiritual beliefs, country of origin, national status, sexual orientation, gender identity, status as a sex worker, prisoner or detainee, because they use or have used illicit drugs or because they are living with HIV.’
So Governments should not pass laws against prostitution or using illicit drugs? ‘Illicit’ means ‘forbidden by law, rules, or custom’. Drugs are ‘illicit’ because they are illegal. If you do something illegal you are criminalised.
Dr Joep Lange died in the Malaysian aircraft disaster.
The Declaration affirms everyone’s right to treatment, but spoils it by clothing it in terms of ‘social justice, equality, human rights’ which can mean anything.
In fact, for the International AIDS Conference, it means a sexual and – taken with the call to decriminalise currently illicit drugs – a drug-crazed free-for-all:
‘In over 80 countries’, it moans, ‘there are unacceptable laws that criminalize people on the basis of sexual orientation. All people, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people are entitled to the same rights as everyone else. All people are born free and equal and are equal members of the human family’.
Uganda’s President Museveni recently signed a law to protect young people from homosexual propaganda.
Yes, they are, but if they break the law they need to be brought to justice. Would the Melbourne signatories complain about laws that criminalise people on the basis that they steal, or murder, or bear false witness, or deliberately infect others, or have sexual relations with children? It is hard not to wonder whether they might.
‘Governments must repeal repressive laws and end policies that reinforce discriminatory and stigmatizing practices that increase the vulnerability to HIV, while also passing laws that actively promote equality’, they say. No, they must keep in place and enforce laws which protect children from predatory homosexuals, particularly, in the developing world, from those from rich Western nations on the look-out for exotic children to corrupt for a couple of dollars.
The Melbourne signatories want to shut up politicians like Uganda’s President Museveni and Nigeria’s President Goodluck Jonathan who speak about decency and Biblical morality:
‘Decision makers must not use international health meetings or conferences as a platform to promote discriminatory laws and policies that undermine health and wellbeing.’ Perish the thought that any challenging view should ruffle the feathers of AIDS activists.
Zambia’s Youth Alive programme would lose funding for opposing the distribution of condoms.
And they are very keen to keep as much project funding as they can in the hands of politically- correct people like them:
‘The exclusion of organisations that promote intolerance and discrimination including sexism, homophobia, and transphobia against individuals or groups, from donor funding for HIV programmes.’
Church-based programmes may find it difficult in future to offer their care and expertise to those in need because the Melbourne Declaration, so keen on non-discrimination, wants to discriminate against them:
‘All healthcare providers must demonstrate the implementation of non-discriminatory policies as a prerequisite for future HIV programme funding.
‘Restrictions on funding, such as the anti-prostitution pledge and the ban on purchasing needles and syringes, must be removed as they actively impede the struggle to combat HIV, sexually transmitted infections, and hepatitis C among sex workers and people who inject drugs.’
The Melbourne people refuse to concede that those who would crack down on prostitution, refuse to distribute condoms and ban the sale of needles to drug addicts are doing it out of good-hearted concern for society at large and trying to protect those who might get caught up in destructive practices.
There is only one way of looking at the world in the Melbourne Declaration and it is an amoral, Western liberal godless way, with avarice clothed in a veneer of altruism. The Melbourne Declaration is not just a recipe for moral degeneration, it is an anti-Christian, self-righteous, self-serving and self-absorbed recipe for moral degeneration.
It is a pity that it has taken an air disaster and the loss of so many lives to bring it to light.
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.
The World Humanist Congress is meeting in Oxford from 8-10th August 2014.
The Congress meets every three years, bringing together activists from over forty countries under the auspices of the International Humanist and Ethical Union. Being ‘ethical’ is important to humanists, because they have constantly to repel charges that without God, they only have their own prejudices to base their ‘ethics’ upon.
This year, the British Humanist Association (‘BHA’) is hosting the World Humanist Congress. They are bringing together no fewer than seventy-seven speakers, from as far afield as Switzerland, America, Australia, India, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Uganda and Greece. The speakers are headed by humanist philosopher A C Grayling, writer Taslima Nasrin, Philip Pullman, Author of ‘His Dark Materials’, and Nigerian writer Wole Soyinka.
Other speakers include Jim Al-Khalili OBE, President of the BHA, Labour Party Peer Joan Bakewell DBE, Richard Dawkins, who is Vice-President of BHA, PZ Myers, Associate professor of biology at the University of Minnesota Morris, who describes himself as ‘A godless liberal biologist’, Peter Tatchell, and Prof Peter Atkins, Roy Brown of the pro-abortion International Foundation for Population and Development.
BBC Crimewatch presenter Nick Ross
Also speaking are Professor Ted Cantle, London Assembly member Tom Copley AM, Andrew Copson, who is Chief Executive of BHA, former RC chaplain Catherine Dunphy, Liz Lutgendorff, Chair of the Conway Hall Ethical Society, author Zoe Margolis, Kerry McCarthy, MP for Bristol East, Maryam Namazie, Maajid Nawaz, the highly-paid co-Founder of Quilliam, in receipt of government grants to counter Islamic extremism, Prof Richard Norman, founder-member of the Humanist Philosophers Group and Vice-President of the British Humanist Association, journalist and broadcaster Nick Ross, and Guardian columnist Zoe Williams.
A number of speakers also have links to the National Secular Society, which is slightly more extreme even than BHA. Philip Pullman is a ‘honorary associate’ of NSS as is Professor Cantle, Richard Dawkins, Nick Cohen, Maryam Namazie and Maajid Nawaz.
According to the WHC website, P Z Myers ‘is an outspoken critic of creationism and intelligent design (for which he has “nothing but contempt”, saying that it is “fundamentally dishonest”)’. Prof Myers was featured in Ray Comfort’s video ‘Evolution vs God‘, trying in vain to think of evidence for evolution and claiming that human beings are fish.
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.
A plan to serve up halal meals to Muslim inmates in a French prison has been dropped, reports Associated Press.
The council of state said yesterday (23rd July 2014) that providing Halal meat at Saint-Quentin-Fallavier prison in Grenoble, eastern France, was impractical “owing to its financial cost and high needs for organization.” That view was upheld by the Council of State on 16th July 2014, which is the highest court in France, after the Court of Appeal had directed the state to provide such meals in March.
France’s Justice Minister Christiane Taubira also argued the plan would infringe France’s robust rules on secularism that ban religious expression in public places. France’s highest appeals court will have the final say.
The plan — which could have proved a test case — was being considered after the request of a Muslim inmate last November.
The French decision is in marked contrast to that of the Prison Service in Britain (see below), where Muslims have become so used to halal food, they are suing because pork DNA was found in it.
HARASSMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS
France has the largest Muslim population in western Europe, estimated at some 5 million. An investigation last year found evidence of Islamic oppression and harassment against non-Muslim inmates in French prisons.
The French magazine Valeurs Actuelles obtained a secret French government document about “proselytism in custody”. Written in 2011, it describes how Islam has taken over the French prison system. Non-converts are subject to pressure, insults, threats and violence. They are marginalised in day-to-day prison life.
BRITAIN SUED OVER PORK IN PRISON HALAL PIES
The situation seems little better in British prisons. The BBC reported in 2010 that gangs of Muslim prisoners were becoming an increasingly powerful force.
“Muslims run the prisons and there’s nothing the screws can do about it. For a Muslim you’d say it’s good but for a non-Muslim, it’s very, very bad,” said a former inmate.
The 2011 census showed Muslims represented 4.7 per cent of the population in England and Wales, yet one in seven prisoners (14 per cent) in England and Wales is a Muslim, according to the statistics.
Amongst young offenders, the position is even more striking. The proportion of Muslim offenders is growing year by year. One in five males in young offender institutions identified themselves as Muslim in 2011/12, compared with 16% in 2010/11.
Our Government have bowed to pressure from Muslim inmates to serve them halal food. In September 2013. it was reported that some 200 Muslims were taking the Prison Service to court because traces of DNA from pork, which is strictly ‘haram’ or ‘forbidden’ in Islam, were found in supposedly ‘halal’ pies from a halal certified supplier.
Professor Anthony Glees
EXTREMISM TAKING OVER BRITISH PRISONS
Since Islam is a religion built around observance and not around the repentance demanded by Christianity, it is perfectly possible to be a criminal – to be a terrorist or even to run a drug firm, a prostitution ring or an extortion racket – and still be a good Muslim.
The Government is so concerned that prisons could become breeding grounds for terrorism that it it has has deployed imams to help steer them away from extremist paths.
Yet even this desperate move is set to backfire. An expert has warned that imams with links to extremist Muslim groups are helping to turn Britain’s prisons into ‘state-funded breeding grounds for extremism‘.
Professor Anthony Glees, head of the centre for security and intelligence studies at the University of Buckingham, said: ‘Our prisons have turned into a state-funded breeding ground for extremism. It is completely unacceptable that imams with extremist views are allowed to preach in prisons.’
Burqa-clad women demonstrating in London against the French burqa ban.
BURQA BAN LAWFUL
Earlier this month, Judges at the European court of human rights upheld France’s ban on wearing the burqa, accepting the French governments’ argument that it encouraged citizens to “live together”.
Foirmer president Nicolas Sarkozy told the French parliament when introducing the ban that the burqa was a sign of “servitude” that isn’t “welcome on French soil.”
There is no sign of such a ban being introduced in the United Kingdom, despite concerns that terrorists can use the dress to escape detection.
Somali-born Mohammed Ahmed Mohammed, 27, escaping police by changing into a burqa in the An-Noor Masjid and Community Centre in Acton, west London, last November. Yassin Omar, now convicted of attempting to blow up a tube train on 21st July 2007, also attempted to evade detection by wearing a burqa.
Latest atrocity from the followers of what Tony Blair described as the ‘Religion of Peace’: Christians crucified by ISIS in Syria. Thanks, Mr Hague.
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.
A Christian occupational therapist was disciplinedfor “bullying” a Muslim colleague, and is now making a legal challenge against the NHS.
Victoria Wasteney, a 37-year-old Head of Occupational Therapy at the East London NHS Trust, was summarily suspended with full pay for nine months and is forbidden to discuss her faith at work. The NHS also gave her a formal warning that will remain on her record for one year.
Wasteney maintainsthat she was always respectful of her colleague and never spoke of her faith unless the woman invited it in their conversations.
“One of the earliest conversations I can recall was one in which she said she had just moved to London. She felt that God had a real plan and a purpose for her,” said Wasteney, who is from Essex. Wasteney was “very cautious because our environment is such that these things can be misconstrued and, with her being from a different faith background, I was mindful of being respectful of that,” Wasteney told the Daily Telegraph.
Eight complaints were originally brought against Wasteney, three of which she was eventually charged for: inviting her colleague to her church events, praying with her colleague, and giving her coworker a book that tells the story of a Muslim woman who converts to Christianity.
Wasteney first invited her colleague to a church event when she found out the coworker was interested in the anti-trafficking work that her church does. After that, she invited her Muslim colleague to other church events.
When her colleague was going to the hospital for treatment, Wasteney gave her the book about a Muslim conversion. She had never read it, but a friend recommended it to her.
“Because we had had these conversations it did not seem abnormal. It certainly was not an attempt to convert her to Christianity, as it was put to me later.”
Later, the Muslim coworker tearfully came to Wasteney’s officeseeking advice, because she had health issues and problems at home that she wanted to discuss.
I said to her that she had strong faith and she should draw on that faith,” said Wasteney.
I said ‘Pray!’ She told me she could not pray, so I replied ‘Maybe I can pray for you?’ And she said ‘OK’.
I asked if I could put my hand on her knee, and she said yes. I don’t know if I said ‘Lord’ or ‘God’ but I said what I thought was the most neutral. Then I said ‘I trust that You will bring peace and You will bring healing.’
She affirmed that she would have stopped praying if she believed her colleague was distressed in any way. She says that they openly discussed their respective faiths and that the Complainant “welcomed” such conversations.
Four months later, the formal complaint against Wasteney was made by her Muslim colleague on 13 June 2013, which included accusations of bullying and harassment. The next day she was called before the Associate Director of Therapies and immediately suspended while the investigation was carried out.
A February hearing upheld the three previously-mentioned charges of misconduct.
“I fear I may have been entrapped by a colleague who encouraged me to discuss my faith, who willingly agreed that I could pray for her and who even accepted an invitation to a church charity event,” she says.
“For nine months I was made to feel I was a danger to my colleagues and the public despite no evidence of wrong-doing. I had email evidence clearly showing the Complainant wanted to come to my charity church event and I only put my hand on her knee in friendship after asking her permission while I prayed for her,” she insists.
Wasteney challenged the NHS in court because she believes the NHS is “stifling ordinary conversations about faith.”
Throughout all of this, Wasteney has tried to show the importance of being tolerant to all religions and not to discriminate against Christians.
“I believe in tolerance for everyone and that is why I am challenging what has happened to me.”
She finds it hard to believe that after all her faithful service to the Trust they are so willing to bring charges against her.
“I’ve had an unblemished 15 year career and suddenly I am confronted with vague and unclear complaints by the Associate Director. I didn’t receive a written complaint until four months later. Now my file shows a nine-month suspension and a Final Written Warning for simply responding in a loving and compassionate way to a young colleague who seemed genuinely interested in talking about my faith as a Christian,” she says.
Wasteney believes the trust took a “one-sided, politically correct decision to punish her despite the fact that the complainant had initiated discussions about faith and never complained to her personally.”
In addition, Wasteney saidthat Christian groups must work around managerial arrangements in the Trust, whereas joint staff and Muslim fellowship meetings are facilitated by the Trust regardless of staffing issues.
“There is undoubtedly a pattern of inequality of treatment of Christians and Muslims in the NHS. Regardless of allocated break times, Muslim staff can pray five times a day, which I am not objecting to, but Christians are often denied time off on Sundays or permission to take breaks during their lunchtime for prayer or religious worship. However, I never expected to be persecuted by the very Trust I have been dedicated to over the past seven years.”
She is appealing to the 2010 Equality Act, and is being represented by Human Rights barrister Paul Diamond through Christian Legal Centre.
Andrea Williams, Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre, arguesthat Wasteney’s case indicates a move away from the very values on which the NHS was built.
“The NHS was founded and inspired by Christian principles and precepts. Such heritage meant that the NHS was a model of how to deliver health care across the world; a place of safety, care, freedom and flourishing with a staff inspired by their chosen career,” she has said in a statement.
“Sadly, this case, along with others, demonstrates that today’s climate in the NHS is increasingly dominated by a suffocating liberal agenda that chooses to bend over backwards to accommodate certain beliefs but punishes the Christian.”
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.
Theresa May: in favour of increased internet surveillance in Britain.
Theresa May has resurrectedplans for a “snooper’s charter” in order to counteract, she says, terrorist threats from British jihadists in Syria.
She stated againthat she wants to “equip the state with greater surveillance powers—including the ability to access citizens’ email and social media accounts.”
May claims that it is vital for security authorities to have enough power to counteract terrorist in a world with ever-increasing internet capabilities. She claims that having this power is a matter of “life and death, a matter of national security.”
She related how many Britons have travelled to Syria to fight the Assad regime, and how this could represent a threat when they return to the UK.
May also claimed that at least 20 cases, 13 of which involved a threat to a child’s life, were dropped by the National Crime Agency in the past six months for lack of communication data.
Speaking at the Lord Mayor’s Defence and Security Lecture, May said that “the real problem is not that we have built an over-mighty state but that the state is finding it harder to fulfil its most basic duty, which is to protect the public.”
She believes that internet technology has given criminals more ways to commit crimes, and that the Government needs to be able to match these criminals in technological advances, which includes accessing information that can help stop them. She even referred to the internet as a “breeding ground for criminals.”
Emma Carr, acting director of privacy campaigner group Big Brother Watch, assertedthat May differs from the majority opinion on this issue.
“Yet again the Home Secretary is clashing with the broad political consensus that no new powers should be introduced until a full independent review into the currently available surveillance legislation and oversight mechanisms has taken place,” she said in a statement.
“We know from surveillance transparency reports published by private companies that they largely comply with law enforcement requests for communications data.
“Therefore, if the Home Secretary is stating that communications data was unavailable in specific cases, then that would suggest that a warrant was either not submitted to, or was rejected by, the companies in question. The question therefore should be why is this the case?” Carr added.
May introducedthe “snooper’s charter” proposal last year to increase surveillance of people’s internet and phone communications, but it was blocked by Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister. He believed her plans would be opening up doors for all sorts of mass surveillance by the government.
If passed, the proposed legislation would require internet firms to keep records of all email and social media interactions for up to a year, in case these records need to be accessed in an issue of national security.
Based on recent reports, May appears to want this legislation passed before the next general election.
May also denieda “surveillance state” programme as alleged by Edward Snowden, and she affirmed that Britain did not rely on the US to illegally obtain internet records.
“There is no programme of mass surveillance and there is no surveillance state,” May asserted.
However, Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) has already been accused by privacy campaigners of spying on citizens by hacking unlawfully into personal information.
Privacy International allegesthat GCHQ was illegally spying on people and has broken the European Convention of Human Rights by doing so. This document ensures citizens a right to privacy and freedom of speech.
Privacy International claims that, based on information from whistleblower Edward Snowden, that the GCHQ and the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) used a monitoring programmed called Tempora, which “taps into the network of fibre-optic cables which carry the world’s phone calls and online traffic.”
The deputy director of Privacy International, Eric King, said this was the “modern equivalent of the government entering someone’s house and reading their diary, correspondence and journals.”
May denied these allegations as well, calling them “nonsense” and affirming that everything the Government is doing in surveillance is perfectly legal.
The Government received more criticism when Charles Farr, Britain’s most senior security official, said in a statement in mid-June that the Government is allowed to access citizens’ personal messages on social media sites because they are regarded as “external communications.” These include searches on Google, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, in addition to emails from non-British citizens.
This is the first time that the Government openly stated that they intercept, without a warrant, what citizens believed were private messages.
Farr said that today the biggest threat to national security in the UK and beyond is from “militant Islamist terrorists,” and it is therefore necessary to find these suspects before it becomes too difficult to trace them. If the government was only allowed to monitor individual people or locations, this would not provide an adequate degree of protection which the people expect.
In addition, ministers have proposed this week to enact emergency laws that would require phone companies to keep records of people’s phone calls, texts, and internet history. Labour and Liberal Democrats are supporting this move but also warnedthat they will not allow this new law to reinstate a more extensive “snooper’s charter.”
Many allegations have been recently made against the Government regarding surveillance, followed by profuse denial from Theresa May. Are online terrorists really a threat to our national safety and is this the only way we can counteract terrorist threats? It is hard to say. But one thing remains certain: as much of a danger as terrorism may be, an even greater danger arises when a populace is willing to surrender substantial liberties for the promise of security. As we pointed out earlier this year, the normalization of the modern surveillance state arises from the universal human temptation to surrender freedom for the often illusory promise of increased security. That is why, when Government officials begin talking about “matters of life and death,” one must be cautious about the motivation behind it.
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.
A bakery firm in Northern Ireland is facing a discrimination case after refusing to bake a cake with a slogan supporting ‘gay marriage’
Ashers Baking Company, which is owned and run by the McArthur family, who are Christians, declined an order from a gay rights activist asking for a cake featuring the Sesame Street puppets Bert and Ernie with a slogan saying ‘Support Gay Marriage’.
Marriage between people of the same sex is illegal in Northern Ireland. In April 2014 the Stormont Assembly rejected a Sinn Fein motion to change the definition of marriage for the third time in eighteen months.
The customer also wanted the cake to feature the logo of a Belfast-based campaign group called “Queerspace”.
The cake was ordered for a civic event in Bangor Castle Town Hall, County Down, to mark the invented ‘International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia’, ‘IDAHOT’ in May.
Homosexual Cllr Andrew Muir campaigns for ‘gay marriage’ by cutting the ‘QueerSpace’ cake.
The event, hosted by Councillor Andrew Muir, the openly-homosexual Mayor of North Down for the divisive Alliance Party, went ahead after another company provided a cake.
But now, six weeks after the event, the County Antrim firm has received a letter from a self-important quango called the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland.
“We thought that was the end of it, but approximately six weeks later we received a letter from the Equality Commission. The Equality Commission’s letter said that we had discriminated against the customer on the grounds of his sexual orientation.
“It asked us to propose how we would recompense the customer for this discrimination. It also said it would pursue legal proceedings if we didn’t respond within a seven-day time period,” Mr McArthur said.
The watchdog confirmed it is assisting the customer. In a statement, it said: “The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland provides advice and can provide assistance to people who complain to us that they have suffered unlawful discrimination.
“In this case the commission has granted assistance to the complainant, and has written to the company concerned on his behalf. The commission will consider any response before taking further action.”
Sammy Wilson, MP for East Antrim, left, presents the Newtownabbey Business Person of the Year award to Colin McArthur of Ashers Baking Company.
But the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) said the Equality Commission had overstepped the mark and the complaint highlighted the need for a “conscience clause” to protect Christians and others who have deeply held beliefs.
DUP MP Nigel Dodds said: “The case re-opens the debate about how exactly religious belief is respected within the United Kingdom and the need for someone’s conscience to be protected whilst ensuring that discrimination does not occur.”
Mr Dodds could point out that Ashers have not discriminated against the complainant on the grounds of his sexual orientation, although this should in conscience be their right.
They have instead objected to manufacturing a product carrying a contentious political message.
Ashers could equally have objected to producing icing depicting the Sesame Street’s ‘Bert’ and ‘Ernie’ out of respect for the copyright protection attached to those characters.
The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland is now considering its next step.
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.
Rahim Kalantar, father of Ali Kalantar, believes his son was radicalised by an imam at a mosque his son attended.
A British man believes his teenage son, who traveled to Syria to join a jihadist group, was radicalised by an imam from a UK mosque.
Rahim Kalantar, father of Ali, 18, toldthe BBC he believes his son is now fighting for the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), an active jihadist group in Iraq and Syria. Kalantar claims that an imam sent him “down this road,” but the imam denied the allegations.
Ali would be one of about 500 Britons who have gone to the Middle East to fight in the conflict.
Kalantar says he worries about his son “every minute” and that his grief is “limitless.” He believes that his son was brainwashed by the imam while Ali was taking classes at a mosque after evening prayer.
Although the BBC contacted the mosque to speak with the imam, he refused an interview and denied all allegations.
Kalantar believes this imam radicalized his son, as well as another 18-year-old, Rashed Amani.
Family members of Amani had travelled to the Turkish-Syrian border to search for the boys, but Amani’s father said they came back “empty-handed” after looking for over two weeks. He also feared that his son had joined ISIS.
“Maybe somebody worked with him, I don’t know. Maybe somebody brainwashed him because he was not like that,” he said.
This report comes after two other young Britons, Nasser Muthana and Reyaad Khan, both 20, appearedin a recruitment video posted by ISIS. In this video the two men encouraged other British Muslims to join the fighting in Iraq and Syria.
Former independent reviewer of terrorism laws, Lord Carlile, informedthe BBC that the Muslim community itself was in the best position to prevent jihadists from recruiting in the UK. He also said that the UK needed to “reintroduce” tougher measures to stop terrorism.
“Mothers, wives, sisters do not want their husbands, brothers, sons to become valid jihadists and run the risk of being killed in a civil war,” he told the programme.
He also said that the Government needs to “look at preventing violent extremism before people leave the country and also we need to look for further measures.” He suggested reintroducing “something like control orders.” These were replaced in 2011 with Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPims), which are less restrictive than control orders.
United States President Obama announced on 19 June that he will send 300 U.S. special operation forces to Iraq in order to repel the uprising of Muslim jihadist troops involved with ISIS.
Although the jihadists recruit mainly Muslims, these incidents are just another way that the increasing Muslim population in Britain is affecting British culture.
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.
The NGA, which told Christian Voice that one-fifth of state school governing bodies are members, says staff are “unable or unwilling” to lead pupils in prayer and that worship is ‘meaningless’ to non-Christian schoolchildren.
In a policy statement, the body said schools were “not places of worship but places of education” and “the worship of a religion or religions in all schools should not be … compulsory.”
“Few schools can or do meet the current legislative requirement for a daily act of collective worship, partly because there isn’t space in most schools to gather students together and often staff are unable or unwilling to lead a collective worship session,” it said.
“There is also the added issue that worship implies belief in a particular faith – if the ‘act of worship’ is not in your faith then it is meaningless as an act of worship.”
The NGA said dropping collective Christian worship from schools’ remit would “not prevent them from holding assemblies that address a whole range of topics, including faith and belief.”
The Church of England said dropping Christian assemblies would “deny children the opportunity to experience something they wouldn’t experience elsewhere in their lives”.
In 2012, Welsh Evangelical Alliance National Assembly Liaison Officer Jim Stewart said of Christian worship in schools: “If this right were taken away from us it would lead to further marginalisation of Christianity in public life. This is not just something that is beneficial to us though – it is for the common good and other faith groups in Wales are supportive of it as are people who don’t have a particular faith.”
Naturally, the British Humanist Association and the National Secular Society welcomed the NGA’s comments, with the BHA saying schools should be “holding inclusive assemblies that forward the spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of all pupils and staff”.
However, it isn’t at all clear what ‘spiritual, moral, social and cultural’ values would qualify as ‘inclusive’ nor whom or what they could be founded on if not on the God who brought this nation victorious through two world wars.
It is no good appealing to ‘multi-culturalism.’ Even though Islam is the UK’s fastest-growing religion, its practitioners still only number 5% of the population. Our African and Caribbean populations are overwhelmingly Christian. Britain is not ‘multi-cultural’ in any meaningful sense.
In a country with such a rich Christian heritage, who defines what is ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong’ if not Almighty God? The school head? The school governors? On what basis?
A collective act of worship has been a statutory requirement in state schools since the Education Act 1944 stated that ‘the school day in every county school and every voluntary school shall begin with collective worship on the part of all the pupils in attendance’. The Act gave parents the right to withdraw their child, perhaps in favour of separate arrangements. The Education Reform Act 1988 reaffirmed that position and reinforced it, stating that the act of worship should be ‘mainly of a broadly Christian character’.
Children in state schools should engage in a collective act of worship because ours is constitutionally and demographically a Christian country. As we lose respect for the sacred, we lose respect for each other. Britain would become just a bit more brutal, crass and disrespectful as a result.
The elimination of school prayer would rank alongside amoral sex education and the silencing of any possibility of creation as a prime motivator of antisocial behaviour. It would be irrational for anyone to ask why God permits this or that outrage of violence in schools which have legislated God out of the door.
The National Governors’ Association cannot claim to represent anything approaching a majority of school governors. But if it is true that staff are unable or unwilling to conduct an act of Christian worship, the way is open for a local church to offer the services of its pastor, youth leader or another committed member of the congregation. So there is an opportunity in the present situation for closer relationships between schools and churches.
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.
Elton John may never become any kind of Christian leader, but he still thinks he should be.
On Sunday, according to the Washington Times, the ageing celeb said ‘that Jesus Christ would support the idea of two gay priests tying the knot and that the celibacy vow among clergy is an “old and stupid” rule that should be abolished’.
Mr. John, who hopes to ‘marry’ his sodomite civil partner David Furnish some time next year, said gay clergy should be allowed to ‘marry’ and have sexual relationships.
“These are old and stupid things. If Jesus Christ was alive today, I cannot see him, as the Christian person that he was and the great person that he was, saying this could not happen,” he said.
Apparently, the greater and more ‘Christian’ one is on planet Elton, the more one agrees that the rectum is an appropriate receptacle for the male anatomy.
That only confirms Elton as confused, crass and clueless about the Christian faith.
The Lord Jesus cannot be described as a ‘Christian person’ and he is alive. He was and is the Son of God who ministered on earth as a Jewish Pharisee, upheld and taught the laws of God and died on a cross to bear the sins of as many as would believe in him, sexual sins like sodomy included.
There is little evidence that Elton John understands this and even less that he has repented of his acts of sodomy and/or gross indecency with David Furnish and countless others. His ignorance of the Lord Jesus knows no bounds:
“He was all about love and compassion and forgiveness and trying to bring people together, and that’s what the church should be about.”
Actually, the Jesus we read about in scripture, not the one who is a figment of Elton’s imagination, is ‘all about’ division:
Luke 3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: 17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.
Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
John 7:40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. 41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? 42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was? 43 So there was a division among the people because of him.
John 9:16 Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.
As to ‘love and compassion and forgiveness’, Elton, yes, the Lord Jesus will forgive all your sins if you turn to him, but if if you persist in your sin and go around promoting it in your pride and arrogance he will be a consuming fire.
The love of Christ is not some mawkish, sentimental endorsement of whatever goes, but a calling to repentance:
Mark 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2John 1:6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.
Sir Elton told Sky News that ‘the global fight for gay rights was stalling’ and that he planned to talk with Russian President Vladimir Putin in November.
“Globally, we seem to have gone backwards over the last 18 months,” he said. “I will see Putin and talk to him. I don’t know what good it will do though.”
Let us hope and pray that President Putin will tell Elton John the truth, that sodomy is a act of abuse, that homosexual desires are vile affections and that Jesus Christ can release him from his sinful life. Then their meeting, if it takes place at all, will have done some good.
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.
A Christian woman sentenced to death and 100 lashes in Sudan has been released, it is reported, two weeks after our witness for her outside the Sudanese Embassy in London.
Meriam Ibrahim was convicted of apostasy and adultery. Although brought up as a Christian, she was considered a Muslim because that was the faith of her father, and when she married a fellow Christian, her marriage was not recognised by the court and she was convicted of adultery.
But Sudan’s Appeal Court has quashed the lower court’s verdict and ordered her release.
It is not yet known where she is staying. Her husband, Daniel Wani, said he was looking forward to seeing her.
Mr Wani, who is originally from South Sudan, said he wanted his family to leave Sudan as soon possible.
Christians from the UK outside the Sudanese Embassy in London on Friday 6th June 2014
Mrs Ibrahim’s lawyer Elshareef Ali told the BBC: “They have released her… she’s on her way to home.” Mr Ali said Mrs Ibrahim had shown “extraordinary courage” during her ordeal.
The case led to a witness for Meriam outside the Sudanese Embassy on 6th June organised by Christian Voice and joined by the Pakistan Christian Association.
After singing hymns and praying for the mother-of-two and prisoner of conscience, those assembled signed and delivered a letter to the Sudanese Ambassador.
IT was the only demonstration for Meriam Ibrahim to be held at a Sudanese Embassy. We believe it changed the spiritual dynamics and we regard her release as an answer to prayer.
Her lawyer, Mr Ali, also told the BBC: “It’s a victory for freedom of religion in Sudan… By Meriam’s strong position, we believe that in the future no-one will be subjected to such a trial.”
It will be very welcome if that is the case, but since the secession of South Sudan, the position of Christians in the northern remainder has become difficult.
The position of Christians in Sudan is now precarious.
Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir has pursued an Islamic identity after the Southern secession. It is hard now to argue for multi-culturalism in Sudan. South Sudanese resident in Sudan were told soon after the South’s independence to leave or register as foreigners, but were provided no details about where and how to register. Christianity is regarded as a South Sudanese religion.
In a report on Christianity in Khartoum, the capital of Sudan, the French research group CEDEJ concluded: “the current situation of Christian communities and churches in Khartoum is characterized by uncertainty and intimidation rather than a systematic violation of the religious rights from part of the Sudanese authorities”.
However, Churches have been closed, burned by mobs and looted by criminals while the police stood by. Some church leaders report of a requirement by the authorities to register the land their churches stand on which is difficult to meet. High registration fees and corruption mean that a lot of land in Sudan is unregistered and for churches to be singled out and required to produce registration documents shows a level of harassment. Sudan is a precarious place to be a Christian, despite Sudanese assurances to the contrary.
We give thanks for the release of Meriam Ibrahim, but must continue to pray for our Christian brothers and sisters in Sudan.
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.
Baroness Hale, pictured, has called into question whether or not the law makes accommodation for Christians beliefs.
In an unexpected turn of events, Supreme Court Deputy Baroness Hale has said that she “may have been wrong” in her earlier ruling against Christian bed and breakfast owners who refused a double bed to a homosexual couple.
The UK’s senior female judge called for a re-think concerning her decision to condemn Peter and Hazelmary Bull of discrimination against homosexuals. In addition, she said that the law has done little to protect Christian beliefs.
Baroness Hale’s remarks,which have come more than six months after the Bulls’ final appeal was refused, call into question the relationship between gay rights and religious rights
In 2008, the Bulls refused to rent a double bed to a homosexual couple in their Marazion Bed and Breakfast called Chymorvah House. The same-sex couple, Steven Preddy and Martyn Hall, took the Bulls to court, where Lady Hale and four other judges eventually ruled that the rights of the gay couple trumped the religious freedom of the Bulls.
Lady Hale declared that the Bulls will not have to pay Preddy and Hall’s legal costs for the case, which was in the original sentence. In addition, she said that laws which ignore the consciences of Christians will not be and may need to be adjusted to include a “conscience clause” for Christian business owners like the Bulls.
Speaking to Irish lawyers, Hale used the Bull case as one example among many recent cases that may have been unfair to Christian beliefs. In this speech she asked: “Should we be developing an explicit requirement upon providers of employment, goods and services to make reasonable accommodation for the manifestation of religious beliefs?”
“It is fascinating that a country with an established church can be less respectful of religious feelings than one without”, Hale was quoted in the Telegraph as saying. “It is not difficult to see why the Christians feel that their religious beliefs are not being sufficiently respected.”
Mrs. Bull was glad to be relieved of the case costs, and hoped that her case would pave the way for other Christians in similar situations.
“It is too late for us, which is a shame, but at the same time I hope her comments will restore some kind of balance back to the issue,” Bull said. “I am glad that something positive looks as though it will come out of this although I would not call it a victory.”
The Bulls nearly closed their B&B because business had declined, and they could no longer keep up their advertising. However, thanks to financial support from different supporters they were able to stay in business.
Mrs. Bull added that she had no hard feelings toward anyone, but thinks that the Supreme Court “missed a big opportunity to put something right.”
“We are certainly not homophobic but hopefully the pendulum is being corrected. I have never been able to understand why two different lifestyles cannot live together harmoniously,” Bull added.
Mrs. Bull’s comments touch on issues of concern in cases like these. Christians have been given the blanket reputation of “homophobe,” while gay people have refused to allow others to disagree with their lifestyle at the expense of their own convictions.
Christians do not call non-Christians “Jesus-phobes” or some other nonsensical term. Contrary to popular belief, it is indeed possible for Christians to have different views and to still treat other people as humans created in the image of God.
While gay rights activists are very fond of calling Christians “homophobes,” in reality they are usually even more intolerant of Christians than Christians are intolerant of homosexuals.
It is hoped that the courage shown by Peter and Hazelmary Bull, together with Lady Hale’s recent remarks, will pave the way for rulings in the favor of Christians to practice their beliefs.
Tony Blair should either apologise and accept responsibility for the mess that Iraq is in, or shut up, according to the Mayor of London.
Boris Johnson has described Tony Blair’s latest intervention, calling for bombs to drop everywhere from Baghdad to Damascus, as ‘slightly unhinged’ and ‘bonkers’.
In an interview, Boris was asked if he had any advice for Tony Blair. “My general message would be to put a sock in it really,” said the Mayor. “Paper bag on head time is my advice.”
Iraq intervention ‘tragic mistake’
Tony Blair and George W Bush oversaw the execution of Saddam Hussain. Hypocritically Mr Blair would never have voted for the death penalty in Britain. Furthermore they allowed the American ‘neo-cons’ to pursue a policy of destroying Iraq’s Bathist infrastructure. They hoped something stable would ‘evolve’ from the ‘democracy’ they imposed. But the chaos and sectarian violence that came instead persists in Iraq to this day.
Describing Britain’s Iraq intervention as a “tragic mistake” and a “misbegotten folly”, Mr Johnson seems at odds with William Hague, the Foreign Secretary. He still believes it was the right thing to do.
Christians are fleeing Homs as ISIS demands they pay a Dhimmi tax – Jizya – for ‘protection’
We continue to argue that Mr Hague has the blood of thousands of Syrians, including Syrian Christians, on his hands. Hague backed the Islamist rebels in Syria rather than President Bashar Al-Assad, with all his faults. He gave encouragement to Al-Qaeda extremists and turned Syria into a blood-bath.
Now the same ISIS extremists who are trying to overthrow Syria’s ruling Alawites, in order to massacre them and the Christians, are advancing in Iraq. President Obama is considering air strikes against ISIS in Iraq. What about ISIS in Syria?
‘Responsibility to Protect’
Her Majesty’s Government became involved at the instigation of pro-democracy activists like those at the George Soros-funded ‘Open Society’. Soros helped spread the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. It gave hard-line Islamists a foothold and left chaos in its wake by funding opposition movements around the Mediterranean. A doctrine invented by a Soros-funded think-tank, ‘Responsibility to Protect’, has given Western governments the excuse they needed to interfere and destabilise countries like Iraq and Libya.
Only in Syria was Western military intervention avoided because the House of Commons voted against it. We thanked God last August for such an answer to prayer. The Syrian Government has been able to fight the insurgents, despite the aid Britain and the United States gave the jihadists. And now the chickens have come home to roost wearing an ISIS black flag. Moreover, the Americans will have to fight the ISIS monster they have created in Iraq. But it’s high time we switched sides in Syria.
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.
Witnessing outside the Sudanese Embassy on 6th June
The Sudan Embassy has responded to a letter from Christian Voice protesting at the sentence and incarceration of Meriam Ibrahim.
Meriam Ibrahim is the Christian Sudanese doctor sentenced to death and to 100 lashes for apostasy, that is converting from Islam to Christianity, and for adultery, that is marrying a man who is not a Muslim.
Despite Meriam being brought up by her mother as a Christian, she counts as Muslim according to Sudanese law because her father was Muslim.
Meriam has just given birth to a daughter in prison and has a 2-year-old son by her husband, Daniel Wani. The Court says she must stay in prison for two years to nurse her baby and will then be executed. It is not know when the flogging is scheduled.
Khalid Al Mubarak, Media Counsellor at the Embassy, said this in an email just received:
Dear Mr. Green,
Thank you very much for your letter. H.E. The Ambassador appreciates your interest in the welfare and stability of our country.
As far as Mrs. Meriam Yahia Ibrahim Ishag is concerned, we didn’t issue a press release about her because it would not be appropriate (in the Sudan and most countries) to comment on a court case which is at a preliminary court. Court cases pass through several stages of appeal and higher courts before a final verdict is reached.
The time for comment is after the final conclusion of the case.
However, I would like to assure you that the Sudan (according to our interim constitution) is a multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-religious country. We have Christians in our Cabinet and in all walks of life. Our ancestors embraced Christianity before some southern European states and we acknowledge that in our National Museum where the remnants of our old churches are preserved and displayed.
A Coptic Christian Sudanese lawyer visiting the UK for an Oxford conference has declared last year that he has never felt discrimination because of his religious belief. Jews and Christians are called “People of the book” in the Koran and we are instructed to deal with them in good faith and amicably.
Moreover, in Islam, one cannot be a Muslim if one does not believe in Moses and Jesus.
Thanks again for your letter and rest assured that the human rights and religious rights of all Sudanese are treasured and well-preserved.
Sadly, this amounts to flannel.
Ambassador of Sudan to the UK, Abdullahi Al Azreg
The world will judge whether Sudan treasures and preserves the ‘human rights and religious rights of all Sudanese’ and whether the ‘People of the book’ are dealt with ‘in good faith and amicably’ not by words but according to whether the verdict and sentence passed against Meriam Ibrahim is lifted and whether the Islamic apostasy law remains in force in the country.
We are also aware that Jesus Christ, the crucified, risen, ascended, glorified Son of God and King of kings is downgraded in Islam to the level of a prophet.
The Ambassador of the Republic of the Sudan to United Kingdom and Ireland is His Excellency Abdullahi H A El Azreg.
The address of the Sudanese Embassy is 3 Cleveland Row, St. James, London SW1A 1DD
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.
‘A study of gay men in the US has found fresh evidence that male sexual orientation is influenced by genes. Scientists tested the DNA of 400 gay men and found that genes on at least two chromosomes affected whether a man was gay or straight.
‘A region of the X chromosome called Xq28 had some impact on men’s sexual behaviour – though scientists have no idea which of the many genes in the region are involved, nor how many lie elsewhere in the genome.
‘Another stretch of DNA on chromosome 8 also played a role in male sexual orientation – though again the precise mechanism is unclear.’
Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University in Illinois, is behind the research, and said, ‘The study shows that there are genes involved in male sexual orientation.’
Homosexuality genetic? It’s not that simple …
Professor Bailey apologised a couple of years ago after allowing a live sex toy demonstration in his ‘human sexuality’ class, so he has something of a campaigning interest in this subject. But when we read on:
‘The gene or genes in the Xq28 region that influence sexual orientation have a limited and variable impact. Not all of the gay men in Bailey’s study inherited the same Xq28 region. The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay.
‘The flawed thinking behind a genetic test for sexual orientation is clear from studies of twins, which show that the identical twin of a gay man, who carries an exact replica of his brother’s DNA, is more likely to be straight than gay. That means even a perfect genetic test that picked up every gene linked to sexual orientation would still be less effective than flipping a coin.’
A ‘gay gene’ would be convenient for mothers who would wish to selectively abort such a baby, but it just does not exist. Bailey himself says there are ‘certainly other environmental factors involved.‘ The same external factors which would be like water off a duck’s back to someone can affect another individual deeply.
Peter Tatchell – rightly opposes ‘gay determinism’
Peter Tatchell is also opposed to the ‘gay gene’ theory on the grounds that it enables an apologetic ‘but I was born this way so you should have pity on me’ line of argument. Peter argues that the line trotted out by homosexual activists that it is ‘impossible to make someone gay’ by classroom propaganda is false. He writes:
‘Removing the social opprobrium and penalties from queer relationships, and celebrating gay love and lust, would allow more people to come to terms with presently inhibited homoerotic desires. In this sense, it is perfectly feasible to ‘promote’ lesbian and gay sexuality and ‘make’ someone queer. Individuals who have a homosexual component in their character, but are inhibited by repression or guilt, definitely can be encouraged to acknowledge their same-sex attraction and act upon it.‘
If homosexuality is presented as normal, vulnerable adolescents may be persuaded to try it. And despite homosexuallity becoming flavour-of-the-month amongst politicians, the media, and in recent public attitude surveys, homosexuals still report mental health problems at a greater level that the rest of the population, and still blame them on everyone else.
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.
“Three-Parent IVF,” or oocyte modification, could be legalized in the UK.
Scientists in the UK have asked the government to approve three-parent babies after experts ruled the practice “not unsafe” and “potentially useful,” according to a Telegraph report.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) made this ruling after examining “voluminous” amounts of data.
To be certain of the HFEA claims it will be necessary to conduct further experiments on human embryos.
Oocyte modification, commonly called “three-parent in vitro fertilization (IVF),” is the process by which damaged mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from the woman’s egg are replaced with healthy mtDNA of a female donor, thus allowing a child to be born with healthy mitochondria.
Experts who want to introduce this procedure say that it prevents “deadly mitochondrial diseases” that arise from damaged mitochondria in the mothers.
These diseases affect one in 6,500 babies and are responsible for 50 genetic diseases, including muscle weakness, blindness, heart failure, and possibly death. Damaged mitochondria can also cause women to miscarry multiple times.
Children only inherit mitochondria from the mother.
Because scientists are not certain what the effects will be in humans, the HFEA called for more tests before mitochondrial IVF could be conducted on human embryos. Even if this procedure is approved, it will mostly likely be two years before experiments are finished.
Chairman of the scientific review panel, Prof Andy Greenfield, stated:
Are these techniques safe in humans? We won’t know that until it’s actually done in humans. Until a healthy baby is born we cannot say 100% that these techniques are safe. If you think back to when IVF was a new technology all of these questions were asked before IVF.”
The practice is currently banned in Britain. However, advocates of the procedure say that it would prevent genetic diseases from being transferred to a child while still allowing the mother to have biological children.
In the UK, 100 babies a year are affected by mitochondrial disease. According to the United Mitochondrial Disease Foundation, 1,000 to 4,000 babies in the US are born with mitochondrial diseases each year. Although this seems like a lot, it is a fraction of all the babies born and is recieving disproportionate attention in the medical field. Why is there such a push to get this procedure legalized when there are so many more deadly diseases that could be addressed?
Part of the answer to this question has to do with medical prestige. The medical professionals in the UK have stated that they want to be the first to begin experimenting with this technique. As a Department of Health spokesperson acknowledged, mIVF will “keep the UK at the forefront of scientific development in this area.”
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, three-parent children is the perfect way to allow same-sex couples, particularly lesbians, to have biological children. Because this procedure allows two eggs to be used in conception, both “mothers” could have their DNA used with a sperm from a male donor.
Unfortunately, the ethical aspect of this issue is being overlooked by advocates of of the procedure. Three parent children would possess DNA from three people, which could potentially lead to the creation of “designer children.”
A small set of DNA resides in the mitochondria of every human, so any person born from this procedure would possess DNA from three people.
Proponents of the procedure justifyit by saying that a human being’s characteristics come from nuclear DNA, not mitochondrial DNA. But if this is the case, why do the damaged mitochondria affect a person’s health? How is this any less important than the person’s physical characteristics?
In addition, scientists have suggested that if the procedure turns out successfully, the children must be monitored for the rest of their lives to make sure there are no adverse effects. These children would essentially be living scientific experiments.
The three parent children practice is unethical and unsafe, but we won’t know the full extent of it until the Government allows scientists to start practicing on human embryos.
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.
Christians from the UK standing for Meriam outside the Sudanese Embassy in London on Friday 6th June 2014
Monday 9th June 2014.
Christians from across the United Kingdom gathered in London on Friday afternoon to protest at the death sentence and continuing detention of Meriam Ibrahim in Sudan.
Around 35 Christians stood in witness opposite the Sudanese Embassy in Cleveland Row in London before moving across the road for the photographic record on the left. The witness was organised jointly by Christian Voice and the Pakistani Christian Association.
After singing hymns and making prayers for the mother-of-two and prisoner of conscience, those assembled signed and delivered a letter to the Sudanese Ambassador.
We welcome the interest taken in this case by political leaders in the UK. It was therefore high time that British Christians should make their concern known to the Sudanese authorities.
The least we could do for Meriam Ibrahim was to show solidarity for her in front of Sudanese territory in London. I believe this is the first demonstration for Meriam to be held at a Sudanese Embassy in the United Kingdom, and possibly in the world.
We call on the Sudanese authorities to drop all charges against Meriam Ibrahim.
We also call on Christians all over the world to follow our example and let Sudan know that Christians show love and concern for one another.
Sudanese Embassy staff heard on Friday from the people of the Lord Jesus Christ, the crucified, risen, ascended, glorified Son of God. I am confident that our prayers, and the way we have shown God that they are serious and fervent, will change things in the spiritual realm and bring about Meriam’s release.
On Saturday 31st May, there were statements from an official in the Sudanese government’s foreign ministry that Meriam Ibrahim would be freed ‘in a matter of days’. These turned out to be false.
If the sentence is not overturned, she will be subjected to 100 lashes and hanged in two years’ time, after the baby to whom she gave birth in hospital is weaned.
On the morning of the witness, the brother of Meriam Ibrahim called for her execution. But at this time of writing, Monday 9th June 2014, her appeal hearing in Sudan had just begun.
Text of the letter to the Sudanese Ambassador:
His Excellency Abdullahi H A El Azreg
Ambassador
Embassy of the Republic of Sudan
3 Cleveland Row
LONDON
SW1A 1DD
6th June 2014
Your Excellency,
MERIAM IBRAHIM
We the undersigned wish to protest at the treatnent of Meriam Ibrahim currently being held in prison in Sudan having been sentenced to death and a flogging by a Sudanese Court for her Christian faith and her marriage to a Christian in Sudan.
We call on President Omar al-Bashir to direct the Sudanese Courts and Government to drop all charges and release Meriam Ibrahim immediately, to allow freedom to convert to Christianity in law and to guarantee the safety of Christians and the Christian Church in Sudan as required by Sudan’s international obligations.
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.
Awareness of FGM has increased in the UK, with schools trying to prevent more girls being victimized.
Awareness of FGM has increased in the UK, with schools trying to prevent more girls being victimized.
British girls are having their genitals mutilated in barbaric Islamic practices while the UK media and public remain in a state of denial.
Denial of the truth about Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) can be seen in the failure to prosecutethe perpetrators of these atrocities and in the media’s reluctance to acknowledge the Islamic basis behind these crimes.
A typical example of this type of denial was the report last month in the Guardian about FGM parties being held in the UK. The article did not even mention Islam, even though it is clear that the practice of FGM is religiously motivated. By failing to recognize the religious context of FGM, the British authorities fighting the problem are doing so with one hand tied behind their back.
Although the full extent of the problem is unknown due to the hidden nature of the crime, the NHS has estimated that “over 20,000 girls under the age of 15 are at risk of female genital mutilation (FGM) in the UK each year, and that 66,000 women in the UK are living with the consequences of FGM.” It has also been reported that the UK has the highest rates of FGM for all of Europe, even though the hideous practice was outlawed in 1985.
In an effort to halt the problem, the Department of Education mailed information to every school in the country giving guidance on how to spot and respond to potential FGM. It was revealed on 22 May that nearly half of the head teachers in London schools have failed to read official guidelines on how to prevent the practice.
Data obtained by the Evening Standard in a Freedom of Information request show that only 56 percent of head teachers even opened the email after it was sent by Education Secretary Michael Gove in April. These new guidelines help teachers identify which girls in their schools are at risk of mutilation or have already suffered from it.
The same data shows that only 45 percent “clicked through” to actually read the guidelines. This means that 1,724 London schools essentially ignored the effort to prevent abuse. 1,534 head teachers opened the email, but only 1,198 actually read it by “clicking through.”
These reports sparked further concern from campaigners and MPs that schools are not taking proper measures to protect vulnerable girls from mutilation.
It is uncertain why the UK has such a high FGM rate. One factor is that the young girls who are FGM victims are unable to protect themselves. FGM is rarely reported because family members are often the ones ordering it. A 4-year-old girl cannot or will not call the authorities and testify against her family. In addition, girls do not know how to bring up the issue even if they wanted to. Female sexuality is something not often spoken about in communities that practice FGM.
But probably the primary reason FGM is so prevalent in Britain is because of mass immigration of Muslims in the last several years. Most of the countries from which these people immigrate are African countries where FGM is a cultural and religious practice. According to a UNICEF report, Muslims are the primary religious group that practices FGM, and many women believe that it is a religious requirement to have FGM performed on them.
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.
