By now all Christian Voice members should have received the January edition of our monthly newsletter. In it we have given an update of the horrendous situation in North Korea, where Christians are treated more severely than in any other nation on earth.
Kang Chol-Hwan came from one of the many Korean families who had come there from Japan in the mid 20th century. Throughout the 1950s there was a large contingent of Koreans living in Japan who had fled to the island to escape the horrors of the Korean war. These refugees had a good life in Japan. Many of them held lucrative jobs, and they were surrounded by friends and family who had also immigrated to the island. Yet many of these Koreans decided to return home to start a life for themselves in the communist North.
These Korean refugees in Japan had been listening with eagerness to news of the revolutionary struggle occurring back in the north of their homeland. They heard how the “people’s struggle” had culminated in the establishment of The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea under the faithful leadership of Kim Il-sung (1912–1994).
Reports continued to flood into Japan through the communist organizations about what a paradise North Korea was becoming. While there were some dissenting voices, warning that North Korea was far from being a communist utopia, the pro-North Korean political groups in Japan dismissed these warnings as anti-communist propaganda.
Thus it was that throughout the late 50s, thousands of Korean families living in Japan decided to immigrate back to their homeland. Leaving behind friends, family and wealth, tens of thousands took the journey, almost ecstatic to be part of Kim Il-sung’s “Paradise on Earth.”
Those who were left behind in Japan waited anxiously to receive news from their family and friends. Often they were met with only silence, or else letters with an unclear meaning. Assuming this must mean things were fine, many other Koreans sailed over.
What the returning Koreans stepped ashore, what they found was not a communist paradise but a prison. Some new arrivals who were loyal to communism were arrested immediately upon arrival, never knowing why and spending the little that remained of their lives in utter confusion and despair. Most were allowed to integrate into North Korean society (little better than a prison itself), but only after the wealth they had brought over from Japan had been systematically confiscated.
Kang Chol-Hwan, author of The Aquariums of Pyongyang, was born into a family whose grandparents were among these immigrants. Kang’s his grandparents’ stepped ashore on North Korean soil, one of his uncles recalled seeing several Koreans who had immigrated a few weeks earlier come up to some of the immigrants and say, “What happened? We sent our friends and family letters warning people not to come! Why didn’t your family listen?” The reality is that their letters had never been allowed to reach Japan.
After listening to this ominous exchange, Kang’s uncle looked around him. “It was like the city was dead – the strangest atmosphere” he recalled. “The people all looked so shabby and aimless in their wandering. There was a feeling of deep sadness in the air, and no movement betrayed the slightest hint of spontaneity.”
By the time Kang’s grandparents realized their mistake, it was too late. They would never be allowed to go back to Japan.
Kang’s parents and grandparents actually had it good. They were allowed to live in the capital city, Pyongyang, and because they had brought over so much wealth, they were favoured by the party leaders. Kang’s grandfather was even able to keep a Volvo he had brought over from Japan, in which he took his children and grandchildren on drives in the country. (Every outing had to be authorized, usually requiring a hansom bribe to a party bureaucrat).
Moreover, because his grandfather worked in food distribution, there was always plenty to eat. Since Kang had never experienced his family’s other life in Japan (his father married in 1967, after the family had already immigrated) he had nothing with which to compare and led a genuinely happy childhood, or as happy as one can realistically expect to be in that totalitarian state.
The trouble began in 1977 when Kang was nine and his grandfather simply disappeared. No one was ever told what he had done, but it was supposed that someone must have reported him for being disloyal. In North Korea there are never any trials, and the mere suspicion that a person is disloyal to the communist party can be enough to send him and his entire family to a labour camp.
Not long after this, agents showed up at the family’s house and abruptly informed the household that they were being transferred. No explanations were given, but the hardest part about it for Kang was that his mother was not allowed to accompany them. Since she was descended from an ‘heroic family’ she was not allowed to join her children even though she begged to be able to.
Nine-year old Kang, along with his seven-year old sister Mi-ho, his father, grandmother, uncle and aunt, were taken to a camp in Yodok, South-Hamkyung Province. For the next ten years Kang remained in the camp, without ever being told what his grandfather had allegedly done to warrant this treatment.
Kang’s account of his time in the North Korean Gulag gives us unique insight into the camp system and the totalitarian regime that sustains it. We also learn about his exciting escape to China and finally to South Korea, where he was converted to Christianity and became one of the chief advocates for human rights in North Korea.
Next month’s Christian Voice newsletter will contain a review of the book, including a detailed description of the horrors witnessed by Kang in the camp – conditions which are still a reality for the thousands of Christians imprisoned in these camps.
In the following video, Kang Chol-Hwan uses satellite imagery to show the horrors of the concentration camp system.
Join Christian Voice by clicking the Join button or send a donation via the Donate button below:
British law needs to support marriage, not encourage promiscuity and divorce
In a Jubilee Centre report from last December, author and therapist Guy Brandon demonstrated that the economic ramifications of our permissive society are almost beyond reckoning.
Moral Hazard
Mr Brandon, the author of Just Sex: is it Ever Just Sex?, used quantitative cost-analysis to disprove the notion that “sex between consenting adults is no one else’s business”, a mantra that has been repeated by both Ken Livingstone and Max Mosley.
By using the category of ‘moral hazard’, he showed that British society has created a system that incentivizes promiscuity.
“‘Moral Hazard’, he explains, “occurs when a contract or financial arrangement creates incentives for the parties involved to behave against the interest of others’ – typically because one party is insulated from risk.”
One of the ways British society does this is through a system in which the financial consequences of promiscuity are not carried by the people directly involved but diffused throughout society collectively.
The British Government has also created a moral hazard when it began to allow the welfare safety net to be exploited in ways which incentivise family breakdown. “At present,” Brandon writes, “the tax and benefits system makes it economically more favourable for some parents to live apart – the so-called couple penalty. Ending this must be a priority.”
Why Free Sex is Never Free
The Jubilee Centre article, titled ‘Free sex: Who pays?: Moral hazard and sexual ethics’, suggests that while “the costs of sexual freedom and relationship breakdown to the taxpayer and wider economy are complex and difficult to calculate… £100 billion annually is probably a reasonable starting point: about twice as much as alcohol abuse, smoking and obesity combined.”
The following are some the areas where the costs of sexual licence are felt the strongest in our economy:
The entire society is forced to cover the cost of promiscuity
Promiscuity often leads to STI’s, which cost the British taxpayer more than £1 billion per year.
Promiscuity often leads to HIV. The estimated 83,000 cases of HIV in the UK at the end of 2008 represent a total lifetime cost of £26 billion.
Promiscuity leads to teenage pregnancy which cost the NHS £63 million per year, and a further £29 million for infertility and other complications arising from chlamydia alone.
Promiscuity often leads to abortions, and 96% of abortions are carried out on the NHS at a cost of £650 each, or £118 million.
Promiscuity often contributes to separation from marriage and cohabiting relationships (including promiscuity prior to entering such relationships), which entails huge increases in tax credit payments, lone parent benefits, housing benefits, in addition to the health, crime and educational impact of relationship breakdown. Altogether this totals about £42 billion a year.
In contributing to relationship breakdown, promiscuity leads to Absenteeism. The loss of working hours following relationship breakdown costs the economy at least £20 billion a year.
In contributing to relationship breakdown, promiscuity can lead to domestic violence which costs the British taxpayer around £3.4 billion a year, and around £21 billion today in ‘human and emotional costs.’
The effect of relationship breakdown on children leads to educational underachievement which results in an estimated £40,000 for each child, reducing GDP by £6 billion. Much of this cost can be directly attributable to the promiscuous activity which contributed to the relationship breakdown.
These facts, all of which Brandon meticulously documents, helps to undermine the common narrative that sex is a choice made only by the couple most directly involved with only limited consequences beyond the two of them. This narrative has found expression in phrases such as ‘recreational sex’ and ‘casual sex’, which obscure the reality that the entire society picks up the bill for promiscuity.
Mr. Brandon contrasts our system with that of ancient Israel which put institutional and legal parameters in place to limit moral hazard. His discussion of Old Testament law provides a helpful framework that our own law-makers would do well to glean from.
The Jubilee Centre report is not as strong in laying out a solution to the problem, although Mr Brandon does make some suggestions on how Government policy makers can limit the degree of moral hazard that is operative.
The first step is simply for the British Government to recognize the full scope of the economic problem. Up to now Government has focused considerable attention on discouraging teenage pregnancy and encouraging ‘safe sex.’ However, promiscuity itself has received scant attention, and is even actively discouraged by much Government policy. As Mr. Brandon has said,
“The UK Treasury does not make the link between the vast costs of relationship breakdown and its drivers, David Cameron’s emphasis on the family notwithstanding. Public policy barely acknowledges the existence of the problem, let alone the scale.”
From an economic point of view, it is not enough to merely encourage safe sex and discourage teenage pregnancy. Until promiscuity itself is adequately addressed, the economic problem will only increase.
WRITE: to your MP and share some of Mr. Brandon’s concerns. You may even want to print out a copy of the Jubilee Centre report to mail to your MP. Ask for your comments to be forwarded to the appropriate minister. Make the point that
Parliament needs to abolish the ‘couple penalty.’
No-fault divorce on demand must go.
The entire culture of sex education must be abolished, since this encourages promiscuity and rarely, if ever, teaches the virtues of chastity. (See our article ‘Ferrari Condemns ‘state-sanctioned child abuse.‘)
Government must take more responsibility to limit the amount of nudity that occurs in the public spaces of the television airwaves. This is because there is evidence that such nudity (especially when it involves sex) contributes to promiscuity at younger ages.
Even as Christians throughout the UK prepare to observe Valentine’s Day as a Day of Purity, our nation is reeling from last week’s revelations of the astonishing scope of Government complicity in the contraceptive trade.
Throughout Southampton special NHS nurses have been visiting nine schools and colleges to offer contraceptive implants to thousands of girls behind their parents’ back.
The full measure of the scandal emerged last week when it was disclosed that a staggering 7,400 girls aged 15 and under were given the implants and jabs, in what amounts to a six-fold increase in just five years.
Writing in yesterday’s Sunday Express, Nick Ferrari suggested that the practice “sounds like a relic from Stalinist Russia or Hitler’s Germany.” He pointed out the inconsistency in a system that prohibits school nurses from even applying a sticking plaster to children in case they have an allergic reaction and yet sends out a special army of nurses to pump underage schoolgirls full of hormones so they can have risk free sex. Mr Ferrari commented,
This is as close to state-sanctioned child abuse as we’ll ever sink….
It is unimaginable that this would be accepted in any other area where we try to educate and discipline children ourselves. If the state were offering teenagers free alcopops or joints, there would be a deafening outcry. Yet when it comes to sex we seem to just shrug and accept it. the pressure on girls from boys who know they can get the implants or injections will be huge. You can hear the shrill whining of “If you loved me, you’d get them” and “Mum and Dad will never know” as the girls are forced to give in.
Of equal concern is the risk of infertility brought about by the Government’s policy. Ferrari writes,
Even if you’re deluded enough to support this, as depressingly many campaigners are, no one seems to think of the massive risk of picking up sexually transmitted infections as girls can swap partners as easily as they change their pop socks. The risk of a girl being left unable to ever conceive is considerable, but to these warped advocates that’s probably seen as a bonus as the girl can have even more sex without even needing the jabs.”
While Government has a teenage pregnancy unit, they have no teenage infertility unit. No one in Government knows how many girls are being made infertile through state-sanctioned promiscuity and, frankly, nobody cares. Nick Ferrari has hit the nail on the head. An infertile girl will not figure into the pregnancy statistics and will actually help to decrease the surplus population, as they see it.
If you are concerned about this and would like information on what you can do to help foster a culture of Chastity, join Christian Voice and get a free copy of our booklet ‘A Generation Betrayed.’ Also visit the Day of Purity website to find out how Christians throughout the UK can spend Valentine’s Day supporting chastity.
Join Christian Voice by clicking the Join button or send a donation via the Donate button below:
A preacher has been found not guilty of a public order offence after a complaint from two homosexuals.
Michael Overd, from Taunton, was part of a street witness and was preaching from 1Cor 6:9-11 in October 2010 when two homosexual men, Craig Nicholl and Craig Manning, passed him holding hands. Hearing the word ‘homosexual’ in the passage, they turned round, went up to Mr Overd and began shouting at him, using despicable foul language. The Court was told Mr Nicholl spat at the preacher.
On a second occasion, 16th July 2011, Michael Overd was preaching alone when the two approached him. In full flow, he said, ‘Even these two dear men, whom I’ve met before, caught in the sin of homosexuality, can have forgiveness of their sin.’
The two Craigs, who recently entered into a ‘civil partnership’, again began screaming at the preacher and making, he told Taunton Deane Magistrates Court, all kinds of homosexually-charged comments and allegations at him. Not satisfied with that, they called the police, but so aggressive did they become, it was Mr Overd who was glad to see the boys in blue.
Michael Overd was prosecuted under Section 4a of the Public Order Act 1986:
Section 4A – Intentionally causing harassment, alarm or distress:
‘A person is guilty if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he
‘a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
‘b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
‘thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.’.
But the Court found that Michael Overd did not have any such intent and found him not guilty.
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, heard the evidence in court and said after the verdict:
‘Coming on a day when both the Bulls and Bideford Council lost their cases in the High Court, this verdict is welcome news. Christians find themselves today in an environment where they can be insulted, sworn at, threatened with violence, even spat at, and then themselves charged with a public order offence. Clearer instructions and better training need to filter down to police officers so that cases like this do not waste the time of the court. This case should never have been brought and the verdict is a victory for Christian liberty and for freedom of speech.’
Messrs Nicholl and Manning, who described each other in court as ‘my husband’ , alleged that Michael Overd told them they would ‘burn in hell’ but this turned out to be as much a figment of their imagination as the idea that they are in any way ‘married’ to each other. Four witnesses told the court that they had never heard Mr Overd use such language.
An amusing moment happened when the prosecutor tried to explore the defendant’s view on certain subjects as heaven and hell, abortion, fornication and homosexuality. Time after time, Mr Overd referred the lawyer to the Bible, saying that he believed what was in it. In the end, the chairman of the magistrates lost patience, and said to the prosecutor, ‘I think we have established that his beliefs are based on what he reads in the Bible.’
By the end of the evidence, the Court was left in no doubt as to who would not inherit the kingdom of God. In the King James Version: 1Cor 6:9 ‘Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.’
Michael Overd was represented in court by Paul Diamond of counsel instructed by Michael Phillips, solicitor.
JOIN Christian Voice or donate by clicking on one of the buttons below:
But there is another issue, and one which we should all be able to agree on regardless of our views on homosexuality. I refer to the way homosexual curriculum, not least the resources UK schools use during LGBT month, overload young children with adult issues that are beyond their cognitive and psychological capacity to process.
To expect a child who has not even reached puberty to understand about transgenderism, cross dressing, gender reassignment surgery, etc., is to introduce categories into their thinking that are well beyond their ability to adequately process and can be deeply confusing. These concepts are confusing for adults, let alone 6-year olds!
That is exactly what Dr. Grossman argued in the following video when testifying last year to the State of California legislature about homosexual curriculum. Her expertise in the field of child psychology and pediatrics gives her a valuable perspective on this debate that the propagators of LGBT History Month would do well to heed.
Join Christian Voice by clicking the Join button or send a donation via the Donate button below:
Our misgivings about child protection social workers were pretty-well confirmed last Monday 30th Jan 2012 with a fly-on-the-wall documentary following a child welfare case in Bristol. You can catch the next episode on BBC2, Monday night at 9.00pm (not Scotland) and/or view episodes HERE.
Called ‘Damned if they do, damned if they don’t’, last Monday’s progranmme followed a seemingly inexorable chain of events in which an uneducated couple lost their son, and then their newly-born daughter, to the care system. The couple went to Bristol Social Services for help, as many do.
We realised afterwards that, except for a hand-out of a bed for their son, there was no help from Bristol SS, only a series of directives and ultimata which the inadequate parents would always be hopeless at fulfilling. These lost souls needed a training course in nutrition and house-management for a start, and a basic all-round education would not have come amiss either.
On ITV’s This Morning yesterday, towards the end of the programme, two high-ranking Bristol social workers, including the one pictured, said they were ‘taking a risk’ by allowing the programme to follow them around. They were right. Even though the family in the programme were an obvious ‘hard case’, the outcome still left a bad taste in the mouth.
They reminded us of the source of their philosophy, which appears to be: ‘If in doubt, take the child out’. It all stems back to the Children Act 1989. This Act made the ‘welfare of the child’ the paramount consideration of the family Court. Keeping a family together is not remotely a consideration. For those who believe the Family has equal status with the State as social institutions of Almighty God, this approach takes some getting used to.
Even knowing what we know about the dangers of the Care System (with apologies to all you good Christian foster parents out there) the Court will still have a default position that the child’s welfare is best served by being in care.
So if they are ‘Damned if they do, damned if they don’t’, why do they not lean towards ‘Don’t’ rather than ‘Do’? (This was a question that the naive Eamonn Holmes was never going to ask.)
The answer is that if they ‘Do’ take a child and get it wrong, then owing to the secrecy of the family courts (in the ‘best interests of the child’ of course) no-one ever gets to hear of it. If they ‘Don’t’ take a child and it all goes sour, the child’s fate ends up on front pages of the newspapers and social workers lose their jobs.
Douglas Wilson has some good things to say here about some of the issues upstream of the modesty debate, which echoes some of the concerns we raised in the July 2011 Christian Voice newsletter when we covered the ‘slutwalks.’
Wilson also helpfully reminds us that when a woman reveals too much flesh, it is often not because she has too much sexual security but too less. Wilson writes,
One of the most striking things about these flesh parades is how unattractive it all is. As in, gekkk. … There are clearly numerous young ladies who have no one in their lives willing to speak to them truthfully. And when women don’t have someone who loves them like they ought to, they become susceptible to any number of fads, so long as someone — most likely a peer with the same emotional problems — is willing to tell them it is “cute.” Well, it isn’t. Sorry to break it to you. There also appears to be an inverse relationship between the class of the person and how many square feet are covered by the tattoo.
The problem here, at least within the church, is that hints don’t get you anywhere, no effect at all, and if you state the problem plainly, it flattens the poor girl for months, like somebody took a pastoral mallet to her. By “hints,” I mean general references in sermons to modesty and decorum, and by “stating plainly” I mean suggesting that she come to church next week with the mammalian pride dialed back just a skosh. The problem is not that she is secure in her sexuality — it is just the reverse. You can tell this because women who want to be “secure” in their sexuality in this way at the same time do not want men around them who are secure in their sexuality in a comparable way.
When Wilson suggests that the problem with women who parade their flesh is not that they are too secure in their sexuality but that they are too insecure in it, I thought of the recent controversy over Lara Pulver’s nude scene in the pre-watershed BBC1 Sherlock Holmes.
Actress Lara Pulver commented that it was "really empowering" to go completely naked in the new Sherlock Holmes series
Significantly, after appearing completely nude in front of Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock) and Martin Freeman (Dr Watson) for eight hours during the shooting (to say nothing of the more than 10 million viewers who were able to see sustained footage of Pulver in her birthday suit), Mrs. Pulver commented that “something really empowering takes over.”
This echoes many of the comments made by those women who participated in the slutwalks, who said that they felt “empowered” when they paraded down the streets of London in various stages of nudity.
If Douglas Wilson is right, a woman who is secure in herself and in her sexuality does not need to take off all her clothes to feel empowered. Indeed, when women think it is empowering to undress in front of men, that is often evidence that our society in general, and fathers in particular, are not giving them the respect and dignity they deserve. Lacking an inherent sense of their own worth, they feel compelled to prove themselves by parading their flesh. Sadly, this often gives women a false empowering that acts as a substitute to genuine female dignity.
(To read more about nudity in films and the implications this has for how we view the body, see the article recently published by the Chuck Colson Center titled ‘Nudity and the Christian worldview.’)
Join Christian Voice by clicking the Join button or send a donation via the Donate button below:
The ‘gay’ lobby is not the only group that has fixated on school children. A report in the Express last week showed how the Brussels’ propaganda machine is introducing resources designed to teach children about the benefits of the EU.
A film was taken at an Education Show in Birmingham in which Judith Schilling was interviewed about her display of resources from the European Commission.
In the film Mrs. Schilling commented, “…everybody has now picked up the idea that we will never succeed in convincing people about the value of being a member of the European Union if we do not start early enough with the young people, before they form prejudices and are misinformed by other sources.”
The free literature for teachers included a resource titled, “The EU: What’s in it for me?” explaining “how we benefit from membership of the EU in our daily life, everything between lower roaming charges and cleaner bathing water.”
Robin Phillips, press secretary for Christian Voice, commented, “The EU is getting desperate because they know that the majority of people in Britain, as well as many of the other states, are not in favour of continuing EU membership. Thus, the EU’s only hope is to try to raise up a new generation that accept the European Union as not only normal but beneficial. To do that, however, they have to start when the children are very young.”
In the video below, Dr. Berlinksi talks about the absence of any laboratory evidence to support the central claims of the Darwinian hypothesis. At the end of the day, what we find is an “inherent species limitation” in which “bugs stay bugs.”
Homosexual groups throughout the UK are getting ready for next month, which has been designated ‘LGBT History Month.’
In preparation for the event, organizations like Stonewall are providing a plethora of resources to children as young as four, who will be learning details of everything from lesbian love to cross dressing. (See some of Stonewall’s Secondary resources here and some of their primary resources here.)
Sign our Petition ‘Leave our children alone’ by clicking HERE. (Opens in a new tab/window)
Significantly, February was chosen for the occasion since it coincides with celebrations of the abolition of Section 28 in February 2005, an event which made it possible for teachers to begin exposing students to homosexual propaganda.
One of Stonewall's many resources for schools
The enthusiasm for February 2012 is not limited to homosexual activists interested in children. Prime Minister David Cameron has issued a letter of support for the month, saying “I am pleased to be supporting this year’s LGBT History Month…. Events like this enrich our society and challenge us to think more about the world around us.”
Mr. Cameron was joined in his sentiments by Labour Party leader Ed Milliband, who wrote in a public letter that “The principles behind LGBT History Month reflect the kind of society we would all like to see…”
So what are “the principles behind LGBT History Month”? What types of things will British school children will be doing throughout February 2012?
Part of the answer to these questions can be found in the 18 pages of school activities that Amnesty International produced in 2005 and which is still being given to schools by the promoters of LGBT History Month. The human rights organization encourages students to do role playing activities in which some of them are supposed to play the part of people who are ‘homophobic.’ Another activity among Amnesty International’s resources involves school children being asked to look up the following terms in dictionaries and encyclopedias:
What promoters of LGBT History Month will not be telling teachers and students next month is that Kinsey was a sexual masochist who supported using children for sexual experimentation and whose pseudo-scientific ‘research’ has been discredited when it emerged that he did not take representative samples
Gay
Homophobic
Lesbian
Sexual orientation
Transvestite
Prejudice
Queer
Bisexual
Gender identity
Biological sex
Transgender
Heterosexist
Amnesty International justifies one of the classroom activities based on data collected by Alfred Kinsey which, according to the organization, showed that “13 per cent of the men interviewed and 6 per cent of the women identified themselves as predominantly homosexual, and a third of men and half as many women said that they had been involved in same-sex activity at some stage in their lives.” What promoters of LGBT History Month will not be telling teachers and students next month is that Kinsey was a sexual masochist who supported using children for sexual experimentation and whose pseudo-scientific ‘research’ has been discredited when it was discovered that he did not take representative samples. (For a more accurate account of Kinsey’s legacy than will be publicized during LGBT History Month, see the articles from Salvo magazine, Rape Rates: Kinsey’s Junk Science & Other Unreported Sex Crimes and Rotten Apple Awards: Sex Ed Based on Lies Is Child Abuse.)
Amnesty International is not the only organization providing resources for teachers next month. One Stonewall resource for use in schools during LGBT History Month says:
“Talk about the special friendships we have when we are older. Reference mums and dads, boyfriend and girlfriend. Also reference, two men who love each other (gay) and two women who love each other (lesbian). Challenge any negativity the children may have around the use or understanding of these words.”
Stonewall also provides resources for school children such as the the book And Tango Makes Threeabout two male penguins who fall in love and start a family, King and King about a fairytale prince who kisses and marries another prince, and Daddy’s Roommate which introduces children to the idea of two men sleeping together through the character of a boy who forms an affectionate bond with his father’s partner.
The official website for LGBT History Month gives various lesson suggestions, which include everything from guided discussions of pro-homosexual story books to an “intersex presentation” involving a pornographic “trans poem” (scroll a quarter of the way down on this page to view the poem).
The website also offers a free resource encouraging school children to read the story of Jakey and Claire, two lesbian schoolgirls who are forced to be separated from each other when their parents and classmates turn against the relationship.
Not to be outdone, the organization Schools Out is advertising training courses so that schools throughout Britain can have the opportunity of replicating the ‘gay friendly’ model of Stoke Newington School in Hackney. (Click here to see their advertizing poster.)
Last year for LBGT month, the state school at Hackney put on what they called a ‘Creative Day.’ In a video about the event, Elly Barnes, who helped organize the day, shared how students went to their usual lessons while issues of LGBT rights were integrated into every subject, including English, Life Skills, French, Humanities, Music and Drama. Students also made signs for the school’s gay rights parade, with messages such as, “If your [sic] gay, say yay’ and ‘Don’t run away – be gay!’ and ‘Nothing Wrong With LGBT.’ The day was punctuated with the school’s ‘LGBT Spring Concert’ in the evening, featuring students from the school and the London Gay Men’s Chorus.
LGBT history month is not just a chance to try to normalize homosexual relationships in the minds of children. The LBGT History Month website also offers lesson plans on gender variance aimed at helping students think “outside of a simple ‘Male-Female’ model”.
In the section on ‘Teaching Goals’ (see page 1 here) we read that “Students are expected to discover and learn that…[p]eople are not always simply male or female.” Teachers are encouraged to discuss questions such as “Was Joan of Arc a transgendered man or a historical feminist heroine?” One class exercise is centred around the question “How does society accommodate or reject gender crossing?”
LGBT month is also a time for homosexuals to ‘out’ historical figures who cannot speak in their own defence. For example, the LGBT website gives this resource for learning about Shakespeare’s love sonnets, claiming “it seems likely that some of the greatest love poems in the English language were written by one man to another.” Because we know very little about Shakespeare’s personal life, and because he wrote one poem that appears to be about the love of one man for another (there is nothing in the poem to suggest the love was physical), the gay lobby have unhesitatingly claimed Shakespeare as one of their partners in perversion.
ACP Warns Against Homosexual Education
The American College of Pediatricians has published research showing that over 85% of school students with same-sex attractions will ultimately adopt a heterosexual orientation if not otherwise encouraged. Den Trumbull, MD, FCP, Vice President of the ACP has written a letter to school educators urging that “schools should not seek to develop policy which ‘affirms’ or encourages these non-heterosexual attractions among students who may merely be experimenting or experiencing temporary sexual confusion. Such premature labeling can lead some adolescents to engage in homosexual behaviors that carry serious physical and mental health risks.” (For more information on this to share with your MP, see the resources the ACP has made available on their ‘Facts about Youth‘ website.)
Stonewall Aims to Make Children ‘Resilient’ Against the Values of Their Parents
As already mentioned, the gay rights pressure group Stonewall is heavily involved in LGBT History month, providing resources and teacher training packs to primary schools who wish to become gay friendly. By using these materials, schools can prove that they are complying with the Equality Act 2010.
As part of a teacher’s training pack, the homosexual group has included a 29-minute DVD in which activists state that their goal is to make children ‘resilient’ against the values of their parents and grandparents.
Garry Ratcliffe, head teacher at Oakfield Cimmunity Primary School in Kent who was interviewed for the DVD, said
“Our school is a safe environment and it’s a secure environment for the children that we teach and we nurture” “But we can’t guarantee that when they leave that nurturing environment, that their parents, their grandparents and their neighbours are going to hold the same values as we do. And that’s why we need to make sure our children are resilient and proud and assertive so that their generation will actually change.”
Another teacher commented,
“We’ve got boys with the pompoms doing the dance, you know, and I think that is absolutely wonderful because not only are they there saying ‘actually, this is fine, I can be who I am and do this without anybody laughing and teasing me’, but that is a wonderful role model.”
Bill's New Frock was made into a children's movie in 1998. It tells the story of a boy who wakes up one morning to discover that he is a girl.
Stonewall is also working to make children resilient against a binary man-woman view of gender and offers resources designed to broaden children’s understanding of gender. Their recommended resources include the bookBill’s New Frock, which Stonewall explains is the story about a boy who “wakes up one day as a girl and is horrified to be sent to school in a frilly pink frock with fiddly shell buttons.” It doesn’t take Bill long for his gender stereotypes to be undermined, not least because boys begin flirting with him (who is now called ‘her’) instead of bullying him. As the day progresses he finds that being a girl isn’t so bad after all.
It would be nice to say that cross-dressing is limited to fictional school children like Bill. However, in the Stonewall training DVD, teachers have shared their experiences encouraging boys to dress up as girls. A class teacher for St. Matthew’s Primary School in Cambridgeshire boasted that “I had a group of boys last year and every day they came into school they wanted to wear the dressing up dresses. And they really loved wearing dressing up dresses and it went on for several weeks, and within the culture of the classroom I wanted to say that that was ok.” The teacher went on to explain how she reprimanded other boys who criticized the cross-dressers. Tony Davies, the head teacher of the same school, explained how the school had a cheer-leading club in which boys dressed themselves in pom-poms and put in “I think that is absolutely wonderful.”
Daniel Villarreal, a contributor at the prominent gay news source Queerty, has been remarkably candid that their goal is to indoctrinate kids. In an article titled, ‘Can We Please Just Start Admitting That We Do Actually Want To Indoctrinate Kids?’ Daniel Villarreal wrote, “We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it.”
If organizations like 'Schools Out' get their way, all school children throughout Britain will march behind the homosexual rainbow flag
Mr Villarreal pleads with his colleagues in the gay lobby to come right out and admit that their agenda does involve “indoctrinating.”
Reacting to gay lobbyists who say “It’s not like we’re trying to recruit your children or anything” Mr. Villarreal said, “let’s face it—that’s a lie…. Recruiting children? You bet we are.”
He continued: “I for one certainly want tons of school children to learn that…people of the same sex should be allowed to legally marry each other…”
“I and a lot of other people want to indoctrinate, recruit, teach, and expose children to queer sexuality AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.” (Capitals his)
What is interesting about Mr. Villarreal’s remarks is that he acknowledges the homosexual lobby has been trying to recruit children all along but that they haven’t had the guts to admit it. “And because we hide from this very basic fact and treat it like something to be ashamed of, we end up with watered-down unemotional pleas for equality…”
Mr. Villarreal is part of a growing number of virulent North American homosexualists who are coming out of the closet to reveal their militant aims. For example, writing in the online edition of Xtra Vancouver in October last year, Robin Perelle said about parents who object to homosexual propaganda in schools, “You’re clinging to an outdated moral code, flailing against a tide of change that’s leaving you and your few remaining followers behind. Speaking to parents with traditional beliefs Mrs. Perelle, who is the managing editor of Xtra, commented, “…the gay rights movement is shifting norms in Canada. And with that comes a message to those who won’t evolve: your outdated morals are no longer acceptable, and we will teach your kids the new norms.”
WRITE: to your MP and protest against the Prime Minister’s support of LGBT History month. Ask your MP to forward your concerns onto the Prime Minister’s office.
READ: Deut 6:5-7; Psalm 111:10; Pro 1:8, 22:6; Luke 2:51; Eph 6:1-6
If you are a parent, PRAY: That the Lord would safeguard your children from all danger. Pray also for wisdom to exercise your duty as your child’s God-ordained principal teacher.
If you are a parent of a child in a school, ask your child’s teacher if anything of a sex and relationships nature is planned for next month. (Don’t specifically mention LGBT History Month). And while you are there, ask to see the sex education materials for your child’s class. If you find anything untoward, ask to see the head, and let us know so we can help you motivate other parents.
NOTE: Many parents are taking their children out of school and educating them at home. Contact us if you want to know the available options for going about that.
Written by the managing editor of WorldNetDaily.com, the book takes a look behind the scenes at the powerful forces that have sold evil to the West throughout the past four or five decades. He shows how the architects of various anti-Christian movements employed well planned out methods for inculcating their ideas into the culture.
These methods were rooted in the most sophisticated advertising techniques available and had the effect of desensitizing our society to many things it previously found objectionable. Things that we take for granted now – like associating the negative idea of abortion with the positive idea of ‘choice’– were the results of deliberate strategizing on the part of elitists.
Kupelian quotes architects of the homosexual movement who, in the late 1980’s, had a ‘War Conference’ to discuss their strategy for the 90s. The conference employed a Harvard researcher in neuropsychiatry to come up with effective tactics for mass persuasion and social marketing. Among the conclusions of the conference was the need to desensitize America culture to otherwise offensive homosexual material through an extensive three-stage strategy of Desensitize, Jam and Convert. By inundated the public with a flood of offensive material presented in the least offensive fashion possible, they hoped that it would eventually seem almost laughable to make a problem out of it. The strategy, summarized by Rondeau in an article from the Regent University Law Review and cited by Kupelian, described desensitization
as inundating the public in a “continuous flood of gay-related advertising, presented in the least offensive fashion possible. If straights can’t shut off the shower, they may at least eventually get used to being wet.” But, the activists did not mean advertising in the usual marketing context but, rather, quite a different approach: “The main thing is to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly tiresome.” They add, “[S]eek desensitization and nothing more. . . . If you can get [straights] to think [homosexuality] is just another thing—meriting no more than a shrug of the shoulders—then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.” This planned hegemony is a variant of the type that Michael Warren describes in “Seeing Through the Media” where it “is not raw overt coercion; it is one group’s covert orchestration of compliance by another group through structuring the consciousness of the second group.”
The Marketing of Evilshows how similar processes of mass manipulation have been operative in other arenas, with the effect that sin has begun to look normal and righteousness strange. Kupelian presents evidence to show how this is going on, even at the moment, to subtly orient the West to accept paedophilia as a normal and legitimate expression of sexuality.
Although The Marketing of Evil is written for an American audience, the issues he raises are relevant throughout the contemporary West. The book is a must-read for all parents with teenagers, as it will help them to understand the powerful forces at work to corrupt the minds of the next generation.
We hear a lot these days about the dangers of moral relativism, or about what happens in a society that has abandoned its commitment to objective morals. This was a theme touched upon in David Cameron’s recent speech on the King James Bible, which we covered in the recent January Christian Voice newsletter. This emphasis on objective morals is important, but it is equally important to remind ourselves what moral relativism looks like on ground level.
Earlier in the week for his Breakpoint program, Chuck Colson told about the recent experience of Dr. Stephen Anderson, who teaches philosophy at A.B. Lucas Secondary School in Ontario, Canada. His students had just finished a unit on metaphysics and were about to start one on ethics. Colson writes about Dr. Anderson’s plan for getting the conversation about ethics going.
Bibi Aisha, the teenage wife of a Taliban fighter in Afghanistan. When Bibi tried to get away from her abusive husband, her family caught her, cut off her nose and ears, and left her to die in the mountains.
To jump start the discussion and to “form a baseline from which they could begin to ask questions about the legitimacy of moral judgments of all kinds,” Anderson shared with them a gruesome photo of Bibi Aisha, a teenage wife of a Taliban fighter in Afghanistan. When Bibi tried to get away from her abusive husband, her family caught her, cut off her nose and ears, and left her to die in the mountains. Only Bibi didn’t die. Somehow she crawled to her grandfather’s house, and was saved in an American hospital.
Writing in Education Journal magazine, Anderson relates how he was sure that his students, “seeing the suffering of this poor girl of their own age, [they] would have a clear ethical reaction,” one they could talk about “more difficult cases.”
But their response shocked Anderson. “[He] expected strong aversion [to it], … but that’s not what I got. Instead, they became confused . . . afraid to make any moral judgment at all. They were unwilling to criticize,” as he said, “any situation originating in a different culture. They said, ‘Well, we might not like it, but maybe over there it’s okay.’”
Anderson calls their confusion and refusal to judge such child mutilation a moment of startling clarity, and indeed it is. He wonders if it stems not from too little education, but from too much multiculturalism and so-called “values education,” which is really just an excuse for moral relativism.
Anderson writes, “While we may hope some [students] are capable of bridging the gap between principled morality and this ethically vacuous relativism, it is evident that a good many are not. For them, the overriding message is ‘never judge, never criticize, never take a position.’” Anderson wonders whether in our current educational system, we’re not producing ethical paralytics? Well, if the horrifying example of the students’ reaction in this case is any indication, Anderson already knows the answer.
Unfortunately Anderson is right. Thanks to relativism, political correctness, multiculturalism, postmodernism, and countless other isms, a generation of young people have been left hesitant to criticize moral atrocities when those atrocities are rooted in a different cultural tradition. How can I say that something that would be wrong for me (or even us) to do is also wrong for people with a different background?
This cultural relativism was condemned by Sam Harris in his book The Moral Landscape. “While few philosophers have ever answered to the name of ‘moral relativist” Sam Harris wrote, “it is by no means uncommon to find local eruptions of this view whenever scientists and other academics encounter moral diversity.” Harris continued:
Forcing women and girls to wear burqas may be wrong in Boston or Palo Alto, so the argument will run, but we cannot say that it is wrong for Muslims in Kabul…. Moral relativism, however, tends to be self-contradictory. Relativists may say that moral truths exist only relative to a specific cultural framework – but this claim about the status of moral truth purports to be true across all possible frameworks. In practice, relativism almost always amounts to the claim that we should be tolerant of moral difference because no moral truth can supersede any other. And yet this commitment to tolerance is not put forward a simple one relative preference among others deemed equally valid. Rather, tolerance is held to be more in line with the (universal) truth about morality than intolerance is.
The interesting thing is that Sam Harris is himself an atheist and a materialistic determinists. Moral absolutes can and do exist, he asserts, but they are rooted in neither God nor biological evolution. Rather, they are grounded in neuroscience. This is the thesis of Harris’ entire book, which we have reviewed in the January Christian Voice newsletter. (To join Christian Voice and receive a copy of our newsletter, click here.) We have shown in our book review that the reductionist account of morality that Harris offers ultimately lapses into the very relativism he is so keen to avoid. For example, Harris writes that each of us
is like a phenomenological glockenspiel played by an unseen hand. From the perspective of your conscious mind, you are no more responsible for the next thing you think (and therefore do) that you are for the fact that you were born into this world.” (p. 104)
“Gazzaniga is surely correct to say that ‘in neurosceintific terms, no person is more or less responsible than any other for actions.’ Conscious actions arise on the basis of neural events of which we are not conscious. Whether they are predictable or not, we do not cause our causes.” (p. 217)
Just think about that: if you and I have no control over what we do, and if we are not responsible for any of our actions, then how can moral values exist in any objective sense? Indeed, within the framework of the scientific determinism that Harris espouses, it is impossible to say that what happened to Bibi Aisha is ultimately wrong in any objective sense.
By contrast, Sainsbury overtook Asda with like-for-like sales in the Christmas period up 2.1%. Morrisons were up 0.7%. Tesco was the only one of the ‘big four’ to see sales and profits drop.
The news follows a Christian Voice campaign of prayer, backed up by emails to directors complaining at the ‘Gay Pride’ decision and leafleting at Tesco stores. Just before Christmas a panic-stricken Tesco announced that the 2012 ‘Gay Pride’ donation would be its last. Hours later, in the face of a homosexual backlash, it had to clarify that gays and lesbians were really important and promise that it would support its homosexual contact group ‘Out at Tesco’ in other ways in 2013, which only made matters worse.
Stung by revelations that it dumped Cancer Research Race for Life days before its Gay Pride announcement, Tesco has now made Cancer Research its 2012 ‘Charity of the Year’, although it seems to expect its staff, customers and suppliers to do all the work.
Analysts are blaming Tesco’s ‘Big Price Drop’ idea for the store’s failure, which has led to them issuing a profit’s warning. Natalie Berg, of consultant Planet Retail, said: “Tesco has taken its eye off the ball. It has focused too much just on the price of food. We now all expect high-quality food and everyone is claiming to be the cheapest – consumers are much more wary.”
‘Our prayer – which we said ‘will humble proud Tesco’ – centred on a desire that the Tesco board would rescind the decision, which has not happened yet. Indeed their announcement on 23rd December made matters worse.
‘However, bad, confused, initiatives have beset the Tesco boardroom. Tesco’s ‘Big Price Drop’, launched in September, was destined to fail. I believe God was anticipating our prayers, knowing from the action we were to take that our prayers would be serious, and that the Almighty was behind that disastrous decision.
‘On top of that, Tesco’s ‘Gay Pride’ announcement, made six weeks before Christmas, could not have come at a worse time for them. It was madness to think that such brazen support for the tiny 1% of the population who are homosexual could have a positive effect. As a result, thousands of Christians and other decent people boycotted the store at what should have been its busiest time of the year.
‘I now call on Tesco to repent of their arrogance before matters get worse and people lose their jobs. Withdraw the grant to Gay Pride. Apologise to the decent families upon whose patronage their business depends. Deal better with your suppliers. And label halal ritually-slaughtered meat so people can see what they are buying.’
Exod 10:7 And Pharaoh’s servants said unto him, How long shall this man be a snare unto us? let the men go, that they may serve the LORD their God: knowest thou not yet that Egypt is destroyed?
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
1 Pray that God will send repentance into the Tesco boardroom, and that they will reverse their grant to gay pride.
2 Boycott Tesco and encourage others to do the same (see (3) below.
3 Mount a witness with banners and/or give leaflets out to shoppers outside Tesco’s high street stores ‘Tesco Direct’ (they can throw you out of their car park, but you have every right to witness on the street). Contact us for leaflets. The text of the LEAFLET is HERE
4 Email/write to the Tesco Group Chief Executive, Philip Clark, philip.clarke@tesco.com and their Marketing Director, Richard Brasher: richard.brasher@tesco.com. You can also write to their new Chairman, Sir Richard Broadbent, at New Tesco House, Delamare Rd, Cheshunt, Herts, EN8 9SL. His email seems to be: richard.broadbent@tesco.com (HERE is what one ex-Tesco-customer wrote.)
6 There are a couple of other really effective things to do as well, but we shall let Christian Voice members exclusively know about them at the proper time through our newsletter which never goes up on the web! For that – and/or to support us in this spiritual battle – you will need to Join Christian Voice:
You can send a donation if you do not wish to join:
Andrew Lloyd Webber is to launch a new musical reality show on on ITV to find someone to play Jesus in a new production of Jesus Christ Superstar.
The multimillionaire composer and life peer has already put on four similar shows on the BBC to find Maria for the Sound of Music and cast members for Oliver.
As well as looking for Jesus, Lloyd Webber is also expected to seek someone to play the part of Judas in the 1971 rock opera, for which he wrote the music to Tim Rice’s lyrics.
The BBC’s fear of offending Christians by telling members of the public ‘You could be Jesus’ is said to explain Lloyd Webber’s move to ITV.
According to Yahoo.co.uk an insider told The Sun that ‘he has been wanting to get this off the ground for some time but the BBC just didn’t want it. They had issues about auditioning for Jesus. They feared Christians would get hot under the collar’.
The Life Peer will be head judge on a panel including Steve Balsamo, who played Jesus in an earlier production.
The winner will perform in a planned arena tour of the production rather like the loss-making tour of Jerry Springer the Opera, which saw every performance lobbied and audiences leafleted in a campaign led by Christian Voice. Every theatre lost money on the tour.
Jesus Christ Superstar was labelled blasphemous when it came out for the extra-biblical tensions between Jesus and Judas, the disrespect shown to the Saviour, the very depiction of ‘images’ of the Lord on stage and the abrupt Crucifixion ending with no Resurrection. It was defended as a ‘Passion Play’ but these were always staged as a precursor to the glories and celbrations of Easter Day. Lyricist Tim Rice decided the Gospels were inadequate portrayals of the passion week, that Jesus had no idea of his deity and that he was just a man with no supernatural powers and certainly not the Son of God.
Like Jerry Springer the Opera, this is a perfect opportunity to reach the unsaved queuing to audition with the Gospel and witness against the reality show and the intended production at the same time.
Stewart Lee, the author of Jerry Springer the Opera, famously said that Christian Voice killed his musical. We give God the glory, but the disaster of the tour, with audiences staying away in droves, shows what miracles God can do when Christian people do the simple things he calls them to.
Now that the story about Tesco giving £30,000 to the debauched and aggressive 2012 London Gay Pride Parade (called ‘World Pride’ this year) is almost two months old, some of us have forgotten that (or even whether) they stopped supporting the ‘Race for Life’ organised by Cancer Research just days before announcing their cash for the gays.
Here is a bit of the confusion reaching us: Fred says: ‘Tesco has not stopped supporting Cancer Research UK, indeed 2012 is likely to produce the biggest sponsorship ever after £7 million in 2011’. Another correspondent takes a sideways line: ‘£30,000 is not much out of Tesco’s total charitable giving budget.’
Last point first. It does not matter how much Tesco are giving to ‘Gay Pride’. If they made a charitable donation of £500 to the National Secular Society or gave £750 to the Euthanasia fanatics, or £1,000 to the abortionists at Marie Stopes, Christians and other decent people would be outraged, even if Tesco said ‘But we are giving £64million to other good causes’ (which is what they do say).
So what is the truth about ‘Race for Life’? The Daily Mail stated on 11th November: ‘Tesco has triggered outrage by ending its support for the Cancer Research ‘Race for Life’ while deciding to sponsor Britain’s largest gay festival.
‘Tesco has worked with Cancer Research for more than ten years, raising hundreds of millions of pounds to help combat an illness that will affect one in three of the population.
‘The chain’s main contribution was support for the annual fundraising Race for Life, the UK’s largest women-only charity event, which has raised more than £400million for the fight against cancer since it began in 1994.
‘But shortly after Tesco announced the partnership would end, the firm said it would be a headline sponsor of Pride London.’
The Mail continued by quoting both Cancer Research and Tesco to back up their story: ‘Cancer Research UK, which gave no sign of disappointment about losing Tesco’s support, is looking for a new partner for the Race for Life.
‘Emma Gilbert, who organises the event, said the partnership ‘came to a natural end’ for both parties.
‘But she added: ‘Tesco employees have taken part in events across the UK, raising over £7million for our life-saving research, and we hope they will continue to take part in the events.’
‘Tesco said it was in talks with the charity to support its work in other ways and would encourage staff to continue taking part in the Race for Life.
‘A spokesman said the decision to drop its support ‘is not connected to our £30,000 sponsorship for Pride, which is one of hundreds of community and charitable events that we will be supporting next year’.
So Tesco could not and did not deny that they had ended their support for Race for Life and days later announced the sponsorship for ‘Gay Pride’ (note how their spokesman leaves out the ‘gay’ bit).
We understand very well that one cannot take what this newspaper says at face value, and we uncovered some Daily Mail spin in their story about atheism at the BBC. But letters and emails from Tesco have confirmed the Daily Mail’s take on the giant superstore. An email dated 22nd November 2011 from Matthew Maycock, Customer Service Executive on behalf of the Chief Executive, Philip Clarke, said:
‘We remain very proud of the work we have done with Cancer Research UK and Race for Life. Since 2002 nearly two-thirds of our staff have taken part in or supported races, raising over £7 million. Though the nature of our relationship has changed, we will continue to support Race for Life in the years to come through the thousands of our staff that enter the event each year – paid for by Tesco.
‘We took a decision to support Pride London with a donation of £30,000 because our Out at Tesco network asked us to help.’
So there we have it. The Mail’s story, and our story is true. Tesco themselves have confirmed that they have indeed ended their formal support for Race for Life (‘nature of our relationship has changed’) and are now relying on their staff to take up the slack. As to the London (Gay) Pride donation, they admit this was lobbied for by the demanding, anti-Christian Tesco homosexual contact group ‘Out at Tesco’. It was rolling over when ‘Out at Tesco’ asked for a few pounds for their gay jamboree that has landed Tesco in this mess. Tesco should have been strong enough and smart enough to have said, ‘Sorry, guys, we just don’t sponsor divisive political statements’.
We are distributing these LEAFLETS at Tesco stores and you can click HERE for other prayer and action, including the email addresses of Tesco executives.
Hillary Clinton with Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, head of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation
In the Christian Voice newsletter we have often had occasion to comment on the strange alliance between fundamentalist Islam and Western left-wing politics. This strange alliance has been particularly strong in 21st century Europe.
On the surface, left-wing politics and fundamentalist Islam share nothing in common. Well, almost nothing. They do share in common a hatred of traditional Christianity. Peter Hitchens put his finger on the psychology of the Left’s alliance with Islam in his book The Rage Against God, when he noted that,
“The Left’s hostility to Christianity is actually specific, because Christianity is the religion of their own homes and homeland, the form in which they have encountered – and generally disliked and resented – the power of God in their own lives. Islam, for most of their time on Earth, has been an exotic and distant creed, never taught to them as a living faith, and never likely to be their own, or to require their obedience. Therefore they can sympathise with it because it is the enemy of their Christian monoculture and as an anti-colonial and therefore ‘progressive’ force. Some Marxists formed alliances with British Muslims despite their highly conservative attitudes towards women and homosexuals. Others prefer to live in a state of unresolved doublethink.”
I said earlier that hatred of traditional Christianity is the only thing that Islam and the political Left share in common. However, there is one more thing. Both are incredibly intolerant of dissent, as seen by the recent coalition of the OIC with the Obama administration to push through a UN resolution that many fear will criminalize criticism of Islam. We will be covering this resolution in our January newsletter. To join Christian Voice and receive our monthly newsletter, click here.
Christian Voice National Director Stephen Green said today,
‘Tesco haven’t actually budged an inch. They are still determined to give £30,000 to London Gay Pride 2012 as they said originally. And by announcing that they will continue to support their in-store homosexual contact group ‘Out at Tesco’ in new ways after 2012 they have made matters worse not better.
‘But Tesco are clearly worried. Christian Voice led the campaign against Tesco on 18th November by providing our members and friends with target addresses and emails for Tesco executives, including CEO Philip Clarke and Chairman Sir Richard Broadbent.
‘We have printed thousands of leaflets pointing out the evils of homosexual practice and calling for shoppers to boycott the supermarket giant. Dozens of our members have been handing these out in the last couple of weeks.
‘I was pleased to see the Christian Institute pick up on our boycott idea a week before Christmas, but what is really important is spreading the message among those who do not visit Christian campaign websites.
‘That is why I and other Christian Voice members spent some time on the day before Christmas Eve leafleting shoppers outside the Tesco Express stores in Baker Street and Melcombe Street.
‘In 2012 we need to step up our campaign. Firms sponsor events, individuals or sporting teams to associate themselves with that product’s ‘brand’. Stars lose sponsorship if their behaviour drops below a certain standard. The ‘gay pride’ brand suggests not wholesomeness but depravity, immorality, drug use, aggression, division and religious hatred. If the Lord blesses our campaign with more prayer and more willing hands, Tesco will be increasingly identified with the negative ‘gay pride brand’ throughout 2012.
‘We have also launched a petition and above all, last month we called for prayer for confusion in the Tesco Boardroom, for sales and profits to fall and for God to have the victory.
‘Confusion is now certainly reigning in the Tesco HQ in Cheshunt, with one inept decision after another, firstly dithering while Tesco’s Head of Research and Development, Nick Lansley, calls Christians ‘evil’ then annoying the gays with an unnecessary announcement while failing to placate decent people, and then trying to pacify the gays hours later. Christmas sales must have taken a knock to cause such panic.’
Tesco’s initial decision to give £30,000 toLondon’s aggressive, divisive display of political muscle and depravity was the result of intense lobbying inside Tesco from Lansley, a militant anti-Christian homosexual who filmed himself reciting the blasphemous Gay News poem and used his blog, on which he gave his full Tesco job description, to describe Christians opposing gay marriage as ‘evil.’
Stephen Green continued: ‘What made Tesco’s decision to bankroll Gay Pride all the worse was that they ended support for Cancer Research days before. They stopped saving precious lives in favour of propping up a deviant lifestyle.
‘It was good to find out last night that Tesco are rattled by our protest and were wobbling even as we were leafleting their stores.
‘It isn’t a victory in any sense yet, but it is an encouragement to press in harder with getting the leaflets into the hands of more shoppers in the New Year. Above all it just shows what power Christians can harness when they pray and act wholeheartedly in unity in a righteous cause.
‘The Governments’ decision to press ahead with so-called ‘gay marriage’ is suddenly looking rather vulnerable.
PLEASE CONTINUE TO PRAY that Tesco will back down, and that many more Christians will join our campaign to leaflet Tesco customers and spread word of the boycott and the reasons behind it.
Today is the Feast of the Holy Innocents, a day that Christians have historically set aside for remembering the baby boys of Bethlehem that Herod cruelly slaughtered (Matthew 2:16-18).
Also called Childermas, the Feast was instituted between 400 and 500 AD by the Latin-speaking church and intentionally placed within the octave of Christmas to emphasize that the Holy Innocents – considered by many to be the church’s first martyrs – gave their life for the newborn Saviour.
But the Feast is also a time when the church annually reaffirms her commitment to the sanctity of life. As George Grant observed last year,
It has long been the focus of the Christian Church’s commitment to protect and preserve the sanctity of human life–thus serving as a prophetic warning against the practicioners of abandonment and infanticide in the age of Antiquity, oblacy and pessiary in the Medieval epoch, and abortion and euthanasia in these Modern times. Generally set aside as a day of prayer, it culminates with a declaration of the covenant community’s unflinching commitment to the innocents who are unable to protect themselves.
As Dr. Grant’s words suggest, today is a time for us to mourn, not only over the Bethlehem martyrs, but over the tens of thousands of innocent victims who have been slain on the altar of the abortion industry. It is a time for us to pray against the modern day Herods who continue to act on the assumption that an infant derives its value (and hence its right to live) from members of the adult community.
At Christian Voice, we have made the sanctity of life a particular focus, and our our archives are filled with many articles on the evils of abortion. We would encourage you to read some of these articles, but more than that, we encourage you to make today a day of prayer for our nation. Ask the Lord to turn the hearts of our modern day Herods from murder to repentance.
Christian Voice is a prophetic ministry in the ‘forthtelling’ sense for those Christians who are fed up with the way things are, have had enough of secularist politicians imposing wickedness on the rest of us and who are not satisfied with trying to get ‘Christian influence in a secular world’ because they know ‘The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein’ (Psalm 24:1). If you want instead to lift high the Crown Rights of the King of kings, you have found the right place!
Membership Application
Yes, I/we wish to join Christian Voice. (Husband and wife may join as one)
I/we unreservedly support the aims of Christian Voice and agree with the Statement of Faith.
Please send me my free copy of Britain in Sin, which lifts the lid on the unrighteous legislation of the past fifity years and its devastating social consequences, my free copy of Understanding Islam, which will tell me all I need to know about Islam, my free copy of Labelling Halal, which exposes the secret sale of Islamic meat, and the latest Christian Voice newsletter, full of confidential prayer targets, which never goes up on the web.
I/we agree to computer storage of all information provided, solely for the use of Christian Voice.
Aims of Christian Voice
To uphold Christianity as the Faith of the United Kingdom.
To be a voice for Biblical values in law and public policy.
To defend and support traditional family life.
At all times to rely humbly on the blessing of Almighty God.
Statement of Faith
We believe in one creator God, eternally existent in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as stated in the historic creeds of the Christian church.
We acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord over all creation.
We believe the Holy Bible to be the inspired, infallible, written Word of God to whose precepts, given for the good of nations and individuals, all man’s laws must submit.
We believe all government to be under the authority of God and that its purpose is the maintenance of freedom and justice solely in accordance with Biblical principles.
Cost of annual membership is £20.00
If you agree with the Aims & Statement of Faith then click the button below.
If you wish to renew your membership please click the button below. We will match your details to our records.
By now all Christian Voice members should have received the January edition of our monthly newsletter. In it we have given an update of the horrendous situation in North Korea, where Christians are treated more severely than in any other nation on earth.
A preacher has been found not guilty of a public order offence after a complaint from two homosexuals.
A few years ago we did a review for our newsletter of David Kupelian’s book The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom.
Tesco has recorded a disastrous Christmas after announcing in early November a £30,000 donation to next year’s divisive, depraved London ‘Gay Pride’.
Now that the story about Tesco giving £30,000 to the debauched and aggressive 2012 London Gay Pride Parade (called ‘World Pride’ this year) is almost two months old, some of us have forgotten that (or even whether) they stopped supporting the ‘Race for Life’ organised by Cancer Research just days before announcing their cash for the gays.
Today is the Feast of the Holy Innocents, a day that Christians have historically set aside for remembering the baby boys of Bethlehem that Herod cruelly slaughtered (Matthew 2:16-18).
