Tell Your Senator to Keep His Promises


John R. Houk

© August 12, 2017

 

In full disclosure, I left the Republican Party after Mitt Romney proved he couldn’t stand up to the lies of Barack Hussein Obama in the 2012 election cycle. Since those days I have registered as an Independent. It’s true that I continue to vote GOP, because in my State most Republican candidates are Conservative.

 

As an Independent I keep my eyes open for a new Political Party to knock out the GOP much like the Republican Party replaced the Whig Party and eventually elected Abraham Lincoln as its first Party President in 1860.

 

The only way for a Political Party to replace the GOP is for Conservative Republican Congressional members to abandon the Republican Party. Until that day, any Political Party formed to attract Conservative voters will be considered also-ran Third Party political hacks with no national coalition to make a difference.

 

Now after my full disclosure, I want to share an American Family Association (AFA) email alert that shows 30 Republican Senators joining the Democrats to keep an obsolete Senate rule (as in not in the Constitution) that forces 60 votes to end a filibuster.

 

As a political in the Senate the GOP is the Majority Party with 52 members. But each time the Dems want to obstruct the Trump they pull a filibuster which they know can’t be stopped by 52 votes. Now it has become worse for the President’s agenda to make America great again because there are THIRTY Republican Senators that refuse to reform the 60-vote rule by changing it to a simple majority.

 

30 GOP Senators Supporting Dems – Photo from AFA email alert

 

If you are a Conservative voter that has become fed-up with a Congress that is opposing President Trump at every turn, examine the photo of 30 to discover if your Senator is amongst them. If your Senator is there Google their contact info and write, phone or both to express your displeasure. If they respond with a form letter or email trying to push some political hocus pocus about Senatorial tradition in their rules. Former Dem Majority Leader didn’t hesitate to suspend the 60-vote threshold when they rammed Obama agenda legislation down Conservative throats.

 

It’s time to toss out the 60-vote rule in favor of majority rule except for where the Constitution specifically calls for a super-majority.

 

For your convenience, the AFA has provided a method to contact your Senator even giving you the text to work from:

 

CONTACT YOUR SENATOR COURTESY OF THE AFA

 

JRH 8/12/17

Please Support NCCR

**************

30 Senate Republicans defending Democratic Obstruction

 

By Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association

 

Sent August 10, 2017

Sent from American Family Association

 

The U.S. Senate has a 52 Republican majority that can get a conservative agenda through the Senate, but 30 of these Senators have declared they support the obstruction of Democrats. These 30 establishment Republican senators oppose putting an end to the ongoing obstruction of Democrat’s legislative filibuster. As U.S. Representative Trent Franks (R-AZ) recently said, “It is time for America to abolish the 60-vote Senate rule” to end the filibuster.

Urge your senators to end Democratic obstruction and end the legislative filibuster.

In fact, they signed on to a letter authored by Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) and Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) sent to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), stating they are “opposing any effort to curtail the existing rights and prerogatives (including the 60 rule vote to end the Democrat filibuster) of Senators to engage in full, robust, and extended debate as we (the Senate) consider legislation before the body in the future.” Sen. McConnell agrees with them.

Regarding the letter, Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) noted that “Democrats want the Senate to work, and we are willing to partner with our colleagues across the aisle if we can get things done for the American people. We have a long way to go to heal the wounds between our two parties, but this letter is a small first step towards that important goal.” (Emphasis added.)

These 30 Senate Republicans, by refusing to stop the Democratic filibuster, want to allow the ongoing obstruction of Democrats in the name of “healing.” Conservative Republicans know that Democrats will not cross the aisle to help pass a conservative agenda.

Democrats oppose a conservative agenda that includes repealing Obamacare, funding the border wall, defunding sanctuary cities, passing Kate’s Law, defunding Planned Parenthood, and applying the Hyde Amendment to ensure federal tax dollars do not fund abortion.

Senate Democrats have been obstructionists to a conservative agenda. Sen. Coons’ statement that Democrats “are willing to partner with our colleagues (Republicans) across the aisle if we can get things done for the American people” is political posturing and an empty promise to pass conservative legislation. Keeping the filibuster is nothing more than a mechanism for Democrats and liberal Republicans to further capitulate to the left. This is not by accident, but by design.

Tell your senators to end Democratic obstruction and end the legislative filibuster.

 

If our mission resonates with you, please consider supporting our work financially with a tax-deductible donation. The easiest way to do that is through online giving. It is easy to use, and most of all, it is secure.

 

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association

__________________

Tell Your Senator to Keep His Promises

John R. Houk

© August 12, 2017

________________

30 Senate Republicans defending Democratic Obstruction

 

American Family Association
P O Drawer 2440  |  Tupelo, MS 38803  |  1-662-844-5036
Copyright ©2017 American Family Association. All Rights Reserved

 

AFA Mission

 

The mission of the American Family Association is to inform, equip, and activate individuals to strengthen the moral foundations of American culture, and give aid to the church here and abroad in its task of fulfilling the Great Commission.

 

PHILOSOPHICAL STATEMENT 


The American Family Association believes that God has communicated absolute truth to mankind, and that all people are subject to the authority of God’s Word at all times. Therefore AFA believes that a culture based on biblical truth best serves the well-being of our nation and our families, in accordance with the vision of our founding documents; and that personal transformation through the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the greatest agent of biblical change in any culture.

 

ACTION STATEMENT

 
The American Family Association acts to:

 

  • Restrain evil by exposing the works of darkness

 

  • Promote virtue by upholding in culture that which is right, true and good according to Scripture

 

  • Convince individuals of sin and challenge them to seek Christ’s grace and forgiveness

 

  • Motivate people to take a stand on cultural and moral issues at the local, state and national levels

 

  • Encourage Christians to bear witness to the love of Jesus Christ as they live their lives before the world

 

To that end, AFA spurs activism directed to:

 

  • Preservation of Marriage and the Family

 

  • Decency and Morality

 

  • Sanctity of Human Life

 

  • Stewardship

 

  • Media Integrity 

 

We believe in holding accountable companies that sponsor programs attacking traditional family values. We also believe in commending those companies that act responsibly regarding programs they support. 

 

It is AFA’s goal to be a champion of Christian activism.  If you are alarmed by the increasing ungodliness and depravity assaulting our nation, tired of cursing the darkness, and ready to light a bonfire, please join us.  Do it for your READ THE REST

 

The Fallacy of “Separation of Church and State”


The best intro to this essay submission from Justin Smith can be summed up from an excerpt:

 

Any attack against Christianity and Judaism in America using the fallacy of “separation of Church and State” is simply an attempt to further undermine, not only Our U.S. Constitution and Religious Liberty, but Our entire traditional American way of life. Do not accept the Fallacy.

 

JRH 8/6/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

The Fallacy of “Separation of Church and State”

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 8/5/2017 3:36 PM

 

The Founding Fathers believed that government’s role in religion should be limited. We cannot discount that the First Amendment begins “Congress shall make no law” either establishing a state religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Rather than articulate an affirmative responsibility for government to protect religion, the Founding Fathers felt it was enough to keep the government out. If nothing else, the language of the First Amendment makes it clear the goal was to restrain government when it came to religion. There is no suggestion the Founders felt the establishment clause and the free exercise clause were in any way competing. Otherwise, why would the Founders include the two clauses together?

 

The point was to keep government out of both realms. Both clauses were needed because it was not sufficient to restrain government from establishing a state religion; government also had to be restrained from any attempt to interfere with religious practices and beliefs. The negative language of the First Amendment does not prohibit Congress from passing a law that promotes religion, provided the judgement does not promote one religion over others.

Before the bad law and judicial activism that started with the abuse of the Constitution by Justice Hugo Black in Everson v Board of Education (1947), the states were not prohibited under the First Amendment from establishing religion, and nowhere in the debate on freedom of religion in the first Congress is there any mention of “separation of church and state.” Our Founders own writings clearly show that they never intended for public officials to check their convictions and beliefs at the door to their offices. They would have been shocked by the Court’s excessively broad interpretation of the First Amendment, given the language the Founders crafted with the belief it would protect open expression of religious beliefs in America.

 

The Founders most certainly would have rebelled against the idea of an absolute “separation of church and state” and the use of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to eradicate all Judeo-Christian references to God from the public square, because these ideas are incompatible with the Original Intent and unalienable rights granted to each of us by our Creator, thus making them erroneous and historically unsupportable.

 

[Blog Editor: Here’s an interesting thought on how the Left and Activist Judges misused the 14th Amendment to rob the Original Intent of the First Amendment:

 

When did things change?

 

Charles Darwin theory’s that species could evolve inspired a political theorist named Herbert Spencer to suggest that laws could evolve. This influenced Harvard Law Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell to develop the “case precedent” method of practicing law, which influenced his student, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

 

This occurred near the same time the 14th Amendment was passed in 1868, introduced by Republicans in Congress to guarantee rights to freed slaves in the Democrat South. The evolutionary “case-precedent” method provided a way to side-step the Constitutional means of changing the Constitution through the Amendment process.

 

Activist Justices began to creatively use the 14th Amendment to take jurisdiction away from the states over issues such as unions, strikes, railroads, farming, polygamy, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly.

 

Freedom of religion was still under each individual state’s jurisdiction until Franklin D. Roosevelt.

 

 

In 1937, FDR nominated Justice Hugo Black to the Supreme Court, who also concentrated power by writing decisions taking jurisdiction away from the states in the area of religion. He did this by simply inserting the phrase “Neither a state” in his 1947 Everson v Board of Education decision: “The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another.” READ ENTIRE ARTICLE (THIS IS HOW ATHEISM BECAME OUR OFFICIAL ‘RELIGION’; By BILL FEDERER; WND; 1/15/16 9:01 PM)

 

Now I can’t vouch for this being Justin Smith’s thought on the 14th Amendment, but using the effect of Darwinism in the development of Case Law to have more authority than Original Intent is enlightening to me.]

On New Year’s Day 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists to assuage their fear that the federal government might one day attempt to condition religious freedom as a right granted by the state. Jefferson, an anti-Federalist [Blog Editor: Federalist/Anti-Federalist Perspectives – HERE, HERE & HERE], clearly stated his intention to keep government out of religious affairs rather than empower it to remove religion from the public arena: “Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in the behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural rights in opposition to his social duties.”

The First Amendment compels government not to eradicate religion from the public arena. If the expression of religious beliefs is an inherent God-designed part of human nature, as the Declaration of Independence proclaimed, then government acting to remove religion from the public sphere would have seemed to Our Founding Fathers to be acting in a manner antithetical to Our Founding Principles.

It is almost as if Justice Black decided the First Amendment was equivalent to the biblical admonition to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s, under the assumption that a discernible distinction could be made without conflict between what was Caesar’s and what was God’s. The whole point of the First Amendment’s attempt to protect freedom of religion is that over time Caesar tends to intrude upon God.

 

In 1948, the Supreme Court ruled in McCollom v Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948) that religious education provided by churches on public school grounds in Illinois during the school day was unconstitutional. Then in 1952, in Zorach v Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), the Supreme Court found that allowing New York students to leave school grounds for religious education was constitutional. Dissenting in Zorach, Justice Black wrote, “I see no significant difference between the invalid Illinois system and that of New York here sustained.” If Justice Black, the author of the court’s majority opinion in Everson, could not distinguish these cases, how could state, county, city or municipal school officials be expected to make the distinction reliably?

 

A Godless public square could not be more antithetical to what Our Founding Fathers thought they were achieving when drafting the First Amendment, and the Courts distort precedent whenever they use the Establishment Clause to crush all things religious Ironically, the very language crafted to protect religious freedom has now reached the point at which Americans can only be assured freedom from religion in all places within this nation, with the possible exceptions of prayer confined to church and free expression of religion confined to the privacy of one’s home.

Jefferson made a poignant remark in Notes on the State of Virginia, which clarifies his thinking: “And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have lost the only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?[Blog Editor’s Emphasis]

 

Why didn’t the Supreme Court choose this text for their ruling? [Blog Editor’s Emphasis] Or his use of “natural rights” in other documents? Justice Clarence Thomas once stated: “… this Court’s nebulous Establishment Clause analyses, turn on little more than “judicial predilections … It should be noted that the extent to which traditional Judeo-Christian religion is removed from the public square and the public schools, it is replaced by other religions, including Secular Humanism, which is specifically recognized as a religion by the Supreme Court.”
In order to combat this assault on religious freedom and religious liberty, to date, twenty-one states have enacted Religious Freedom Restoration Acts since 1993. Currently, ten states [5/4/17 – 9 States] are considering legislation on the topic this year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Virginia amended their state RFRA, but otherwise no states have passed their legislation.
For eight decades, the ACLU has been America’s leading religious censor, waging a largely uncontested war, until recently, against America’s core values, utilizing every fallacy, piece of misinformation and outright LIE imaginable in its war against religious liberty, with the support of much of the current Marxist media; both are intent on destroying traditional America, including the nuclear family. We now live in a country where our traditional Christian and Jewish faith and religion — civilizing forces in any society — are openly mocked and increasingly pushed to the margins, and our weapon to stop them is the Founding Fathers’ own words and their Original Intent regarding the U.S. Constitution.
Ultimately, two very diverse thinkers, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams concluded, that without virtue based on a solid belief in God, Liberty was inevitably lost. In other words, if the Supreme Court, through the efforts of Communists, atheists and fools and ACLU prompting, succeeds in removing the Judeo-Christian God from American public life, a foundation pillar upon which American liberty has depended will have been removed, perhaps irretrievably. Without the open expression of religious freedom so fundamental to American liberty that it is written into the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, American Liberty will not long persist.

 

Americans cannot and must not allow the Communists and atheists of this nation and the ACLU to secularize America to the point where our tolerance is turned into silencing and punishing religious speech. Life is valuable; marriage is a God-ordained institution between one man and one woman, and families are comprised of a male father and a female mother with any number of children. Any attack against Christianity and Judaism in America using the fallacy of “separation of Church and State” is simply an attempt to further undermine, not only Our U.S. Constitution and Religious Liberty, but Our entire traditional American way of life. Do not accept the Fallacy.

 

By Justin O. Smith

__________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links and any text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Challenging Activist Judge & NAF


Troy Newman & Judge William Orrick

 

John R. Houk

© August 5, 2017

 

On July 14, 2015, the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) released its first undercover Planned Parenthood video, blowing the whistle on the abortion industry’s practice of illegally harvesting and selling the body parts of aborted babies.

 

Just 17 days later, the National Abortion Federation (NAF) filed a lawsuit against CMP and ultimately secured a preliminary injunction against lead investigator and CMP founder David Daleiden. The injunction prohibited him from releasing any footage obtained during NAF conferences and meetings, which David had attended undercover with the goal of exposing illegal activity by the abortion industry.

 

Fast forward almost two years—and the lawsuit is still ongoing. Meanwhile, Daleiden’s footage from the NAF conference remains under lock and key, leaving some to wonder what secrets NAF is trying to hide. (Abortion Industry’s Interests Should Never Outweigh Public Concerns or First Amendment Rights; By Marissa Mayer; Alliance Defending Freedom; 4/21/17)

 

U.S. District Judge William Orrick violated the First Amendment Rights of the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) by gagging all undercover videos exposing the murderous intent by National Abortion Federation (NAF) in trafficking aborted and live birth baby parts for profit. Planned Parenthood was stung the same way. Leftists in law enforcement are doing their best to cover-up these nefarious murders and felonious activities with baby part trafficking.

 

U.S. District Judge William Orrick, who granted the preliminary injunction in favor of the National Abortion Federation to halt the release of the videos, ordered any links to the video to be removed after it was published by the Center for Medical Progress on Thursday.

 

Judge Orrick also ordered CMP lead investigator David Daleiden and his attorneys to appear in court June 14, The Associated Press reported, for a hearing where he will consider holding them in contempt for releasing the footage.

 

Mr. Daleiden has been charged with 15 felonies in California stemming from his undercover investigation into the abortion giant. His attorneys have called it a “witch hunt” that flies in the face of the First Amendment.

 

YouTube has not responded to a request for comment.

 

The three-minute video showed top Planned Parenthood executives joking about severed fetus heads, admitting to altering abortion procedures to preserve fetal organs and conceding that clinics have a financial incentive to sell the human remains from abortions. (YouTube removes latest Planned Parenthood video on judge’s order; By Bradford Richardson; Washington Times; 5/26/17)

 

Judge Orrick took advantage of the 9th Circuit Appellate Court’s unfavorable ruling to make that gag order.

 

The abortion industry has desperately tried to suppress and delegitimize the work of CMP, including through the use of litigation. We represent former CMP board member Troy Newman – who is also the President of Operation Rescue – in lawsuits filed by the National Abortion Federation (NAF) as well as Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and numerous Planned Parenthood affiliates, and we recently filed briefs in both cases.

 

In the NAF case, the trial court issued a preliminary injunction that prevents the defendants from publishing videos or materials relating to NAF conferences, or sharing such information with anyone, including state Attorneys General or local law enforcement officers, while the case moves forward. The defendants have appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals to the Ninth Circuit, and we recently filed a reply brief (under seal by court order) that emphasizes that government investigators, and the general public, have a compelling interest in being able to review the videos and materials themselves.

 

In the PPFA case, we recently filed a reply brief supporting our motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Our brief explains that all of the claims – such as wire fraud, racketeering, and breach of contract – are meritless, so the case should be dismissed. (Two Briefs Filed in Fight to Expose Illegal Abortion Practices; By ACLJ.org; 7/2016)

 

One of the founders of CMP, Troy Newman, has filed a petition with the Supreme Court to win back the First Amendment Right to expose the crimes of Planned Parenthood.

 

Here is the Press Release that I first received in my Inbox from Operation Rescue; however, I’m cross posting the PR from ChristianNewsWire.com.

 

JRH 8/5/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

Newman Files Petition with Supreme Court Challenging Gag Order that Bans Sharing Evidence with Law Enforcement

 

PRESS RELEASE

August 4, 2017

ChristianNewsWire.com

 

Contact: Troy Newman, President, 316-683-6790 ext. 111; Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Vice President , 316-516-3034; both with Operation Rescue,  info.operationrescue@gmail.com   

 

WASHINGTON, Aug. 4, 2017 /Christian Newswire/ — Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue and a founding member of the Center for Medical Progress, filed a petition yesterday to the U.S. Supreme Court, challenging the Constitutionality of a preliminary injunction that prohibits the release of undercover videos recorded at National Abortion Federation (NAF) meetings – even to law enforcement when they contain evidence of crimes.

 

The petition, captioned Newman v. National Abortion Federation, states:

 

This Petition stems from an injunction forbidding the voluntary disclosure to law enforcement agencies, other governmental bodies, and the general public of recordings and other information that the enjoined individuals and entities-as well as Congressional investigators-believe are evidence of widespread criminal, illegal, and unethical conduct, including felonies.

 

Newman is represented by Jay Sekulow, who leads Newman’s team of attorneys from the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ).

 

During Newman’s tenure on the Board of the Center for Medical Progress, the NAF, and later Planned Parenthood, filed suits in a San Francisco Federal Court against Newman and others in an effort to prevent the release of further undercover videos that exposed the illegal trade in aborted baby body parts.

 

And it is little wonder that the NAF would not want the videos released.

 

Newman’s Supreme Court Petition notes that Congressional investigations conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives referred members of the National Abortion Federation and Planned Parenthood to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies for criminal investigation and prosecution.

 

Newman argues that the enjoined recordings corroborate the determination of the two Congressional investigations, which found evidence that NAF members (including several Planned Parenthood organizations) were engaged in the following criminal conduct:

 

  • Profiting from the sale of fetal organs;

 

  • Altering abortion procedures for financial gain;

 

  • Performing illegal partial-birth abortions;

 

  • Killing newborns who survived attempted abortions;

 

  • Failing to obtain informed consent for fetal tissue donations;

 

  • Violating federal regulations regarding Institutional Review Boards (IRBs); and

 

  • Fraudulent overbilling practices.

 

Newman’s petition further states:

 

It has long been a tenet of Anglo-American jurisprudence that individuals who believe that they have information concerning criminal or illegal activities should be permitted, and encouraged, to voluntarily provide such information to government authorities. Similarly, investigative journalism concerning matters of public concern, including the uncovering of illegal, unethical, or troubling activities, is a constitutionally protected, venerable undertaking.

 

Newman’s unsuccessful appeal to the Ninth Circuit was joined by state 14 Attorneys General, led by Arizona, who are seeking to review the evidence contained in the recordings.

 

As the most important abortion case currently under litigation, Newman v. NAF could have profound implications on the future use of undercover investigative techniques and the ability of law enforcement to gather evidence in criminal investigations.

 

Read the Petition in Newman v. NAF

 

Operation Rescue is one of the leading pro-life Christian activist organizations in the nation and has become a strong voice for the pro-life movement in America.  Click here to support Operation Rescue.

____________________

Challenging Activist Judge & NAF

John R. Houk

© August 5, 2017

__________________

Newman Files Petition with Supreme Court Challenging Gag Order that Bans Sharing Evidence with Law Enforcement

 

About Operation Rescue

 

Who We Are

 

History

 

Endorsements

 

What Others Say About Us


Contact

 

© Christian Newswire 2017. All Rights Reserved. | 2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW – Washington – DC – 20006 | 202-546-0054 

 

Christian Newswire Services:

 

Christian Newswire is the most used and most recognized distributor of religious content news releases in the nation.

 

Over 2100 public policy groups, government agencies, PR firms, religious organizations, think-tanks, watchdog groups, advocacy groups, coalitions, foundations, colleges, universities, activists, politicians, and candidates use Christian Newswire to distribute their news releases.   Click to see our client list. 

 

How much does it cost?

 

$75 is what we charge to transmit your 400-words-or-less(‡) news release to our exclusive national media list.  Our competitors charge from $295 to $395, yet they do not have the direct contact with reporters and news producers that we have.

 

You do not need to use a credit card.  We will send you a bill.  It is that easy.  Just email us your news release, or use the form on this website and tell us to send it out.  No membership fee. You are not required to purchase any additional services.

 

Want to know more about where your news release will go and who will see it?

 

National list of over 2500 reporters and news producers whose beat is “conservative & family issues” ($75 for up to 400 words‡)  These are TV, radio, wire-service, and print reporters/producers that cover family and conservative issues, that READ THE REST

 

Sharia UK


Victoria Wasteney

 

A fellow member of the G+ Community Kafir Supremacist found a Jihad Watch post exposing European dhimmitude/submission to Islam by an employment tribunal and the UK judiciary.

 

This UK system judged that UK citizen Victoria Wasteney violated the rights of a Muslim colleague by sharing her Born-Again faith in a time the Muslim colleague appeared to have a personal crisis. Enya Nawaz indicated a receptivity to Wasteney’s offer of prayer on a personal level then turned around and filed a complaint of proselytizing on the job.

 

I find it interesting there seems to be no definitive photo of the 25-year-old Islamic Supremacist complainant on any searches I executed. I did find one photo of a twitter account attributed to an “Enya” but I have no idea if it is the same whiner. The twitter photo looks about the same age as 25 and her account is closed to non-approved viewing. Here is that photo:

 

Enya Nawaz – twitter:

 

I recently posted about how Islam stifles Free Speech with its intolerance of criticism by non-Muslims. God help America if the same Free Speech intrusion takes root in the USA when even non-critical offers of Christian empathy becomes against the law.

 

JRH 8/3/17

Please Support NCCR

*******************

Sharia UK

Posted by Delenda Islam Est

By Christine Douglass-Williams & Samuel Smith

Aug 2, 2:04 PM

Kafir Supremacist

 

UK: Christian woman prosecuted for talking about Christianity to a Muslim colleague

August 2, 2017 12:30 pm; Jihad Watch; By Christine Douglass-Williams

A Christian therapist in England who was suspended after being accused of evangelizing to a Muslim colleague has suffered another loss in court.

Would a Muslim be taken to court for sharing his or her faith with a coworker? Whether or not Victoria Wasteney was proselytizing to her Muslim colleague on the job or not is to be determined in court. However, there remains a larger issue: Western authorities are giving the impression that while Christians are studied under a microscope for accountability, Muslims are not. Some examples:

University of California Berkeley Muslim professor Hatem Bazian has been openly calling for an intifada in America, and he has issued these violent calls at several venues throughout the United States.

Nadia Shoufani, a Toronto-area school teacher who called a Palestinian jihadist who crushed the skull of a four-year-old Israeli girl a hero and martyr, was said to have been investigated by her school board and by Toronto Police. But there has been no followup.

Farrah Marfatia, a principal of a Muslim academy in Mississauga, near Toronto, Canada was instructing parents to teach their children that “homosexuals are cursed by Allah as are the men who imitate or dress up like women.” Once again, there was no followup.

One can imagine the public outcry if Christians or Jews were preaching those same words — the court battles, the disdain. But where is the same reaction when Muslims say this? Instead, we see Victoria Wasteney, a Christian woman, in court for imparting messages about her faith’s love and healing to a Muslim colleague with whom she developed a relationship (or so she thought). While there are rules against proselytizing in places of employment, Wasteney was discussing her faith to a colleague, not to a client.

While Ms. Wasteney is being prosecuted in London, Sharia courts in Britain are sending Muslim women back to abusive husbands.

“Christian Hospital Worker Punished for Sharing Faith Loses Again in Court”, by Samuel Smith, Christian Post, July 29, 2017:

A Christian therapist in England who was suspended after being accused of evangelizing to a Muslim colleague has suffered another loss in court.

Victoria Wasteney, the former head of Forensic Occupational Therapy at a hospital in London, was issued a nine-month suspension by East London National Health Service in 2014 after an eight-page complaint was filed against her by a Muslim colleague named Enya Nawaz.

As has been reported, Nawaz and Wasteney, a born-again Christian, developed a relationship while working at the St. John Howard Centre in East London and at points discussed religious differences.

Nawaz’s complaint accused Wasteney of trying to convert her to Christianity. Wasteney reportedly offered to pray with Nawaz, gave her a book authored by a Muslim convert to Christianity and invited her to an event organized by her church.

Wasteney was also accused of putting her hand on Nawaz’s knee while in a prayer and asking God to come to Nawaz.

Wasteney was initially thrown off by the allegations because she thought they had developed a good relationship. She told the Daily Mail in 2015 that she only put her hand on Nawaz’s knee to comfort Nawaz when she was dealing with health problems.

“I put my hand on her knee to comfort her and asked if that was okay, and said, ‘Would you like me to pray for you?’” Wasteney told the Daily Mail, “She said yes, so I asked for God to bring peace and healing. She left the office afterwards and said she was okay.”

Wasteney has denied that her act of giving Nawaz the book I Dared to Call Him Father, was an attempt to convert her.

According to The Telegraph, an East London NHS Foundation Trust disciplinary hearing in February 2014 upheld three charges against Wasteney and found five charges to be unsubstantiated. In the hearing, Wasteney was convicted of “gross misconduct.”

In October 2015, Wasteney won the right to appeal the NHS’ action to the Employment Appeal Tribunal on the basis of religious liberty. However, Judge Jennifer Eady ruled against her in April 2016.

“What the court clearly failed to do was to say how, in today’s politically correct world, any Christian can even enter into a conversation with a fellow employee on the subject of religion and not, potentially, later end up in an employment tribunal,” Wasteney was quoted as saying at the time. “If someone sends you friendly text messages, how is one to know that they are offended? I had no idea that I was upsetting her.”

According to the U.K.-based Christian Legal Centre, Wasteney filed for an appeal against Eady’s 2016 decision and appeared in court Thursday. However, a tweet from the advocacy group on Thursday explained that Wasteney’s “permission to appeal has been rejected” and the “legal battle goes on.”….

 

[Blog Editor: This last sentence not a part of the Kafir Islamist/Jihad Watch post but in the Christian Post.]

 

In a video posted online Wednesday, Wasteney said she hoped Thursday’s hearing would grant her permission to seek a full hearing on the matter in an appeals court.

 

+++

Blog Editor: Here is the short video of Victoria Wasteney speaking:

 

VIDEO: Christian NHS worker to appear in court in the next stage of her legal battle

 

Posted by Christian Concern

Published on Jul 26, 2017

 

Victoria, former Head of Forensic Occupational Therapy at a London hospital, was suspended for ‘gross misconduct’ for nine months, and then received a written warning following allegations of ‘harassment and bullying’ by a Muslim staff-member.

In October 2015, Victoria won permission to appeal when the judge recognised the significance of her case in protecting religious freedom.

The Judge had said that the Employment Appeal Tribunal should consider whether the original ruling had properly applied the European Convention on Human Rights’ strong protection of freedom of religion and expression.

Victoria lost her appeal in April 2016. In the judgment, Judge Eady QC upheld the Tribunal’s ruling, that the NHS had acted reasonably in disciplining Victoria for inviting her colleague to church-related events, praying with her (with consent), and giving her a Christian book.

Supported by the Christian Legal Centre, Victoria applied for permission to appeal the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s decision, but this was rejected.

She is now seeking to challenge this.

_____________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

Responding to Revisionist Critic


John R. Houk

© July 21, 2017

 

On June 26, 2013 I posted at my NCCR blog (one of three blogs) entitled “SCOTUS Continues to Push America into Ungodliness”. The Supreme Court had just struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) enabling homosexuals to legally marry in the same manner as heterosexuals. I was very displeased that SCOTUS extra-Constitutionally circumvented traditional marriage that a majority of States upheld, meaning a majority of the voting We the People.

 

In the comment section to the post “SCOTUS Continues to Push America into Ungodliness” a person identifying themselves as Debbs was quite upset with my Biblical stand and embarked on a path of criticism of my interpretation of the Bible as unsound theology on July 17, 2017. I am assuming “Debbs” is a female.

 

Here is a refresher to my thoughts roughly four years ago.

 

I cited Scripture from the Holy Bible justifying my disagreement with SCOTUS and the American Left in general. I even found a photo of a Bible page highlighting Leviticus 18: 22:

 

 

I shared the reason God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah from Genesis 19 (verses 1, 4-11, 13, 24-25 for brevity’s sake). In case you listen to Biblical revisionists, here is God’s perspective: God obliterated the two city areas because of moral depravity which included primarily but not limited to homosexuality.

 

Now from the Christian perspective Jesus Christ the Son of God has Redeemed Believers from the curse of the Law which God gave through Moses. Redemption in Christ means the penalty of sin is not held as judgment for the person who has turned their life to Christ abandoning the ways of the unredeemed individual. (I just slipped into the realm of the politically correct to make the Left happy. The Bible uses the word “man” which means instead of “person” I could have written “man”. And yet, “man” is used as in the sense of mankind which is inclusive of both males and females. And yes, I realize the word “mankind” is repugnant to the PC Left who might rather use “humankind”. Get over it. 😊)

 

The Law’s penalty for homosexuality was death. Thank God Jesus has Redeemed believing humanity from that penalty. Enforcing that penalty would mean the State would have to locate a lot of rocks. Thank God Christianity has been an influence on Western Culture enough that our society has abandoned the penalty of the Old Testament Law in the Western Criminal Justice System.

 

You would do well to read all the Epistle to the Galatians, but here is the part on the Law, the Curse and Redemption in Chapter 3:

 

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”[a] 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.”[b] 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.”[c]

 

13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”[d]), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. (Bold text Editor’s – Gal. 3: 10-14 NKJV)

 

And yet if one lives an unredeemed life (Christian or sinner), there is a price that one pays in the flesh. The Mercy of God is eternal for those who ask for forgiveness with a true heart (God knows the true heart from the false heart. It’s not like you can lie for forgiveness and fool God like you might another person).

 

The New Testament makes it quite clear on what is true morality from the false morality that claims if it feels good it is okay to do. Romans the sixth chapter is one place:

 

What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

 

12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

 

15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness. (Bold text Editor’s – Rom. 6: 1-4, 12-19 NKJV)

 

I am perturbed on how activist Courts make laws rather than adjudicating the text of the Original meaning of the Constitution. Spiritual minded Leftists do the same revisionism to God’s Word, in this case pertaining to homosexuality. Romans chapter one affirms that God still is extremely displeased with homosexuality. AND God is the Creator of ALL that exists, thus He sets the rules:

 

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,

 

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,

 

26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

 

32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. (Bold Text Editor’s – Rom. 1: 18, 24, 26-27, 32 NKJV)

 

Take note that “deserving of death” is the penalty under the Law. The Redemptive Blood of Christ expiates the penalty of the Law, but God Almighty still considers homosexuality a sin that separates a person from the Presence of God. Eternal separation from God is the Second Death that occurs at the Last Judgment when one is sent to hell in permanent separation from the Presence of God.

 

People! Always choose life rather than any rule of man that will separate you from God. That has been the path of Activist Judges for decades and not just in 2013 with DOMA. Revisionist theologians have been doing the same harm to the Holy Bible.

 

Debbs uses the standard theology argument that comes from Leftist theologians that are attempting to revise God’s intent much like Activist Judges are revising the Constitution’s Original Intent by creating law the Constitution reserves ONLY for Congress or Amended by the sovereign States via ratification or Convention.

 

Unlike the Constitution, God’s Word cannot be amended to suit the creation over the intent of the Creator. Hence, homosexuality was wrong in the Old Testament Law but only the penalty is forgiven in the age of Grace that Redeems humanity by faith in Jesus Christ the Son of God.

 

So, I am going to refute the revisionist theology that Debbs uses to contradict my agreement with the Word of God. From this point on, my thoughts and responses will be in bold text and Debbs comments at NCCR will be in plain text and indented as a quote.

 

First Debbs goes on a bit of a rant on me misusing “ORIGINAL words” because the English translation has a different meaning than the ancient Hebrew:

 

Only cowards print articles and don’t allow comments on the page.

 

Well, I guess I’m not a coward because her comment exists.

I could write plenty of things with conviction from the Bible that would cause people’s heads to spin. Anyone can copy passages from an ENGLISH translation of a bible (and anyone can use a variation of translations for key words to0); but the ORIGINAL words and what they mean are important and cannot be overlooked. If the Bible is the Word of God, then there is no other book that is more important to have its original Hebrew words translated correctly. Otherwise, they aren’t the God’s words, they are the words of the translators. Not only do you have to get the translation correct, but a study of the same word should include comparisons where that word is used again and again.

 

I actually concur with Debbs that the context of the most original manuscripts is quite important to making written content current, but as in the proper interpretation as opposed to revisionism.

 

And, is it not dishonest for “Christians”- those who follow His teachings, to completely ignore what Jesus said or didn’t say on any given subject? Is it not dishonest to draw a conclusion about one story, yet ignore the explanation from a biblical Prophet that contradicts that conclusion? And if one thing is an abomination and “Christians” go out of their way to demonize and dehumanize a group of persons (ignoring the Prophet Ezekiel and the Saviour) and even try to pass laws to subjugate and oppress that group based on their “Christianity”; should they not do the same with every single “abomination” listed in the same Biblical books? Shouldn’t they be even more aggressively attacking violations of the 10 Commandment or the things the Lord HATES and Detests?

 

Yes Debbs, it would be dishonest to ignore what Jesus said or didn’t say as long as you realize what He didn’t say is in context as being viewed as a fellow Jew by most of His listeners. Jesus does not terminate the Torah or the Tanakh, rather He affirms them. I also concur whatever was detestable in the Old Testament is still detestable before God today. As far as Christians are concerned, what is detestable in the Old Testament is forgiven in the New Testament by virtue the penalty of the Law is paid for by the Blood of Jesus.

 

Abominations (list sourced from All 613 Commandments in the Old Testament Law):

 

 

  • Women not to dress as a man (the context being to look like a man) – Deuteronomy 22:5

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Don’t eat unclean birds; example in Scripture: eagles, vultures, buzzards, ravens, owls, storks, herons, bats and their kind – Leviticus 11:13-19

 

  • Don’t eat creeping things that creep. According to Pulpit Commentary found at BibleHub.com: Verses 41-43. – The last class is that of vermin, which constitute a part of the un-winged creeping class already spoken of (verses 29, 30). Whatsoever goeth upon the belly indicates snakes, worms, maggots: whatsoever goeth upon all four, things that grovel, as moles, rats, hedgehogs; whatsoever hath more feet, or doth multiply feet, centipedes, caterpillars, spiders.Leviticus 11: 41-44

 

 

  • If divorce wife and she marries another and for whatever she becomes marriage eligible, can’t remarry her – Deuteronomy 24: 1-4

 

Some of these abominations seem quite ridiculous in this day and age. I have no idea if observant Jews adhere to the abomination list except I can confidently say the Temple burnt offering are not a concern today. Much of the dietary abominations could be reasoned with a gentile-Christian Redemption from Law’s penalty. A cursory examination shows that of the abomination list above only homosexuality (and some other sex no-nos) was a death sentence. Of the death sentences only homosexuality is a sex-sin abomination specifically listed. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out sex-sins are bad, but homosexuality is really bad – Leviticus chapter 20. Pertaining to homosexuality is Leviticus 20: 13 (NKJV):

 

13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

 

++

And, if the religious right’s political support and beliefs are about cutting/eliminating social programs that have successfully helped the elderly, disabled, poor and hungry; and they distrust and do not want to “share” America’s abundance of food and wealth or offer protection and refuge to refugees and immigrants- then are they not “Sodomites” according to the Prophet Ezekiel?

 

Debbs you need to read Ezekiel a little better I think. In referencing sodomites and social programs to the poor, is NOT what Ezekiel said in which the context is the Jewish rulers living in Jerusalem:

 

46 “Your elder sister is Samaria, who dwells with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who dwells to the south of you, is Sodom and her daughters. 47 You did not walk in their ways nor act according to their abominations; but, as if that were too little, you became more corrupt than they in all your ways.

 

48 As I live,” says the Lord God, “neither your sister Sodom nor her daughters have done as you and your daughters have done. 49 Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. 50 And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.[a] (Ezekiel 16: 46-50 NKJV)

 

History lesson time: Samaria was the capital city of the 10 northern Hebrew tribes who retained the name Israel when the ten tribes separated from the two southern tribes which went by the name Judah. The northern tribal rulers had taken on the corrupt nature of their surrounding neighbor nations in becoming polytheistic which included temple prostitutes (male and female), sacrificing children in burnt offerings and other manners of social oppression.

 

Sodom had been destroyed long before the 12 Hebrew tribes formed a Jewish nation ultimately called Israel under the kings Saul. David and Solomon. Sodom’s destruction was in the days of Abraham. And we have already discussed the perversions that became so evil that God destroyed the people living in Sodom and its sister city-state Gomorrah. A clue to the most repulsive sin is that the homosexual sex-act of sodomy is named after Sodom.

 

In referencing Sodom and Samaria, Ezekiel is telling the rulers based in Jerusalem that they too will be destroyed as a nation. Sodom’s perversions resulted in obliteration by fire and brimstone. Samaria’s rejection of the God that freed them Egyptian slavery, resulted in a massive deportation of the ruling elite to an uncertain destination left to historical guess work.

 

Judah’s rulers had morally devolved as well and Ezekiel warned the end of the kingdom was coming unless they changed their ways. Judah’s rulers did not change and later during the days of the Prophet Isaiah the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar did to Judah what the Assyrian kings did to the northern tribes of Israel – deported the ruling elite:

 

The Northern Kingdom of Israel was conquered by the Neo-Assyrian monarchs, Tiglath-Pileser III (Pul) and Shalmaneser V. The later Assyrian rulers Sargon II and his son and successor, Sennacherib, were responsible for finishing the twenty-year demise of Israel’s northern ten-tribe kingdom, although they did not overtake the Southern Kingdom. Jerusalem was besieged, but not taken. The tribes forcibly resettled by Assyria later became known as the Ten Lost Tribes. READ ENTIRE HISTORY (Assyrian captivity; Wikipedia; page was last edited 7/15/17 18:04)

 

As to your accusation against Conservatives: “the religious right’s political support and beliefs are about cutting/eliminating social programs that have successfully helped the elderly, disabled, poor and hungry; and they distrust and do not want to “share” America’s abundance of food and wealth or offer protection and refuge to refugees and immigrants”.

 

That is a load of hogwash. Cutting social programs is not the aim of Conservatives, rather ending fraud and waste inherent in the slave-making version of social programs. The religious right is highly involved in food for the poor and elderly without taxpayer dollars. The disabled will not have benefits cut and more than likely under Conservative management will have better access to effective healthcare rather than the bureaucratic delays and mismanagement occurring under Leftist management. AND your linkage of the poor and elderly in ancient Judah had no connection to the context Ezekiel made pertaining to Sodomites.

 

Ezekiel 16:49 ► Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. [They were Republican, right-wing conservative Christians].

 

Debbs a truer statement the “sister Sodom” was Dem Party Left-Wing morally depraved Secular Humanists

 

Proverbs 6:16-19
There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him:
17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood,
18 a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil,
19 a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.
[Again, right wing conservatives, Donald Trump. Paul Ryan and Mitch Mcconnell]

Again, a better moral equivalence is the Left-Wing Dems like the corrupt Obama, Crooked Hillary, Loretta Lynch, other Obamaites and the lying Fake News Media.

My Republican Christian mother woke up in 2016 and was disgusted by all of the blatant lies, the hate, the racism, “religious people” ignoring their own moral standards, and her party’s determination to harm the middle class, disabled, and poor– while they give HUGE tax cuts to the wealthiest 1% of Americans and Billions in subsidies to corporations like Ford, GM, Intel, Alcoah, BofA, Exxon, Chevron, Goldman Sachs, etc. They serve corporations and only care about corporate profits- they do not serve the PEOPLE.

 

Your mother was lied to since most of 2016 was under the Leftist big government corrupt Obama, who taxed the crap out of the rich meaning he drove jobs to foreign nations further ruining the tax revenue to help support those bloated and often fraud-infested social programs you unwittingly serve.

 

Proverbs 12:22
Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight.
So, every time a republican tells a lie, they should be stoned to death.

Again, the abominable lying lips are the Dems and Fake News propagandists trying to exact an unconstitutional coup against making America great rather than the empty and morally deficient such as Sodom, the northern Kingdom of Israel and Judah.

 

Clearly, if you look up the word “abomination” in an English dictionary, you will find that the word means “vile”, “wicked”, “wrong” and “hateful”. It is equally clear that the Bible was not written in English (but in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic). The 17th century translation of the Bible known as the King James Version (KJV) translates the Hebrew text of Leviticus 18:22 in this way: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” The term translated as “abomination” is the Hebrew expression תֹּועֵבָה (tō’ē’bā, a noun which may be pronounced “toevah”).

There is widespread agreement among Hebrew scholars that the word “toevah” as used in Leviticus is not, in fact, a moral term; instead, it is a cultic term which indicates “ritual uncleanness”. Any action that is said to be “toevah” is an action which requires a person to engage in ritual purification before they may come to worship. Sometimes, the term “toevah” can be used in the Bible to refer simply to sinful behaviour in general, but in the case of the text in question, scholars agree that ritual uncleanness is implied.

 

Debbs since you insist on using a theological revisionist evaluation of “abomination” translated toevah in Hebrew, I will use the respected and much touted Biblical lexicon (except among theological revisionists) called Strong’s Concordance (Make sure to click “Read More”):

 

it is abomination
tow`ebah (to-ay-baw’)
something disgusting (morally), i.e. (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol — abominable (custom, thing), abomination
. (Leviticus 18:22; BibleHub.com)

 

Did you see the word “morally”?

 

Skip Moen has an interesting take on “toevah”:

 

Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence. Leviticus 18:22 JPS [Blog Editor: Jewish Publication Society of America Version]

 

Abhorrence – When it comes to the Hebrew word to’evah (abomination, abhorrence), most discussions move immediately to this verse.  Why?  Because homosexuality is such a hot political/religious topic.  The incendiary comments on both sides offer plenty of garbage and confusion.  But little progress can be made without first understanding the framework and intention of the biblical concept of to’evot (plural).  After you have digested what we will discover, you might want to look at Jay Michaelson’s article claiming a mistranslation of the term (he misses the point of to’evot because he stands outside the culture).

 

To’evot are prohibitions within the cultural framework of Israel.  What is an abomination for those in the household of Israel is what God calls an abomination, period.  It doesn’t matter what the other nations do or what other arguments suggest.  If you are part of Israel, the things God calls abominations are prohibited to you.  Claims that other nations would not call some of these practices abhorrent are correct.  Other nations have different prohibitions.  But that is beside the point.  As followers of YHWH, we are not held accountable to the standards of other nations.  We are held accountable to the standards God sets for His nation.  In fact, the biblical record specifically demands that the followers of YHWH do not live as the other nations live in all kinds of areas, not just sexual practices.  With all of the contemporary fuss over homosexuality, we may overlook that fact that eating pork and forsaking the Torah are also considered to’evot.  The Tanakh lists several other practices, some considered perfectly acceptable in contemporary society, as abominations.  This should help us realize that we are not dealing with universalized human mores.  We are dealing with what God expects of His people.  And God expects that His people will not eat certain things, will not worship in certain ways, will not make certain vows and will not engage in certain sexual practices even if the rest of the world does so.  In other words, to’evot are marks of distinctive difference; the difference in behavior that accompanies being a citizen of the Kingdom.

 

Let’s set aside the claim that some people are born with homosexual proclivities. Frankly, it doesn’t matter.  The biblical issue with homosexuality is not about DNA, cultural mores or legality.  It is about identification with the tribe of Abraham.  Just as the tribe of Abraham is distinguished by its dietary restrictions, so it is distinguished by its sexual restrictions.  If you want to belong to the tribe, you live by the rules of the tribe.  You can live by other rules, but you won’t belong to the tribe.  You will belong to the “nations.”  You decide.  It’s still a choice.  It has always been a choice.  Of course, living by the mores of the nations ultimately means death, but that has always been the choice too. (Stepping In It – Rewind; By Skip Moen; SkipMoen.com; 11/17/16)

 

Moen’s assessment is that the Law of Moses is linked only to the Jews. His view is the Law has no applicability to people outside the covenant between God and Abraham. And he is correct. Except for one principle that makes people outside of God’s Promises to the Jews engrafted into a covenant. Ephesians 2: 11-18 tells how Jew and Gentile can be one through Jesus Christ. But for brevity read this portion:

 

11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise

 

14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two

 

Thus as I said, homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God making the practice extremely immoral.

 

Thus, according to the same book of the Bible, eating pork is also said to be “toevah” (unclean). According to Leviticus 11:10, as rendered in the KJV, “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.” This means that eating squid, prawns, lobsters and other shellfish is “toevah”. Similarly, according to this ancient text, any man who has sex with a menstruating woman has committed toevah (see Leviticus 20:18). [Blog Editor: I’m not Jewish but on a personal level I agree with the Bible – That is some nasty sex] And any person who commits toevah within ancient Israel could not join the community in its acts of worship until they had been ritually purified.

 

Answered with a combination of Skip Moen and Ephesians 2: 11-18 above.

 

Few today would regard shellfood [sic – she means shellfish] restaurants as abominations; not would most regard eating pork as an unclean act; and I don’t know anyone who believes a man has corrupted himself in any way by having sex with his wife during her menstrual cycle [Ibid. (grammar citation for dummies)]. Some may say that homosexuality is different, since the book of Leviticus also calls for the execution of those men who are found to have had sex with other men. But the Old Testament texts in question sanction the death penalty in all kinds of cases. The text tells us that a child (no age specified) who repeatedly disobeys his or her parents may be executed [ibid.]. The act of picking up sticks on the Sabbath was punishable by death. And even having sex with a menstruating woman is worthy of death, according to this ancient body of literature (see Leviticus 20:18; Ezekiel 18:13, and many other texts to that effect). Who today regards any of these acts as unclean or meriting execution? [At least as far as Christians are concerned: Ibid.]

All of which brings us to a more central question. Why does the book of Leviticus describe sex between two men as “toevah”? Many people offer may answers to that question, and many of those answers have been aired recently on radio and elsewhere. But one possible explanation I haven’t heard outlined should be added to the mix. It is suggested by (amongst others) Rabbi Arthur Waskow (see his article: “Homosexuality and Torah Thought” [Blog Editor: Same author but similar title, “Emerging Torah of Same-Sex Marriage”]). He argues that the text of Leviticus itself reflects the world in which it was written, and this ancient world was a culture dominated by men which subordinated women [Blog Editor: A typical Leftist perspective of ignoring the origin in favor of present Leftist mandated cultural acceptance of man-made norms over the Creator]. This was a culture in which righteous men prayed daily giving thanks that they were not created female. Those who wrote this text would have regarded men having sex together as tantamount to one man playing (what was considered) a culturally inferior role (that of a woman) during sex [Blog Editor: Or men and women accepted the ordinance of God in their Jewish culture as mandated by the Law of Moses]. This would make a man less than a man, since he was making himself comparable to a woman. This would also explain why sex between two lesbians is not condemned in the Old Testament, since all women were thought to be of such inferior status that “neither would be seen as adopting a dominant or a subservient role during sexual encounters” [Blog Editor: OR culturally the women assumed what was good for the goose was good for the gander. Thus, the mandate for males would be presumed the same for females in a Jewish cultural setting honoring obedience to God’s Word].

 

Debbs is big with saying many theologians agree with her Left-Wing perspective of revised theology. When citing Rabbi Arthur Waskow she precedes his name in parenthesis the phrase “amongst others”. If the “amongst others” are of the same metal as her cited Rabbi let’s look at his theological credentials:

 

Arthur Ocean Waskow (born Arthur I. Waskow; 1933) is an American author, political activist, and rabbi associated with the Jewish Renewal movement. … READ THE REST OF WASKOW’S LEFTIST AFFILIATIONS AT WIKIPEDIA

 

My God, Waskow changed his middle name to “Ocean” probably due to the Marxist Globalist Green Movement of Climate Change (formerly called debunked Global Warming because the ice caps still exist and the East and West Coasts are not submerged by water).

 

Let’s examine just how revisionist the Jewish Renewal Movement is. This from a Jerusalem Post article that seems more favorable than critical. The JPost article is based on an interview with Rabbi i David Ingber of Romemu located in New York City (Manhattan):

 

On its website, Romemu describes itself as “attempting to transform the way Judaism is practiced and experienced by infusing aspects of Eastern spiritual practices with traditional Orthodox influences, so the ta’am, or taste, is unmistakably Jewish.”

Besides incorporating moments of meditation and early Saturday morning yoga, Romemu’s services are filled with music and Jewish chants in which the fully egalitarian congregation takes part, and to which it even dances or claps, as the mood strikes.

Several instruments are used each week, including a piano, darbuka drums, guitars and, on occasion, a double bass.

But the main characteristic of the Friday night and Saturday morning ceremonies, Ingber explained, is that the liturgy and traditional Jewish texts are made more accessible by juxtaposing Hebrew and English; focusing on less, but fully exploring prayers; and connecting texts with their meaning in modern times.

 

 

Romemu subscribes to a fairly recent approach to Judaism known as Jewish renewal, based on deep textual knowledge and a need to make the liturgy more accessible and relevant. (JEWISH RENEWAL: EXPERIMENTAL OR ESTABLISHED MOVEMENT? By DANIELLE ZIRI; Jerusalem Post; 12/26/16 01:51)

 

The key words and/or phrases that connect Jewish Renewal to a revisionist Judaism are: Eastern spiritual practices, modern times, fairly recent approach and relevant. All words justifying paths to replace the Creator with a human vision of spiritual reality. The same human attitudes that destroyed Sodom, the northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah. When humans defy God, God withdraws His protective Hand.

 

These are the kinds of issues being debated by scholars [Blog Editor: as in revisionist scholars] of the Hebrew Bible, and their considerations should be included in our continuing public debate about the use of an ancient text in the 21st century. [Blog Editor: I say NO to human revisionism and YES to the will of the Creator!] There is much more to be said, of course [Blog Editor: More said to stop revisionism against God’s Word] — and this post does not consider, for example, the New Testament passages concerning same-sex sexual intercourse [Blog Editor: Probably because they are more specific about homosexuality and Redemption from the penalty of the Law]. Nevertheless, if the Bible is going to be drawn into public debates about controversial social and moral issues, we can surely all agree that it is important to try to do justice to what the Bible actually says.

 

Doing “justice” is another Socialist/Marxist/Leftist synonym for transforming society into Leftist Secular Humanism in order to disregard that which God calls Holy and replacing with that which is human carnality.

 

JRH 7/22/17

Please Support NCCR 

Defeat the Islamic Invasion with Christ


John R. Houk

© July 20, 2017

 

I just finished reading an interesting essay from the Acton Institute by Ed West. The essay is about the Muslim migration to Europe. West notes that the Europe has become a secularist society in which the Christian influence that developed Western Culture and mores has been pushed to near non-existence.

 

Then West notes that a Europe that replaced Christianity with religion-killing Multiculturalism. A lying Multiculturalism that claims to accept everything that is diverse EXCEPT Christianity.

 

West does not specifically spell out a solution for the Muslim invasion rather he dwells on how it happened and its current affects.

 

Here is my suggestion to reverse the curse of observant Islam in Europe which will be a great inoculation for America’s future. BUT my suggestion will drive Leftists, Multiculturalists and – wait for it – Muslims – crazy.

 

It is time for Christian Americans to evangelize Europe to return faith to Europeans. The obstacle to evangelism is that secularist Multiculturalism is so entrenched that Europe’s hate-speech laws that look away when it comes to Islam is avidly anti-Christian. Until those hate-speech laws are reversed to allow Christians to criticize Islam as much as Muslims are able to criticize Christianity in some of the most vile hate-preaching imaginable, Christian evangelism will have to avoid speaking the truth about Islam as compared to the Christian faith.

 

Christian evangelism will have to focus on the power of Christ’s Redemptive purpose for humanity and hammer the meaning of the Love of God which is finding Salvation. Even that will be a fine line because Biblical morality is harshly divergent from Secular Humanist morality. When Leftist alternative lifestyles criticize God’s morality, Evangelists will need to confront the criticism in the same manner the Early Christians confronted Roman polytheistic cosmopolitanism. Which was with steadfast faith in Christ without violence and willing to become a public yet moral spectacle even if it ends with a martyrdom quite different from Muslim martyrdom.

 

Muslim martyrdom is willing to die while killing as many non-Muslims as possible.

 

Christian martyrdom is to die alone or with fellow Believers as an example of faith in God. Christian martyrdom has a spiritual purpose to influence non-Christians that joy in Christianity is vastly different than selfish secularist joy which is only about self-gratification.

 

Devoted praying Christians believing in the unseen power of God over the seen power of a Leftist State and the seen power of Muslim violent Jihad, will prevail. THE KEY is the word “devoted”.

 

Devoted

 

Dictionary.com

 

zealous or ardent in attachment, loyalty, or affection

 

Vocabulary.com

 

Being devoted to something means being focused on that particular thing almost exclusively. When you are devoted to a cause, you work to achieve its goals. When you are devoted to a person, you place their needs above your own.

 

Being devoted doesn’t have to refer only to personal relationships. It can focus on any area, activity, or passion. READ THE REST

 

TheFreeDictionary.com

 

American Heritage Dictionary

 

  1. Feeling or displaying strong affection or attachment; ardent: a devotedfriend.

 

  1. Having been consecrated; dedicated.

 

Collins English Dictionary

 

  1. feelingor demonstrating loyalty or devotion; ardent; devout

 

  1. (foll by: to) set apart, dedicated, or consecrated

 

Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection.

 

Adj.

 

  1. devoted – zealous in devotion or affection; “a devoted husband and father”; “devoted friends”

 

»» dedicated – devoted to a cause or ideal or purpose; “a dedicated dancer”; “dedicated teachers”; “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”- A. Lincoln

 

  1. devoted – (followed by `to’) dedicated exclusively to a purpose or use; “large sums devoted to the care of the poor”; “a life devoted to poetry”

 

»» dedicated – devoted to a cause or ideal or purpose; “a dedicated dancer”; “dedicated teachers”; “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”- A. Lincoln

 

YourDictionary.com

 

devoted

 

adjective

The definition of devoted is someone who is very loyal and steadfast in giving love or attention. (yourdictionary.com definition)

 

Webster’s New World College Dictionary

 

  1. characterized by devotion or zeal; dedicated

 

  1. very loving, loyal, or faithful: a devoted husband

 

English Wiktionary

 

Adjective

(comparative more devoted, superlative most devoted)

 

  1. Voweddedicatedconsecrated.

 2. Zealous; characterized by devotion.

 

So you get the idea of the selfless devotion in prayer and faith in God that I am talking about, right? This is not a “let us bow our heads and pray” for five-seconds. This evangelistic prayer to revive Christianity in Europe and revitalize Christian faith in America, is a get down and get to work spiritually to cast down those unseen enemies that will eventually lose anyway if you read the end of The Revelation of John the Apostle.

 

Here is a character of evangelism that is work and will succeed and Christ will add to the invisible Church hastening the return of King Jesus from the Epistle to the Ephesians:

 

Therefore be imitators of God [copy Him and follow His example], as well-beloved children [imitate their father].

 

And walk in love, [esteeming and delighting in one another] as Christ loved us and gave Himself up for us, a [a]slain offering and sacrifice to God [for you, so that it became] a sweet fragrance.

 

For once you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord; walk as children of Light [lead the lives of those native-born to the Light].

 

For the fruit (the effect, the product) of the Light or[a]the Spirit [consists] in every form of kindly goodness, uprightness of heart, and trueness of life.

 

10 And try to learn [in your experience] what is pleasing to the Lord [let your lives be constant proofs of what is most acceptable to Him].

 

11 Take no part in and have no fellowship with the fruitless deeds and enterprises of darkness, but instead [let your lives be so in contrast as to] [b]expose and reprove and convict them.

 

12 For it is a shame even to speak of or mention the things that [such people] practice in secret.

 

13 But when anything is exposed and reproved by the light, it is made visible and clear; and where everything is visible and clear there is light.

 

14 Therefore He says, Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall shine (make day dawn) upon you and give you light.

 

15 Look carefully then how you walk! Live purposefully and worthily and accurately, not as the unwise and witless, but as wise (sensible, intelligent people),

 

16 Making the very most of the time [buying up each opportunity], because the days are evil.

 

17 Therefore do not be vague and thoughtless and foolish, but understanding and firmly grasping what the will of the Lord is.

 

18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but ever be filled and stimulated with the [Holy] Spirit.

 

19 Speak out to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, offering praise with voices [[c]and instruments] and making melody with all your heart to the Lord,

 

20 At all times and for everything giving thanks in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God the Father. (Ephesians 5: 1-2, 8-20; 6: 10-18 AMPC)

 

JRH 7/20/17

Please Support NCCR

______________________

The spiritual cause and cure of the ‘European intifada’

 

By Ed West

July 14, 2017

Part of the Acton Blog RELIGION & LIBERTY TRANSATLANTIC

Acton Institute

 

At the start of the Syrian migration crisis, an Israeli security official warned of a coming “European intifada.” Few noticed it at the time. But after a series of attacks on largely Jewish targets in France and Belgium, the new reality finally hit home in January 2015, when armed men opened fire at the Paris offices of the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. Since then, terrorist atrocities have escalated through Paris, Nice, Belgium, Sweden, Berlin, and London. They include the murder of a priest by two Islamists in Normandy as he was saying Mass.

 

Charlie Hebdo is a tedious and tasteless publication that makes fun of dead children and has predictable 1968 views on almost everything, except one of the most sacred: criticism of Islam. The day of the massacre Hebdo featured as its front page a caricature of Michel Houellebecq, whose controversial new novel was published that week. Soumission is set in a France in the near future in which an Islamist party has come to power with the connivance of both the Left and Right in order to defeat the nativist National Front. Houellebecq, already in trouble for criticising France’s second largest religion in a previous work, has since moved to Ireland, seeing France as no longer safe. Soumission became a mega-bestseller. Also topping the charts that week was a polemic by Éric Zemmour, a journalist of Jewish-North African descent who has criticised mass immigration and the “demographic tsunami” it has brought.

 

The recent attacks in Manchester and London came as another important book was selling in vast numbers, The Strange Death of Europe by Douglas Murray, which has spent weeks at the top of the Sunday Times charts despite this subject being not the sort of thing one talks about in polite company. Murray’s book follows James Kirchick’s equally bleak-sounding The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Ages. In his book, Kirchick warns:

 

A Europe unmoored from the Enlightenment values it brought to the world, ignorant of and unwilling to protect its civilizational achievements, captive to chauvinist demagogues, indisposed to defend itself, bereft of its Jews, estranged from America, cowed before Russia, and reverted to its traditional state of nature with nations pursuing mercenary self-interest at the expense of unity would not only spell the end of Europe as we know it. Such a collapse would usher in nothing less than a new dark age.

 

Despite this, Kirchick is more optimistic than the title suggests. He concludes that the continent may get out of its current mess, if it can pool its resources and enjoy closer integration.

 

Others are not so optimistic. In Germany, historian Rolf Peter Sieferle has made even more of a splash. His account of German political psychology and its effects, Finis Germania, has enjoyed good sales just as it has been roundly condemned by the prestige press. Die Zeit called it a book of “brazen obscenity.” (He has not been able to enjoy his surprise bestseller, having taken his own life last September.)

 

A former socialist who grew disillusioned with his generation’s naivety, Sieferle wrote that “[a] society that can no longer distinguish between itself and the forces that would dissolve it is living morally beyond its means.” In fact, he argued, Germans actually want to disappear because of a belief that Germans are uniquely guilty due to the Holocaust – that they carry a blood guilt as “the absolute enemies of our common humanity,” becoming “a scapegoat people.”

 

This was perhaps why in 2015 German Chancellor Angela Merkel made the momentous decision to open her nation’s borders. The numbers involved, and the future implications for our continent, are staggering; the reasons for her decision remain a mystery. Earlier that year the chancellor had told Reem Sahwil, a 14-year-old Palestinian girl who wanted to stay in Germany, that if she allowed Sahwil’s family to stay in Germany, all Africans would want to join them. Germany “cannot cope with that,” she said.

 

Many in the German media criticised the coldness of Chancellor Merkel’s response and so when in late August migration pressure looked like overwhelming Greece and Italy, the Germans snapped. In August 2015, Merkel announced her open door policy, cloaking it in moral terms. “Universal civil rights were so far tied together with Europe and its history,” she said. “If Europe fails on the question of refugees, its close connection with universal civil rights will be destroyed. It won’t be the Europe we imagine.” As she told them, “Wir Schaffen das” – “We can do this.” What followed were scenes of jubilation among Germans as they welcomed refugees into their towns, as Murray writes:

 

As the trains came into the stations and the migrants got off and went through the crowds some locals wolf-whistled and gave them high-fives. Human chains of volunteers handed out food and gifts, including sweets and teddy bears for the children. It was not just an expression of the Willkommenskultur (“welcoming culture”) that Germany says it likes to practise. These migrants were not merely being welcomed. They were being celebrated, as though they were the local football team returning triumphant, or heroes returning from a war.

 

In just a year Germany accepted a total of 1.1 million migrants. Most were not Syrian, and most were not refugees as defined by the UN. Most were young men, and most intended to bring their family with them; once those relatives are taken into account, Germany will have experienced nothing short of a demographic revolution. At a time when low-skilled jobs are disappearing this is a potential explosive cocktail.

 

Kirchick wrote that “historical guilt for the crimes of Nazism inspired an open-door refugee policy as ill considered as it was well intentioned, the negative consequences of which will be felt for generations.” Among the new Germans was the Sahwil family, which was given permission to stay at the end of 2015. The young girl gave a little-noticed interview in which she said she hoped to return home one day … when Israel “is no longer there.”

 

Merkel’s executive decision was only an acceleration of a long-running trend that began after the Second World War with the first migrant workers in Britain, France, Germany, and the Low Countries. They were there for economic reasons, and people did not expect them to stay, but as Western Europe became diverse, much to the discomfort and opposition of people outside the political class, all sorts of rationalizations were offered. Yet as Murray accurately points out, at the heart of this was a spiritual void.

 

On a profound level, we imported religious people because of the absence of our own faith. Western Europe took immigrants from the Islamic world just as it was adopting bohemian culture mores, characterised by more liberal attitudes to drug and alcohol use, and extra-marital sex. The new “bourgeois-bohemian” middle class combined this countercultural individualism with the materialistic values of capitalism. Across 10 Western European countries, church attendance fell from 38.4 to 16.6 percent between 1975 and 1998. Europe became a consumerist paradise with an economic model that depended on demographic growth, which only religious societies can provide. In France, Caucasian women who practise religion have a half-child fertility advantage over the non-religious; in Austria self-identified atheists have fertility rates of just 0.86 children per woman.

 

It was assumed, if unspoken, that Muslim migrants – dressed in suits, often moderate beer drinkers – would become godless or at least less observant upon breathing European air, their children even more so. It’s safe to say there are now few people left who have not been disabused of this notion. Muslims arrived in a continent going through a revolutionary social change which made the path to integration complex and difficult. Unsurprisingly their sons, feeling the sense of alienation common to second-generation migrants sometimes feel little attachment to the national culture, preferring a strong, global brotherhood of faith that offers the comfort of certainty and the heroic narrative. And yet when the UK government repeatedly emphasises “British values” during anti-extremism initiatives, they find it hard to articulate those same values without the obvious one: Christianity. Instead, they limply define Britishness by tolerance and diversity, almost as if these things are a replacement faith.

 

… Which they sort of are. Diversity offers Europeans a form of redemption, something heavily influenced by the tragedy of 1914 to 1945 but also deeply linked to our guilty culture. When the body of three-year-old Syrian boy Aylan Kurdi, a Syrian washed up on a Turkish beach, it became the most powerful image of the decade. Yet in the Arab world, there was little sense that this was their fault. As Murray writes, “there was not anything there remotely like the introspection and self-accusation indulged in by Western politicians and media.” Indeed, the Gulf Arab states have taken virtually no Syrian refugees.

 

Europe has a guilt and savior complex. As a result, it seems to be replacing the atonement of the Savior’s death with its own.

 

Much of Europe’s behaviour since 1945 has been an attempt to exit history, a tired continent looking for peace and inner calm, sick of the wars of religion, ideology and race that have dogged it for centuries; in doing so it can also finally achieve its redemption. The tragedy is that, in doing so, it has almost certainly ensured that their posterity will not get that peace. Murray concludes that “[i]t is always possible that the tide of faith that began its long, withdrawing roar of retreat in the nineteenth century will come back in again.” One must hope. Together with their traditional faith, Europeans must recover their lost Burkean notion of society being a compact between the living, the dead and those yet unborn.

___________________

Defeat the Islamic Invasion with Christ

John R. Houk

© July 20, 2017

__________________

The spiritual cause and cure of the ‘European intifada’

 

Ed West is an author, journalist and blogger. He writes a regular blog for The Spectator and is deputy editor of The Catholic Herald. He is the author of The Diversity IllusionGroupthink, and The Silence of Our Friends.

 

© 2017 Acton Institute

 

Acton Institute Mission & Core Principles

 

The Acton Institute is a think-tank whose mission is to promote a free and virtuous society characterized by individual liberty and sustained by religious principles.

 

The Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty is named after the great English historian, Lord John Acton (1834-1902). He is best known for his famous remark: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Inspired by his work on the relation between liberty and morality, the Acton Institute seeks to articulate a vision of society that is both free and virtuous, the end of which is human flourishing. To clarify this relationship, the Institute holds seminars and publishes various books, monographs, periodicals, and articles.

 

The Acton Institute organizes seminars aimed at educating religious leaders of all denominations, business executives, entrepreneurs, university professors, and academic researchers in economics principles, and in the connection that can exist between virtue and economic thinking. We exhort religious leaders to  READ THE REST

 

Blasphemy Law is Revenge Instrument in Pakistan


John R. Houk

© July 19, 2017

 

American 1st Amendment Truth is a Death Sentence in Pakistan

 

And yet another Pakistani Christian is being accused of blaspheming the false-prophet Muhammad as a tool of revenge in a Muslim/Christian argument.

 

Christians in Pakistan are treated as subhuman class of dirt even being denied proper avenues of education. Why? Because Muslims are taught in their revered writings – Quran, Hadith and Sira/Sunnah – that Muslims are superior are to ALL non-Muslims and those non-Muslims should be denigrated for refusing to believe in Islam.

 

Needless to say, equal justice for all people is something that is extremely absent in Islamic dominated societies.

 

The lack of justice and equal rights are particularly apparent in Pakistan’s society when Christians risk voicing their opinion that Christ is the Son of God and Muhammad is a false-prophet. This will get you beaten or killed by a Muslim mob or escaping public Muslim retribution, put in jail being charged with the capital crime of blasphemy.

 

Yet burning a Church, torching a cross or destroying a Holy Bible will not be treated as a crime in Pakistan.

 

The Pakistani Christian Shahzad Masih is finding this hatred of Christians on a first-hand basis.

 

I was first made aware of Shahzad Masih’s plight in an email alert from Assist News. I discovered greater details from World Watch Monitor (WWM) on Shahzad’s persecution. Some of the details differ. For example, Assist News has Shahzad as age 17 and WWM lists him as age 16. Assist News writes from the perspective of the mother listed as Hina Shafaqat. WWM uses the father’s perspective who is listed Shafaqat implying the last name of Masih. One should realize among Pakistani Christians “Masih” is a Christian honorific.

 

I am cross posting Assist News first for getting the story to me and then the WWM article which has better details.

 

JRH 7/19/17

Please Support NCCR

**************

ISLAMISTS IN PAKISTAN ACCUSE CHRISTIAN MINOR OF BLASPHEMING ISLAM’S PROPHET

 

By Dan Wooding

July 19, 2017 03:39

Assist News

 

Shahzad Masih – Morning Star News courtesy of family

No motive given for alleged comment.

 

LAHOREPAKISTAN (ANS — July 18, 2017) – A member of an Islamic extremist group in Pakistan has accused a Christian minor of blasphemy after the boy had an argument with a Muslim, sources said.

 

Hina Shafaqat, mother of 17-year-old Shahzad Masih, told Morning Star News (http://morningstarnews.org) that her son had been wrongly implicated in the case by a Muslim colleague with whom he had a quarrel 10 days ago, and the family has not been able to locate him since his arrest.

 

Working as a sweeper at Shamim Riaz Hospital in Dinga town, Gujrat District, Punjab Province for the past nine months, Masih had an altercation with hospital pharmacy employee Ishtiaq Ahmed Jalali, she said. A senior medical officer at the hospital intervened and calmed the quarrel, but “Jalali nurtured a grudge against my son and has now plotted this case against him to settle the score,” she said.

 

“I’ve raised Shahzad as a devout Roman Catholic – I’ve never taught my children to hate people belonging to other faiths, which is why I am sure that my son is being wrongly accused of blasphemy,” she said. “The police arrested my son on Friday [July 14], and since then we have been trying to locate his whereabouts.”

 

Neither the Dinga police nor the Kharian police said they have him in their custody, she said.

 

“We have searched so many police stations but have failed to trace him,” she said, adding that police were torturing the family mentally by not disclosing her son’s location or revealing his well-being.

 

According to the Pakistan correspondent for Morning Star News, Masih, the oldest of five children, is the family breadwinner along with his father, a daily wage mason. Shahzad Masih went to school until grade four, after which his family could not afford to further education.

 

“We, and the family of my brother-in-law Rafaqat, had to relocate to a relative’s house on Friday [July 14] to avoid any backlash from the local Muslims, who are being instigated by an Islamist outfit,” she said.

 

More than 30 other Christian families also live in Mohalla Railway Station of Dinga town.

 

Dinga Police Station House Officer (SHO) Inspector Shahbaz Ahmad dodged questions about facts of the case, telling Morning Star News only, “The accused has committed blasphemy.”

 

Morning Star News stated that the police official did note that a First Information Report (FIR No. 273/17) was registered against Masih under Section 295-C, which calls for death or life imprisonment to those found guilty of blaspheming against Muhammad, the prophet of Islam.

 

According to the FIR, complainant Nadeem Ahmed – president of the Dinga chapter of Islamist outfit Tehreek Tahafuz-e-Islam Pakistan – alleged that he was sitting in his electronic appliances shop when Ishtiaq Ahmed Jalali came and informed him that Masih had uttered derogatory remarks against Muhammad. Jalali is also a member of Tehreek Tahafuz-e-Islam Pakistan.

 

“Upon hearing this, we sent a boy to Shahzad Masih’s home and asked him to come to the Popular Mobile Shop for clearing the issue,” Ahmed alleged in the FIR. “When Masih came there, we asked him about the accusation, to which he again started abusing and cursing the Holy Prophet. Some people who had gathered at the shop by then also witnessed the blasphemy done by Masih.”

 

Ahmed alleged that the Christian boy “managed to escape from the shop.”

 

Inspector Ahmad declined to comment on why he thought Masih had committed blasphemy or if he had admitted to it.

 

“You know very well I cannot repeat the blasphemous words,” he said, avoiding questions as to what could have motivated the Christian to do such a thing. He also did not offer any plausible explanation as to how Masih was able to flee from the scene in the presence of a large number of upset Muslims.

 

“Talk to the SP, because we just registered the case and forwarded it to him for further action,” he said before putting down the phone.

 

Repeated attempts to reach Superintendent of Police (SP) Maaz Zafar failed as his telephone operator said that the senior official was busy and would return the call later. At this writing, however, Zafar had not contacted Morning Star News.

 

Attorneys Riaz Anjum and Kashif Naimat from the Pakistan Center for Law and Justice (PCLJ) told Morning Star News from Dinga that they had offered legal and financial assistance to Shahzad Masih’s family as he was one of the main providers of income for the family, and his arrest had badly degraded their finances.

 

“The case is clearly fabricated, because the FIR does not state any motive for Shahzad Masih’s alleged blasphemy,” Anjum said. “It’s very unfortunate that Pakistani police book people in blasphemy cases before even trying to ascertain the facts. Now the boy will be made to suffer in prison like so many other innocent people who have fallen victim to the harsh blasphemy laws.”

 

He said that their investigation had corroborated the account of the Christian family.

 

“It is true that Masih had a fight with a pharmacy worker over a week ago, and the matter was resolved by a doctor,” Anjum said. “Local sources told us that Jalali bore a grudge against Masih, and he had connived with the complainant, Nadeem Ahmad, to settle his personal score with the Christian boy.”

 

+++

Pakistani Christian boy, 16, charged with blasphemy for discussing his faith

 

By World Watch Monitor

July 19, 2017

 

Pakistani Muslims call for the hanging of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman on death row for blasphemy since 2010, at a protest in Karachi on 13 October 2016. That was the day Pakistan’s Supreme Court delayed her appeal after one of the judges stepped down.

 

A 16-year-old Pakistani Christian boy has been charged with blasphemy for talking with a colleague about his belief in Jesus, the second such incident in a month.

 

Shahzad Masih, 16, a cleaner at a hospital in the city of Dinga (near the religiously conservative city of Gujrat), was arrested on 13 July after his colleague, Ishtiaq Ahmed Jalali, accused him of insulting Islam’s prophet Muhammad, a crime punishable with death in Pakistan.

 

A month earlier, on 15 June, Ashfaq Masih, 28, was arrested in the nearby city of Lahore for saying he believed Jesus to be the final prophet.

 

The latest incident took place at the Shameem Riaz Polyclinic. Jalali, who works at the hospital pharmacy, is a member of Tehreek-e-Tahfuz-e-Islam Pakistan, an organisation that strives to protect the name and honour of Muhammad. It belongs to the Barelvi school [Blog Editor: Barelvi extremist Islamism has developed according Left-Wing news site HuffPo] of Islamic thought, which is considered “moderate” and has even faced criticism from other Muslims for its “polytheism” of worshipping at shrines. Barelvis are known for the special respect they afford to Muhammad – more so than any other Islamic school of thought – and are chief supporters of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws.

 

Shahzad Masih’s father, Shafaqat, who works as a labourer, told World Watch Monitor that the argument related to who Christians worship.

 

One of the relatives of Shahzad Masih’s colleague Ishtiaq Ahmed Jalali, a leader of Tehreek-e-Tahfuz-e-Islam Pakistan, told a local TV station a day after Masih’s arrest: “If the blasphemer is acquitted of the charge then each member of our organisation would attack him.”

 

“My son told him that we follow Jesus and then their discussion became sour, at which point a doctor intervened and calmed them down,” he said.

 

The police complaint was lodged by another man, Nadeem Ahmed, who claims to have called Shahzad Masih from his mobile phone repair shop, which is beside the hospital, to ask him about what he’d said. In his report, Ahmed states that Masih repeated his “abusive words” against Muhammad and then fled.

 

Police reports in Pakistan, called First Information Reports (FIR), are often key in court cases, though the veracity of the claims in such reports is often the subject of contention.

 

Shafaqat Masih says that two days prior to the lodging of the FIR, his son’s colleague, Ishtiaq Jalali, told his son that Christians worship at the shrines of Muslim sages.

 

“My son told him that he didn’t know about this and he would ask me about it,” Shafaqat Masih said. “Then on 13 July, I was at work when he called me at around 4pm. He had returned from hospital but they asked him to come to the mobile phone repair shop, which is in front of the hospital.

 

“I told him that it would take me some time to get there, so he should call his uncle, Rafaqat, whom I also called on the phone to go to him. I arrived at around 7pm at the hospital, where they all had gathered. We tried to intervene, but they did not let us talk. Then they told us that they did not want to make the matter public and wanted to settle it amicably. At the same time, they kept calling others to join them and a large number of clerics gathered while we three were all alone [Shahzad, his father and uncle].

 

“One of the clerics told me that the head of a nearby madrassah had called them to the madrassah to settle the matter, after which the entire mob went there.

 

“[His uncle] Rafaqat and I also went there, but I sent Rafaqat to go inside along with Shahzad, who they had in their custody. The leader of the group argued that the crime committed by Shahzad was punishable with death alone. While they were discussing this, two police vans arrived. The chief policeman asked for Shahzad, but they were reluctant to give him up and only handed him over on the promise that the decision would be taken the next morning. As I was standing outside, I saw the police taking Shahzad along with them, but since then they haven’t allowed us to see him.”

 

The police chief, Shahbaz Hinjra, told a local newspaper that Masih was in their custody and that they were investigating the matter.

 

Former Punjab parliamentarian Tahir Naveed Chaudhry, leader of the largest Christian political party, told World Watch Monitor that he had personally investigated the matter and found that initial argument had centred over Shahzad Masih’s colleague’s attempts to convert him to Islam.

 

“When our people try to defend themselves and their faith then often it becomes an issue and later such cases are lodged,” he said.

 

One of Jalali’s relatives, Muhammad Saqib Shakeel Jalali, a leader of Tehreek-e-Tahfuz-e-Islam Pakistan, told a local TV station a day after Masih’s arrest: “If the blasphemer is acquitted of the charge then each member of our organisation would attack him.”

 

Pakistani Muslims line up to visit the tomb of [assassin] Mumtaz Qadri on the outskirts of Islamabad on 1 March 2017. Qadri was hanged in February 2016 for the murder of former Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer, who criticised Pakistan’s blasphemy laws and defended Asia Bibi, a Christian woman on death row for blasphemy since 2010.

 

Masih’s father says he and his family have been on the run ever since. “We don’t even know what to eat and where to live,” he said.

 

His uncle, Rafaqat, told World Watch Monitor that there are about 25 Christian families in the area and no such incident had ever taken place before.

 

The Tehreek-e-Tahfuz-e-Islam Pakistan website claims that no suspect has yet been awarded the death penalty under Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, even though the Christian woman Asia Bibi has been on death row for blasphemy since 2010. The website also says that liberal Muslims want to amend the current blasphemy law and must be stopped – a key reason for the organisation’s founding 10 years ago. In April, a Muslim student was beaten to death in the city of Mardan following an accusation of blasphemy.

 

Several blasphemy cases have been registered before in Gujrat, one of the most conservative areas of the Punjab province. In August 2015, 15 Christians were accused of blasphemy after they used the word “apostle” to describe a pastor who had died years before. Then in July 2016, a Christian man was accused of blasphemy after a religious argument on the messaging service WhatsApp. Both cases are still pending in the court.

 

The Aasiya Noreen story

Aasiya Noreen, commonly known as Asia Bibi, received the death penalty in 2010 after she allegedly made derogatory comments about Islam’s prophet Muhammad during an argument with a Muslim woman.

While the two women were working together, the Muslim woman had refused water from Bibi on the grounds that it was “unclean” because it had been handled by a Christian.

The Muslim woman, together with her sister, were the only two witnesses in the case, but the defence failed to convince the appeals judges that their evidence lacked credibility.

In the High Court appeal hearing in October 2014, Bibi’s lawyer, Naeem Shakir, argued that the main complainant in the case, the local Muslim cleric Mohamed Salaam, had not heard Bibi blaspheme, and that his original complaint had been lodged five days after the women’s quarrel. Shakir argued in his appeal that during the trial the only reason given for this delay was “deliberation and consultation”, and said that Salaam had acknowledged this in court.

Salaam was filmed by an international film crew who made a film about Bibi in May/June 2014, saying that it is his religious obligation to defend the dignity of Muhammad and that is why he decided to be a witness before the court. He only heard Bibi allegedly confess to blasphemy when she had been brought before a village council several days after the quarrel.

Her other main accuser, Mohamed Imran, the owner of the field in which she worked, had not been present at the time of the quarrel either; he was away from the village.

Bibi’s case attracted widespread global attention, much of it critical of Pakistan’s anti-blasphemy laws, which critics contend are routinely abused as a pretext to settle personal scores. Two prominent Pakistani politicians were assassinated in 2010 after they spoke publicly in Bibi’s defence.

______________

Blasphemy Law is Revenge Instrument in Pakistan

John R. Houk

© July 19, 2017

_____________

ISLAMISTS IN PAKISTAN ACCUSE CHRISTIAN MINOR OF BLASPHEMING ISLAM’S PROPHET

 

About the writer: Dan Wooding, 76, is an award-winning winning author, broadcaster and journalist who was born in Nigeria of British missionary parents, and is now living in Southern California with his wife Norma, to whom he has been married for more than 54 years. They have two sons, Andrew and Peter, and six grandchildren who all live in the UK. Dan is the founder and international director of ASSIST (Aid to Special Saints in Strategic Times) and the ASSIST News Service (ANS). He is also the author of some 45 books and has two US-based TV programs –- “Windows on the World” (with Garry Ansdell) and “Inside Hollywood with Dan Wooding” — which are both broadcast on the Holy Spirit Broadcasting Network (http://hsbn.tv/), and also a weekly radio show called “Front Page Radio” on the KWVE Radio Network (www.kwve.com).

 

You may republish this or any of our ANS stories with attribution to the ASSIST News Service (www.assistnews.net). Please tell your friends and colleagues that they can receive a complimentary subscription to our news service by going to the above ANS website and signing up there.

________________

Pakistani Christian boy, 16, charged with blasphemy for discussing his faith

 

Copyright © 2011 – 2017 — World Watch Monitor. All Rights Reserved. 

 

About WWM

 

World Watch Monitor reports the story of Christians around the world under pressure for their faith.

 

Freedom of belief, guaranteed by the UN Declaration of Human Rights, plays a critical part in the unfolding, complex story of the 21st Century. We exist to tell this part of the story with accuracy and authority. We respect and uphold everyone’s right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; Our focus is on the global Christian Church.

 

World Watch Monitor is particularly concerned with reporting on the underlying causes of persecution. We aim to connect the dots to reveal the forces behind acts of violence and injustice.

 

We strive to be the most trusted and consulted source of news about Christians who suffer for their faith. World Watch Monitor editors commission journalists around the world to report on persecution, from READ THE REST