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

 

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

 

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

 

On Defining Religion


nonie-darwish-2-i-will-not-submit

Ex-Muslim Nonie Darwish explains the reasons that Islam has absolutely NO harmony with the Western perception of values and religious freedom. The last sentence of this essay Darwish asks:

 

Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

 

JRH 2/13/17

Please Support NCCR

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

On Defining Religion

 

By Nonie Darwish

February 12, 2017 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam and that Muslims must, sooner or later, demand to live under an Islamic government.

 

  • The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader.

 

  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book” — Jews and Christians — but to replace them, after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible.

 

  • Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and it relies on government enforcement to do so.

 

  • Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

 

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said that President Donald Trump’s 90-day ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries is “a religiously based ban,” and “if they can ban Muslims, why can’t they ban Mormons.” This has become the position of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, which has influenced not only the American public but has convinced the majority of the world that America is “bad.” How can we blame the world, and even a good segment of American citizens, for hating America when such disingenuous and misleading claims are aired to the world from US officials and broadcast by American television channels?

 

The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump Administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader, rather than to see a dictatorship — secular or theocratic — as a world leader. He ran as a Republican; meanwhile, Democrats and the mainstream media refuse to engage in respectful and legitimate debate on the most vital threat to Western civilization in the twenty-first century: Islam. Truth has become irrelevant; people seem to prefer a political game of tug-of-war to sway public opinion against the Trump Administration, and, presumably, to elect Democrats forever. That is how the system is set up.

 

Political discussions on television have become extremely frustrating; they have turned into shouting matches and name-calling at the least informative levels. Television hosts often become instigators and participants in the shouting matches. The thinking is apparently that the louder they get, the more attractive the program will be. Meanwhile everyone is talking at once; the viewer cannot hear anyone, so the program could not be more boring.

 

Under the US Constitution, freedom of religion is protected. and Islam has been welcomed inside the West on that basis as one of the three Abrahamic religions. According to Western values and the Western understanding of the word, “religion” is supposed to be a personal relationship with God, where free will is of utmost importance; the believer has authority only over himself or herself when it comes to religious laws or punishing sins (such as leaving the religion or committing adultery) — quite different from criminal laws intended to protect society. Western values also allow followers of a religion the freedom to proselytize, but never by resorting to government enforcement.

 

Bottom line, the Western definition of religion is in harmony with the Biblical values of the human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that all human beings are created equal under the law. It is considered a basic Western value to view God, family and country as a top priority.

 

Now let us compare these values to Islamic values:

 

  • Muslim citizens have the right to punish other citizens with humiliating, severe, cruel and unusual punishments such as death, flogging and amputation, for sinning against Allah, the Quran or Islam. Those “crimes” include leaving Islam, being a homosexual, or committing adultery. And if the Islamic government does not enforce such punishments, any Muslim on the street has the right to apply the punishment against another Muslim and not be prosecuted. That is why apostates, such as myself, cannot visit any Muslim county; the fear is not only from Islamic governments but from anyone on the street.

 

  • Being a Muslim is not a personal relationship with God, as it is under the Bible, but is enforced by the state at birth. When a child is born in Egypt to a Muslim father, the birth certificate is stamped “Muslim” and all government-issued documents as well. A child must learn Islamic studies in school and practice Islam throughout his life. In Egypt, the twin sons of a Christian divorced mother were forced to take Islamic studies and become Muslim just because their originally-Christian father converted to Islam. Today, in Egypt, I am still considered Muslim and such a status could never change if I ever lived there again.

 

  • Islamic law and leaders rely on government enforcement — under penalty of death — to keep Muslims within Islam and to convert the minority Christian population into Islam. Islamic sharia law, obliges Islamic states to enforce religious law, and if the Muslim head of state refuses to follow religious law, sharia permits the public to use force to remove the head of state from office.

 

  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with “the people of the book,” Jews and Christians, but to replace them — after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible. Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and relies on government enforcement to do so.

 

The tenets above are just a few of the differences in values between Islam, the Bible and the Western concept of religion. What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam, and Muslims must demand to live under an Islamic government sooner or later. That might explain the reason for the eternal violence in nearly all Muslim countries, between government being in the hands of a religious theocracy or of the military. Islam, as it is practiced today, has violated all Western definitions of religion and values.

 

Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

 

THE FIRST AMENDMENT

1st-amendment-image-source-brent-payne-flickr

 

___________________

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of “Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values.”

 

© 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor: I did not ask for permission to re-blog this essay from the Gatestone Institute. If requested I will remove the post.]

 

About Gatestone Institute

 

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.” — John Adams

 

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

 

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;

 

  • Human Rights

 

  • A free and strong economy

 

  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world

 

  • Energy independence

 

  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

 

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

 

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and READ THE REST

 

Religious Freedom in Elementary School


religious-liberty-under-attack

John R. Houk

© December 1, 2016

 

Just the other day I had a conversation with my 3rd grade grandson about his reading regimen. He was trying to squirm out of his daily reading by telling me he forgot to bring his book from school.

 

I told him to get a book from home. He tried to tell me we didn’t have any. I knew better. So I told him we many versions of the Bible to read.

 

He told me his teacher said he couldn’t read religious books.

 

I said, “Tough! Get a Bible. I’m going to have to talk to your Public School teacher about Religious Freedom in the First Amendment.”

 

My wife saved our grandson’s bacon by assigning something I can’t recall right now. BUT it really chapped my hide that a Public School teacher said reading the Bible was unacceptable.

 

It’s a good thing I didn’t fly-off the handle. I checked my email later in the day and had received an email from the 3rd grade teacher. Lo and behold – she was asking why I hadn’t been turning in my grandson’s reading record.

 

Oops, my bad I had not kept up with that. Reading the email further reading suggestions were included. Guess what. Religious literature was a part of the approved reading. Now the word “Bible” was not used specifically, but as far as I am concerned “religious” included the Bible.

 

I wish my grandson was as bright in doing homework as he is in slipping out of homework.

 

I was thinking about all this Religious Freedom vs. the mythical Separation of Church and State (See Also HERE and HERE)and I ran into the article I am cross posting below from United Families International about preserving Religious Freedom for our children or in our case grandchildren that we are raising.

 

JRH 12/1/16

Please Support NCCR

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

PRESERVING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM FOR OUR CHILDREN

 

By Diane Robertson

November 30, 2016

United Families International

 

This week I received an email from Alliance Defending Freedom, a group of lawyers who defend religious freedom, that began thus:

 

“Dear Diane,

 

Do you ever wonder what the future will look like for your children and grandchildren?

 

We live in a world where religious freedom for future generations cannot be assumed. It must be fought for—every day.”

 

As I have studied the issues, written for UFI, discussed the issues with friends, family, and strangers, and written and spoken with lawmakers, I have often thought, “Have we so little compassion for the destinies of our own children that we can feel just about ignoring the destruction of the freedoms we have enjoyed?”

 

There are so many reasons people give to ignore the current erosion of religious freedom– we are too busy; losing our freedom is inevitable; religious freedom marginalizes people with other beliefs; religion itself is bigoted and old fashioned, and so on. The fight for religious freedom is not a friendly fight.

 

It’s true that those on the side of religious freedom are continually disparaged. They are told that their views are based on bigotry and hate for certain groups of people. It’s hard to stand up against such demeaning accusations. And it is certainly not true for most. Most people fighting for religious freedom do so because they believe that everyone should be allowed to live and work according to the dictates of their conscience. They believe in property rights, freedom of belief, and freedom of conscience. They oppose laws that limit the ability of people to live, work, and worship as they believe.

 

In the same email mentioned above, ADF reported that their:

 

“Clients are regular people who were going about their daily business—work, school, church—until they were confronted by a culture intolerant of their faith. A Christian printer faced a boycott and lawsuit because he politely declined to print t-shirts promoting the local ‘pride’ festival. A decorated firefighter was suspended because of a Christian book he wrote in his spare time. A college student was threatened with expulsion because of her Christian beliefs. A church was told that their house of worship is no longer sacred, but just another public accommodation.”

 

These are a few of the ways religious freedom is eroding in North America. It has hit some individuals hard. There are forces working to establish laws that would limit what churches can do in their buildings and even what religious leaders are allowed to preach. There are forces working to regulate private property as if it were public or government property.

 

To help our children and grandchildren enjoy the same freedoms we have enjoyed, we must study the issues, understand current events, and speak up. Losing our religious freedom is only as inevitable as we allow it to be. If enough people act, freedom can still be preserved for the generations to come.

 

______________

Religious Freedom in Elementary School

John R. Houk

© December 1, 2016

____________________

PRESERVING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM FOR OUR CHILDREN

 

OUR 5-POINT MISSION

Strengthening and defending:

 

Family

Family is the foundational unit of society

 

Marriage

Marriage between a man and woman, is founded on chastity before marriage and fidelity in marriage

 

Life

Life is sacred and should be protected including the life of unborn children.

 

Parents

Parents have the right and obligation to love, protect, provide for and teach their children.

 

Religious Liberty

Religious Liberty emphasizes the right to live our lives according to our religious convictions, and the importance of religion to individuals and society.

Media Myths of the Homosexual-Transgender Agenda


Gay Agenda Demands

Accuracy in Media (AIM) sent an email explaining the real stats on homosexuality and transgenderism in America.

 

In America these alternate lifestyle morons can choose this ungodly immoral path. The U.S. Constitution guarantees these individual rights – even for the ungodly. HOWEVER, the Constitution does not guarantee or entitle the ungodly and immoral to force their views or lifestyles on other Americans – Christian or otherwise.

 

The height of bigotry is when America’s significant and huge non-LGBT majority is forced to comply to the designs and accommodations of the significant and tiny minority. I realize that is my opinion and I can hardly wait for the few homosexuals and Leftists that will barrage me with disparaging profanity.

 

God tells me to reject the lifestyle of the ungodly and that works for me:

 

22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. – Leviticus 18: 22 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. – Leviticus 20: 13 NKJV

 

+++

 

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,[a] for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.

 

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

 

20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,

 

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

 

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.

 

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;

 

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 Emphasis is mine) Romans 1: 16, 18, 20-22, 24-28, 32 NKJV

Would U Risk Soul for Gay Agenda

I am using the AIM email as an intro and/or summary to the report it is reporting which is by Peter LaBarbera. The LaBarbera Report looks at real stats and facts which Homosexual activists obfuscate or downright lie.

 

JRH 8/20/16

Please Support NCCR

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

AIM Special Report: Media Myths of the Homosexual-Transgender Agenda

 

Sent by AIM

Sent: 8/19/2016 9:11 AM

 

The mainstream media have promoted a number of myths about homosexuality and transgenderism, including that being gay has a genetic component. A new AIM Special Report by Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth, explodes this and other myths that are harming American society by helping to promote the acceptance of sexual lifestyles that are both unsafe and immoral.

 

The LGBT media lobby is working overtime to convince Americans that gays are a major force in America, and that there are significant numbers of homosexuals and transgenders. In reality, these individuals account for about 3 percent of the population, yet have an oversized effect on popular culture and political correctness.

 

“Some researchers are coming forth with alternative theories linking the development of adult homosexual identity to childhood trauma, e.g., incest between twins or child molestation,” writes LaBarbera in the AIM Special Report. “Interestingly, two prominent openly homosexual TV personalities—CNN’s Don Lemon and MSNBC’s Thomas Roberts—were sexually assaulted as boys by homosexual adult predators.”

 

In this report you will learn that:

 

  • The assertion that 10 percent of the population are LGBT is an unsupported myth.

 

  • Transsexual “sex reassignment surgeries” often do not produce happiness, and many of these individuals consider suicide post-operation.

 

  • LGBT activists are pushing radical “transgender” ideology on children, even to the point of encouraging underage kids to get body-destroying surgeries.

 

  • Children who are raised in homosexual and transsexual households are suffering.

 

Instead of the media promoting this “alternative lifestyle,” Americans desperately need the press to educate society about its inherent risks.

 

For more information, or to arrange an interview with Peter LaBarbera, contact Spencer Irvine at 202-364-4401, ext. 103, or preferably by email at spencer.irvine@aim.org.

 

***********

Media Myths of the Homosexual-Transgender Agenda

 

By Peter LaBarbera

August 19, 2016

Accuracy in Media

 

Warning: This report contains some offensive descriptions

 

The purpose of this report is to expose and refute some of the longstanding statistical lies and propagandistic myths of the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) activist movement. With media support, homosexual and leftist activists now openly campaign to banish dissenting conservative voices. This dangerous dynamic gives the homosexual-transgender lobby nearly full rein to advance its agenda, which now includes:

 

  • Levying large fines to punish Christians and traditionalists who do not want to participate with their small business in homosexual “weddings”;

 

  • Criminalizing pro-heterosexual change therapy for sexually confused minors;

 

  • Using the government to force schools and businesses to allow “transgenders”—e.g., men who think they are women—to use public female (opposite-sex) restrooms and locker rooms;

 

  • Using LGBT “nondiscrimination” laws to mandate that public schools and businesses punish anyone who does not adhere to politically-correct transgender-inclusive language—such as using “zir” instead of “her.” New York City now demands “respect” for 31 “gender identities,” including “genderqueer,” “third sex” and “pangender”;

 

  • Taxpayer-funding for horrifying, body-disfiguring “sex reassignment surgeries,” e.g., a woman having her healthy breasts surgically removed to look like a flat-chested “man,” or a man having his penis surgically destroyed to craft a makeshift “vagina”;

 

  • Allowing transsexuals into the U.S. military, and paying for their destructive, gender-bending “surgeries” in the name of “health care”;

 

 

  • Teaching very young children—even kindergartners—to accept homosexuality and the radical “transgender” idea that they can choose a “gender identity” that does not match their biological sex.

 

o awash is the public in pro-homosexual propaganda that a 2011 Gallup poll found the average American “guesstimated” that a whopping 25 percent of the population is “gay.” (Women and people under 30 put the number even higher, at around 30 percent.) The actual percentage of homosexual men, lesbians and bisexuals in the U.S. population is just 2.3 percent (see below).

 

The 10 Percent Myth

 

The “10 percent” myth is one of the most enduring propaganda claims of the homosexual activist movement. Concocted in the late 1970s by Bruce Voeller, founder of the National Gay Task Force (predecessor of today’s National LGBTQ Task Force), it was accompanied by the slogan, “We Are Everywhere.”

 

Thus, just as “gay” militants pressured and bullied America’s mental health professionals to remove homosexuality from the list of mental disorders in 1973, they greatly exaggerated the homosexual population to expand their political power in subsequent years. And the media duly cooperated by promoting the statistical sham. For decades American reporters treated the 10 percent claim—a misreading of deviant, pioneering “sexologist” Alfred Kinsey’s discredited research—as fact, using it to “report” huge numbers of alleged homosexuals in society.

 

The 10 percent myth served its purpose of projecting enormous “gay” political strength when the movement was still weak. But study after study came up with estimates of the homosexual-bisexual population under 5 percent. A massive 2014 survey of 35,557 Americans by the federal National Center for Health Statistics dealt a death blow to the Ten Percent claim. It found that only 1.6 percent of those polled identified as “gay or lesbian,” while 0.7 percent said they were “bisexual.” In 2011 the pro-LGBT Williams Institute at UCLA estimated that 0.3 percent identified as transgender. Thus a combined estimate for homosexuals, bisexuals and transgenders in America is around 3 percent.

 

Born Gay?—No Way

 

Another popular “gay” activist myth is the notion that homosexuals are “born that way.” This convenient narrative—stoked for many years by LGBT advocates—takes morality out of the homosexual debate by suggesting that homosexuals are not responsible for their sexual behaviors because “being gay” is a genetic part of “who they are.”

 

From a scientific perspective, however, the “born gay” myth—like its bogus “10 Percent Gay” counterpart—has fallen on hard times. In the 1990s, talk of a “gay gene” was all the rage after then-closeted homosexual researcher Dean Hamer published a media-ballyhooed 1993 study in the journal Science purporting to find a “genetic marker” for male homosexual “orientation.” But Science could not replicate its own study, and other attempts failed as well. Now genetic homosexuality is no longer in vogue, although the possibility of a “gay gene” still excites reporters.

 

The most serious blow to the “gay gene” theory has come from identical twin studies. Once used to promote the idea of inborn homosexuality, they are now widely seen as demonstrating the opposite. Dr. Neil Whitehead, one of the world’s leading conservative researchers on the issue states:

 

“From six studies (2000-2011): if an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances that the co-twin has it too, are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.”

 

“Because they have identical DNA [concordance on sexual orientation it] ought to be 100 percent” Dr. Whitehead told OrthodoxNet.com.

 

Childhood Trauma and “Gayness”

 

Finally, some researchers are coming forth with alternative theories linking the development of adult homosexual identity to childhood trauma, e.g., incest between twins or child molestation. (Interestingly, two prominent openly homosexual TV personalities—CNN’s Don Lemon and MSNBC’s Thomas Roberts—were sexually assaulted as boys by homosexual adult predators.)

 

A 2015 study led by Keith Beard and published in the journal Cogent Psychology found that, “Same-sex sibling incest also significantly increased the likelihood that participants would self-identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or questioning (rather than homosexual).”

 

Notably, the authors of the study took pains to issue a gay-affirming disclaimer: “Our results were consistent with the idea that the sexual orientation of adults cannot be changed.”

 

Is it not cruel to tell a man who was raped as a boy by an adult pervert—or seduced into incestuous sex by an older brother—that he is now destined to be stuck with a deviant and immoral sexual identity for the rest of his life? With so many ex-“gays” like Dennis Jernigan proclaiming freedom from past homosexuality, how can anyone—journalist, gay activist or scholar—claim that adults cannot change their “sexual orientation?”

 

The “Born Gay” Myth Is Still Popular

 

Tragically, despite growing evidence to the contrary, about half of Americans surveyed still believe that homosexuals are “born that way,” according to a 2015 Gallup poll. Gallup has polled on this and other homosexual issues every year since 1977. In that initial year, only 13 percent of Americans believed people were “born with” homosexuality while 56 percent cited a person’s “upbringing and environment” as the main causative factors. By 2013, those findings were reversed, and a record 51 percent of respondents believed homosexuals were born with that inclination while a record low of 30 percent cited environmental factors.

 

Such data shows the tremendous, suffocating power of the media to drive the “gay” debate. Now the same media are working overtime to mainstream transgenderism, which is also said to be an innate condition.

 

Homosexuals Can Change

 

There is no truth despised by homosexual activists more than the simple reality that people who once lived as “gay” or lesbian (or “transgender”) can change and live honorably according to the natural, created purpose of their bodies before God. Homosexual activists continue to assert that people cannot change their “sexual orientation”—ignoring the many testimonies of people like Stephen Black and Dr. Rosaria Butterfield who have overcome the pull of homosexuality in their lives. See this Mastering Life Ministries website for video testimonials of ex-homosexuals. Notably, ex-“gays” rarely get serious treatment in the media—rewarding the lobby efforts of powerful LGBT media pressure groups like GLAAD.

 

Now the pro-homosexual lobby, including leftist allied groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center—mislabeled as a “civil rights group” by news organizations—have taken it up a notch by pushing for state and national laws to ban pro-heterosexual change therapy for minors. Such anti-freedom laws now exist in California, Oregon, New Jersey, Illinois, Vermont and the District of Columbia. President Obama has endorsed a federal bill designed to ban so-called “conversion” (change) therapy for minors. This highly dangerous legislation would curtail the freedom of parents and children—including those victimized by homosexual predators—to pursue the healthy change they desire.

 

Dangerous “Sex Reassignment” Surgeries

 

Walt Heyer is a former transsexual who went through “male-to-female” “sex reassignment surgery” to become his female alter ego (“Laura”). Heyer was not “born transgender” but instead the childhood victim of some tragic circumstances—including a grandmother who dressed him up in fancy dress when he was a little boy. Now he has regained his natural male identity and urges gender-confused men not to go through the radical operations and hormone therapy to pursue a fantasy. See Heyer’s website, SexChangeRegret.com.

 

Heyer cites the testimony of Dr. Paul McHugh, the Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, who shut down the university’s “sex reassignment surgery” program after studying the outcomes of men who went through the “sex change” operations compared to those who did not. Wrote McHugh in 2014:

 

“Most of the surgically treated patients described themselves as ‘satisfied’ by the results, but their subsequent psycho-social adjustments were no better than those who didn’t have the surgery. And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a ‘satisfied’ but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.”

 

Transgenderism Harms Children

 

Dr. McHugh saves his most devastating critique for those adults who would foist radical transsexual surgeries and hormone treatments on the very young and gender-confused teenagers (emphasis added):

 

“Another subgroup consists of young men and women susceptible to suggestion from “everything is normal” sex education, amplified by Internet chat groups. These are the transgender subjects most like anorexia nervosa patients: They become persuaded that seeking a drastic physical change will banish their psycho-social problems. “Diversity” counselors in their schools, rather like cult leaders, may encourage these young people to distance themselves from their families and offer advice on rebutting arguments against having transgender surgery. Treatments here must begin with removing the young person from the suggestive environment and offering a counter-message in family therapy.

 

“Then there is the subgroup of very young, often prepubescent children who notice distinct sex roles in the culture and, exploring how they fit in, begin imitating the opposite sex. Misguided doctors at medical centers including Boston’s Children’s Hospital have begun trying to treat this behavior by administering puberty-delaying hormones to render later sex-change surgeries less onerous—even though the drugs stunt the children’s growth and risk causing sterility. Given that close to 80 percent of such children would abandon their confusion and grow naturally into adult life if untreated, these medical interventions come close to child abuse. A better way to help these children: with devoted parenting.”

 

To echo Dr. McHugh’s warning, the American College of Pediatricians, a pro-family alternative to the reliably pro-homosexual American Academy of Pediatricians, recently put out an outstanding statement, “Gender Ideology Harms Children,” which includes among its points:

 

  • Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous…

 

  • According to the DSM-V [the APA’s diagnostic manual for mental disorders] as many as 98 percent of gender confused boys and 88 percent of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.

 

  • Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.

 

  • Rates of suicide are 20 times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBTQ—affirming countries.

 

  • Conditioning children into believing that a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthy is child abuse.

 

Children of Homosexuals and Transgenders Suffer

 

Homosexual activists rely on “gay”-authored research with sloppy methodology to claim that there is “no difference” between homosexual and normal, mom-and-dad households—and sometimes assert that “gay”-led parenting is superior to the traditional variety. But again, the facts suggest otherwise.

 

Writes Jamie Bryan Hall, citing the work of Catholic University sociology professor Dr. Paul Sullins, who analyzed data from the federal National Health Interview Survey from 1997 to 2013:

 

“Controlling for child sex, age, and race and parents’ education and income, Dr. Sullins finds that children of parents in same-sex relationships fare significantly worse than those of opposite-sex parents on nine of 12 measures of emotional or developmental problems and their use of mental health treatment. In general, children of parents in same-sex relationships are about two to three times more likely to experience such problems.

 

In his most extensive statistical analysis, in which he also takes into account relationship stability, stigmatization, and parents’ psychological distress, Sullins finds the prevalence of emotional problems among children living with same-sex parents to be 4.5 times as high as among children living with their married biological parents, three times as high as children living with a married stepparent, 2.5 times as high as those with cohabiting parents, and three times as high as children with a single parent.”

 

There are now many moving firsthand testimonies available from men and women who grew up in homes with homosexual or transsexual parents. See Dawn Stefanowicz’s testimony of life with her promiscuous “gay” dad, and Denise Shick’s story of living with a selfish, cross-dressing father.

 

Homosexuals and Health Problems

 

In every area of life, “gay” activists apply their egalitarian formula to posit a moral equivalence between homosexuality and normalcy (heterosexuality). But what Dr. Sullins wrote in 2004 remains true today:

 

“Like abortion, homosexuality is associated with increased problems of mental health and distress. Though rarely acknowledged in popular media or discourse, emerging epidemiological evidence in the past decade has clearly established a link between homosexuality and mental illness or emotional problems.”

 

The Obama administration’s successful campaign to allow male homosexuals to donate blood has exposed how the LGBT lobby is more concerned about scoring another “gay rights” win than protecting our nation’s blood supply. It is as if the many thousands of stories over the last few decades including those about the AIDS crisis—showing the high correlation between “Men who have Sex with Men” (MSM) and various diseases—had never been published. Consider these facts from the Centers for Disease Control CDC (emphasis added):

 

 

 

  • Hepatitis—“New research shows that gay men who are HIV-positive and have multiple sex partners may increase their risk for Hepatitis C.”

 

  • Shigellosis—“Anyone can get shigellosis but it is recognized more often in young children. Those who may be at greater risk include children in daycare centers, foreign travelers to certain countries, institutionalized people and people exposed to human feces through sexual contact.

 

 

More than 25 years ago, Americans were shocked as “gay” activists and educators introduced children’s picture books like Daddy’s Roommate and Heather Has Two Mommies to indoctrinate children into accepting homosexual behavior and “gay families” as natural and harmless. Now a new generation of very young children is growing up with picture books like My Princess Boy (available at Walmart.com) that popularize and glamorize extreme gender confusion.

 

Unless citizens demand an end to the media’s incessant promotion of the gay and transgender agenda, it will be too late to return America to a state of sexual sanity, in which the health and well-being of our children is protected, instead of being undermined.

 

Helpful Websites

 

American College of Pediatricians (ACOP)—A pro-family alternative to the pro-LGBT American Association of Pediatrics (AAP); Excellent resource: “Gender Ideology Harms Children”

 

SexChangeRegret.com—A website by former transsexual Walt Heyer

 

MassResistance.org—A site that does excellent work exposing LGBTQ activism

 

FactsAboutYouth.com—Produced by the American College of Pediatricians (ACOP)

 

NARTH.com and the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity—Websites that present scholarly research from opponents of “gay” advocates; provide evidence for pro-heterosexual change through therapy; defend right to treatment for people seeking to overcome unwanted same-sex attractions

 

Mastering Life Ministries—Features dozens of heart-warming ex-“gay” video testimonials and is founded by former homosexual David Kyle Foster; a Christian site that also contains resources on overcoming: sex and porn addiction, child sexual abuse and transgender confusion

 

CDC has a site on STDs and Gay & Bisexual Men—The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is strongly pro-homosexual, but its reports provide ample evidence on the relationship between homosexual/bisexual behavior and disease. Start here.

 

RobGagnon.net—A site by Prof. Robert Gagnon, a leading authority on the Bible and homosexuality

 

Help 4 Families—A transgender resource, a Christian ministry to families of transsexuals headed up by Denise Shick, whose own father desired to be a woman

 

mygenes.co.nz—Dr. Neil Whitehead’s “My Genes” website; a leading site presenting academic research debunking genetic homosexuality; Dr. Whitehead is the author of My Genes Made Me Do It: Homosexuality and the Scientific Evidence

 

Public Discourse—Witherspoon Institute site with excellent essays on homosexuality and gender issues

 

Heritage Foundation—Heritage Foundation discusses family and marriage issues; has excellent public policy research

 

AmericansForTruth.org – Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) reports on and confronts the homosexual/transgender agenda.

 

____________

Peter LaBarbera is president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH.org), and a former reporter for the Washington Times. He can be reached by email: americansfortruth@gmail.com

 

©2016 by Accuracy in Media. All Right Reserved.

 

Donate to AIM

 

 

Looking at Nilsson Comment to Army Vet Threatened by Muslims


John R. Houk

© April 10, 2016

 

Robert Nilsson posted this as a comment to “Muslims Threaten an Army Vet in Minnesota”:

 

Did you see this?
https://youtu.be/ra45nX9JmW4

 

VIDEO: ‘Sharia Patrols’ Harassing Citizens in London, Belgium, Sweden

 

 

Posted by LthlWepon

Published on Mar 21, 2015

 

And this was my thoughts on this video:

 

The Sharia being forced upon British citizens MUST NOT be allowed to take root in America. If those Sharia patrols emerge on American soil, then those forcing Sharia need to be arrested for breaking the Free Speech and Religious Freedom portions of the First Amendment. OTHERWISE American vigilantism will arise again in America to beat down this multicultural lunacy.

 

I don’t know about you, this irritated me enough to make it a standalone post.

 

JRH 4/10/16

Please Support NCCR