Two Hot Button Issues:Sharia Law in Great Britain and Homosexual Marriage in the U.S.

Daniel Greenfield is one of the very best at combining sarcasm and truth,particularly when it comes to the foibles of Islam. Check out his latest article which exposes the sorry state of affairs in Great Britain in relation to their Sharia Courts.

The BBC’s Panorama series has gone undercover at Sharia councils where Islamic law is doled out in the state within a state within the multicultural bureaucracy to discover that the dispensers of Islamic law have failed abused women. Failing abused women is the nice genteel way that lefties use to mean that the judicial system of a religion built on abusing women is perpetuating those abuses in the UK.
Similarly Comrade Delta failed the woman he raped. And the Socialist Workers Party failed her by putting the rape to a vote. Jimmy Savile failed a great many children and Islam has failed to uphold the standards that the defenders of multiculturalism somehow expect from religious leaders out of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
According to the head of the UK’s ‘Equality and Human Rights Commission’, Muslims “are doing their damnedest” to develop an Islam compatible with liberal democracy. And if you don’t believe him, then just ask Tony Blair
who not only reads the Koran every day but also marvels at how progressive it is.
Forget all the fussing over Muslim immigration and terrorism. The future looks bright for Britain. We’re probably only a short while away from the first female Imam and drive-through abortion clinics in local mosques. Mecca is going to host its first swimsuit competition on its black rock and Ramadan will unite with Gay Pride Day for a parade that no one will ever be able to forget.
At The Guardian, where left is always right, Musleh Faradhi assures us that Sharia courts are not about to displace English law or flog Prince Charles as an adulterer in front of Buckingham Palace. “Women who come to this country with little or no English and are then discriminated against by their own husbands or relatives has nothing to do with sharia, but rather with traditions and culture,” says Faradhi. “This should not be used as a stick with which to beat sharia councils.”

Rest of the article here – http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2013/04/sharias-sticks-and-stones.html

 

On a different note, I have a portion of a blog post by a Reformed Pastor who has some very strong things to say to Christian pastors as regards the topic of homosexual marriage. Read,and consider what he has to say. I appreciate his honesty and willingness to speak to an issue that many are tiptoeing around. Political correctness rules the day when it comes to this topic. One may disagree with his assessment,but if you do,give a reasoned explanation of why you disagree. Don’t respond based on emotions and slogans.

 

The spirituality of the church will protect no one…

by Tim Bayly on April 10, 2013 – 2:09pm

One massive change since 9/11 has been Americans’ eagerness to trade civil rights for greater security. Government surveillance is the worst aspect of this loss of liberty and the internet is ground zero of Big Brother’s omniscience. As this article demonstrates, the internet has greased the path to our political masters knowing us inside out. If you use a phone or computer, you can’t hide.

Christians tend not to worry about this because we read in Scripture, “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right” (1Peter 2:13, 14).

“I’m not an evildoer,” we think. “I may have a few secret sins, but who doesn’t? The government has a lot bigger fish to fry than I.”

Which is true—the part about the government having bigger fish to fry… But what if we started leaving the comfortable privacy of our sanctuaries and took the Word of God outside into the public square? What if we had a restoration of Christian faith and boldness and rejoined the Apostle Paul in the Areopagus calling Athens’ city fathers to repent of their idolatry, their “ignorance” of God’s Law?

In other words, what if the People of God and their officers actually returned to loving their neighbors by calling them to repentance and faith? Would our political masters still leave us alone?

Radical idea, isn’t it? Reformed men don’t love our neighbors. We love the truth—or I should say we love arguing over words and the relative merits of laying a garland on this or that dead man’s tomb. In bondage to our intellects, we are inane, innocuous, and impotent.

It’s intentional.

We think we won’t be persecuted as long as we don’t start preaching God’s Moral Law and naming sin. “Let Hollywood deal with ‘The Help’ in Jackson, Mississippi; it’s not our job. What will keep the Reformed ghetto safe today is a sanctuary of wealthy white Presbyterians singing hymns accompanied by an organ and listening to the word of God preached by someone with a doctorate or a Scottish accent (preferably both) who is as sophisticated as the Apostle Peter in his understanding of our relegation of the Gentiles to our nursery to help with our children.”

Have you ever wondered what the Apostle Paul would say to southern Presbyterians about their “help?” Or do you think he’d allow them to gag him under threat of being labelled another Clarence Jordan social justice do-gooder?

Those with even a minimal commitment to their eyes being opened by the work of the Holy Spirit through Scripture will recognize the sinful utility of the spirituality of the church. It’s transparent. Show me a Reformed pastor still parroting that antebellum party line “the spirituality of the church” and I’ll show you a man crying “peace, peace” where there is no peace. Fornication? Greed? Adultery? Bitterness? Divorce? Gossip? Incest? Theft? Sodomy? Racism? Check, check, check, check, and double-check. Reformed churches are full of them.

The idea that the man who clings to a sophisticated intellectual excuse for refusing to call his neighbor to repentance and faith would be faithful in preaching repentance and faith to his own congregation and would call his session to visit their sheep, correcting, exhorting, and admonishing them concerning their sin, is ridiculous. The pastor who justifies his lovelessness toward his neighbor also justifies his lovelessness toward his flock, and the pastor who justifies his lovelessness toward his flock will not lead his session to go out into the ravines and walk the cliffs and part the thorn bushes looking for those who are lost to bring them back home to the sheepfold.

The man with no love for his neighbor only loves himself and his saltlessness will corrupt his home and church and pulpit and session meetings as it corrupts his city. Deathly afraid of pastors and church officers outing them, Reformed intellectuals looking for peace in their time counsel church officers to be silent out at our city gates. “The church’s work is not political. It’s spiritual. Jesus called us to make intellectuals of all men, baptizing them in the names of Thornwell, Dabney, and Anthony the Great.”

Sodomy is the best example of our saltlessness and lovelessness just now. The whole world is in “burn, baby, burn” mode concerning God’s laws against this wickedness. Every other area where sin is in the process of being normalized has taken a back seat to our political masters’ insane drive for queer marriage. Democrats and Republicans alike are clawing out each other’s eyes trying to climb on the wagon of repentance for ever honoring God’s Word and Law. “I was wrong.” “I’m sorry.” “What could I have been thinking?” “I’ve finally come to recognize gays and lesbians are people, too, and I sincerely regret the pain I have caused them in past years when I believed that thing they do is sin. Honestly, now I’m ashamed of myself! What could I have been thinking? What could I have been believing?”

So here’s what’s happening. Our political magistrates are leading a rebellion against God’s decrees concerning the foundations of human life—the meaning of that glorious diversity of Adam and Eve, man and woman—and they are in the process of making that rebellion as foundational to our society as sexuality itself is. Who will escape their work?

Men who try to keep their religion private and warn their pastors and officers to shut up about it except when the door to the session room is closed and locked?

No. No one will escape. There will be no place to run, no place to hide. There will be no private sphere where Christians will be free to express their private opinions.

Rest of the article here – http://baylyblog.com/blog/2013/04/spirituality-church-will-protect-no-one

Abortion,Homosexuality and Idolatry: Is Transformation Possible?

Denny Burke has covered two very important topics at his blog over the past several days. The first deals with the federal judge making the “morning after” pill available to girls under the age of 17 without a prescription. This is as much an attack on parental rights as it is a pro-abortion ruling. As America reverts to paganism in a post –Christian world,we will see more rulings like this.

 

It’s now legal for your 11-year old daughters to buy abortifacients

by Denny Burk on APRIL 5, 2013 in THEOLOGY/BIBLEhttp://www.dennyburk.com/author/admin/

Welcome to the brave new world. Now your 11-year old daughter can purchase abortifacient “birth control” over the counter without parental consent. Here’s the lead from NBC News’ report:

A federal judge on Friday reversed a contentious Food and Drug Administration ruling and ordered the agency to make the so-called “morning-after pill” available without a prescription to all girls of reproductive age, including those younger than 17.

Read the rest here.

 

See this article from LifeSite News as well -

April 5, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A federal judge has ordered the FDA to make the morning after pill, known as Plan B, available to girls of all ages without prescription within 30 days.

The order overturns a 2011 decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, to continue to restrict over-the-counter availability of the drug to girls ages 17 and over. In so doing, Sebelius had overruled the FDA, which had been poised to lift the remaining age restrictions.

New York Judge Edward Korman ruled today that the administration’s age restriction on the potentially abortifacient drug, which is designed to be taken within 72 hours of “unprotected” sex, is “arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable.”

“We are reviewing the decision and evaluating the government’s options,” said F. Franklin Amanat, a lawyer for the government.

Korman is the same judge who in 2009 had ordered the FDA to make Plan B available over-the-counter to girls 17 and older, in a case brought forward by the Center for Reproductive Rights. Before that, it had only been available over-the-counter to girls 18 and older.

Anna Higgins, J.D., director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, slammed today’s decision, arguing that it “places the health of young girls at risk.”

Higgins said she is “troubled” that the judge had ignored concerns raised by the HHS and other medical experts that there is little data on the health consequences of Plan B on adolescent girls.

She also raised concerns that making Plan B available over the counter will encourage reckless sexual behavior, and could expose young girls to sexual predators.

“There is a real danger that Plan B may be given to young girls, under coercion or without their consent,” she said. “The involvement of parents and medical professionals act as a safeguard for these young girls. However, today’s ruling removes these commonsense protections.

Rest of the article here- http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ny-judge-fda-must-make-morning-after-pill-available-to-girls-of-all-ages-wi?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com

 

The second article carried by Denny Burke is an article written in The Atlantic by a former student at Liberty University who “came out” as a homosexual. He details the responses he received from some of his professors,and describes what life was like on campus at Liberty. The homosexual movement is radical and growing. Again,another sign of a pagan post Christian culture. Sexual confusion abounds,and all boundaries are being erased.

http://www.dennyburk.com/author/admin/

I just finished reading what has to be one of the most riveting articles I’ve ever seen. The author is Brandon Ambrosino, and the title is “Being Gay at Jerry Falwell’s University.” Writing for The Atlantic, Ambrosino tells his story of coming out as a homosexual while he was a student at Liberty. This is not a conversion story. Ambrosino writes as one who has come to terms with his homosexuality and has embraced it.

The real import of the story is how the Christians at Liberty University responded to the revelation of his sexuality. He had feared that they would want to stone him. But instead, he found out that quite the opposite happened. Even though professors and administrators believed homosexuality to be a sin, they loved him and embraced him with open arms. His expectations were so off that he realized he had been suffering from “homophobiaphobia.” These fundamentalist Christians didn’t turn out to be the nasty caricatures that they are often made out to be. Continue Reading →

Just a few comments from your friendly editor – If you had a son or daughter who needed the Lord,but was in rebellion against the known will of God what type of Christian would you want them to meet and talk to ? Wouldn’t it be one who lived a humble life but who was willing to speak the truth in love? One who showed a genuine concern for their life and their soul?

  • While I did not expect the Liberty professors to “bash” or denigrate Brandon,I did expect several of them to offer the gospel in love and truth. The power of God is transformational,if not for immediate deliverance,than sufficient for celibacy. I did not get the impression that Brandon was born again,although he confesses that he “likes” Jesus.
  • The student behavior at his quad that Brandon described as “cool”etc. was far more childish than what I lived through at a secular college as an agnostic. He describes a great deal of worldliness,some legalism,but one is left wondering if he knew any godly students. Or if the ones that were godly he believed to be legalistic.
  • The Christian counselors that Brandon spoke with for three years are probably fine men,who are accepting and tolerant. But again,to speak the truth in love requires great grace and courage. It must be done,because it is only by the power of the Holy Spirit that a person can be set free,whether from homosexuality,or drunkenness,or any other idolatry that seeks to rule our lives.
  • He and his roommate should have been expelled for sleeping together-Are there any standards at Liberty? it is one thing to struggle with sin and seek the grace and power of God to overcome it,it is quite another to wallow in the sin and smirk at those whom you know who regard it as sin.Again,love requires some tough questions and honesty. Playing games and ignoring core issues does everyone a disservice.
  • One final comment in response to this quote from Brandon.
    • When people find out I underwent therapy at Jerry Falwell’s Christian college, they assume I went through something like gay reparative therapy. But that isn’t what happened. I saw two counselors at Liberty—Dr. Reeves also had me meet with Ryan, one of his grad students, once a week—and neither of them ever expressed an interest in “curing” me. Did they have an agenda? Yes. Their goal, which they were very honest about, was to help me to like myself, and to find peace with the real Brandon. I remember one time telling Dr. Reeves I felt like I was being a different Brandon to each person in my life. Dr. Reeves raised his eyebrows and asked, “Isn’t that exhausting?” Dr. Reeves and Ryan knew I was tired of hiding and lying, and living in fear and subjection to others’ opinions; and so they told me that I should try liking myself because, after all, I was a likable guy and they enjoyed spending time with me.

 

  • We all have friends who are likeable that need the Lord. We need to guard against “likeableness” leading to a compromising of the gospel. One of the functions of the Holy Spirit is to convict us of sin.Sin is real,and sin puts us in bondage. We cannot find peace with ourselves until we have peace with God through Jesus Christ. This lack of peace will lead to “role playing” as we seek to please others. It’s not that I like or don’t like myself. If we have peace and fellowship with the Lord than we have all we need. It is possible that Brandon did not ” hear” truths that his counselors expressed. We were not there and have no idea what was said to him. I hope truth was plainly spoken in the midst of the obvious grace and love that they extended to him.
  •   Finally, God the Father demonstrated His love for us through the crucifixion on the cross of His Son the Lord Jesus Christ-We all need to repent,believe,worship.

Click to open expanded view http://www.amazon.com/What-Some-Were-Christopher-KEANE/dp/1876326417/ref=sr_1_1?s=books

The Apostle John speaks to heart of this issue -

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—2 the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—3 that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4 And we are writing these things so that our joy may be complete.

5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. (1 John 1, ESV)

The Pope and Sexual Abuse Cases in Argentina:Cause for Concern?

Many people have high hopes that the new Pope will take quick action to eliminate pedophile priests and break the culture of abuse that has existed in the Catholic Church for many years. The following article should be a cause for concern to Catholics who are looking for decisive action. Time will tell.

 

Victims of Argentina’s pedophile priests say Pope was little help

MICHAEL WARREN

BUENOS AIRES — The Associated Press

Published Tuesday, Mar. 19 2013, 9:10 PM EDT

Last updated Tuesday, Mar. 19 2013, 9:27 PM EDT

From the link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/victims-of-argentinas-pedophile-priests-say-pope-was-little-help/article9977086/

A Roman Catholic activist group said Tuesday that Pope Francis was slow as head of the Argentine church to act against sexual abuse by clergy and urged him to apologize for what it called church protection for two priests later convicted of sexually assaulting children.

A lawyer for some of the victims, meanwhile, said the future pope, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, had not met with or helped victims, and charged that mid-level church officials who covered up the problem haven’t lost their jobs.

The Buenos Aires archbishop’s office didn’t immediately comment on the complaints, which came as Francis was being installed as pope in a Vatican ceremony seen around the world.

The U.S.-based Bishop Accountability group cited the cases of two priests: Father Julio Cesar Grassi, who ran the “Happy Children” foundation and was convicted of pedophilia in 2008, and Father Napoleon Sasso, convicted in 2007 of abusing girls at a soup kitchen in suburban Buenos Aires, where he was assigned after being accused of pedophilia elsewhere.

Grassi is currently free pending appeal, thanks partly to a court filing on his behalf by the Argentine church, which was headed by Bergoglio as archbishop of Buenos Aires. Bergoglio oversaw Argentina’s bishops conference when Sasso was assigned to the soup kitchen at a chapel, said the victims attorney, Ernesto Moreau.

Bishop Accountability co-director Anne Doyle said those events show Bergoglio was behind the curve in the Catholic Church’s global struggle to deal with sex abuse by its priests, which erupted in 2002 after thousands of cases became public in the United States and around the world.

“We would be alarmed if the Archbishop Bergoglio had done this in the ‘60s or ‘70s. That would be sad and disturbing,” Doyle told The Associated Press. “But the fact that he did this just five years ago, when other bishops in other countries were meeting victims and implementing tough reporting laws, it puts him behind some of his American counterparts, that’s for sure.”

The group said that to send a message of zero tolerance in the church around the world, the new pope should tell the Buenos Aires archdiocese to release the complete files on the Grassi and Sasso cases, publicly identify any other priests who are “credibly accused” of sex abuse and endorse mandatory reporting by church officials to law enforcement of suspected abuse.

The pope himself should admit that he was wrong to defend abusive priests, apologize to the victims of Grassi and Sasso, and offer to meet with the victims, the group said.

Noting the pope’s coronation, Doyle said: “The victims of these two priests are the very children of God about whom he was speaking in his homily today. They are the most vulnerable of the poor. We hope that Francis will seize this as a priority and reach out to the victims and rectify his terrible insensitivity to them when he was archbishop.”

No one has presented evidence that Bergoglio was directly involved covering up sex abuse.

But Moreau told the AP that Bergoglio, as the top authority for the Argentine church, was ultimately responsible for the treatment of the victims, who have yet to get medical treatment or compensation.

“Bergoglio has been the strongest man in the Argentine church since the beginning of this century,” Moreau said, and yet “the leadership of the church has never done anything to remove these people from these places, and neither has it done anything to relieve the pain of the victims.” (Rest of the article at this link – http://rapevictimsofthecatholicchurch.wordpress.com/tag/father-julio-cesar-grassi/)

 

A follow up article -

The case of Father Grassi has been particularly troublesome to children’s advocates here because Bergoglio was widely viewed as close to the young priest, who told reporters before his conviction that he spoke with Bergoglio often and that the archbishop “never let go of my hand.”

Grassi was not expelled from the priesthood after the guilty verdict. Instead, church officials led by Bergoglio commissioned a lengthy private report arguing that Grassi was innocent.

(Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post) – The unkempt grounds of Felices los Niños in Hurlingham, Argentina, founded by Father Julio Cesar Grassi.

 

The report was submitted as part of the priest’s legal appeal, which is pending, and prosecutors say the document has helped Grassi avoid jail time so far. A court has granted him a provisional release that allows him to continue residing across the street from the classroom and dormitories of Happy Children.

The sprawling, gated complex in a working-class neighborhood on the outskirts of Buenos Aires once had more than 600 students and resident orphans. It became the economic and religious hub of the community as Grassi channeled private donations into its schools, vocational workshops, bakeries and playgrounds.

Today its classrooms are mostly shuttered. The foundation’s grounds are choked with weeds and uncut grass, its swings are rusting, and its statuary is dimmed by creeping mold.

“He gave with one hand, but he took away with the other,” said neighbor Sabina Vilagra, whose husband worked as a janitor at the foundation and was called to testify in the trial.

“He had his favorites — always boys,” said her daughter, Florencia Vilagra, who also worked at Happy Children at the time.

“He would give them bicycles or toys and would designate one as his special ‘secretary,’ ” she said.

There were three accusers in the trial — given the names “Ezequiel,” “Gabriel” and “Luis” to protect their identities — who ranged from ages 9 to 13 at the time of the abuse, according to prosecutor Juan Pablo Gallego.

Rest of the article – http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/pope-francis-was-often-quiet-on-argentine-sex-abuse-cases-as-archbishop/2013/03/18/

 

A new e-book is available by a former Australian priest – seems to be well documented and will be controversial to say the least.

 

A Catholic priest exposes systematic cover-ups of pedophilia and predatory homosexuality in his own Church

Father Kevin’s claim to have forced a Royal Commission into sexual abuse of children in Australia is not without foundation. He had been agitating about it for over a decade. And if you analyse the chronology of events, Father Kevin’s admission on Channel 7′s 6pm news on April 31st was the catalyst that sparked media interest into why a successful priest would commit sacerdotal suicide by telling everyone he had been living a lie for over a year.
As Father Kevin told the journalists who were sent into a feeding frenzy over the discovery that a proclaimed celibate priest was actually married, he did it because of his frustration that his constant complaints of pedophilia and sexual abuse among members of the Church were being continually denied or concealed by both police and Church hierarchy. “It is not possible to live a double life” he was told by his Bishop, “there is too much scrutiny of priests”. So he set out to show how it is done.
He wanted to prove how priests can appear to be living celibately but can actually be living a total lie.
This book will explain how, after six years of preparation and twenty years of ordained ministry, Father Kevin Lee gradually came to realize that the Church he was born into was not as it appeared.

For more information about the book -

http://www.unholysilence.com/

Homosexual Marriage:An Oxymoron of Family Shattering Proportions

Oxymoron : a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (a cruel kindness); broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements

The Bad Good – Daniel Greenfield

Posted: 30 Mar 2013 10:47 PM PDT

Others have already pointed out the absurdity that gay marriage is becoming a right in places where plastic bags and large sodas are becoming against the law. This sort of next wave civil rights step is only an expansion of freedom if you aren’t paying attention.
All the arguments over the differences between civil unions and marriage are largely meaningless. Once gay marriage is recognized, then marriage becomes nothing more than a civil union. The real casualty is the destruction of the word “marriage”, but the left is adept as destroying language and replacing meaningful words with meaningless words.
There was no word in Newspeak for freedom. We can look forward to an English language in which there is no word for marriage. And what does freedom mean anyway in a country where most things are banned, but we are constantly throwing holidays to celebrate how free we are?
But if marriage is no longer refers to a natural social institution, but now means a civil union recognized by the state, then why stop at two? Gay rights advocates insist that there is some magic difference between polygamy and gay marriage. There isn’t any difference except the number. And if we’re not going to be bound by any antiquated notion that marriage is an organic institution between man and woman, then why should we be bound by mere number?
Surely in our enlightened age and time, it can be possible for large groups of consenting adults to tie their confusing knots together in any number from 2 to 2,000.

Rest of the article here – http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

 

 

What harm would it do to legalize gay “marriage”?

BY PETER SPRIGG

Q—What harm would it do to the institution of marriage if we redefine it to include same-sex couples?

At the outset, it is worth noting that this question is often framed in a rather misleading way: “What harm would a same-sex couple getting married do to your opposite-sex marriage?” The issue, however, is not how any one couple’s marriage would affect any other specific couple’s marriage—the issue is how changing the definition of marriage under the law would change the social institution of marriage.

Giving unique privileges and a unique status to the only type of relationship that can ever result in the natural creation of another human being sends an important message to society. Contrary to the charges of those who would redefine marriage, that message has nothing to do with “sexual orientation” as such. It simply sends the message that relationships of a type which can result in natural reproduction are unique, and are uniquely valuable to society; and it further sends the message that children benefit uniquely from being raised by their own mother and father (as well as the message that a man and woman should take responsibility for children produced by their union).

If “marriage” is redefined to include same-sex couples, it will of course not abolish civil marriage as an institution, or prevent opposite-sex couples from marrying and having children. However, it will effectively negate—and indeed, reverse—the social message that privileging “marriage” over other relationships would send.

Instead of sending the message that potentially procreative relationships are uniquely valuable and that children being raised by their mother and father is uniquely valuable, the message to society will be the exact opposite. Since same-sex relationships, which are intrinsically infertile and can never result in natural procreation, would be treated as identical under the law to opposite-sex relationships which are the onlytype that can ever result in natural procreation, the explicit message to society would be that there is nothing uniquely valuable about the very reproduction of the human race. This would be a shocking denial of a reality that is literally fundamental to human existence.

By the same token, same-sex couples never provide a child with a home that includes the care of both their mother and father, and on the contrary deliberately and permanently deny a child such a home. Treating such couples—which are deliberately motherless or fatherless—in a way identical to couples that provide both a mother and father would send the message to society that there is nothing uniquely valuable about a child being raised by his or her own mother and father.

Sending these messages—officially denying, as a matter of public policy, the unique value and importance of reproduction, and of mothers and fathers—would inevitably have an impact on the behavior of people in society.

The following harms would be the predictable results (these are adapted and updated from my 2010 Family Research Council booklet, The Top Ten Harms of Same-Sex “Marriage):

  • Fewer children would be raised by a married mother and father.

The greatest tragedy resulting from the legalization of homosexual marriage would not be its effect on adults, but its effect on children. For the first time in history, society would be placing its highest stamp of official government approval on the deliberate creation of permanently motherless or fatherless households for children.

Rest of the article here – http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/what-harm-would-it-do-to-legalize-gay-marriage?

 

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

(Ephesians 5:22-33 ESV)

Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening.
Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.

(1 Peter 3:1-7 ESV)

When Debate Means Stomp:Another Orwellian Moment on a College Campus

Professor Makes Students “Stomp on Jesus”

Posted in Top Stories | 0 comments

Professor Makes Students “Stomp on Jesus”

Mar 21, 2013

By Todd Starnes

A Florida Atlantic University student said he was punished after he refused a professor’s directive to stomp on a piece of paper with the word “Jesus” written on it. The university, meanwhile, is defending the assignment as a lesson in debate.

“I’m not going to be sitting in a class having my religious rights desecrated,” student Ryan Rotela told television station WPEC. “I truly see this as I’m being punished.”

Rotela, who is a devout Mormon, said the instructor in his Intercultural Communications class told the students to write the name “Jesus” on a sheet of paper. Then, they were told to put the paper on the floor.

“He had us all stand up and he said ‘Stomp on it,’” Rotela said. “I picked up the paper from the floor and put it right back on the table.

The young college student told the instructor, Deandre Poole, that the assignment was insulting and offensive.

“I said to the professor, ‘With all due respect to your authority as a professor, I do not believe what you told us to do was appropriate,’” Rotela said. ‘I believe it was unprofessional and I was deeply offended by what you told me to do.’”

Rotela took his concerns to Poole’s supervisor – where he was promptly suspended from the class.

Poole did not return calls seeking comment.

According to his university profile, he has a PhD from Howard University and is authoring a book titled, “Obamamania: The Rise of a Mythical Hero.”

A university spokesperson told they could not comment about Rotela’s case due to student privacy laws.

However, the university is defending the instructor’s assignment to stomp on the name of Jesus.

“As with any academic lesson, the exercise was meant to encourage students to view issues from many perspectives, in direct relation with the course objectives,” said Noemi Marin, the university’s director of the school of communication and multimedia studies.

“While at times the topics discussed may be sensitive, a university environment is a venue for such dialogue and debate,” Marin added.

The lesson on bashing the name of Christ is included in a textbook titled, “Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach, 5th Edition.”

Rest of the story here – http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/professor-makes-students-stomp-on-jesus.html

 

Here is some info on the so-called professor who required the “stomping”-

Deandre Poole
Deandre J. Poole
Instructor
Email: dpoole3@fau.edu
PhD, Howard University
Areas of Specialization: Intercultural Communication, Leadership and Communication, Political Communication
Deandre Poole teaches courses in intercultural communication, ethnicity and communication, leadership and communication, and organizational communication. His research focuses on the role mediated messages play in shaping individual attitudes and beliefs concerning issues of justice and inequality, and examines how leaders, organizations, and other influential authorities dominate and oppress marginalized groups of people. Currently, he is authoring the book, Obamamania: The Rise of a Mythical Hero, to be published by the Edwin Mellen Press. In addition to his academic pursuits, Dr. Poole is actively engaged in various community service projects throughout Palm Beach County.

 

This episode illustrates a few things.

  • Parents are overpaying when they send their kids to Florida Atlantic University.
  • Dr. Poole has a doctorate that means nothing. Hmm,perhaps parents are overpaying when they send their kids to Howard University as well.
  • Dr.Poole has no idea what the word debate means. Unless the new meaning for debate and dialogue is “to kick something or someone”. That does sound progressive and union like.
  • This exercise is actually reminiscent of how Communists brainwash their captives into a different world view. They would have their prisoners verbally and/or physically attack the family,their religion(religious artifacts),capitalism etc.
  • Last time I checked “a university envireonment” is where the professor assigns the grades and if he or she doesn’t like you and is a wacko to boot,you fail. Not exactly conducive to fairness.
  • Contextualadj -relating to, dependent on, or using context-“The lesson on bashing the name of Christ is included in a textbook titled, “Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach, 5th Edition.” What was that context for stomping on the name of Jesus again? How about an actual discussion within the context of a given topic related to what the class was supposed to be about.

If Florida Atlantic was anything like a university it would fire this guy and not look back. What are the odds of that happening? About like Georgetown winning the NCAA tournament.

Jack Schaap : Twelve Year Sentence

Sentencing has come down for Jack Schaap. One can hope and pray that this experience will lead him to true repentance and a real walk with the Lord.

 

Jack A. Schaap

By Andy Grimm Tribune reporter

4:45 p.m. CDT, March 20, 2013

Jack Schaap, the former pastor of a 15,000-member northwest Indiana megachurch, was sentenced today to 12 years in prison for engaging in sex with a troubled underage girl who sought him out for counseling.
In a statement, the victim wrote that Schaap would text her from the altar during his sermons. In another statement, written as a letter to Schaap, she wrote: “When you first kissed me I was shocked. . .When I asked you if it was wrong, you said ‘No.’ You told me that I was sent you from God, I was his gift to you. You made me feel special.”
Schaap entered a guilty plea last September in a deal with federal prosecutors, admitting to allegations that led to his ouster from the highly conservative Hammond Baptist Church that his late father in-law, Jack Hyles, had built into one of the area’s largest churches.
But at sentencing today, U.S. District Court Judge Rudy Lozano said a 10-year-deal hammered out by both sides did not meet the 12-year-minimum required under federal sentencing guidelines. Schaap stared at the judge without emotion.
While Lozano lauded Schaap for quickly pleading guilty last fall before the complaint was even filed, Lozano said he did not want to set the example by “giving a 25 percent discount” for that cooperation.
While Schaap eventually took responsibility for his actions Schaap initially denied the allegations when he was confronted by church officials, Lozano said. In explanations for the stiffer sentence, the judge pointed to Schaap’s attempts to get rid of evidence by deleting text messages and photos of him with the girl and that the pastor also fired at least one church staffer who had questioned the pastor’s relationship with the girl, Lozano said.
About 70 church members were in attendance at the hearing, with many of them bowing their heads as if in prayer. The girl’s family declined comment.
More than 100 letters of support were sent to Lozano, attesting to decades of good works by the pastor, and claiming that stress and health problems— including prostate troubles and “low lithium levels”— led Schaap to stray during a romantic relationship with the vulnerable teen.
During his sentencing, Schaap referred to a news story about rescuers saving people who had fallen through ice and said, at first, his intentions had been honorable.
“I thought I wanted to be this family’s savior,” Schaap said. “Sometimes people try to be heroes … in trying to be a hero, I became a fool.”
He apologized to his wife, children and parents and urged the congregation of Hammond Baptist to show compassion for the victim and her family.

Rest of the story here – http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-schaap-church-teen-sex-20130320,0,3000934.story

Jack Schaap betrayed his calling as a pastor,and brought reproach upon the name of Christ. Schaap is Dutch for sheep according to Google Translator. And he was a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

7 So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by me,he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. 11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. (John 10:7-13, ESV)

schaap

Just a reminder that Hyle Anderson has a long track record of producing men with a penchant for sexual misconduct-is there a culture of misogyny that is pervasive on campus ?http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2012/08/isolated-incidents-completely-unrelated-to-all-the-others-just-like-it/

While the folks over at Hammond are still feigning shock that one of their own would be guilty of a “sexual indiscretion,” I though it might be a good time to look back at the last few years and observe some of the other infamous offenders from this church and school. This is not an exhaustive list and do keep in mind that these are only representative of the ones who have been caught…

March 1993, AV Ballenger, Former FBCH Deacon, convicted for molesting a child. Jack Hyles had the church give him a standing ovation and kept him in the bus ministry.

July 1995 Russell K Overla, Hyles-Anderson graduate, pleads guilty to molesting two underage girls at various locations over a period of months and years.

July 1999 Kerry Martin, former Hyles Anderson student, is sentenced to 205 years in prison for raping a teenage girl in his church office.

March 2001 Joe and Evangeline Combs, former Hyles-Anderson staff members who took a girl from the orphanage in 1978 but never adopted her. Joe used her for sex. Evangeline repeatedly tortured her in a jealous rage. Both of these monsters were convicted and are now in prison.

May 2001 William Beith, Hyles-Anderson graduate, kidnaps an 11-year old girl and takes her across state lines stopping at various motels to have sex with her. He had previously managed to get into a counseling program instead of facing charges of exposing himself in public but was allowed to become principal of Liberty Baptist Academy anyway where he met his victim. He was released from prison in 2009

May 2003, David Joseph Jorgensen, Hyles-Anderson graduate, pleads no contest to two felony counts of committing lewd acts upon a child, according to online court records. After he completed probation, he sought to have the crimes reduced to misdemeanors and had his record expunged in September 2006, but is still part of a civil lawsuit for allegedly “committing lewd acts” on a female when she was 14. He then reportedly went on staff at the First Baptist of Hammond.

April 2006, Craig Sisson, Hyles-Anderson graduate, convicted of first degree child molestation of an 11 year old girl.

May 2011, Chris Settlemoir, Hyles-Anderson graduate, convicted for Criminal Sexual Conduct wth underage males.

May 2011 Matt Jarrell, former Hyles-Anderson student, was arrested on suspicion of rape and sodomy after picking a woman up in a West Virginia bar. He then committed suicide in his jail cell before he could be made to face the charges against him.

October 2011 Greg Neal, Hyles-Anderson graduate, escapes charges of sexual misconduct by hiding evidence of his video voyeurism util the statute of limitations had run out. The church refuses to cooperate with the investigation.

January 2012 Tedd Butler, Hyles-Anderson graduate, is sentenced to twelve months in the county jail for Criminal Sexual Misconduct (in two separate counties) for his molestation of a five-year old boy.

Special dishonorable mention goes out to Dave Hyles, Hyles-Anderson graduate, former FBCH staff member, former heir to the Hyles throne, who has never been convicted but was attached to numerous scandals, and bravely pleaded the fifth amendment when questioned about the death of Brent Stevens.

For a college of just over 1000 people Hyles-Anderson College certainly does seem to have quite the stable of perverts, criminals, and twisted minds.

A big Thank You goes out to Jeri Massi who has worked tirelessly to document abuses cases not only from Hyles Anderson but also from fundamentalist institutions around the world. Her passion for helping victims and seeking justice for predators is unwavering.http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2012/08/isolated-incidents-completely-unrelated-to-all-the-others-just-like-it/

Rob Bell,Meet Rabbi Gilles Bernheim:The Issue of Homosexual Marriage

I first encountered Rob Bell through his book Velvet Elvis. My daughter was required to read it at the Christian college she attended. I read part of it and was bored. She read it all and was bored. Who knew that it would become a best seller and he would become a Christian “rockstar”. Bell is very good at asking questions in such a way as to raise doubts in the minds of those hearing or reading his questions. For an in-depth look at his communication techniques please review this article -

 

I find Rob Bell fascinating.

Sure, I disagree with his theology, but when it comes to engaging communication, the man is virtually without peer.

If you want to see a masterpiece in clever communication, look no further than a promotional video for a Rob Bell book.

This is Bell in his element.

Attention-grabbing.
Engaging.
Dynamic.

Take, for instance, this recent offering:https://alastairadversaria.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/rob-bell-and-don-draper-the-ad-mans-gospel/

 

 

San Francisco, California – Rob Bell, author of the best-selling and controversial book Love Wins, which challenges the Christian teaching of Hell, came out in support of homosexual marriage on Sunday and called “narrow” Christians to repentance.

According to reports, Bell was speaking at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco and delivered a message based on his new book What We Talk About When We Talk About God.

During the question and answer period, Bell was asked about his beliefs regarding same-sex “marriage.”

“I am for marriage. I am for fidelity. I am for love, whether it’s a man and woman, a woman and a woman, a man and a man,” he said. “I think the ship has sailed and I think the church needs — I think this is the world we are living in and we need to affirm people wherever they are.”

 

Bell opined that many evangelicals can no longer be classified as conservatives because their beliefs have changed with the times.

“I think we are witnessing the death of a particular subculture that doesn’t work,” he asserted. “I think there is a very narrow, politically intertwined, culturally ghettoized, evangelical subculture that was told ‘we’re gonna change the thing’ and they haven’t. And they actually have turned away lots of people.”

“And I think that when you’re in a part of a subculture that is dying, you make a lot more noise because it’s very painful. You sort of die or you adapt,” Bell continued. “And if you adapt, it means you have to come face to face with some of the ways we’ve talked about God, which don’t actually shape people into more loving, compassionate people. And we have supported policies and ways of viewing the world that are actually destructive. And we’ve done it in the name of God and we need to repent.” Rest of the article here- http://christiannews.net/2013/03/18/no-hell-bell-comes-out-in-support-of-homosexuality-tells-narrow-christians-to-repent/

 

 

One of the better responses to the idea of” homosexual marriage” is found in the following article by a Rabbi from France.

PART ONE
Rabbi Bernheim offers an analysis of arguments advanced by those who favor a law establishing homosexual marriage, first giving the argument that we hear for it and then what we often neglect to say.

Homosexual marriage in the name of equality?

What we hear: “Homosexuals are victims of discrimination. They must have the right to marry, the same as heterosexuals.”
What we often neglect to say: From the fact that people love each other it does not follow necessarily that they have the right to be married, whether they be heterosexual or homosexual. For example, a man cannot marry a woman who is already married, even if they love each other. Likewise, a woman cannot be married to two men on the grounds that she loves both of them and that both want to be her husband. A father cannot marry his daughter, even if their love is uniquely paternal and filial.
Of course, we understand the wish of people who are in love that their love be recognized. Still, there are strict rules defining what kinds of unions can be recognized as marriages and what kinds cannot. Thus “marriage for everyone” is only a slogan, since after the authorization of homosexual marriage the law would maintain forms of inequality and discrimination that would continue to apply to those who love each other but to whom marriage is not available.
The argument for marriage for all conceals a split between two existing visions of marriage. According to one worldview, which I share with a great number of people, both believers and nonbelievers, marriage is not only the recognition of a loving attachment. It is the institution that articulates the union between man and woman as part of the succession of generations. It is the establishment of a family—that is, a social cell that creates a set of parent–child relations among its members. Beyond the common life of two individuals, it organizes the life of a community consisting of descendants and ancestors. So understood, marriage is a fundamental act in the construction and the stability of individuals as well as of society.
According to another worldview, marriage is an obsolete and rigid institution, the absurd legacy of a traditional and alienating society. Is it not paradoxical to hear those who share this worldview raising their voices in favor of homosexual marriage? Why do those who reject marriage and prefer free unions demonstrate alongside activists in favor of homosexual marriage?
Whichever worldview you hold, it is clear that what is going on behind the slogan of “marriage equality” is a substitution: An institution fraught with legal, cultural, and symbolic significance would be replaced by a de-sexed legal category, thus undermining the foundation of individuals and of the family. In the name of equality and the struggle against discrimination, should we suppress all references to sexual difference in relations between citizens and the state, beginning with the marriage ceremony and the family records that issue from this ceremony?

Homosexual marriage to protect the partner?

What we hear: “Many homosexuals find themselves in a precarious situation without legal protection after a death or a separation. Homosexual marriage will provide a remedy.”
What we often neglect to say: Marriage, or for that matter civil union, cannot create rights and obligations unless it is legally contracted. In other words, the authorization of homosexual marriage in France would not automatically guarantee the protection of all partners in all homosexual couples. The partners would still need to marry. This is equally true for heterosexual couples, many of whom choose to live together without marrying.
Many heterosexual couples choose civil unions (in French, the pacte civil de solidarité, or PACS) because they find this form of union in their interest, in particular the economic and legal parameters that define the material interests of the parties (housing, finances, social insurance, and so on). The gap between the two legal forms is limited. Even if certain provisions given automatically to the married are not given automatically to those in civil unions, they are nevertheless possible. Take the example of inheritance. A partner in a civil union can inherit under the same conditions as a spouse in a married couple, but his partner must have drawn up a will and designated him as the heir. In the case of PACS, as in the case of marriage, the partner’s inheritance is not subject to estate taxes.
A question does arise about the difference in compensatory payments when a separation causes a significant decline in income for one of the partners, though the partner can apply to a family law judge to divide joint property and redress grievances. I want to express my wish that technical solutions be found that would protect partners in civil unions at the same level as married spouses in the case of death or separation.
And I wish especially to emphasize that in the framework of civil unions already in place in France, there is no reason that our concern for protecting partners would cause us to put in question the institution of marriage in the radical way implied by the authorization of homosexual marriage.

Homosexual parenting in the name of love?

What we hear: “What is most important is love. A homosexual couple can give much love to a child, sometimes even more than a heterosexual couple.”
What we often neglect to say: To love a child is one thing; to love a child with a love that provides the necessary structure is another. There can be no doubt that homosexuals have the same capacity to love a child and to convey this love as do heterosexuals, but the role of parents extends beyond the love they feel for their children. To reduce the parental bond to its affective and educative aspects is to overlook the fact that the parent–child bond is a psychological vector of fundamental importance for the child’s sense of identity.
All the affection in the world will not suffice to produce the basic psychological structures that address the child’s need to know where he comes from. For the child establishes his own identity only by a process of differentiation, which presupposes that he knows whom he resembles. Thus he needs to know that he issues from the love and the union between a man, his father, and a woman, his mother, thanks to the sexual difference between them. Even adopted children know that they originate from the love and the desire of their parents, even when these are not their biological parents.
Father and mother represent a genealogy for the child. The child needs a clear and coherent genealogy in order to find his place as an individual. What has always and will always constitute our humanity is the capacity for language in a sexually differentiated body and as part of a genealogy. To identify a child’s parentage is not only to indicate who will raise the child, with whom he will have affective relations, and who will serve as his adults of reference. It is also, most important, to situate him in a generational chain. The chain guarantees each individual a place in the world in which he lives, for he knows where he came from.
Today we face the immense risk of irreversibly scrambling the chain of generations. Just as one cannot destroy the foundations of a house without the house collapsing, one cannot reject the foundations of our society without putting that society in danger.
“Homosexual parenting” is not parenting. The term itself was invented to mitigate the impossibility of homosexuals’ being parents. This new foundation, invented to promote the legal option of giving a child two “parents” of the same sex, is part of a fiction. Neither marriage nor parenthood has ever been based on the sexuality of individuals but rather on sex itself—that is, on the anthropological distinction between man and woman.
Thus, by abandoning the man–woman distinction in favor of the heterosexual–homosexual distinction, homosexual activists demand not parenthood (paternity or maternity) but the right to some new abstract parental status that reduces the role of the “parent” to the exercise of certain functions such as education. This overlooks the fact that, even in the case of adopted children, to be a parent is not only to educate the child but also to recreate lines of paternity and maternity.
We must therefore strongly reaffirm that to be a father or a mother is not merely an affective, cultural, or social function. The term “parent” is not neutral; it involves sexual difference. To accept the term “homosexual parenting” is to strip the word “parent” of its intrinsic bodily, biological, and fleshly meaning.
The Association of Gay and Lesbian Parents and Future Parents has proposed several substitutes for the term “parent” depending on the various functions to be performed: “stepparent,” “co-parent,” “homo-parent,” “mother to another,” “biological parent,” “legal parent,” “social parent,” “second parent,” etc. It seems unlikely that a child could manage naturally to find a stable meaning in relation to all such terminologies.

Homosexual parenting to give legal protection to the children who already have homosexual parents?

What we hear: “Homosexual parenting already exists as a matter of fact: Hundreds of thousands of children are being raised by homosexual couples. A legal framework must be created to protect these children.”
What we often neglect to say: The law already allows for the practical organization of recomposed families. Article 377 of the civil code of France lets parents delegate the exercise of parental authority to a third party by the decision of a family law judge. The mechanism was made more flexible in 2002 and now lets family law judges organize the sharing of parental authority as best suits the educational needs of the child and in accordance with parental wishes. The Supreme Court has already accepted the proposition that parental authority can be shared between a mother and her homosexual companion. The Court affirmed that the civil code “does not oppose a mother who has sole parental rights delegating all or part of the exercise of those rights to the woman with whom she lives in a stable and continuous union, as long as the circumstances require it and as such a measure is in conformity with the best interests of the child.”
There is no need to add to the law. French law already has the resources to address the needs of recomposed families, including “families” led by homosexual “parents.” Rather than adding to the legal code, wouldn’t it be better simply to make more people aware of the law, encouraging flexible solutions appropriate to individual situations?

Adoption to protect the right to a child?

What we hear: “Homosexuals are victims of discrimination. Just like heterosexuals, they must have the right to have children.”
What we often neglect to say: The right to a child does not exist. The desire to have a child in no way establishes the right to have a child, neither for heterosexuals nor for homosexuals. The wishes of an infertile heterosexual couple may not be honored if conditions are not optimal. For example, one may judge that a young and healthy couple is better suited to have a child than an older couple in fragile health. If a right to a child for homosexual couples were recognized, then all heterosexual couples denied children would feel themselves victims of discrimination in one way or another and would have grounds for claiming the same right.
There is no question of denying the suffering experienced by homosexual couples owing to their infertility—a suffering they share with heterosexual couples who cannot procreate. Such homosexual couples now demand that their suffering be recognized and alleviated. But no one has the right to be relieved of suffering at another’s expense, particularly when this is to the disadvantage of the weak and innocent. Their suffering is not a sufficient reason to give them the right to adopt.
The child is not an object of rights but a subject of rights. To speak of a “right to a child” instrumentalizes and objectifies the child. In the current debate, the child as a person, as a subject, is absent in the arguments of those who demand adoption for homosexual couples. This absence allows adults demanding rights to avoid asking about the rights of the child, what the child might need, and whether the child might prefer having a father and mother instead of two parents of the same sex. This is a case where our carelessness borders on cynicism. The right of the child is radically different from the right to the child. The former right is fundamental. It consists in particular in giving the child a family in which he will have the best chance to have the best life.

Adoption to help the children waiting to be adopted?

What we hear: “Thousands of children are waiting for adoption, and it would be better for them to be adopted by a homosexual couple than to remain in an orphanage.”
What we often neglect to say: The adopted child needs a father and mother even more than other children. At the deepest level, viscerally, he desires to find a place close to the basic cell that gave him life: a father and a mother. The adopted child is burdened by the simultaneous traumas of abandonment and of the family’s double identity. Even more than other children, this child needs a clear sense of a biological chain. This is because he or she has no sense of being the fruit of a loving union. He was not desired, he has no one’s eyes, and he cannot recognize himself in any member of his new family.
It is common for the adopted child to reject one of the two sexes. It is therefore important that the child be able to identify with two parents of different sexes: with his mother, because he needs to be reconciled with the woman; and with his father, in order to know the presence of a man, without whom his mother would not have been able to have a child.

Rest of the article here – http://www.firstthings.com/article/2013/02/homosexual-marriage-parenting-and-adoption

Homosexuality,Pedophilia,and Ephebophilia:Standing at the Crossroads

In the ever changing world of sexual ethics it behooves the Christian to study the Word of God,talk with Christians who have a thorough knowledge of the Word of God,and be willing to listen to those who are ministering to men and women who are in sexual bondage. In other words,heed those who  have the heart of a shepherd,and a genuine concern for peoples souls,but are ministering according to the truths of the Word of God. The following articles look at these issues from different angles.

 
First,from Walt Mueller-

Wrestling With Homosexuality. . . What’s A Christian to Do? . . .

I didn’t sleep well last night. Another conversation about homosexuality was something I was a part of yesterday. There have been plenty of these conversations. . . more and more, in fact, in the last few months. But the issue is rising quickly to the point where we must all intentionally resolve to read, study, pray, consult. . . and then come down somewhere. I’ve been working to figure out how to best help parents, youth workers, and others do that. I’ve been traveling on this journey for some time. Today, it’s becoming more intentional and directed.
My conversation yesterday was with a table full of highly-respected Christian friends. Each of them have had a profound impact on my life and ministry in some way. But it was evident that we don’t all agree. And, our disagreement is evidence of the fact that the “us vs. them” battle that once raged with a fairly well-defined line in the sand between the church and the world isn’t that well defined any more. On the one hand, this is a very good thing. What it means is that more and more followers of Christ are realizing that we haven’t taken the time to understand the issues, to understand the Scriptures, and to understand the grace and mercy of Christ that we are called to show to those who wrestle with same-sex attraction. The issue needs to be raised and we need to wrestle with it
. Rest of the article here -

http://learningmylines.blogspot.com/2013/02/wrestling-with-homosexuality

 

Second – From Andrée Seu Petersonhttp://www.worldmag.com/2013/01/culture_creep

 

I almost started this column by saying The Guardian is a mainstream British daily newspaper and not the U.K.’s version of theNational Enquirer. But that would insult the National Enquirer, which, whatever you want to say about supermarket tabloids, was the first to expose presidential candidate John Edwards’ dalliances when respectable papers held their noses.

On Jan. 2 the respectable Guardian published an article, “Paedophilia: bringing dark desires to light.” The title choice is more prophetic than intended, calling to mind Isaiah’s “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20). Below are excerpts, a case study in journalistic slouching toward Gomorrah.

“There is little agreement about paedophilia, even among those considered experts on the subject.”

Right off the bat we are introduced to the notion of different opinions, which is Strategy No. 1. The Dark Side (Ephesians 2:2; 5:11; 6:12) need merely suggest that something evil is really only “controversial.” When the discussion begins at that level, the bad guys have already won ground: Pedophilia is now put forth as a subject on which reasonable people disagree. Rest here – http://www.worldmag.com/2013/01/culture_creep

 

I have done several articles that focused on the problem of “pedophile priests” in the Roman Catholic church. There is another possible angle to that story. There certainly could be a significant number of pedophile priests,as well as homosexuals who would be classified as Ephebophiles. Either way,they should not be ministering,they need to repent and be saved,and they need to take responsibility for what they have done. No more coverups. There is grace for the homosexual and power from the Holy Spirit and the Word of God to turn from their sin.The author of the next article believes that the Pope (now resigned) did quite a bit to fight the problem. Totally different opinion from Patrick Wall. As I have said before,I believe the Roman Catholic system is fatally flawed in theology and in structure.

With the Pope Against Homoheresy

BY F. DARIUSZ OKO, PH.D.

  • Tue Feb 26, 2013 21:01 EST

This article was originally published in Polish in Fronda 63 (2012), pp. 128-160

For several weeks now Poland has witnessed a heated discussion on the “huge homosexual underground in the Church”, provoked by the most recent book by F. Tadeusz Isakowicz-Zaleski entitled Chodzi mi tylko o prawdę (Truth Is All That Matters).

Some deny any such underground exists, and put forward theses profoundly inconsistent with the teaching of the Church, both being at odds with truth. The problem is serious to the extent I feel I must join in the discussion as well, because I also care about truth, and first of all about good, the fundamental wellbeing of man and of the Church – the basic community in which he lives.

Any discussion should have as its starting point the basic, axiomatic assumption that any one of us can know with certainty only a part, and that part is likely to be partially wrong. That should result in any opinions being presented with humility, and the arguments of partners or opponents being listened to with attention. That way we may best benefit from the parts of knowledge each of us has, and correct them. They will always remain only parts, but they will be bigger and purified from errors to a greater extent. That is the blessing of an honest dialogue, and it is in this spirit that I want to proceed.

My feeling of duty to take a stance results from my involvement in the philosophical criticism of homosexual ideology and homosexual propaganda (abbreviated to homoideology and homopropaganda), which I have dealt with for several years now to the order and with encouragement from many cardinals and bishops. In doing that, I have accumulated what is probably the biggest Polish collection of writings on the topic, one of the largest collections of data. This has been accomplished with the help of many friends and allies, both lay people and clergymen, university professors and practicing physicians, as well as a large number of people I had not known before, but who, encouraged by the opinions I have expressed and having read my articles, wished to add to and correct my knowledge. Thus, I have received news, results of scientific studies, and official documents from both around Poland and various regions of the world, particularly the United States, Great Britain, Ireland, Germany, Austria, Holland and Italy, first of all from the Holy See.

I began my work as a struggle against a deadly, external threat to Christianity, but then gradually discovered that the division is not that simple. The enemy is not only outside the Church, but within it as well, sometimes perfectly camouflaged, like the Trojan Horse. We are dealing not only with the problem of homoideology and a homolobby outside the Church, but with an analogous problem within it as well, where homoideology takes the form of homoheresy. One does not even need to study the archives of the Institute of National Remembrance, which is only one of many sources. These facts are self-evident also in those countries which have not heard of any such Institute at all. It is enough to collect reliable information from lay and Catholic media concerning the recent years, and add to it the knowledge of human nature, some logical thinking, put two and two together and study documents which present the Church’s response to these facts.

A GLOBAL PHENOMENON

We should first expose the common lie presented by the media. They keep talking about paedophilia among clergymen, while it is most often the case that the problem is ephebophilia, which is a perversion consisting in adult, homosexual men being attracted not to children, but to pubescent and adolescent boys. It is a typical deviation related to homosexuality. Basic knowledge about that reality includes the fact that more than 80 percent of cases involving sexual abuse by clergymen reported in the U.S.A. were cases of ephebophilia, not paedophilia! That fact has been carefully hidden and ignored, as it reveals particularly well the hypocrisy of the homolobby in both the world and the Church. It is all the more important that it be exposed…

Rest of the article here – http://www.lifesitenews.com/resources/with-the-pope-against-homoheresy

 

And by the way,if you are involved in any kind of ministry you need to set up “safety guidelines” to protect yourself. The following story from Shaun Groves is a perfect illustration of why “two is better than one”.

Years ago, in a church green room, another singer asked me why I was traveling with a road manager. There was some friendly ribbing from him about how important I must think I am to need an entourage. “My wife trusts me,” he joked. So I told him a story.

I was in college, serving as a worship leader at the Methodist Children’s Home in Waco, Texas. A kid got cross with me and got even by telling my boss I’d touched her inappropriately. She was specific in her allegation – place, time – too specific. The inquiry only lasted a few hours – I was able to quickly prove I was in a class taking an exam at the time this girl claimed I’d misbehaved.

That was a close one. And I learned a valuable lesson.

My wife does trust me, but I’m still human. Alone, I’m more likely to mess up in a million ways – look at something I shouldn’t, succumb to cynicism and negativity, waste time being unproductive, get a big head from the kind words of “fans”…

But even if I do everything right, there’s always the possibility of being accused of doing wrong. And isn’t that all it takes to destroy a ministry? An allegation doesn’t have to be true. It just has to be made. So I almost never travel alone.

But I had to this past weekend. And I didn’t like it. Nossir. Not one bit. I felt vulnerable. And the music I made solo just wasn’t as good as what Micah and I create together.

Two is better than one – for too many reasons to travel alone.http://shaungroves.com/2013/02/two-is-better-just-as-i-am-video/

Stairway to Hell: Covering Their Deeds of Darkness One Step at a Time

 

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. (Ephesians 5:11)

The Catholic Church is embroiled in more than just a search for a new Pope. As Patrick Wall points out in the article below,child/sex abuse cases are at an epidemic level. Roman Catholic leaders (including Pope Benedict) have covered up child sex abuse by priests in an effort to “protect” the church. This strategy has backfired,and has cost Roman Catholicism dearly. Unregenerate men love the darkness and flee the light. May this serve as a lesson to never excuse,cover up,or turn a blind eye to evil.

From Patrick Wall – ( check out his blog for many good articles dealing with this issue.) Check out his links – a massive amount of information that will leave your head spinning. Endemic abuse,layers of coverups from the highest levels of leadership.How many broken hearts that now distrust the very idea of God?

Catholic Clergy Child Abuse Investigations Since 2005 … and a Papal Resignationhttp://patrickjwall.wordpress.com/

The German Pope’s resignation today as the Bishop of Rome (for health reasons) is the final lie in his Papacy. Since 2005, Benedict XVI’s church has been the subject of more civil and criminal inquiries of the Church since the time of the Protestant Reformation.

Just look at the sheer volume of child abuse and financial abuse inquires during Benedict XVI’s reign. The real story is how these worldwide child abuse inquires brought on the first resignation of a healthy Pope in eight centuries.

Click on the links to read the full reports.

Germany

German Bishops Halt Child Abuse Inquiry

Australia

Australian Prime Minister Julian Gillard announces National Inquiry of child abuse in the Roman Catholic Church

Belgium

Report on wide spread child abuse in Belgian Church

Bishop Roger Vanghuewe resigns after child abuse accusations

Mexico

Reverend Marcial Maciel, Founder of the Legionaries of Christ, was removed in 19 after first being removed as head of the Order for sexually abusing children in the 1950′s

United States

Los Angeles – Cardinal Roger Mahony’s 1985-2011 coverup of 128 priest perpetrators is revealed and Benedict XVI remains silent

Milwaukee – In the midst of planning for Bankruptcy and moving assets to shield them from child sex abuse survivors, Archbishop Dolan pays for the perpetrators silence. Pope Benedict XVI rewards Dolan and promotes him to Cardinal

Philadelphia – After two grand Jury Reports Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua knowingly keeps priest perpetrators in ministry, orders the destruction of the evidence and his Vicar for Clergy is criminally convicted

New Hampshire

Ireland

Cloyne Report

Ferns Report

Murphy Report

Ryan Report

Amnesty International Report

Italy

Genoa

Vatican Bank inquiry

Verona

Vatileaks and Monsignor 007

 

Innocent until proven guilty,but multiple accusers are not a good sign for O’Brien.

By John Bingham, and Simon Johnson

10:00PM GMT 25 Feb 2013

Cardinal Keith O’Brien, the leader of the Church in Scotland, said that as well as standing down as Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh, he would take no part in the forthcoming conclave to elect Benedict XVI’s successor.

A fierce opponent of gay marriage, he said he did not want to become a distraction during the choosing of a new leader for the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics.

He would have been the only Briton with a vote in the conclave. His decision to stay away because of a personal scandal is thought to be without precedent.

It raised pressure on a number of other cardinals from the US, Ireland and Belgium, to stand aside from the vote amid allegations of covering up child abuse.

Vatican watchers said that it laid bare a growing sense of crisis at the top of the Church.

One of Scotland’s most eminent historians described Cardinal O’Brien’s resignation as “probably the gravest single public crisis” for the Scottish Catholic Church since the Reformation. There were predictions that the allegations, if true, would shatter its moral credibility and demoralise the faithful.

The Cardinal has said he will be “contesting” the allegations, published in The Observer at the weekend, and is consulting lawyers. In a statement, the normally plain-spoken cleric said simply: “For any good I have been able to do, I thank God. For any failures, I apologise to all whom I have offended.”

Four men – three priests and one former priest – have accused him of “inappropriate” behaviour dating back as far as 1980, before he was Archbishop.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9893539/Cardinal-Keith-OBriens-resignation-casts-shadow-over-Papal-Conclave.html

 

The Vatican on Saturday accused the Italian media of spreading “false and damaging” reports in what it condemned as a deplorable attempt to influence cardinals who will meet in a secret conclave next month to elect a new pope.
Since Pope Benedict announced his resignation on Feb. 11, Italian newspapers have been full of rumors about conspiracies, secret reports and lobbies in the Vatican that they say pushed the pope to abdicate, including a rumor that involved a shadowy “gay lobby” within the Vatican.

CNN Senior Vatican Analyst John Allen, who is also a correspondent with the National Catholic Reporter, cautioned that such unsourced speculation should be taken with a grain of salt.
While Allen said he doesn’t know for sure whether a network based on sexual orientation was investigated by the Vatican, he said “frankly, it would be a little surprising if they hadn’t” — given past scandals that have come to light.
Allen theorized that the Pope may have been worn down by the “cumulative impact of the various meltdowns over the last eight years” in a piece he wrote on Friday.http://www.newsmax.com/Newswidget/Vatican-Denies-Gay-Blackmail/2013/02/23/id/491677?

 

And some Protestant news of abuse -

First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana, voted Sunday to select John Wilkerson as its new head pastor. But among the many challenges Wilkerson will face as he prepares to lead what used to be one of the nation’s largest megachurches will be the legacy of its previous pastor: Jack Schaap, who awaits sentencing in a nearby federal courthouse.

Last fall, the 54-year-old Schaap, heir to Jack Hyles’s famous pulpit,pleaded guilty to charges of “transportation of a minor with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.” Later, Schaap signed a plea deal admitting to sexual encounters with a 16-year-old member of his congregation. Many supporters and detractors have come forward since.

But a new report from Chicago magazine alleges Schaap was “part of what some call a deeply embedded culture of misogyny and sexual and physical abuse.”

“Multiple websites tracking the First Baptist Church of Hammond have identified more than a dozen men with ties to the church—many of whom graduated from its college, Hyles-Anderson, or its annual Pastors’ Schools—who fanned out around the country, preaching at their own churches and racking up a string of arrests and civil lawsuits, including physical abuse of minors, sexual molestation, and rape,” states the magazine in its January 2013 issue.

http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2013/01/megachurch-produced-more-abusive-pastors-than-just-jack-schaap-claims-report.html

When Life Hits Rock Bottom Does Anybody Care ?:Theodore Dalrymple Meet Mez McConnell

One of my favorite authors over the past ten years has been Theodore Dalyrmple. He is bright,articulate,and shines a spotlight on the sad lives of those in the inner city of London.I believe he is an atheist who is not hostile to Christianity. Mez McConnell is a former drug addict,and criminal who had an abusive childhood. His story shows the amazing grace of God,and demonstrates the importance of Christians reaching out to those whom no one cares about. I am going to intersperse highlighted sections from my Kindle from both authors(from the linked books) to give you a taste of their writing and of what life is like in the inner cities of Great Britain for many people. Dalyrmple will be describing the types of problems he encounters as he deals with many different people(indented writings). McConnell will be writing from the first person perspective as he describes his own life. Ultimately,McConnell’s story is what needs to happen for people who are at the end of their rope.These are but a few of the highlights. I recommend both books highly.Check the bottom of the article for links to the books.

As a doctor who has worked for the past decade in a busy general hospital in a British slum, and also in a nearby prison, I have been in a privileged position to observe the life of this underclass. I have, for example, interviewed some ten thousand people who have made an attempt (however feeble) at suicide, each of whom has told me of the lives of four or five other people around him. From this source alone, therefore, I have learned about the lives of some fifty thousand people: lives dominated, almost without exception, by violence, crime, and degradation. My sample is a selected one, no doubt, as all samples drawn from personal experience must be, but it is not small. Moreover, having previously worked as a doctor in some of the poorest countries in Africa, as well as in very poor countries in the Pacific and Latin America, I have little hesitation in saying that the mental, cultural, emotional, and spiritual impoverishment of the Western underclass is the greatest of any large group of people I have ever encountered anywhere.

Nevertheless, patterns of behaviour emerge – in the case of the underclass, almost entirely self-destructive ones. Day after day I hear of the same violence, the same neglect and abuse of children, the same broken relationships, the same victimisation by crime, the same nihilism, the same dumb despair. If everyone is a unique individual, how do patterns such as this emerge?

Our house is cold and damp. There’s no carpet on the floors or paper on the walls. I have a bed and a blanket and a million bed bugs. They’re small and red, and they live in my mattress and in the folds of the curtains. They come out at night. I know they’re coming because they smell funny. They crawl on my face, my eyes and my hair. I get used to them. I’m hungry. Dad lost his wages on the horses again. Dad is always in the betting shop. Sometimes SHE sends me down there to get him. Dad looks embarrassed when I go in and he always makes me wait outside for him. I daren’t go back without him because if I do, SHE hits me. I’m hungry. There’s not enough food this week. There’s enough for cigarettes and beer but not for food. Dad disappears again and I’m locked in my room without food. It’s worse in the holidays because I have to stay there for days on end. I feel alone.

I’m so hungry. Sometimes I lie in bed at night and wonder what it would be like not to be hit. In my head I transport myself into the future where I’m big and strong. There is no hitting in my dreams. I can’t even remember when the hitting started. I can’t remember what it’s like not to be hit. Sometimes, if I’m lucky, I just get slapped on the head. Often I’m punched on the back of the head and the kidneys. The punch to the kidneys hurts the most. I try and avoid that if I can. It usually means leaving my head wide open, but anything is better than the kidneys. I try to avoid curling up on the floor because SHE kicks me in the testicles. I don’t cry out any more for it doesn’t do any good. Sometimes I wonder where my mother is. This is all her fault.

 

On my right sat a man in his late 60s, intelligent and cultivated, who had been a distinguished foreign correspondent for the BBC and who had spent much of his career in the United States. He said that for the last ten years he had read with interest my weekly dispatches – printed in a rival, conservative publication – depicting the spiritual, cultural, emotional, and moral chaos of modern urban life, and had always wanted to meet me to ask me a simple question: Did I make it all up? Did I make it all up? It was a question I have been asked many times by middle-class liberal intellectuals, who presumably hope that the violence, neglect, and cruelty, the contorted thinking, the utter hopelessness, and the sheer nihilism that I describe week in and week out are but figments of a fevered imagination.

On being asked whether I make it all up, I reply that, far from doing so, I downplay the dreadfulness of the situation and omit the worst cases that come to my attention so as not to distress the reader unduly. The reality of English lower-class life is far more terrible than I can, with propriety, depict. My interlocutors nod politely and move on to the next subject.

My social worker is dead. He committed suicide. He fed a pipe from his car exhaust in through the car window and turned the engine on. One day he’s telling me how to work through my ‘issues’ and the next day he’s dead. I feel cheated. How could he help me when he couldn’t even help himself? That was the first time I consciously questioned life. More than that, it was when I began to realise that life didn’t last forever. I began to question my own mortality. I thought I believed in God. But who was God? What did he have to do with me? What had he ever done for me? Was there a reason for all this madness? Did there even have to be a reason? I didn’t know why we were here and it seemed that nobody else did either. Maybe God was someone we made up to make us feel better about ourselves. I went to the funerals but found no comfort there. We sang songs and we committed them to a god that none of us ever seemed to talk about.

School, which had once been my only refuge, now became the bane of my life. I lost all motivation to study and do well. I took perverse pleasure in handing in work that I knew to be wrong. I became uncooperative and sullen and grew to resent my teachers and fellow students more and more. What was the point of it all anyway? To get a good job? To earn lots of money? We were all going to die and it all seemed like a momentous waste of time and effort. What good will a job and money do when we’re dead?

 

Human behaviour cannot be explained without reference to the meaning and intentions people give to their acts and omissions; and everyone has a Weltanschauung, a worldview, whether he knows it or not. It is the ideas my patients have that fascinate – and, to be honest, appal – me: for they are the source of their misery. Their ideas make themselves manifest even in the language they use. The frequency of locutions of passivity is a striking example. An alcoholic, explaining his misconduct while drunk, will say, ‘The beer went mad.’ A heroin addict, explaining his resort to the needle, will say, ‘Heroin’s everywhere.’ It is as if the beer drank the alcoholic and the heroin injected the addict. Other locutions plainly serve an exculpatory function and represent a denial of agency and therefore of personal responsibility. The murderer claims the knife went in or the gun went off. The man who attacks his sexual consort claims that he ‘went into one’ or ‘lost it’, as if he were the victim of a kind of epilepsy of which it is the doctor’s duty to cure him. Until the cure, of course, he can continue to abuse his consort – for such abuse has certain advantages for him – safe in the knowledge that he, not his consort, is its true victim. I have come to see the uncovering of this dishonesty and self-deception as an essential part of my work. When a man tells me, in explanation of his anti-social behaviour, that he is easily led, I ask him whether he was ever easily led to study mathematics or the subjunctives of French verbs. Invariably the man begins to laugh: the absurdity of what he has said is immediately apparent to him. Indeed, he will acknowledge that he knew how absurd it was all along, but that certain advantages, both psychological and social, accrued by keeping up the pretence. The idea that one is not an agent but the helpless victim of circumstances, or of large occult sociological or economic forces, does not come naturally, as an inevitable concomitant of experience. On the contrary, only in extreme circumstances is helplessness directly experienced in the way the blueness of the sky is experienced. Agency, by contrast, is the common experience of us all. We know our will’s free, and there’s an end on’t.

It’s New Years Eve and there’s a big rave on in Bradford. There’s a lot to do. We’ve to go and score for a start. We pick up 200 LSD tabs, 100 Es and a couple of ounces of speed. We might as well make a few quid while we’re there. They reckon there’s going to be thousands there so we’ll have no bother getting shot of them. How mad is this? 3000 people rocking the place! I drop an E and some speed and wait for the party to really start. I can’t feel my legs! I’m flying! I just feel so much love! How can this be wrong? How can this be illegal? Just feel it! I never want this to end! My head is mashed, battered, fried. What am I doing? I haven’t slept for days. I can’t think straight. What am I doing? I don’t even know what I’m taking half the time. It’s not so much fun any more.

There’s got to be more to life than this, surely. Why won’t my friends discuss it? Why can’t we face the truth that our lives are going nowhere? I feel like we are missing something important, but I don’t know what it is. I want to ask questions, but I don’t know what questions to ask. I don’t know who to ask. I want answers, but nobody has any. Everybody has ideas and theories, but nobody has answers.

 

Violent criminals often use an expression auxiliary to ‘My head went’ when explaining their deeds: ‘It wasn’t me.’ Here is the psychobabble of the slums, the doctrine of the ‘Real Me’ as refracted through the lens of urban degradation. The Real Me has nothing to do with the phenomenal me, the me that

snatches old ladies’ bags, breaks into other people’s houses, beats up my wife and children, or repeatedly drinks too much and gets involved in brawls. No, the Real Me is an immaculate conception, untouched by human conduct: it is that unassailable core of virtue that enables me to retain my self-respect whatever I do. What I am is not at all determined by what I do; and insofar as what I do has any moral significance at all, it is up to others to ensure that the phenomenal me acts in accordance with the Real Me.

At the very heart of all this passivity and refusal of responsibility is a deep dishonesty – what Sartre would have called bad faith. For however vehemently criminals try to blame others, and whatever appearance of sincerity they manage to convey while they do so, they know at least some of the time that what they say is untrue. This is clear in the habit drug addicts often have of altering their language according to their interlocutors. To doctors, social workers, and probation officers – to all who might prove useful to them either in a prescribing or a testimonial capacity – they emphasise their overwhelming and overpowering craving for a drug, the intolerability of the withdrawal effects from it, the deleterious effects it has upon their character, judgment, and behaviour. Among themselves, though, their language is quite different, optimistic rather than abject: it is about where you can obtain the best-quality drug, where it is cheapest, and how to heighten its effects.

Among themselves, though, what must be the discourse as they establish contacts, learn new techniques, and deride the poor fools who earn an honest living but never grow rich? That their outlook is dishonest and self-serving is apparent in their attitude towards those whom they believe to have done them wrong. For example, they do not say of the policemen who they allege (often plausibly) have beaten them up, ‘Poor cops! They were brought up in authoritarian homes and now project the anger that is really directed at their bullying fathers onto me. They need counselling. They need their heads sorted out.’ On the contrary, they say, with force and explosive emotion, ‘The bastards!’

 

That’s how I met them, the Christians. The Bible bashers, gimps, freaks. Take your pick. They just turned up one day out of the blue. I wasn’t too sure at first. Maybe they weren’t Christians. Maybe they were the police. They had hired the gym in the Centre and invited us in to play football with them. I was highly suspicious. People just don’t turn up out of nowhere and ask you to play football, do they?

‘Why don’t you just shut up going on about God, Mate?’ ‘Because he wants to have a relationship with you.’ ‘You what? A relationship? What you on about, Mate? Are you off your head or what?’ ‘God loves you, Mez.’ ‘Well that’s a real comfort when I’m sleeping on my floor tonight. If God loves me, Mate, then why does my life suck?’ ‘Because of your sin.’ ‘Tell you what, why don’t you and I go outside and we’ll see if your mighty God can stop me kicking your backside. How about that, God freak?’ I had another panic attack today. That’s the third one this week. I can’t seem to control them. Sometimes my chest tightens up and I get pains in my arms and can’t breathe. I curl up into a ball and pray that it will go away. God, please help me!

Sometimes I’m nearly convinced by these guys. I mean, they are so into it. They are so excited about it all. I have nothing in my life that gets me that excited. I have nothing in my life, full stop.

(In prison)

‘Oi, Mate. You serving on D-wing tonight?’ ‘Yeh.’ ‘Will you give this to Johnno for me?’ It’s a little plastic envelope full of smack. Everyone knows Johnno. He’s doing life for killing his wife’s boyfriend. I pass it on and make two new friends. That’s the way it works. I could charge, but I decide that I need friends more than I need snout. That’s how it goes. Tobacco, letters, phone cards, drugs, they all get passed on from wing to wing. A favour here, a favour there. Building up friends in case of emergency.

‘Quick, before a screw comes!’ One by one we pour our slop buckets under the gap of the cell door. There are about a dozen buckets in all. ‘Who’s this one?’ ‘A priest, I think. He nonced a nine month old baby.’ Another nonce got it this morning. Someone stabbed him in the buttocks. Apparently he squealed like a baby. Why do I do these things? Where’s the justice in this world? How can one man get nine months for noncing a kid and another get three years for stealing a car? Sort that one out, God. Sometimes I think about God and all that stuff when I’m alone in my cell, but the noise of life just seems to block it all out. Some lad got raped today on B-wing. He was a first timer like me. We were on total shut-down until the busies arrived and sorted it out. Freaks me out thinking about it.

I got a letter this morning from one of those Christians. They want to know if they can come and see me. Why not? I don’t get that many visitors anyway. Maybe they’ll be good for a bit of snout. I decide to send them a Visiting Order.

LAST WEEK, a 17-year-old girl was admitted to my ward with such acute alcohol poisoning that she could scarcely breathe by her own unaided efforts, alcohol being a respiratory depressant. When finally she woke, 12 hours later, she told me that she had been a heavy drinker since the age of 12. She had abjured alcohol for four months before her admission, she told me, but had just returned to the bottle because of a crisis. Her boyfriend, aged 16, had just been sentenced to three years’ detention for a series of burglaries and assaults. He was what she called her ‘third long-term relationship’ – the first two having lasted four and six weeks, respectively. But after four months of life with the young burglar, the prospect of separation from him was painful enough to drive her back to drink. It happened that I also knew her mother, a chronic alcoholic with a taste for violent boyfriends, the latest of whom had been stabbed in the heart a few weeks before in a pub brawl. The surgeons in my hospital saved his life; and to celebrate his recovery and discharge, he had gone straight to the pub. From there he went home, drunk, and beat up my patient’s mother. My patient was intelligent but badly-educated, as only products of the British educational system can be after eleven years of compulsory school attendance. She thought the Second World War took place in the 1970s and could give me not a single correct historical date. I asked her whether she thought a young and violent burglar would have proved much of a companion. She admitted that he wouldn’t, but said that he was the type she liked; besides which – in slight contradiction – all boys were the same. I warned her as graphically as I could that she was already well down the slippery slope leading to poverty and misery – that, as I knew from the experience of untold patients, she would soon have a succession of possessive, exploitative, and violent boyfriends unless she changed her life. I told her that in the past few days I had seen two women patients who had had their heads rammed down the lavatory, one who had had her head smashed through a window and her throat cut on the shards of glass, one who had had her arm, jaw, and skull broken, and one who had been suspended by her ankles from a tenth-floor window to the tune of, ‘Die, you bitch!’ ‘I can look after myself,’ said my 17-year-old. ‘But men are stronger than women,’ I said. ‘When it comes to violence, they are at an advantage.’ ‘That’s a sexist thing to say,’ she replied. A girl who had absorbed nothing at school had nevertheless absorbed the shibboleths of political correctness in general, and of feminism in particular. ‘But it’s a plain, straightforward, and inescapable fact,’ I said. ‘It’s sexist,’ she reiterated firmly.

 

They came. These people travelled 250 miles to visit me for fifteen minutes. They even brought me a personal stereo so that I could listen to music. I don’t know who’s more freaked out here, them or me? ‘Right, time’s up, McConnell.’ ‘OK, Boss.’ ‘Thanks for coming.’ For the first time since I’d met these people they never once referred to Jesus or God. They talked to me like a real person and not some pet project. For the first time I began to take their message seriously. Maybe there was something to all this Jesus stuff after all. I mean, who would come all that way for a fifteen minute chat with a bloke who does nothing but give them grief ?

The gates swung open and I stepped outside. I had stepped outside many times before on my way to the fields to work. But this time I was not under guard. This time I was a free man. I took a deep breath and waited for the feeling of elation I was told would come. I watched as wives, girlfriends, children and parents met those released with me. But nobody came for me. I was a twenty-two-year-old, drug addicted, ex con with thirty quid in his pocket and a chip on each shoulder. A wave of anger and regret swept over me. Prison had not changed me. I narrowed my eyes in determination and headed for the nearest train station. Once again I found myself alone.

 

The relativism that has ruled the academy for many years has now come to rule the mind of the

population. The British middle class has bought the multiculti cant that, where culture is concerned, there is only difference, not better or worse. As a practical matter, that means that there is nothing to choose between good manners and bad, refinement and crudity, discernment and lack of discernment, subtlety and grossness, charm and boorishness.

The combination of relativism and antipathy to traditional culture has played a large part in creating the underclass, thus turning Britain from a class into a caste society. The poorest people were deprived both of a sense of cultural hierarchy and of the moral imperative to conform their conduct to any standard whatever. Henceforth what they had and what they did was as good as anything, because all cultures and all cultural artifacts are equal. Aspiration was therefore pointless: and thus they have been as immobilised in their poverty – material, mental, and spiritual – as completely as the damned in Dante’s Inferno.

Having in large part created this underclass, the British intelligentsia, guilty about its own allegedly undemocratic antecedents, feels obliged to flatter it by imitation and has persuaded the rest of the middle class to do likewise.

So I think I know what Marx meant when he wrote that religion is the sigh of the oppressed, the heart of a heartless world, the opium of the people. Of course, he misidentified the oppressor: in present-day England it is not the bloated plutocrat; it is your drug-dealing, rock-music-playing, baseball-bat- wielding neighbour. And inside this Pentecostal church the pastor addresses a large congregation that knows only too well what it is to live in the shadow of lawlessness, where psychopathy rules. He quotes the case of a seven-year-old girl, placed on a table in a pub by her mother and sold to the highest bidder to abuse as he liked for the night – a story I should be inclined to dismiss as apocryphal were I not to hear equivalently dreadful tales every day in my hospital.

 

I woke up tonight thinking about Jesus. If what the Bible says is true, then Jesus was innocent and yet he willingly chose to go to the cross in the place of guilty people. I mean, what was that all about? Nobody does stuff for other people without some hidden agenda, right? If God loved him, then why did he let Jesus do that? It just doesn’t add up at the minute. If my old man gave me up to die, I don’t think we’d be staying the best of mates! ‘Mez, have you thought any more about eternity, about the gospel?’ ‘Nah.’ ‘Why not?’ ‘It does my head in.’ I can’t sleep. I can’t think. I can’t even have a fag in peace. I just feel hyper all the time. Jittery. Nervous. I don’t know what I feel anymore. I just can’t seem to focus on anything other than Jesus. He’s just in my head constantly, mocking me with his sinlessness and his death and resurrection. I need to go for a walk.

 

I was sitting on a park bench when it happened. It was the 3rd of May 1995. I remembered that I hadn’t had a fag for three days and my head was well and truly mashed. I just sat looking at a flower. A simple daisy it was. I suddenly realised that this flower didn’t get here by accident. It wasn’t the result of some cosmic explosion millions of years ago. It was created; it was quite clearly designed and perfect in every way. God was a reality that I had to face. Jesus has left me nowhere to run. I’ve been busted. I can’t hide behind my background, my life and my childhood anymore. I can’t excuse my behaviour, my feelings and my problems. I have to face the fact that I am a sinner. I have to take responsibility for my own actions. But I don’t want to. Everything within me is trying to fight, to escape these truths. I feel like I’m drowning. I can’t get my guilt out of my mind. But I’m scared that I’ll have to give up all my hate when I want to keep it with me. I’m scared that I’ll have to forgive those who don’t deserve it. I’m scared that my life won’t be my own anymore. I’m afraid of everything I’ll have to give up. I want to be in control. In control! That’s a joke! Is my life my own anyway? What would I have to give up? My misery, anguish, despair? I would be glad to get rid of them.

 

Every few months, doctors from countries like the Philippines and India arrive fresh from the airport to work for a year’s stint at my hospital. It is fascinating to observe their evolving response to British squalor. At the start they are uniformly enthusiastic about the care that we unsparingly and unhesitatingly give to everyone, regardless of economic status. They themselves come from cities – Manila, Bombay, Madras – where many of the cases we see in our hospital would simply be left to die, often without succour of any kind. And they are impressed that our care extends beyond the merely medical: that no one goes without food or clothing or shelter, or even entertainment. There seems to be a public agency to deal with every conceivable problem. For a couple of weeks they think this all represents the acme of civilisation, especially when they recall the horrors at home. Poverty – as they know it – has been abolished. Before very long, though, they start to feel a vague unease. A Filipina doctor, for example, asked me why so few people seemed grateful for what was done for them. What prompted her question was an addict who, having collapsed from an accidental overdose of heroin, was brought to our hospital. He required intensive care to revive him, with doctors and nurses tending him all night. His first words to the doctor when he suddenly regained consciousness were, ‘Get me a fucking roll-up.’ His imperious rudeness didn’t arise from mere confusion: he continued to treat the staff as if they had kidnapped him and held him in the hospital against his will to perform experiments upon him. ‘Get me the fuck out of here!’ There was no acknowledgment of what had been done for him, let alone gratitude for it. If he considered that he had received any benefit from his stay, well, it was simply his due. My doctors from Bombay, Madras, or Manila observe this kind of conduct open-mouthed. At first they assume that the cases they see are a statistical quirk, a kind of sampling error, and that, given time, they will encounter a better, more representative cross section of the population. Gradually, however, it dawns upon them that what they have seen is representative. When every benefit received is a right, there is no place for good manners, let alone for gratitude. Case after case causes them to revise their initial favourable opinion. Before long they have had experience of hundreds, and their view has changed entirely.

I said the Sinner’s Prayer about a dozen times again today. I don’t want to tell anyone about it because I would feel like a right muppet if I told people and then God didn’t let me in the club. This is getting out of hand. I’ve prayed about ten times today and yesterday and the day before that. I need to talk to someone who knows God a bit better than me, someone who’s got one of those relationships they keep going on about.

‘You sure it’s OK to pray in a car, Dave? I mean, I never heard of people praying in cars before.’ ‘It’s fine, Mez. If you’re a Christian, you have access to God twenty four hours a day, and you can reach him anywhere.’ ‘Man, how mad is that?’ ‘But what about the peace, Dave?’ ‘What peace?’ ‘The one that passes all understanding. I can’t sleep at night so maybe God hasn’t accepted me yet. Maybe I’m on the waiting list or something.’ ‘Mez, if you have truly repented of your sins and put your faith and trust in Jesus, then you have made your peace with God. It doesn’t make any difference whether you sleep well or not.’ ‘Serious? Nice one! How about one last prayer, Dave, just to make sure?’

I realised today that, for the first time in years, I don’t feel black inside anymore. I actually feel quite hopeful, purposeful even. For the first time in my life I actually feel at peace with the world. Church still freaks me out. Half the time I don’t know what’s being said, and those songs they sing! Some of the words are just beyond me. Man, what are this lot on! I feel like I’m going to a funeral every week.

I’ve started meeting up with this bloke from the church. His name is Mark and he knows everything about the Bible. It’s called a discipleship class. Haven’t got a clue what a disciple is? It’s just another one of those freaky words they seem to use? I think this lot speak some sort of secret language that nobody else understands. I tell you what, they ought to give you a dictionary of freaky sayings when you become a Christian. Man, I love my discipleship class. I get to learn about God and how he created the world and everybody in it, and I also get to ask every question I can think of. It’s much better than that church lark. You’re not allowed to ask questions there. You’ve just got to sit while some bloke goes on for forty minutes. I’m lucky if I understand ten minutes of it.

 

What had she known of this man before she took up with him? She met him in a club; he moved in at once, because he had nowhere else to stay. He had a child by another woman, neither of whom he supported. He had been in prison for burglary. He took drugs. He had never worked, except for cash on the side. Of course he never gave her any of his money, instead running up her telephone bills vertiginously. She had never married but had two other children. The first, a daughter aged eight, still lived with her. The father was a man whom she left because she found he was having sex with 12-year-old girls. Her second child was a son, whose father was ‘an idiot’ with whom she had slept one night. That child, now six, lived with the ‘idiot,’ and she never saw him. What had her experience taught her? ‘I don’t want to think about it. The Housing’ll charge me for the damage, and I ain’t got the money. I’m depressed, doctor; I’m not happy. I want to move, to get away from him.’ Later in the day, feeling a little lonely, she telephoned her ex-boyfriend, and he visited her.

I discussed the case with the doctor who had recently arrived from Madras and who felt he had entered an insane world. Not in his wildest dreams had he imagined it could be like this. There was nothing to compare with it in Madras.

I asked the doctor from Madras if poverty was the word he would use to describe this woman’s situation. He said it was not: that her problem was that she accepted no limits to her own behaviour, that she did not fear the possibility of hunger, the condemnation of her own parents or neighbours, or God. In other words, the squalor of England was not economic but spiritual, moral, and cultural.

By the end of three months my doctors have, without exception, reversed their original opinion that the welfare state, as exemplified by England, represents the acme of civilisation. On the contrary, they see it now as creating a miasma of subsidised apathy that blights the lives of its supposed beneficiaries. They come to realise that a system of welfare that makes no moral judgments in allocating economic rewards promotes anti-social egotism. The spiritual impoverishment of the population seems to them worse than anything they have ever known in their own countries. And what they see is all the worse, of course, because it should be so much better. The wealth that enables everyone effortlessly to have enough food should be liberating, not imprisoning. Instead it has created a large caste of people for whom life is, in effect, a limbo in which they have nothing to hope for and nothing to fear, nothing to gain and nothing to lose. It is a life emptied of meaning. ‘On the whole,’ said one Filipino doctor to me, ‘life is preferable in the slums of Manila.’ He said it without any illusions as to the quality of life in Manila.

I’m glad that my faith doesn’t rest on how I feel. Most of the time I don’t feel particularly great at all, but I know that at any time I can turn to God in his Word and he’ll be there. He’s my Constant, the anchor in my life when I’m feeling adrift. I’m not one for all this emotional stuff, but I know deep down, in my own way, I love God and I love his Word. His love for me will never change. That’s much more certain than my fragile emotional state. If I’ve learned one thing this year it’s that the Bible stands above all our spiritual experiences and us. It’s the final arbiter in all things. It’s flawless and completely trustworthy on all things. The more I understand and trust the Bible the stronger I feel my faith becomes. I don’t feel so antagonistic toward people these days. I don’t much like them, but at least I’m willing to talk to them – even those I consider to be muppets. It’s an improvement, I suppose. I’ve got to learn to love these people. God loves me and all my (many) faults. Still, I find it so hard. Sometimes I wake up at night and pray that God will just take my anger from me. But then the next day somebody annoys me and I have to start again.

I look at my wife, my girls, my life and I see the power of the gospel. The true power, not just the intellectual proposition that says unless you repent and believe you will perish for all eternity. The glorious gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ is so much bigger than anything we could ever imagine. The greatest sermon that I ever heard was in a prison visiting room when two men walked in, looked me straight in the eyes and said, ‘How are you, Mez?’ If I’m honest, that was the moment when I realised the gospel was true. Hell held no fear for me at that time. I needed hope; I needed the promise of, not only peace with God, but also peace of mind. I needed a reason to go on, a reason to exist. And I needed to connect with the human race once again. Jesus Christ has not only freed me from my sin, he has not only reconciled me to God, but he has changed my future and the future of my offspring for generations to come. He has broken the chains that bound me from birth. The cycle of pain and misery will stop with me. My children will never know what it is to be beaten at home. They will never know what it is to be abused physically and mentally by those who are meant to care for them.

Jesus was right when he said that the cost would be high if we follow him. I’ve seen many friends fall by the wayside in the years since Bible College. I’ve seen many people start on the Christian road only to stumble and disappear from sight. But I’ve clung to the cross, sometimes by my fingernails, and God has helped me to persevere through difficult times. I want to say that I‘ve forgiven everybody in my life, but I’m not sure if that would be honest. However, I’m no longer consumed by hate. I’m consumed by serving my Lord and Saviour. I’m consumed with Jesus Christ. I don’t skip down the road every morning whistling a tune whilst the birds sing in the trees because that’s not real life. But I will not let the past dominate my life and influence my future any more. The Bible says that ‘the old has gone’ and it truly has. I’m not a recovering drug addict; I’m not a recovering anything. I’m a new creation and all because of the power of God.

Product Details

Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Makes the Underclass by Theodore Dalrymple

 

Product Details

Is There Anybody Out There?: A Journey from Despair to Hope by Mez McConnell and Irene Howat

Mez McConnell’s ministry website - http://www.20schemes.com/