Christian Persecution in "Free" Countries

[harth1026]

I read this this morning and thought you guys should know...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522637,00.html

[cslewislover]

That's crazy. The USA is going to start to be covered in International Christian Concern and Voice of the Martyrs.

[jlay]

Friends, this is a blessing.

No one persecutes the fake church. This means "the church" is alive and well in San Diego.

[cslewislover]

San Diego County officials backed down already. As the linked article says, we have religious freedom here as well as freedom to assemble. The code enforcement officers must've been bored. I didn't purposely find a "right-wing" article; it was the first one I found: http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=4015

[Imperial]

ok now this is just ridiculous >_> i may not believe everything in christianity, but i don't think innocent people like that should be kept from studying what they believe. Unless they were doing somthing generally bad and actually against the law.

[ageofknowledge]

ok now this is just ridiculous >_> i may not believe everything in christianity, but i don't think innocent people like that should be kept from studying what they believe. Unless they were doing somthing generally bad and actually against the law.

Exactly Imperial. Forcing Christians into a box where they are only allowed to meet the felt needs of people is tyranny plain and simple. How would you like it if we forced you into a box where you couldn't share your beliefs and understanding with others?

You're right to see this for what it is. You should have the right to express your opinion in a public forum same as me. In my understanding (which you can disagree with if you like), God GAVE you the right to choose an opinion whether or not you decide rightly or wrongly.

The law should be for behavior. If you engage in an illegal behavior... This speech and thought crime approach is way way out of line for a free society.

[PropUSN]

You've got to be kidding me!!!! What's this country coming to???? First our moronic president Obooboo says that this is NOT a Christian nation. Now we can't have a few friends over in San Diego county to have a friendly Bible study??? The USA and I think the entire world is on the brink of obliteration if this keeps up. They want 'God' off of our money, schools don't say a prayer or the national anthem anymore, they want to remove 'God' from the Pledge of Allegiance!!! I bet the ACLU has something to do with this too. SHAME ON YOU CALIFORNIA!!!! Lord... I think it's time.

[ageofknowledge]

Easy. That was all resolved quickly in the Christians favor with apologies made. An overly aggressive bureacrat was told not to do that anymore or he would be disciplined.

[N4SC]

You've got to be kidding me!!!! What's this country coming to???? First our moronic president Obooboo says that this is NOT a Christian nation. Now we can't have a few friends over in San Diego county to have a friendly Bible study??? The USA and I think the entire world is on the brink of obliteration if this keeps up. They want 'God' off of our money, schools don't say a prayer or the national anthem anymore, they want to remove 'God' from the Pledge of Allegiance!!! I bet the ACLU has something to do with this too. SHAME ON YOU CALIFORNIA!!!! Lord... I think it's time.

Our moronic president is right, this is not a Christian nation, as we can plainly see by walking outside and looking in any direction. This was bound to happen eventually, because (contrary to evolutionary theory) things and people don't get better over time, they get worse. Especially so when they create for themselves a set of so-called morals which they are free to edit and distort however they please.

[cslewislover]

This is not the first example I've heard of persecution of Christian witness in England, but this has gone to trial:

http://www.tangle.com/view_video?viewke ... d98ef85771

Also, concerning the UN's Defamation of Religions Resolution: http://www.christianexaminer.com/Articl ... 09_07.html

There's also an article about that here, but you may have to sign up to see the whole thing: http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/16051 "Code words: Some call a U.S.- and Egyptian-backed resolution against incitement to religious hatred a wolf in sheep's clothing"

[ageofknowledge]

Don't Forget To Sign The Petition:

http://members.opendoorsusa.org/site/Pa ... ee2Believe

[cslewislover]

Here is some interesting new news! This is taken from SIFYnews http://sify.com/news/over-100-groups-pr ... fgiff.html

Over 100 groups protest UN debate on 'defamation of religion'
2009-11-13 01:30:00

More than 100 non-governmental organisations Thursday protested attempts by some governments to push through a UN resolution to save religion from defamation.

Those NGOs said such a move, if it leads to a binding UN resolution, could give states more reasons to adopt new domestic laws clamping down on human rights and freedom of expression.

The UN General Assembly's human rights committee was considering a draft resolution put forward by Syria, Venezuela and Belarus asking the UN to oppose the 'negative stereotyping of religions'.

The draft raises 'deep concern' that racial and religious profiling have continued against certain groups of people and that Muslim minorities remain the target of attacks following the Sep 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the US.

The draft calls on the UN to oppose 'manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religions or belief still evident in the world'.

It would condemn 'all acts of psychological and physical violence and assaults' on people on the basis of their religion or belief.

NGOs from 20 countries joined the protest, including Freedom House, the Centre for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, the Anti-Defamation League, UN Watch and the American Jewish Congress.

They said the UN was trying to create a new legal mechanism to fight 'incitement to racial and religious hatred' and was making the mechanism binding on states.

Freedom House said such a resolution is 'incompatible with the fundamental freedoms of individuals to freely exercise and peacefully express their thoughts, ideas and beliefs'.

Freedom House and the NGOs that signed the petition against the UN debate warned that governments could use the UN resolution to make domestic laws against blasphemy and to punish peaceful expression against political and religious beliefs and ideas.

The NGOs said existing international legal instruments already deal with problems arising from discrimination, personal defamation and incitement in ways that do not violate freedom of expression and of religion.

'It is vitally important for governments to combat violence motivated by bias and hatred and to encourage respectful speech and civil dialogue, while at the same time affirming that freedoms of expression and freedom of thought, conscience and religion, are integral to the health of free societies and the dignity of the human person,' the NGOs said.

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom in Washington called the UN debate a dangerous idea of protecting religions from defamation.

It said the Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC) has been pushing through the UN system 'the problematic idea' of new legislation against 'defamation of religion'. It warned it could provide justification for governments to restrict freedoms of religion and expression.

Hillel Heuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights group, said the draft is 'the latest salvo in a pervasive campaign waged by Islamic states at the UN to declare that the primary victim of the Sep 11, 2001 terrorist attacks was Islam'.

'In fact, the victims were some 3,000 Americans and others, and those who perpetrated the mass murder acted in the name of a radical Islamist ideology,' Neuer said in a statement.

[cslewislover]

Another good article, and it's short! From http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/pu ... detail.asp


November 5, 2009
UN's 'Defamation of Religions' Resolution Goes Against Free Speech and Human Rights
The Editors

The UN is poised to consider passing a resolution called “Combating the Defamation of Religions.” Backed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the resolution was first introduced in 1999 as a resolution to combat the “Defamation of Islam.” In 2008, the language of the resolution was expanded to include other religions, including Christianity and Judaism.

Although not binding in its current form, it urges UN member states to adopt laws prohibiting the “defamation of religion.” Such language is murky, since “defamation” could range from something as heinous of the firebombing of a religious structure to simply satirizing a religious figure or practice. Considering the fact that the effort gained traction in the General Assembly since the now-infamous Mohammed cartoon debacle in Denmark, one might wonder exactly how seriously different nations — and religions — would take the resolution.

Even more disturbing is the idea that there is a movement outside of the General Assembly, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, which would incorporate similar measures against the “defamation of religions” into international treaties, which would then grant legal force to the resolution as a part of international law.

This is not only a violation of the tenets of free speech, but also a potential breach of sovereignty.

The Center for Inquiry, a secularist think tank and NGO, has delivered a statement which strongly opposes this resolution, which is expected to be considered by the UN's Third Committee in the coming days.

"This misguided resolution would turn human rights law on its head. International law protects individuals, not systems of religious belief," said Derek C. Araujo, general counsel and representative to the United Nations for the Center for Inquiry. "Existing laws and norms already protect religious people as individuals from discrimination and abuse. This resolution serves the interests of those who would violate freedom of belief by stifling religious dissent and criticism."

Araujo says that the resolution would give cover to countries that silence, intimidate, or punish human rights activists, religious minorities, and nonbelievers. "This is a direct threat to the guarantees of freedom of speech and belief found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," added Araujo.

CFI's statement to the UN Third Committee maintains that "it is possible to protect individual religious believers from discrimination without shielding religious belief systems from criticism, and without threatening the rights of religious dissidents, religious minorities, and nonbelievers."

In the interest of achieving this, the Center for Inquiry statement contains the following recommendations:

*Rather than hewing to the misguided and problematic idea of preventing "defamation of religions," draw on the legal concept of "incitement to national, racial and religious hatred, hostility or violence," which is grounded in existing international legal instruments.

*Ensure that any protection of religious believers against incitement must equally protect nonbelievers, who may be the targets of hateful expression on the basis of their disbelief or dissenting belief.

*Stipulate that protections against incitement must not restrict proselytizing, discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse.

CFI's full statement can be read here.

Brought to you by the editors and research staff of FamilySecurityMatters.org.


Here's actually a very good article, and up to date: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115910

[ageofknowledge]

Arrested for sharing the Gospel? An expected outcome in North Korea, China or any Muslim country on the globe. But in Pennsylvania? Yep. Arlene Elshinnawy, a 75-year-old grandmother of three, and Lynda Beckman, a 70-year-old grandmother of 10 (along with nine others), were arrested for sharing their faith on the public sidewalk in Philadelphia, Pa., USA. They faced 47 years (the rest of their lives) in jail for spreading the Gospel because of a Pennsylvania "hate crimes" law that is nearly identical to H.R. 254 — the "hate crimes" bill reintroduced in Congress and said to be on the "fast track" in the House Judiciary Committee. This is the same bill that previously passed both the House and Senate and was killed only because of Republican leadership opposition in conference — something we no longer have.
Don't believe hate crimes will silence your freedom of speech and freedom of religion? Think again.

Pastors in Pennsylvania are now seeking liability insurance to protect themselves from being prosecuted under the "hate speech" law. That's right. They are reacting to Pennsylvania's addition of "sexual orientation" to the state's hate crimes laws. Of particular concern was the expansion of the definition of "harassment" to include "harassment by communication" — which means one could be convicted based upon spoken words alone.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54125

[cslewislover]

This is just really really really scary. It doesn't even seem believable, that anyone, and our govt, could think this way.