Thursday, April 29, 2010

Christainity, Islam, Homosexuality, & Britain's Socialist State

I have addressed the left's two century old war on Christianity at some length here, pointing out that the left wants to rip Christianity from the foundations of society. In its stead, the left seeks to redefine morality based on whatever they believe is the greater good. We see this at work on both sides of the pond, with the most recent example coming from Britain - a Christian nation with a national Church - in a recent court case:

A judge today threw out a Christian counsellor's claim he had been wrongly sacked for refusing to give sex therapy to homosexual couples.

In a ruling which will further inflame fraught relations between the Church and the judiciary, Lord Justice Laws said that the protection of views purely on religious grounds cannot be justified.

He said it was not only an irrational idea, 'but it is also divisive, capricious and arbitrary'.

The case was brought by father-of-two Gary McFarlane, a former Relate counsellor, and backed by the former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey.

Mr McFarlane, 48, from Bristol, had worked at the Avon branch of Relate where he had offered advice on sexual intimacy to straight couples.

But during his three years at the centre, he refused to work with same-sex partners because he believed it went against his religious beliefs.

This eventually led to him being sacked in 2008. Mr McFarlane later alleged unfair dismissal on the grounds of religious discrimination.

But a tribunal dismissed his claims in January last year. He had gone to the High Court to seek leave to appeal the decision.

In a ruling issued today, Lord Justice Laws, threw out his case.

He said 'We do not live in a society where all the people share uniform religious beliefs.

The 2001 British census showed the populace of Britain to be Christian - 71.6%, Muslim - 2.7%, Hindu - 1%, other - 1.6%, and unspecified or none - 23.1%. This is a judge imposing multiculturalism and socialist ethos on a predominantly Christian nation - and a nation where the Judeo-Christian ethic has undergirded its legal system for well over a millennium.

'The precepts of any one religion - any belief system - cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of any other.

'If they did, those out in the cold would be less than citizens, and our constitution would be on the way to a theocracy, which is of necessity autocratic.

This is fatuous reasoning indeed. Leaving aside the fact that Britain is still a Christian nation, whose belief system is the judge imposing? Obviously he is imposing some belief system, he is just not being honest about it. And indeed, he is imposing the belief system of the secular left - something which history has shown to have a tendency towards the most autocratic of systems.

'The law of a theocracy is dictated without option to the people, not made by their judges and governments.

'The individual conscience is free to accept such dictated law, but the State, if its people are to be free, has the burdensome duty of thinking for itself.' . . .

A theocracy? I would expect a more sophistated argument from a high school student.

So according to this radical secularist, any laws which are undergirded by the Judeo-Christian ethic make of Britain a theocracy? That is utterly ludicrous. Britain, like all of Western civilization, has had laws based on the Judeo-Christian ethic for well over a millennium, yet no one with even the slightest passing acquaintance with British history could ever have called it a theocracy. One wonders if this judge has any idea what a theocracy is? Or did he learn his history reading Marx?

Actually what the judge is doing is the opposite of respect for conscience. Regardless of what one may think of homosexuality today, the reality is that it has been deemed a wrong for millennia in both Judaism and Christianity. Whether and to what extent it should be accepted in society today is a question of social policy to be decided by the community at large. But that is not what is happening here. The Judge, by his decision, is enforcing a modern secular belief system - the conscience of left wing socialist state - favoring homosexuals over the left's nemesis, Christianity, and making it a modern secular sin to do anything but fully accept homosexuality as a normal life-choice.

And do note, while the secular left is conducting its war against Christianity, it is wholly servile when it comes to Islam. While a Christian acting in accord with his conscience and belief is punished, Muslims are accommodated. For example, Muslim female hospital employees are allowed to wear long sleeves in hospitals despite the fact that such is much more likely to transmit "superbugs." All Brits in the UK are now paying welfare benefits for Muslims in polygamous marriages. And these are only a few of the many accommodations made to Muslims. The secular left favors Islam because, for now, it is an ally in the left's war on Christianity.

1 comment:

OBloodyHell said...

> said that the protection of views purely on religious grounds cannot be justified.


Isn't this the nation where they banned someone from having a "pig mug" because some asswipe Muslim was "offended" by it? Oh, yeah.