Court case won't just look at Mormon polygamists; Muslims under scrunity too - Winnipeg Free Press

 

A court case to determine whether Canada's polygamy laws violate religious protection might have been sparked by a fundamentalist Mormon sect in southeastern British Columbia, but the legal challenge will also examine rarely discussed polygamous practices among North America's Muslims.

Interesting to note that there is wide agreement among experts that women in polygamous marriages “had greater frequency and severity of a variety of psychiatric symptoms, decreased marital satisfaction, and lower self-esteem.” and that “more often than not, the practice is a harmful one.”

As one might expect, and certainly from the records of early Mormon polygamy, it is usually about power and the attitude of men towards their wives in this arrangement is abusive.

Court case won't just look at Mormon polygamists; Muslims under scrunity too - Winnipeg Free Press

Romance Is Not Dead – Quite.

The Song of Songs compares love to “a rose of Sharon, a lily of the valleys. Like a Lily among thorns…”

Shakespeare compares his love to a summer’s day, declaring, “Thou art more more lovely and temperate.”

Robby Burns declares his love to be “like a red, red rose that’s newly sprung in June…like the melody that’s sweetly sung in tune.”

This week Robby Williams married and is reported to have compared his love to “a Swiss Army penknife because she can do everything.”

Its nice to know romance isn’t dead, though troubling to see her lingering on life support.

Ian Huntley’s Occupational Hazard

I admit this story got my hackles up. When you have taken two innocent young girls and murdered them you should count yourself lucky that you are still alive, have a room and a bed and three square meals a day, let alone doctors, psychiatrists, counsellors, recreations…  When even the worse of the criminal classes are so disgusted with what you have done that one of them takes a pop at you, then surely that is an occupational hazard and goes with the territory.

I am no flog ‘em and hang ‘em merchant and I do believe in rehabilitation but I wonder sometimes at the rights the worse of us enjoy that the rest of us can’t have. The one that always gets me is when someone has been prosecuted, tried and judged guilty of some terrible crime but fails to appear in court for sentencing. They refuse to come. Refuse to come!? They have forfeited any right to refuse and should be dragged kicking and screaming if necessary to face the full wrath of the society they have offended and should count their blessings that all they must face is the stern verdict of a judge and not the wrath of the mob.

Surely the first step to rehabilitation is facing what you have done. These days, if someone is caught standing over the body, with a gun in one hand, a blade in the other and a bottle of poison in their pocket they plead not guilty and, if found guilty, launch an appeal straight away, demanding a reduced sentence if not acquittal. “Fair cop guv’”? Not a chance these days.

 

BBC News - Soham killer Huntley 'should not sue' over jail attack

Editorial – Kay Parris: Glimpses of metanoia

An excellent and thought-provoking comment by Kay Parris in the new online Reform magazine. Maybe it is the cult of personality that explains how we ended up with this dreadful chimera of a government that my daughter-in-law calls "The ConDemnation."

Editorial – Kay Parris: Glimpses of metanoia

Religious Liberty Monitoring: USA: not immune from Western religious liberty trends

 “The principal religious liberty trend of the multicultural West is that religious liberty is disappearing as the traditionally Judeo-Christian culture's Biblical foundations are being excavated. The excavation is integral to the social engineering/renovation project underway aimed at producing a 'post-Christian' culture. Unfortunately, most Christians do not comprehend the implications of this phenomenal strategic shift, and likely will not until the new social order has been consolidated and direct persecution starts to impact them personally.

Christians in the West are losing the right to criticise non-Christian (minority) religions (particularly Islam) and witness to non-Christians (particularly Muslims). They are also losing the right to conscientiously object to new social norms being imposed upon them essentially at the behest of radical feminist and Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender (GLBT) lobby groups.”

This quote is from an excellent commentary on the threat to religious liberty posed by post-Christian, liberal social norms. The non-thinking nonsense in the two stories illustrating the piece is breathtaking. Its a long blog but, I think, well worth taking time to read.

One of my favourite quotes is from George Orwell who wrote,“Liberty is the right to tell people what they don’t want to hear.”  This , as the blog illustrates, is being taken from us in the truly meaningless name of multiculturalism and tolerance. Some Christians are being taken in by this message, mainly because “tolerance” seems so right somehow, so typical of what Jesus would do. They need to remember that this same Jesus declared, “I am the way and the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me” (Jn. 14:6) Let’s define a couple of terms that are frequently abused today and bring them back to their true and original meaning, the meaning they had before the liberals got hold of them:

TOLERANCE: My dictionary gives the definition of an allowable variation from a standard dimension. In the liberal world there is no standard dimension and every worldview, philosophy and “lifestyle choice” is equally right.  Tolerance, according to my dictionary, means indulgence of beliefs or practices different from one’s own. One who is tolerant is said to be practicing forbearance, to be enduring something. The language of tolerance then is endurance, forbearance, indulgence, allowance. To tolerate something is not to give it approval but to indulge it, to endure it for the greater good. Liberals would have us treat the words “tolerance” and “approval” as synonyms and fiercely condemn anyone who isn’t “tolerant” by this definition.

Democratic principles demand that, while I disagree profoundly with the tenets and practices of Islam, I am willing to endure its presence in a democratic society. I am not, however, bound to like, appreciate or approve of Islam and I am certainly not bound to welcome the  colonisation of Western societies by Muslims with the attendant cultivation of Muslim principles and ideas.

PHOBIA: A phobia is defined as an exaggerated and illogical fear. Common phobias include fear of spiders, the dark, flying, indoors, outdoors etc. It does seem irrational for a grown person to fear a common house spider, or to fear going outdoors, but plenty of people do and many seek help to overcome them. This word has become almost meaningless as people are encouraged to think of those who disagree with them as phobic. The previous paragraph would, in the eyes of many, identify me as “Islamophobic.” I also adhere to the biblical view that homosexual practice is wrong in the eyes of God and this, to many, makes me “Homophobic”.

Of course, the old way of presenting the same idea is by dubbing people “anti” this, that or the other. Critics of Mormonism are dubbed “anti-Mormon”, of the Roman Church as “anti-Catholic” etc. In those days it was easier to see that these tags were often ways of avoiding the issues and dismissing the critic by naming and blaming. In those days fewer people got away with it.

Things have changed however and the liberal lobby has such a grip on society that people indifferent to faith issues don’t just tut in disapproval when they hear people declaring strongly held beliefs contra to the beliefs of others. These days, to hold strong beliefs, no matter how tolerant one is prepared to be towards others, is to risk vilification and possibly prosecution. Because you are allowed to be anything in the brave new world – as long as it is liberal and adheres to the new dictionary definitions prescribed by liberals.

Some Christians fail to see that, while democratic principles, tolerance, liberty and freedom are precious, nevertheless, our first loyalty is to the God of the Bible. I note that many who enjoy this new way of looking at the world move away, very quickly, from Scripture and instead embrace the values of fallen man. If freedom and tolerance mean immorality, compromise, idol worship and worldliness then we had better get back to the true definitions of those terms. More urgently, we had better get back to God’s Word. Click on the link to read the Religious Liberty Monitor review.

Religious Liberty Monitoring: USA: not immune from Western religious liberty trends

Something for the Weekend: Plaid MEP, Jill Evans heralds Historic day for Welsh language in the European Parliament (From Western Telegraph)

The language of heaven is finally accepted in the European Parliament as Plaid Cymru (Party of Wales) MEP Jill Evans delivers a seminar on language policy in her native tongue. Mrs Evans insists that the EU could develop a better relationship with its citizens by using the languages people actually speak.

"Currently Welsh enjoys a semi-official status after a long hard campaign. It is now my goal to use this historic day to push for Welsh to be a fully recognised EU language" she said.

The EU translates documents and speeches into 23 “official languages.” At its inception the official languages of the EU were Dutch, French, German and Italian but as it has grown more languages have been included, such as Danish, English and Irish (added 1973), Greek (1981), Portuguese and Spanish (1986) and Finnish and Swedish (1995).

The first thing that often comes to people’s minds when the subject is raised is the cost and, of course, this has to be a consideration. The argument is often put that most people speak English, certainly everyone in Wales does, so what exactly is the point? The argument is made that if we stick with a few languages that most people speak then why go to such trouble and expense just to please people?

“Just the Facts Ma’am”

This famous line attributed (incorrectly) to Sgt. Joe Friday of the Dragnet police drama perhaps epitomises the spirit of a world that puts a high premium on data,  facts and efficiency, a world imprisoned by literalistic ways of thinking. In such a world the ability to convey “just the facts” seems paramount. But he world is about a lot more than simple facts, and language conveys more than facts, it conveys culture, heritage, custom and creates identity and belonging. As the Welsh anthem has it:

Mae hen wlad fy nhadau yn annwyl i mi,
Gwlad beirdd a chantorion, enwogion o fri;
Ei gwrol ryfelwyr, gwladgarwyr tra mâd,
Dros ryddid collasant eu gwaed.

(Cytgan - Chorus)

Gwlad, gwlad, pleidiol wyf i'm gwlad.

Tra môr yn fur i'r bur hoff bau,

O bydded i'r hen iaith barhau.

Don’t try it at home, you’ll only hurt yourself. The following is one translation of the whole song:

The land of my fathers is dear to me,
Old land where the minstrels are honoured and free;
Its warring defenders so gallant and brave,
For freedom their life's blood they gave.

Home, home, true am I to home,

While seas secure the land so pure,

O may the old language endure.

Old land of the mountains, the Eden of bards,
Each gorge and each valley a loveliness guards;
Through love of my country, charmed voices will be
Its streams, and its rivers, to me.

Though foemen have trampled my land 'neath their feet,
The language of Cambria still knows no retreat;
The muse is not vanquished by traitor's fell hand,
Nor silenced the harp of my land.

Who Are You?

What is the harp, the bard, Eisteddfodau (Welsh cultural festival), valley and mountain, choir and chapel, coal mine and slate quarry, Welsh Rugby, Welsh history and politics to one not Welsh? In the same way, each culture claims its own distinguishing features, its foods and customs, its traditions and festivals, its habits of mind and action and its language in which all these are expressed in a way not entirely possible in translation.

This is important, not just because the culture, heritage and identity of 611,000 Welsh speakers in Wales are represented in the European Parliament but because if we don’t know who we are, don’t have a clear idea of our identity we risk losing it.

Civitas is the Institute for the Study of Civil Society and in a recent report claimed that new hate crime legislation is preventing free speech and singling out alleged crimes by white Christians. A foreword to its report ‘A New Inquisition: religious persecution in Britain today’ argues that prosecutors and police are interpreting laws in favour of ethnic and religious minorities.  The report calls for a public enquiry into whether religion-based groups in the criminal justice system are driving a campaign of bias against the majority population defined as ‘white’ or ‘Christian’.

In a week when the despicable Nick Griffin was barred at the last minute from a Buckingham Palace official party and is making capital of the fact, complaining on the basis that he represents 1million voters in the UK, it is well to remember that if the majority population feels under attack the fault lies as much with ourselves as anyone. If we see richness and colour in others’ cultures but not our own, if we are unsure about our place as a people in the market of world cultures and if we too easily concede to others who have strong cultural identities then it lies with us to stop blaming those others, rediscover who we are and be proud of our heritage and values. Maybe this weekend we could think about who we are and what it really means to us.

BBC News - David Cameron launches Tories' 'big society' plan

 

Speaking to the BBC before the speech, Mr Cameron rejected suggestions that the plans [for a big society]were "cover" for substantial cuts in public services in many areas as the government tries to cut the deficit.

"It is not a cover for anything," he told BBC One's Breakfast. "This would be a great agenda whether we were having to cut public spending or whether we were increasing public spending.

"This is not about trying to save money, it is about trying to have a bigger, better society."

Margaret Thatcher told us that there is no such thing as society, meaning of course that there is no autonomous entity called society to catch you if you fall and we all have to take responsibility. Now David Cameron tells us that there is little else but society, meaning – well the same thing really.  They are two sides of the same coin.

It was worrying to hear him tell Phil Redmond that he got his “Big Society” idea from watching Grange Hill. What I want to know is, if we are all going to take more responsibility for things and government is going to do less, will we pay less in taxes, moving the resources as well as the task to the big society, or will we pay the same or more in taxes leaving the weak to go to the wall – Social Darwinism which has always been a key Tory philosophy?

BBC News - David Cameron launches Tories' 'big society' plan