Paraguayan government bans gender ideology in schools

“I kept my position because of my convictions, not for my convenience”,

(Evangelical Focus)  The Ministry of Education and Science of Paraguay has issued a resolution prohibiting “the dissemination and use of materials” referring to “gender ideology” in public and charter schools.

The Education Minister, Enrique Riera, presented this resolution in Asuncion, during the General Assembly of the Latin Evangelical Alliance (AEL in Spanish), on 18 October.

“We are not going to teach gender ideology in the school, but we are not going to discriminate anyone either,” explained Riera.  The Ministry of Education and Science of Paraguay has issued a resolution prohibiting “the dissemination and use of materials” referring to “gender ideology” in public and charter schools. The Education Minister, Enrique Riera, presented this resolution in Asuncion, during the General Assembly of the Latin Evangelical Alliance (AEL in Spanish), on 18 October.   “WE ARE NOT GOING TO TEACH GENDER IDEOLOGY AT SCHOOLS” “We are not going to teach gender ideology in the school, but we are not going to discriminate anyone either”, explained Riera. He acknowledged that he found a strong internal opposition to his idea of applying the national Constitution, which advocates for the marriage between a man and woman. Riera received a lot of pressure from both the Ministry and the international community. “I kept my position because of my convictions, not for my convenience”, he explained. The minister emphasized the importance of parents as the ones who educate in values inside the family. At the end of his presentation, interrupted with frequent applause, participants in the assembly prayed for Minister Riera, political leaders and the country of Paraguay.   STATE AND CHARTER SCHOOLS The prohibition affects both public and charter educational institutions, which will not be able to use in their classrooms any kind of resource, whether printed or digital, that refers to gender ideology.

“The Ministry is not going to promote gender ideology or any other kind of ideology”, Riera said. And he added: “We respect diversity, but that does not mean instilling gender ideology, which, as everyone knows, is a controversial topic throughout the world. As Paraguayans the idea is clear: dad, mom, children. There is no easier way to say it”

 REVIEWING THE EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM The resolution prohibiting the use of materials on gender ideology also entrusts the Curriculum, Evaluation and Guidance General Board to review the educational content and issue a report within 60 days, with proposals which follow the “constitutional principles and the current legislation”. In addition, the educational coordinators and supervisors will be responsible for ensuring compliance with this law, the resolution says.   PARAGUAYAN CHRISTIANS ASK FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF GENDER IDEOLOGY This measure responds to the controversy that arose a few weeks ago about the alleged use of materials on gender ideology in the country’s schools. Both evangelical and the Catholic churches of the country demanded the withdrawal of such materials. Hundreds of people took part in a demonstration in front of the Paraguayan Congress several days ago, to demand a public education based on the traditional family values, included in the Paraguayan Constitution.  The main claim focused on maintaining the concept of gender ideology outside the educational materials of Paraguayan public education, since they do not want concepts such as homosexuality or bisexuality to be taught in school.

Mom Who Beat Daughter for Not Reciting Bible Verses Correctly Sent to Prison

Each time the teenager gave an answer Shoffner did not find acceptable she slammed her daughter’s head into bathroom drywall.

A mother who allegedly assaulted her 13-year-old daughter after she failed to correctly recite Bible verses earlier this year was sentenced to two-and-a-half to five years in state prison Wednesday after she pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, strangulation, terroristic threats and endangering the welfare of a child.

The mother, Rhonda Shoffner, 41, of Middletown, Pennsylvania, was sentenced by Dauphin County Judge John F. Cherry, Penn Live reported.

“This was an extremely scary situation for this young victim to have to endure. Fortunately, she is doing well now and is in a safe place,” Chief Deputy District Attorney Sean McCormack said Thursday.

According to Penn Live, Shoffner was reportedly drunk for three days straight when the assault took place in March. Police said Shoffner told her daughter to call several family members and when none of them responded, she forced her daughter to get on her knees in the bathroom of their home.

The daughter said this was a sign that her mother was getting ready to beat her so she began pleading with her mother to spare her the abuse.

“Please don’t hit me. I don’t want to get on my knees,” police said the victim told her mother.

An angry Shoffner demanded that the 13-year-old “get on her (expletive) knees,” police said.

After the girl complied, Shoffner started reciting Bible verses which she expected her daughter to repeat verbatim as well.

“What did God tell the man to do with his son?” she asked the teenager.  

When her daughter could not respond police say Shoffner told her: “God told the man to kill his son.”

When the teenager told her mother that “God said to forgive his son,” Shoffner grabbed her by the hair and slammed her head into a wall.

Each time the teenager gave an answer Shoffner did not find acceptable she slammed her daughter’s head into bathroom drywall. She did this at least five times, police say, even as her daughter begged her to stop.

Shoffner then told her daughter to lie on her back and the girl complied, she began to strangle her, declaring: “I’m gonna kill you (expletive),” police said.

It was at this point that the teenager, afraid she might die, began fighting her mother. Shoffner responded by biting her daughter’s left forearm and sinking her teeth into her left shoulder.

The teenager kept fighting until the frustrated mother told her “just leave and don’t ever come back.”

She grabbed a coat, a pair of sneakers and her phone and fled. She was then met by her father who took her to the police who later charged Shoffner. 

 Rhonda Shofner

As part of her sentence, Shoffner was also ordered to undergo alcohol and drug counseling and to remain drug and alcohol free, the Press and Journal said. She will also be subjected to random drug and alcohol testing upon her release from prison.

In January, Shoffner also pleaded guilty to a simple assault charge stemming from a second assault incident. Shoffner assaulted a woman during an argument in a car. She hit the woman and bit her during that assault, the Press and Journal said.

written by  Leonardo Blair 


Planned Parenthood vs. Little Girls: Sex-Selective Abortion in America

“Modern abortions politics has done strange things to our culture.” Those who claim to be advocates for women turn a blind eye to the single greatest form of discrimination against them.

The worst form of discrimination against women in our time is one that is virtually ignored by feminists.

The abortion industry has long billed itself as a champion of women’s rights. Almost thirty years ago, the head of the National Abortion Rights Action League, or NARAL, told the New York Times that “Abortion is the guarantor of a woman’s right to participate fully in the social and political life of society.”

But as Cathy Ruse pointed out recently at the Daily Signal, abortion is being used right now to keep millions of women from participating in life, at all.

By some estimates, there are as many as 160 million girls and women missing worldwide because of sex-selective abortion. Modern technology that allows parents to find out before birth whether they’re having a boy or girl, coupled with traditional cultural preferences for boys, results in nothing less than “gendercide”—the systematic killing of female babies over males. And it’s not just happening overseas.

Newsweek reported last year that sex-selective abortions are on the rise right here in the U. S. One study by Columbia University found that Chinese, Korean and Indian parents on their second pregnancy gave birth to 117 boys for every 100 girls. For third children, the ratio shot up to a staggering 151 boys for every 100 girls.  

The culprit, says Newsweek, is sex-selective abortion. So-called “family planning” clinics like those affiliated with Planned Parenthood are helping women kill their unborn daughters. You’d think organizations that pride themselves on protecting and empowering women would want this to stop, but you’d be wrong.

Last year, after the state of Indiana passed a law banning sex-selective abortion, a federal district judge granted a permanent injunction against the law at the request of—you guessed it—Planned Parenthood. In the name of ending discrimination against women, this abortion giant is literally making sure fewer women exist.

This is beyond perverse.

Even worse, pro-choice and feminist support for gendercide remains virtually unflinching. Back in March, when Arkansas enacted a ban on sex-selective abortions, the American Civil Liberties Union complained that the law prevents women from “obtaining abortions that they want for whatever reason,” even, apparently, if that reason is preferring boys over girls.

As Ruse remarks, “Modern abortions politics has done strange things to our culture.” Those who claim to be advocates for women turn a blind eye to the single greatest form of discrimination against them.

Now occasionally, a pro-choice feminist will let slip how he or she really feels about gendercide. That’s what happened back in 2011 when Pulitzer finalist Mara Hvistendahl published a book called “Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men.” In it, she decries systematic discrimination against female fetuses, but comes up short of blaming the real culprit: abortion.

Reviewing the book in The New York Times, Ross Douthat observed that the problem of gendercide puts pro-choicers in a “distinctly uncomfortable position.” They insist “that the unborn aren’t human beings yet, and that the right to abortion is nearly absolute.” But this leaves them “struggling to define a victim for the crime [they’ve] uncovered.”

As pro-lifers, we need to continually point out this glaring inconsistency in the pro-choice worldview. To anyone not sold out to abortion-on-demand, it’s obvious that the sex of a baby is not a legitimate reason to kill her.

Of course, there’s never a legitimate reason to deliberately kill a baby—in the womb or out. But the 160 million missing girls worldwide should convince many that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry—far from empowering women—have become the greatest perpetrators of their extermination.

Written by By John Stonestreet

Christian Magistrate Fired for Views on Gay Adoption Loses Court Appeal

 Former Magistrate Richard Page

A Christian magistrate who was fired from his job after he voiced belief that adopted children are better off with hetrosexual couples instead of same-sex couples has lost a court appeal against his former employer.

An employment tribunal in the United Kingdom has ruled that the Kent and Medway National Health Service Trust was justified for refusing to reinstate Richard Page, a 71-year-old non-executive director, after he was suspended for suggesting on national television that children do best when placed with a mom and dad rather than when they are adopted by a same-sex couple.  

The U.K. Christian news outlet Premier reports that Page worked for the NHS for two decades but that all changed after the Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust (KMPT) requested that the NHS Trust Development Authority suspend Page over comments made on BBC defending his views on parenting.

Page was accused of being “biased and prejudiced against single sex adopters.” 

The U.K. Christian news outlet Premier reports that Page worked for the NHS for two decades but that all changed after the Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust (KMPT) requested that the NHS Trust Development Authority suspend Page over comments made on BBC defending his views on parenting.

Page was accused of being “biased and prejudiced against single sex adopters.”   

According to the news outlet, a three-judge panel at the Croydon Employment Tribunal ruled that Page was removed from his position because he participated in television media appearances to defend his views on parenting. The panel maintained that Page was not removed because of his beliefs on adoption.

“I am very disappointed by this outcome but I am determined to appeal,” Page told Premier. “This case is much bigger than me now; it is about how ordinary folk, just like me, are becoming increasingly fearful to speak out against the homosexual agenda.”

Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which advocates for Page, said the ruling “makes a mockery of the freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and the rule of law.”

“There is no real difference between suppressing dissent and suppressing an expression of dissent. To split hairs in this way makes no sense,” Williams said in a released statement.

“Judgments like this do enormous damage to people’s confidence in the administration of justice.”

As previously reported, Page worked for the courts at Maidstone and Sevenoaks for over 15 years and worked at the NHS Trust for nearly 20.

“My responsibility as a magistrate, as I saw it, was to do what I considered best for 

the child, and my feeling was therefore that it would be better if it was a man and woman who were the adopted parents,” Page told BBC in 2015.

He stepped down from a full-time role at the trust in 2012 but worked in a part-time non-executive role and was removed in March 2016.

The NHS Trust Development Authority ruled that the media appearance that Page gave last year defending his beliefs on adoption and family life “undermined” the confidence of staff. According to the Daily Mail, Page was suspended after complaints from gay and lesbian staff at the trust.

“Simply for holding a perfectly lawful view, a view that many people would hold up and down the country, this gentleman finds himself removed from public office,” Williams told Premier’s Alex Williams in an interview.

Williams explained how Page found himself in this situation.

“For expressing behind closed doors the view that children do best when raised with a mom and dad, [Page] found himself being reported by fellow magistrates for something he had said in a retiring room, which led to him being removed from the bench of the Family Magistrates Court,” Williams said.

“As a result of that publicity, a complaint came in to the NHS Kent Trust from the LGBT group within the NHS Trust complaining about his presence as a non-executive director in the Kent Trust. As a result of that complaint, he was warned and finally removed from his position as a non-executive director.”

Williams argued that what has happened to Page is equivalent to “bullying” and “harassment.”

“It’s a very chilling case and one that is vital to take further and one that is vital to appeal through the system,” she added.

“The freedom to believe, the freedom to express belief is very important and we as Christian believers have to believe that and we won’t stop until justice is done. If we are not getting justice in court, then what we want to do is reveal. We want to show that this is what is happening in Great Britain today and we are hoping and we are praying that many people will get behind Richard Page and the many others like him who are experiencing similar things.”

Written by By Samuel Smith 

Benny Hinn’s Nephew says that Prosperity Teaching Is ‘Twisted’

“Real pastors and real churches have to stand up and say ‘No, that is not Christianity. That’s not what the Bible teaches.

The nephew of Benny Hinn Costi Hinn, who is a pastor in Southern California criticizes his uncle’s prosperity theology and teaching, explaining how it cost him personally as a member of the Hinn family. The theology his uncle espouses is “twisted,” he said.

In an HLN exclusive interview with Carol Costello, Costi Hinn described growing up in the Hinn family as a hybrid of being a “royal family” (lavish riches) and the “mafia” (strict enforcement of the mafia). 

“You keep to your own, you defend your own. You never, ever, regardless of what the truth might be, do anything to harm or expose at the expense of family. It’s just a tight-knit, tight-lipped community,” Hinn explained.

He recounted that the first time he ever said anything publicly about his family — as people had been asking — he got a phone call from a family member who told him “you need to pipe down, don’t talk about family.”

Hinn further explained that the luxurious way of life that he had was “living the dream,” with flights on a G4 or G5 private gulfstream airliners, layovers in Monte Carlo, and stays in a fancy hotel suites that cost $25,000 per night.

Costello asked Hinn how they justified preaching the message of Jesus, who was not a wealthy man, with such a lavish lifestyle.

The theology they used was “twisted,” he replied.  

Costi Hinn
 Costi Hinn

“If you take the Bible and you take what Jesus taught and you take some of the promises of heaven and the riches of heaven and the wonderful glories of heaven and you make them a now thing, then you really have a model for your best life now.”

“That’s really not the heartbeat of Christianity,” he continued, “the heartbeat of Christianity is, if you have wealth, you want to be generous and rich in good works. If God has blessed you with a lot, you have a great responsibility.”

Conversely, if one is poor, he added, God still loves you and has a purpose for your life, and in your poverty He is still with you; and the hope of Heaven is much greater than worldly riches and temporary earthly pleasures.

The heart of prosperity preaching is a formulaic prescription, that if you do certain things you will become wealthy and that is what God wants, he explained. This approach to Christianity fails poor people in impoverished nations who are doing all the steps to become rich and show up and give the last of their money to prosperity preachers in hopes that they will receive material blessings.  

“You put a guy on a platform in a real nice suit in a very beautiful auditorium and he’ll tell a whole bunch of Americans, ‘if you do this, and do this, and do this, you’ll get this.’ And God is like your magic genie,” Hinn said.

“If you rub Him right and do all the right things, your bank’s going to grow, you’re going to get that promotion, you’re going to get that woman that you want to marry, that perfect man, your life is going to be perfect, because that’s what God wants for you.”

But when that does not happen for people, people get hurt, he said.

“Real pastors and real churches have to stand up and say ‘No, that is not Christianity. That’s not what the Bible teaches.'”

Hinn told Costello he is “disgusted” with his former self, but thankfully the power of the Gospel became real, and the Gospel includes the good news of hope and the bad news of the reality of sin.

“Our job as preachers and pastors is to give the whole story,” Hinn said.

“It’s bad news. I was greedy. I was very ambitious for all the wrong things. We were teaching things that were wrong. We were taking advantage of [people], exploiting the poor, using our greed, squeezing every last dollar out of people so we could live the way they could never,” while using Jesus to do that, he explained.

But the Gospel is also good news, he would come to find out.

“Jesus died to forgive my sins. He loves me just the way I am in all my mess and all my greed. And if I commit to a change He’ll meet me right where I am. And He did. He changed my heart and I just had no taste for it anymore. I did not want that life.”

Benny Hinn is reportedly not happy with him, and their relationship is limited, he said. But he hopes that he gets a call from his uncle one day and will spend the next 10 years of his life showing people what the grace of God really is.

Costi Hinn is now an executive pastor at The Mission Bible Church in Orange County, California.

written by By Brandon Showalter

Christian History ~Part 1

The church NEVER acknowledges the fact that Adolf Hitler was a Christian.

There are Christian sects that have many things in common with the radical Islamic religious groups which can be seen in the writings of the “church fathers” and Christian reformers. This history is by no means hidden although it is very rarely discussed in mainstream Christianity and it’s quite possible that most preachers and teachers of Christianity are unfamiliar with this information because they have absolutely no interest in learning about the history of Christianity. Many Christians are following in the footsteps of those early “church fathers” who hated the Jews and tried to erase even the very memory of them from the earth believing that they could take from the Jews that which was given to them by God.  When I was a child my father taught me things about my forefathers so that I would know where I came from and the church should do the same. Lets read some excerpts from the writings of  Martin Luther and other early church fathers…. 

St. Thomas Aquinas: “It would be licit to hold Jews, because of the crimes, in perpetual servitude, and therefore the princes may regard the possessions of Jews as belonging to the State.” ( Antisemitism in the New testament  written by Shmuel Golding)

St. Augustine:  How hateful to me are the enemies of your Scripture! How I wish that you would slay them (the Jews) with your two-edged sword, so that there should be none to oppose your word! Gladly would I have them die to themselves and live to you! (c. 354-430 A.D.- Confessions, 12.14)
Martin Luther: The Jews were no longer the chosen people, but were “the devil’s people.” They were “base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth.” The synagogue was a “defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut …” and Jews were full of the “devil’s feces
“What then shall we Christians do with this damned, rejected race of Jews? First, their synagogues should be set on fire, and whatever does not burn up should be covered or spread over with dirt so that no one may ever be able to see a cinder or stone of it. And this ought to be done for the honor of God and of Christianity, in order that God may see that we are true Christians. Secondly, their homes should be likewise broken down and destroyed. Thirdly, they should be deprived of their prayer books and talmuds in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught. Fourthly, their rabbis must be forbidden under threats of death to teach anymore.” (from “The Jews and their lies” by Martin Luther)

How many preachers can honestly say that they teach their congregations this stuff!? The church only has wonderful things to say concerning Martin Luther by referring to him as “a great church reformer” but he HATED the Jews and supported killing them! All Church doctrines were established by these despicable so-called church fathers; lets read more from “The Jews and their lies” written by Martin Luther.  I encourage every truth seeker to obtain this book and READ IT. 

Martin Luther: “Now whoever wishes to accept venomous serpents, desperate enemies of the lord, and to honor them, to let himself be robbed, pillaged, corrupted and cursed by them, need only turn to the Jews. If this is not enough for him, he can do more: crawl up into their…… and worship the sanctuary, so as to glorify himself afterwards for having been merciful, for having fortified the Devil and his children, in order to blaspheme our beloved lord and the precious blood that has redeemed us. He will then be a perfect Christian, filled with works of mercy, for which Christ will reward him on the-day of judgment with the eternal fire of hell (where he will roast together with the Jews).” 

“In truth, the Jews, being foreigners, should possess nothing, and what they do possess should be ours.” 

“If I find a Jew to baptize, I shall lead him to the Elbe bridge, hang a stone around his neck, and push him into the water, baptizing him with the name of Avraham!.. I cannot convert the Jews. Our lord Christ did not succeed in doing so; but I can close their mouths so that there will be nothing for them to do but to lie upon the ground.” 

“I hope I shall never be so stupid as to be circumcised; I would rather cut off the left breast of my Catherine and of all women.” 

“If we are to remain unsullied by the blasphemy of the Jews and not wish to take part in it, we must be separated from them and they must be driven out of their country.” 

What really irritates me about all of this is that Christians talk against all other religions except Christianity, they refuse to acknowledge the evil beginnings of Christianity, the evil that continues in Christianity and how the Christians hatred towards the Jews actually led to THE GREAT HOLOCAUST.  The church never acknowledges the fact that Adolf Hitler was a Christian! 

Martin Luther: What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? Since they live among us, we dare not tolerate their conduct, now that we are aware of their lying and reviling and blaspheming. If we do, we become sharers in their lies, cursing and blasphemy….

First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians….

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them the fact that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God….

Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them…

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb…

Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let them stay at home…

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping…
Seventh, I recommend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen. 3 :19).  Martin Luther – “The Jews & Their Lies”(1543)

Clearly, Martin Luther encouraged setting Jewish synagogues on fire, destroying Jewish prayer books, forbidding rabbis from preaching, seizing Jews’ property and money, smashing up their homes, and ensuring that these “poisonous envenomed worms” be forced into labor or expelled “for all time.” Luther also seemed to give approval to the murder of the Jews by saying; “We are at fault in not slaying them.” No doubt, he greatly influenced Adolph Hitler who destroyed six million Jews and the Nazi persecution of the Jews. This is what Hitler said after murdering the Jews: 

“In defending myself against the Jews, I am acting for the Lord. The difference between the church and me is that I am finishing the job.” (Adolf Hitler)

If you’re going to “be a part” of a religion- at least KNOW the history of it- know it INSIDE OUT so that you can defend it properly when someone else who opposes Christianity confronts you. God never formed religion, and neither did Yehosua. Religion is a compilation of man made laws/rules and conspiracies against the Jews.  Yeshua the Jewish Rabbi came to show us “THE WAY”, not religion! 

written by Ariella Batya 

Christians And Their Religion

If any Christian says that he/she wants to “expose deception and turn people to Christ” he/she can began with looking into the origin of Christianity and all of the filth and evil associated with it.  

It’s funny how Christians can attack EVERY OTHER RELIGION besides Christianity! (Mathew 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?). Radical Islam is terrible indeed just as radical Christianity is. The KKK ( Klu Klux Klan) is an example of radical Christianity that sees people of color as “less than infidels” just as the radical Muslims do but the Christians don’t want to talk about that! Most [if not all] of those Klansman will tell you they are Christian and are “carrying out the will of God.“Repent Amarillo” is another example of radical Christianity. Repent Amarillo is a militant Christian fundamentalist group whose antics have ranged from staging a mock execution of Santa Claus by firing squad to posting a “spiritual warfare” map on its Web site that cited a Buddhist temple, an Islamic center, gay bars, strip clubs and sex shops as places of demonic activity.  The “Army of God”, another example of radical Christianity (active since the early 1980’s) is a loose network of radical anti-abortionists with a long history of promoting terrorism and premeditated murder in the name of Christianity. The Army of God has published an anti-abortion training manual that offers instructions on bomb-making, arson and other ways to attack clinics. The group’s Web site praises a long list of Christian terrorists who have been convicted of violent crimes, including Paul Jennings Hill (who was executed by lethal injection in 2003 for the murders of abortion provider John Britton and his bodyguard James Barrett), Scott Roeder (who was convicted of first-degree murder for the 2009 shooting of George Tiller, a Kansas doctor who performed late-term abortions), Michael Frederick Griffin (who was sentenced to life in prison for the 1993 murder of Dr. David Gunn, an ob/gyn based in Pensacola, Florida), James Charles Kopp (who shot and killed Barnett Slepian, a physician who performed abortions, in 1998), Matthew Lee Derosia (who, in 2009, rammed his SUV into the front entrance of a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Paul and told police that Jesus ordered him to carry out that attack) and John C. Salvi (who attacked a Planned Parenthood clinic in Brookline, Massachusetts in 1994, shooting and killing receptionists Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols and wounding several others).  hitler1Adolf Hitler is another example of radical Christianity– why else do you think he killed all of those Jews?! Hitler was a Christian who had a twisted interpretation of bible scripture who actually believed that he was doing the will of God. 

Kingdom Identity Ministries is another example of radical Christianity and is one of the largest suppliers of so-called Christian Identity materials that present a racist interpretation of Christianity. Their products include training books, pamphlets, and Bible study courses. Their mission to preserve the white race encourages white women to reproduce only within their race and encourages the superiority of the white male as interpreted from the Bible.   America’s Promise Ministries is another radical Christian group that relies strongly on the literal interpretation of the Bible. This church also insists that Jesus was white and believes that all greatness achieved in the United States is attributed to the work of the white race and none other. Several members of this congregation have committed violent acts of terrorism and murder, including abortion clinic bombings, bank robberies, and shootings.

There’s NO “right” religion because neither God or His son Yeshua formed ANY them, they are ALL man-made, including Christianity. The Sharia law AT LEAST is nothing less than the enforcement of keeping moral laws but in this country that claims to be “founded on Christianity [whatever that means]” there is NO ENFORCEMENT of keeping moral laws, much less what’s written. People who identify themselves as Christians support EVERYTHING THAT’S EVIL by not actively standing against it… abortion, same-sex marriage, organ harvesting, church pimping, sexual immorality, telling “white lies”etc. and this evil began in the 1st century with Simon Magus during the time of Christ. No, Im not a Muslim- I’m not affiliated with ANY religion, I AM FREE to worship God in truth and in spirit with no religion involved that would take me off of the path of righteousness and keep me from speaking against and opposing all evil. But to all of you involved in religious wars, remember this- “And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand [Mathew 12:25]…And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand [Mathew 12:24} .. Those “houses” and “kingdoms” are in reference to different religions. ALL RELIGIONS are divided which is why there are various denominations or sects of EVERY RELIGION in existence, and according to Christ NONE OF THEM WILL STAND! Not even Christianity. If any Christian says that he/she wants to “expose deception and turn people to Christ” he/she can began with looking into the origin of Christianity and all of the filth and evil associated with it.  

Catholic leaders attack ‘erosion of respect’ for doctors who oppose abortion

200,000 pregnancies were terminated in the UK in 2015 alone

Catholic heads in the UK are issuing a robust defense of the Church’s abortion teaching after criticism of bishops’ stance from within the Catholic hierarchy.

Describing having a termination as a ‘grave decision’ the two leaders of the Catholic Church in England, Wales and Scotland attack the ‘contradiction’ in abortion laws for disabled babies and praised politicians who try to change the law.

They also lambast an ‘erosion of respect’ for those who oppose abortion, saying doctors and nurses ‘face increasing difficulty in being able to combine their dedicated professional work with their personal conviction’.

Pointing to recent cases where doctors and pharmacists feel they cannot refuse to offer abortion services, the senior bishops write: ‘So much talent is being lost to important professional areas. Personal conscience is inviolable and no-one should be forced to act against their properly formed conscience in these matters. This is something which needs greater debate in our society.’

The joint statement from Cardinal Vincent Nichols, president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales and Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, president of the Scottish Bishops’ Conference, marks the 50th anniversary of the Abortion Act 1967 which first permitted terminations in some circumstances in the UK.

 Cardinal Vincent Nichols, with Cardinal Tartaglia, has attacked Britain’s abortion laws.  Reuters

‘Even despite the concerns raised at the time, it would, perhaps, have been difficult to predict that the number of abortions in our countries would have increased to such an alarming level,’ they write, pointing to figures suggesting nearly 200,000 pregnancies were terminated in the UK in 2015 alone.

They launch an attack on disability laws in the UK, which allow abortions to take place up until birth if the baby has a deformity but ban terminations beyond the 24th week of pregnancy for babies without a disability.

‘The witness of those who compete in the Paralympic games shines out as a way in which people with disability excel and compete, using their gifts to the full. We hope that greater reflection and consistency in the approach to unborn children with disabilities will lead to a change in understanding, with greater protection provided through new legislation,’ they write.

It comes after debate within the Catholic hierarchy after the Church’s teaching on abortion was branded impractical and figures showed most British Catholics do not hold to the bishops’ teaching with 61 per cent agreeing ‘the law should allow an abortion if the woman decides…she does not wish to have a child’.  

The respected Catholic journal The Tablet published an editorial saying the Church’s strict stance means it ‘comes close to having no position at all, or at least none that has any relevance either to law-making or to the lives of real people’.

number of bishops were ‘scandalised’ by the piece and a number of bishops openly attacked the magazine as trying ‘to obscure the witness of Christian teaching’.

The Bishop of Shrewsbury, Mark Davies, told Christian Today: ‘Sadly there are journals which use the name “Catholic” but are not reliable guides to the faith and teaching of the Catholic Church.

‘The teaching of the Church could not be clearer in affirming that every human life must be presented and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.’

He went on: ‘No Catholic Christian could sincerely claim that this teaching is unclear or irrelevant to law-making or the moral choices made in the lives of people today.

‘It would be especially tragic in this anniversary year which marks the destruction of 8 million human lives since 1967 that anyone would seek to obscure the witness of Christian teaching to the value of every human life.’

Then in a blog post Bishop Michael Campbell of Lancaster said abortion was a ‘foundational issue’, adding: ‘Sadly, the price of admission into mainstream British life has meant that we somehow keep the Catholic brand name and tribal loyalty, but are content to live a mix of nostalgia and generic good will and “keep our heads down” in the public sphere’.

He added: ‘Some Catholics – including some periodicals and newspapers who claim to use that name – seem simply embarrassed by the abortion issue.

‘The abortion struggle gets in the way of their natural political alliances. Others don’t really agree with the Church’s teaching, or don’t accept the personhood of the unborn child. Others just want a respectable way to explain away this issue and get on with what they regard as the ‘real’ work of the Church!’

The fierce defence from Catholic bishops comes as a range of events are planned to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Abortion Act.

The Tablet’s leader said that the Church’s teaching ‘would logically involve handing out long prison sentences not just to the doctors and nurses involved but to the women herself – and in every case, including if the termination of the pregnancy occurred the day after it started’.

Brendan Walsh, the editor of The Tablet, hit back at the criticism, saying that the bishops are ‘in a bit of a bind’.

He told Christian Today at the time: ‘The sanctity of the life of the unborn is one of the cornerstones of our beliefs as Catholics. Our leader in the issue of September 16 sympathised with the position of the Catholic MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, who personally opposes abortion in even the most difficult of circumstances, but has said he would not try to impose his views on others. It’s a position that attracted considerable hostility, but was also widely understood and respected, and could even be the start of a helpful conversation about life issues.

‘The Catholic bishops – it seems to me – are in a bit of a bind. They want to celebrate and protect every human life, from the moment of conception. But if they hold fast to the view that women should not be allowed the right to choose an abortion under any circumstances, the Catholic voice is less likely to be listened to.’

Written by Harry Farley

Street Preacher Arrested for Offending Islam Released from Prison

While his actions may have gotten him in trouble with police, Sleeper says he’s not quieting down any time soon. 

A street preacher in the UK, who was arrested for criticizing Islam, has been released from jail. 

Ian Sleeper was arrested for holding up a sign in Central London that said “#Love Muslims Hate Islam Time For The Truth.” He was held for 13 hours for allegedly causing disorder. 

However, after being unable to charge Sleeper with an actual crime, prosecutors let the case go. 

Sleeper said his decision to hold the controversial sign came when he realized the Muslim employees at his restaurant knew very little about their religion. 

“After reading the Qur’an and observing the behavior of my Muslim staff, it became clear that they were not practicing much of their religion’s teachings,” he told Christian Concern. “I found this curious, and, after chatting to them about their belief, I realized this was due to their ignorance of the Quranic verses. They simply do not know what their religion teaches.”

“Their ignorance is almost on a par with the wider public’s, where the horrors and gross gender inequalities of Islam are not apparent to most people,” he added. 

That’s when he decided to publicly share his message about Islam even if it cost him his freedom.

While many people view Sleepe’s actions as hate-filled, he says that’s not the case. 

“As Christians we must hate sin, spread the gospel and love God. Through my actions I aim to achieve all three,” he says. 

In fact, he believes there is a strong distinction to be made between Muslims and the ideology of Islam. 

“I differentiate between Muslims the people and Islam the ideology”, he said. “I love my Muslim neighbor as the Bible commands, and I am friends with all my Muslim staff. But I hate the religion’s ideology. It is not Muslims we should be attacking, it’s Islam. Islam makes Muslims victims with a tight grip that holds them captive to an evil ideology.”

While his actions may have gotten him in trouble with police, Sleeper says he’s not quieting down any time soon. 

“Truth cannot be taken for granted in our modern world, and so I will be back out on the street soon,” he said. “Please pray for me and my brothers and sisters in Christ, as we all seek to expose deception and turn people to Christ.”

A Gay Couple Just Asked The Supreme Court To Rule Against A Christian Baker

“Bakeries could refuse to provide not just wedding cakes for gay couples, interracial couples, or interfaith couples, but birthday cakes for African-American families, graduation cakes for women, and cupcakes for a Catholic family celebrating a First Communion,”

In their first brief to the court on the merits of their case, David Mullins and Charlie Craig warn that creating a loophole for religious business owners to sidestep Colorado’s anti-discrimination law could blow a hole in civil rights protections in general.

Charlie Craig and David Mullins
From left: Charlie Craig and David Mullins

A gay couple and state officials in Colorado asked the Supreme Court on Monday to uphold a judgment against a Christian baker who refused to sell a custom wedding cake in 2012, warning that creating a loophole for religious people to sidestep Colorado’s anti-discrimination law could have far-reaching consequences that diminish rights of other minorities.

“Whether wedding cakes are artistic expression is not the issue here,” the couple’s lawyers wrote in a brief filed Monday. “The question, rather, is whether the Constitution grants businesses open to the public the right to violate laws against discrimination in the commercial marketplace if the business happens to sell an artistic product. Under this Court’s precedent, the answer to that question is no.”

It marked the first time David Mullins and Charlie Craig fleshed out the merits of their arguments to the Supreme Court in their case, which began five years ago in a Denver suburb and has snowballed to become the nation’s foremost dispute between same-sex couples and religious objectors.

The couple’s attorneys at the ACLU were responding to claims made by Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who is being represented by lawyers at the Alliance Defending Freedom with support from the Trump administration’s Justice Department.

The Colorado Civil Rights Commission, another party in the case, also filed a brief on Monday to defend the state’s civil rights law, warning that granting leeway to “expressive” businesses is a slippery slope.

“For example, a family portrait studio could enforce a ‘No Mexicans’ policy,” the state lawyers write. “A banquet hall could refuse to host events for Jewish people.”

“The First Amendment does not privilege the expressive rights of some businesses above the expressive rights of others when it comes to selling goods and services to the public,” says Colorado’s brief.

Likewise, the couple says that both Phillips and Justice Department’s arguments to protect free expression are “boundless in practice.”

“Bakeries could refuse to provide not just wedding cakes for gay couples, interracial couples, or interfaith couples, but birthday cakes for African-American families, graduation cakes for women, and cupcakes for a Catholic family celebrating a First Communion,” lawyers for the couple write. “Numerous other businesses could claim exemptions from anti-discrimination laws and other regulations of commercial conduct.”

Phillips and his backers have said providing wedding-related services to same-sex couples amounts to participating in the ceremonies, thereby violating First Amendment rights to religious exercise and free speech.

“Businesses could claim exemptions from anti-discrimination laws and other regulations of commercial conduct.”

But in their brief on Monday, lawyers for the couple dismiss that line of thinking, saying the Supreme Court has never cut down a civil rights law like that.

“The Anti-Discrimination Act applies to businesses that choose to serve the public at large and requires that once they offer a product, they not refuse service based on enumerated personal characteristics, including race, religion, and sexual orientation,” the brief filed on Monday states.

The case dates back to July 2012, when Craig and Mullins attempted to order a custom wedding cake from Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado, but Phillips declined, saying that it would violate his religious beliefs.

“I’ll make you birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings,” court records say Phillips told the men.

The couple filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which found in 2014 that Phillips ran afoul of a state law banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The commission ordered Phillips to train his staff to follow the law and submit quarterly compliance reports. A Colorado appeals court upheld the ruling, saying the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act prohibits a business open to the public “from picking and choosing customers based on their sexual orientation.”

The court added the law “does not impose burdens on religious conduct not imposed on secular conduct.”

But in Phillips’s brief to the Supreme Court, which agreed in June to hear his appeal, he argues Colorado’s nondiscrimination law targets those who oppose same-sex marriage, thereby limiting their First Amendment rights to free exercise and free expression. Given that the law infringes on certain people of faith, the baker’s lawyers argue the state government must have a compelling reason for the law and tailor it narrowly. They say the law fails that test.

Phillips leans heavily on Hurley v. Irish American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston, a 1995 Supreme Court decision that found a parade could exclude an LGBT group.

In responding on Monday, lawyers for Mullins and Craig note the parade decision isn’t germane because it “applied not to commercial conduct, but to a private, expressive parade.”

The couple’s lawyers go on to counter the baker’s claim that the nondiscrimination law must meet a higher standard, known as strict scrutiny, by saying the law is applied neutrally — not to any particular expression or type of speech. But even so, they cite a raft of Supreme Court decisions upholding civil rights laws over concerns about free expression or free exercise. Among them, the high court found in 1984 a law firm couldn’t deny a promotion to a woman, even though the firm engaged in expressive conduct, and in 1983 that a religious university couldn’t ban students from interracial relationships.

“The Anti-Discrimination Act furthers the State’s substantial interest in eradicating discrimination, an interest that is ‘unrelated to the suppression of expression’ … and that interest would be achieved less effectively if ‘expressive’ businesses were allowed to discriminate,” lawyers for the couples write. “Indeed, the Anti-Discrimination Act would survive even strict scrutiny, because it is precisely tailored to serve not just an important, but a compelling government interest in ending discrimination by commercial establishments open to the public.”

Written by Dominic Holden