Christians Bad; Muslims Good

Chris Brand has just posted a big lot of links about the epidemic of attacks on Christianity at British universities. Christian groups are in effect being run off campus. The excuse for it is that Christians disapprove of homosexuality. Muslims however want to stone homosexuals to death and I have yet to hear of any Muslim student group being treated disapprovingly.

For convenience, I have reproduced the whole of Chris's post below:

British Catholics were given the news of attacks on them by the luniversities of Edinburgh, Exeter, Birmingham and Heriot-Watt (also in Edinburgh) (Independent Catholic News, 20 xi) (The Universe, 21 xi). The 200,000 Protestant readers of Inspire were similarly alerted (20 xi) and asked to write in protest to E.LU.’s Vice-Chancellor, Comrade Tim O’Shea; and Christian Today (21 xi) carried the story. Apparently Laura Stirrat, the robust vice-president of Edinburgh University's Christian Union, had pointed to the simple truth of the matter: "The university is effectively closing down free speech."

Britain’s yags carried the news of the impending battle in their PinkNews, 20 xi. Apparently, PURE came from the USA, from the founders of the chastity-till-marriage-advocating ‘Silver Ring Thing.’

The Times (21 xi), under the heading ‘These are exciting times for Christian students,’ carried three letters responding to its p.1 article, two backing free speech and one criticizing ‘evangelical’ take-overs of Christian Unions. The Telegraph (21 xi) revealed that NuLabour had forced through regulations in Northern Ireland to criminalize discrimination against homosexuality or criticism of homosexuality, obliging schools to educate children as much in homosexuality as in heterosexuality – and similar ‘protection’ of yags was planned for England and Wales. News that “Christians across Britain were preparing to take legal action against university authorities” reached Oz (The Australian, 21 xi).

Edinburgh’s Student (21 xi) reported Matt Tindale, the UCCF staff worker at the Edinburgh University Christian Union, as saying: “…from what our lawyers have been saying, we have a strong legal case.” E.LU. student union President Tim Goodwin burbled fatuously that “The decision to ban PURE is less about religious groups and more about ensuring that all groups on campus are free to express themselves regardless of their sexuality or any other discriminating factor;” and E.LU.’s National Union of Students-appointed (and presumably salaried) Officer for LGBT affairs whinged that the Christians had chosen to “target some of the most vulnerable students on campus” – when said “vulnerable students” had in fact set themselves up for criticism not only by their shameless exhibitionism but by their frankly tyrannous effort to close down the Christians’ freedom of speech. Student’s editorial settled for a middle way of complaining that the Christian Union was “subsidized” in its “repugnant” views by the University – though the CU was in no way different in this from any other E.LU. society, getting free antiquated rooms in dilapidated buildings in the smallest of returns for its members’s fees to the LUni. E.LU.’s CU reported that the LUniversity had not even consulted them before banning PURE.

The director of the London-based interdenominational ‘Share Jesus International,’ the Reverend Dr Rob Frost, offered his support to any British student Christian Unions wanting to do battle with censorious institutions such as E.LU. (Christian Today, 22 xi). (The movement involved 700 churches and its annual Easter event was attended by some 6,000 people.) Nine Anglican and Catholic bishops, including the previous Archbishop of Canterbury, the Evangelical Lord Carey, announced they had, together with eight academics and Christian representatives, written to the Times to condemn the “intolerant and unlawful” behaviour of such luniversities (Inspire, 22 xi; published Times 24 xi – though the letter diplomatically omitted saying that the censorship and to believing that "The Bible, as originally given, is the inspired and infallible Word of God" and "is the supreme authority in all matters of belief and behaviour" (Spero, 23 xi). Apparently LGBTs hoped that non-evangelical Christians would join them in condemning such ‘exclusory’ requirements. A Times news report (24 xi) said the four CUs (at Birmingham, Edinburgh, Exeter and Heriot-Watt) had been told that they had “strong cases” and that they should they press ahead with court action.

These troubles for the lunis arose at the same time as British Airways was criticized by 100 MPs (including Labour’s ex-Foreign Secretary Jack Straw) for not allowing a female employee to wear her crucifix (despite displaying on its aeroplanes’ tailfins the crosses of St George, St Andrew and St David) – BA eventually buckled under the barrage, promising further ‘review’ of its peecee policies; and it was said with academic authority that 25 lunis were wittingly or unwittingly providing facilities for training Muesli wannabe suicide bombers. The National Secular Society called the new assertive moves by Christians “sinister” (23 xi)

The UCCF website provided further news, press cuttings etc. and called on “Christians everywhere” for support. In particular it noted that Edinburgh’s Christian Union was under attack from the University itself and not just from Edinburgh University Student Association. News of the bishops’ letter was carried by The Scotsman (24 xi) and Virtue Online (“The Voice of Global Orthodox Anglicanism”) (24 xi) and the Anglican Diocese of Lichfield (24 xi). The trouble at Exeter LUni had started in May when just one student had complained of finding the Christian Union’s declaration of faith too restrictive and took action via the Student Guild to have the Union’s name changed to ‘Evangelical Christian Union.’

With laughable disregard for any principle of free speech, the National Secular Society accused the bishops who had written to the Times of defending “mistreatment” of and “discrimination” against unbelievers in general and yags in particular (26 xi). Although Times Higher (24 xi) declined to show any interest in the debate, evidently adopting the mainstream left’s usual fall-back tactic of denial (as with Dr Sushi Kasanova lately, with Dr Frank Ellis last year, with Richard Lynn’s IQ and the Wealth of Nations and with myself for the past ten years) the battle for free speech (that should have been held in 1996/7/8 about The g Factor vs Edinburgh LUniversity) was hotting up.

Scotland on Sunday’s Paul Stokes came down in favour of free speech between E.LU.’s Christians and yags, writing (26 xi): “No idea or faith should be immune from criticism, attack and ridicule. Let the Christians back in, let them harangue the gays, and let the gays shout back. If you can't do that in a university then where can you? If we really want to encourage the harmonious co-existence of radically opposed ideas then we must learn to treat each other with due disrespect.”

Times signatory Lord Carey, the previous Archbishop of Canterbury, managed some unusually stirring words for the Sunday Telegraph: “This country is in danger of losing sight of its Christian heritage. One of the most telling recent cases is the action taken by student unions agains Christian organisations on university campuses. I was among those who earlier this year spoke in Parliament and voted against a proposed law that would exempt religion from free speech. Yet I am beginning to wonder whether the principle of free speech can even be preserved on university campuses. ….Are we beginning to see the menace of censorship and political correctness in the very places where we expect liberality and generosity.” {Apparently, His Holiness did not know that the assault on free speech in the UK’s universities had begun in Edinburgh, just ten years previously….}

News of Christians versus yags and lunis appeared in the USA’s Fox News (26 xi) and in Australia’s The Age (27 xi), which pointed out that 1986 legislation obliged universities to support free speech on campus. {But, sadly, my own 1996/7/8 case showed this obligation was worthless for it could be overridden (decided a Scottish High Court judge) if a luni found some particular case of free speech to be bad for its business. The Church would find it had left things too late for lawyers to solve, and that it would have to use its muscle – if it had any left after years of selling out to lezzies.}


1 comment:

  1. Bless you this New Year from the city of Jerusalem, the city of Jesus Christ, although I am a Muslim youth, but this did not prevent the celebration of the new year and the birth of Jesus Christ-peace be upon him, I wish prosperity and happiness of all the inhabitants of the land and freedom for people in the occupied Palestinian territories.

    Palestinian Gifts Online store


All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them