Pastor Prefers Prison to Apology

Pastor Daniel Scot, an Australian evangelical preacher convicted of "villifying" Islam at a 2002 seminar, said he prefers to go to prison rather than take back his remarks:

One of two Australian pastors found guilty of vilifying Muslims in December of
2004 says he will rather go to jail than apologize. At a Christian seminar in
March 2002, Pastor Daniel Scot said that Muslims were aiming to take over the
country and encouraging domestic violence. He also called Islam an inherently
violent religion, according to the Herald Sun.

The judge in the case has yet to
assign a date to hand out a penalty, which could include a mandatory speech of
apology or a fine. The judge stated that the pastors' comments demeaned
Muslims."It was presented in a way which is essentially hostile, demeaning and
derogatory of all Muslim people, their God, Allah, the prophet Mohammed and in
general Muslim religious beliefs and practices," said Judge Michael Higgins.

The Islamic Council of Victoria had sought a court order that the pastors’ ministry
and both pastors acknowledge religious discrimination in statements in their
newsletters and website. The requested posting would also include the judge’s
findings that both were not credible witnesses and that they had not distinguished between mainstream and extremist Muslims in their 2002 comments, said the Herald Sun.

What's not covered in this Christian Post article is the fact that Daniel Scot is a refugee from Islamic religious intolerance in his native Pakistan. Quoth the Barnabus Fund, a UK organization which advocates on behalf of persecuted Christians in Muslim and Communist countries:

Scot, a Pakistani Christian, became one of the first victims of Pakistan’s
notorious blasphemy laws when in 1986 he was charged with insulting the Islamic
prophet Muhammad, which under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code carries a
death sentence. The blasphemy laws have attracted widespread condemnation from
human rights groups and the international community for their harsh punishments
and the way they have been misused to target vulnerable religious minorities. Scot had been threatened by the council of the college in Okara, Pakistan, where he worked, that a charge would be brought against him unless he converted to Islam.

The charge was brought after he refused to do so and explained his belief that his spiritual salvation could come only from Jesus
Christ, and not Muhammad. Political pressure meant that Daniel was never prosecuted. However, he was forced to flee to Australia with his family to escape the threat of Islamic extremists who have since murdered four Christians accused of blasphemy in Pakistan.

Now seventeen years later, having fled
religious discrimination in Pakistan, Scot again finds himself accused of a similar crime in Australia, the country in which he originally found refuge. This is an indication of the growing trend to place Islamic teaching and Muslim actions beyond the bounds of criticism, not only in the Islamic world, but also,
as a result of misguided ideas of political correctness, in the West as well.

And so the State of Victoria, Australia -- a country which is a child of the Enlightenment -- now apes the medieval religious laws of a Third World country, Pakistan, all in the name of "anti-racism" and other warm-fuzzy sounding principles. A man who fled his own land for freedom finds the same brand of un-freedom in his adopted country.

And the people who instituted this abomination dare to call themselves "progressives."

No comments:

Post a Comment

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