Expelled from University for Quoting Bible on Facebook

War on Christianity

It seemed like only a generation ago when gays came out of the closet. Now they are successfully putting Christians into those closets. It's OK to be a Christian, as long as you don't talk about it!

This is astonishing! The judge makes all the right arguments and then comes to the completely wrong conclusion.

A Christian student who was expelled from university after posting on Facebook in support of Biblical teaching on marriage and sexual ethics has today lost his case in a judicial review of the university’s decision.

Felix Ngole was studying for an MA in Social Work at Sheffield university. In 2015 he made comments using his personal Facebook account on the story of the American registrar Kim Davis who was imprisoned after conscientiously refusing to register same-sex marriages. Felix expressed his Christian beliefs on the issue and argued that: "same sex marriage is a sin whether we like it or not. It is God’s words and man’s sentiments would not change His words". He was asked where in the Bible it says that same-sex marriage is wrong, and he quoted various passages to demonstrate this.

Nearly two months later, Felix received an email from a university official informing him that his Facebook comments were being investigated. He was later interviewed by an investigatory team, and subsequently removed from his course by a panel chaired by Professor Marsh, an LGBT rights campaigner.

Felix, supported by the Christian Legal Centre, sought to challenge the university’s decision in a judicial review which was heard in the High Court over two days. The court ruled that the university acted lawfully in removing Felix from his course.

'May have caused offence'

The court heard that the university “investigatory team accepted that Felix was fully entitled to his religious beliefs, and had acted with honesty and integrity”. The university held that it was not Felix’s views that were at issue, but his public posting of these views. They held that this expression of his views “may have caused offence to some individuals”.

The university argued that they were right to sanction Felix and bar him from his chosen profession in spite of the fact that Felix had lawfully expressed his Christian views as a practicing Christian, outside of his professional studies, in a context in which he was not identified as a social work student, and despite this expression having no impact on his work and professional abilities.

So the court is saying that not only is offending someone against the law, but merely creating the possibility of offending someone is against the law, or, at least, unacceptable on a University campus, even if the offending statement was not made on the campus and had nothing to do with the university. Soon you will have to be careful what you think.

'Freedom of speech impaired'

The university and the court agreed that Felix's freedom of speech had been impaired. The judge accepted that his posts “were undoubtedly intended by him to convey a religious perspective.” Nevertheless, the court ruled that “Felix had no religious imperative to comment on an American news website about Kim Davis”.

So, shut up and get back in the closet!!!??? 

The judgment stated: “Freedom of expression is an important right. Exercising that right to express the content of deeply held religious views deserves respect in a democratic and plural society, nowhere more so than in a university. Freedom of religious discourse is a public good of great importance and seriousness.”

'No discrimination'

The university agreed that there had been no cause for concern or evidence of Felix acting in a discriminatory fashion, whether on placement or otherwise. The university’s decision was not based on speculation that Felix would discriminate in the future either. No discrimination has actually occurred, or is expected to occur in this case.

'Severe sanction'

The judge accepted that the university’s sanction of Felix “was indeed severe”. The judgment also stated: “Nor is it to doubt that there may well be good grounds to fear more generally for the place of religious discourse, and the understanding of and respect for religious adherents, in the context of a liberal and secular consensus within universities or elsewhere.”

The judgment further stated: “If a chain of events, starting with a student posting Bible verses on a news website and ending with him being removed from his course, is one for which the law does not provide him with a remedy, it is important to test hard why not.”

'Perceived risk'

What in the end was judged to have justified the university’s actions was a perceived risk of damage. The court ruled that “It was how they could be accessed and read by people who would perceive them as judgemental, incompatible with service ethos, or suggestive of discriminatory intent. That was a problem in its own right. … But whatever the actual intention was, it was the perception of the posting that would cause the damage. It was reasonable to be concerned about that perception”.

Seriously!

'Biblical views must not be expressed'

Andrea Williams, Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre which is supporting Felix commented:

“The court has ruled that though Felix is entitled to hold his Biblical views on sexual ethics, he is not entitled to express them. But freedom to believe without freedom of expression is no freedom at all.

“Many views are frequently expressed by students on social media and in other contexts. It is the expression of Biblical morality that has been singled out for sanction by the university.

“The university, in investigating Felix's personal Facebook posts and disciplining him for them, is acting as if they are thought police. This ruling will have a chilling effect on Christian students up and down the country who will now understand that their personal social media posts may be investigated for political correctness.

“As the judgment stated: 'Freedom of expression is an important right. Exercising that right to express the content of deeply held religious views deserves respect in a democratic and plural society, nowhere more so than in a university.' In this case the judge has failed to safeguard Felix's freedom of expression, in spite of the importance she rightly attaches to that freedom.

“This ruling comes after Jo Johnson, the universities minister last week criticised universities for failing to protect freedom of speech. He said: 'Freedom of speech is a fundamentally British value which is undermined by a reluctance of institutions to embrace healthy vigorous debate. Our universities must open minds not close them.'

“This ruling flies in the face of the government’s expressed intention to promote free speech at universities."

'Christian bar to office'

Felix said: “I am very disappointed by this ruling which supports the university’s decision to bar me from my chosen career because of my Biblical views on sexual ethics. I intend to appeal this decision which clearly intends to restrict me from expressing my Christian faith in public.”

Andrea Williams said: “Rulings like this show that society is becoming increasingly intolerant of Christian moral values. Christians are being told to shut up and keep quiet about their moral views or face a bar from employment. Unless the views you express are politically correct, you may be barred from office. This is very far from how a free and fair society should operate.

“We will appeal this ruling in an attempt to protect basic freedoms in our society. No democratic society can function without freedom of expression. This ruling shakes the foundations of freedom in our society.”

In Canada, Trinity Western U has been trying to launch a law degree program for a few years but several provinces have stated that they will not recognize TWU law degrees because the university requires its students to sign a declaration that they will confine sexual activity to that between a man and his wife. This has the LGBTQ lobby up in arms and fighting tooth and nail against TWU, even though there are almost certainly no LGBTQ students at the Christian TWU.

You can follow this campaign in the War on Christianity by searching this blog for 'Trinity'.

The War on Christianity Flares Up at Sheffield University, UK

UK university expels Christian postgrad student over Facebook anti-gay marriage post - media

Is this the first act of discrimination for citing scripture?

© Mike Segar / Reuters

A social worker postgraduate has been expelled from Sheffield University for citing a biblical verse against homosexuality on his private Facebook profile while backing Kim Davis, a US clerk, who refused to issue marriage certificates for same-sex couples.

Felix Ngole, a 38-year-old father of four, was forced to abruptly finish his studies as a second year Masters student after the university’s ‘fitness to practice’ committee ruled that by calling gay marriage an ‘abomination’ on his FB he “transgressed boundaries which are not deemed appropriate for someone entering the Social Work profession," the Telegraph reports. Ngole, a devoted Christian, was citing Leviticus while propping his argument on the gay marriage issue.

The designated Bible verse says: “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

The university’s disciplinary board began reviewing the case two months after the post appeared on his page, following a complaint from a fellow student. Ngole, who had already completed two university degrees and used to work as a teacher, was accused of “bringing the profession into disrepute” by voicing his personal opinion on the sensitive subject. 

The probe by the Fitness to Practice Committee said that although the student was entitled to express his views on gay marriage, his remarks “may have caused offence to some individuals.” Based on this judgment, Ngole was found unfit to pursue the chosen career path and was "no longer recognized as a University student.”

So, freedom of speech is sacrificed on the altar of 'may cause offence'. This would be a very quiet world if no-one was allowed to offend anyone else. Or is it that the remark 'may have caused offence' to a gay person? 

I would suspect that if the roles were reversed and a gay person made a disparaging remark about Christians, the Fitness to Practice Committee would not find it the least bit offensive. Christians are fair targets; gays are not. Even though Christians are persecuted and martyred all over the world (more than 10,000 of them in Nigeria alone), it is gays who need protection!!!??

Ngole intends to appeal the decision on the basis of discrimination.

“I wonder whether the university would have taken any action if a Muslim student who believes in Sharia law, with its teaching about women and homosexuality, had made moderate comments on his Facebook page. I don't think so," said Ngole, stressing that he was being discriminated against for expressing Christian beliefs, as cited by Premier ChristianRadio.

Or if a Muslim was sanctioned for reciting the Quran or Hadith, would that spark a reaction from the Committee (read: Thought Police)? If it did, there would certainly be a counter-reaction from the Muslim community, and not a very pleasant one.

Ngole who came to England from Cameroon in 2003 as a refugee, also questioned the right of educational institutions to monitor students` personal activity and rule that a particular student is fit or unfit for a profession based on his/her social media postings.

"If each university is making its own, arbitrary decisions, who is monitoring these decisions and how can students ensure that, across all universities, there is good, fair and equal assessment of such issues?” Ngole asked, warning of dangers that lie in banning persons from becoming professionals in social work and other fields in connection with their personal statements.

Universities, in his opinion, should follow a completely different path and, instead of censoring peoples’ beliefs, encourage an exchange of opinion.

“If they are 'censored' from even sharing their ideas or beliefs as part of a discussion on Facebook then how can that happen?” says Ngole, who plans to file a legal motion referring to the breach of his right of expression if his appeal to the university panel fails.

"I am not against people who are in same-sex relationships: that is their choice. But I am a Christian and if asked for my views I should be free to express that,” he said, as cited by the Guardian. He intends to challenge the panel’s argument that he would be unable to work with gay people, as they may stumble on to the controversy surrounding his name on the internet.

"I have worked with people in same-sex relationships in the past and there has been no issue whatsoever,” he claimed.

Andrea Williams from the Christian Legal Centre said the university’s conduct violates Ngole’s fundamental rights.  

"The university has failed to protect his freedom of speech under Article 10 and his freedom of religion under Article 9,” she said, referring to the Human Rights Act.

A spokesperson from the University of Sheffield told RT: “The University of Sheffield is concerned that stories in the media about a student undertaking a MA in Social Work are factually incorrect. The individual concerned is currently appealing the decision of a Fitness to Practise Committee, relating to professional registration and the standards of the relevant professional body.

“These standards are nationally determined by the Health and Care Professions Council. As the case is subject to appeal, the University of Sheffield will not comment on this case at this time.”

A spokesperson for the University of Sheffield denounced the accusations of religious bias against the student, saying that media reports were “incorrect.”

It's not an intentional 'religious' bias, but it is religious bias. Those on the committee are most likely to be atheists who don't believe the Bible was inspired by God, nor do they even believe in the God they will have to stand before in judgment. Most atheists believe that the 2.4 billion Christians around the world are all idiots. They, unfortunately, have completely missed the very point of our existence.

Kentucky Clerk Could be 1st Christian Jailed for Refusing to Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

Religion vs gay rights

Another test of freedom of religion which the Supreme Court threw under the bus when it legalized gay marriage

A defiant Kentucky county clerk, who has been ordered to face a federal judge on Thursday in a hearing about her refusal to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, says she won't resign.

"It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision"- Kim Davis

“Some people have said I should resign, but I have done my job well,” Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis said in a statement posted to the website of the law firm that represents her, Liberty Counsel.

“I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage,” Davis said in the statement. “To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience.”

Davis' office has steadfastly denied marriage licenses since the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage this summer, and that practice continued Tuesday morning when at least two same-sex couples were denied as Davis invoked "God's authority." Rowan County Attorney Cecil Watkins says the federal court alerted him later Tuesday morning that a hearing was scheduled for 11 a.m. Thursday in Ashland. Watkins says clerk Kim Davis is summonsed to attend, along with all the deputy clerks who work in her office.

Kim Davis needs lots of prayer for this court appearance Thursday. Please pray for strength, courage, wisdom, faith, and anything else you can think of. Kim is my hero today. God bless you, Kim.

After Davis initially stopped issuing marriage licenses, two gay couples and two straight couples sued her. A federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, an appeals court upheld that decision and the Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene in the case, seemingly leaving Davis with no legal ground to stand on.

But Davis has refused to issue the licenses, saying her deeply held Christian beliefs don't let her endorse gay marriages.

As an elected official, Davis can't be fired. Any impeachment of her would have to wait until the legislature's regular session next year or could come during a costly special session.

“I have received death threats from people who do not know me,” Davis said in the statement. “I harbor nothing against them. I was elected by the people to serve as the County Clerk. I intend to continue to serve the people of Rowan County, but I cannot violate my conscience.”

On Tuesday, Davis asked David Moore and David Ermold, a couple who has been rejected four times by her office, to leave. They refused, surrounded by reporters and cameras.

"We're not leaving until we have a license," Ermold said.

"Then you're going to have a long day," Davis told him.

From the back of the room, Davis' supporters said: "Praise the Lord! ... Stand your ground."

Other activists shouted that Davis is a bigot and told her: "Do your job."

On Tuesday morning, shortly after Davis' remarks, the sheriff's office cleared the county office of those gathered to support both sides of the issue.

The two groups lined up on either side of the courthouse entrance to chant at each other. Davis' supporters told her to "stand firm," while gay-rights activists shouted "do your job."

The rejected couples' supporters called the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit on their behalf. They asked that their attorneys file to have Davis held in contempt.

Randy Smith, leading the group supporting Davis, said he knows following their instruction to "stand firm" might mean Davis goes to jail.

"But at the end of the day, we have to stand before God, which has higher authority than the Supreme Court," he said.

Ermold hugged Moore, his partner of 17 years, and they cried and swayed as they left the clerk's office. Davis' supporters marched by, chanting.

"I feel sad, I feel devastated," Ermold said. "I feel like I've been humiliated on such a national level, I can't even comprehend it."