Don't You Just Love Irony - German University's ‘DISCRIMINATORY’ Job Ad for ANTI-DISCRIMINATION Counselor

..

Whites need not apply? German university in hot water after ‘DISCRIMINATORY’

job ad for ANTI-DISCRIMINATION counselor

27 Aug, 2021 17:25

FILE PHOTO: The building of the Humboldt University of Berlin. ©  Global Look Press / Jens Kalaene

Berlin’s renowned Humboldt University has gotten in hot water after its Students Council published an ad for the position of anti-discrimination counselor. The ad was branded discriminatory as it discouraged whites from applying.

In late July, Humboldt University’s Students Council (AstA) announced it was looking for a person to fill the position of an “anti-discrimination” counselor to help students facing discrimination over “race, ethnicity or migrant background” starting from September 15.

The job ad never hid the fact that the counseling would be held on a “partial” basis that would be focused on the “needs and positions of a person seeking advice.” It also added that the goal was to create an atmosphere “in which those affected by racist discrimination feel comfortable to share their experiences.”

Yet, it apparently went a step too far when it openly said that such a goal would be best achieved only if “the counselor is… black or a person of color.” The Students Council also did not stop at this and openly added that it “asks the white people to refrain from applying for this counselor position.”

The issue was picked up by the German media on Thursday and quickly drew criticism from politicians. Adrian Grasse, a Berlin lawmaker, condemned the ad as a “clear violation” of Germany’s General Equal Treatment Act.

“The advertisement for an anti-discriminatory [counselor] position is itself discriminatory,” Grasse, who is a science policy spokesman for the Berlian parliamentary faction of the Chancellor Angela Merkel’s center-right CDU party, told the German media.

The politician also demanded that university President Sabine Kunst and Berlin’s Mayor Michael Mueller “immediately ensure” the “scandalous” job ad is “taken down.” “Conditions listed there, according to which people with white skin should not apply, are illegal and blatantly discriminatory,” Mueller told Germany’s Bild newspaper, adding that “racism must not be fought with racism.”

German MP Christoph de Vries, also a CDU member, slammed the controversial ad as well, saying that it violates the nation’s constitution. “In short, the job advertisement is racist and discriminatory,” he told Bild, calling the ad an example of the “excesses of the leftist identity politics” that are increasingly dividing German society.

The gravity of the issue reached such proportions that even Germany’ Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency had to take a stand on it. “In such a case, certain applicants must not be excluded from the onset,” the agency’s head, Bernhard Franke, told Bild.

Following the outcry, the university told the German media it was “expressly not in the interests” of the educational facility to discriminate against any people, regardless of their skin color, origin, gender, ideology or age. The university also said that it sees itself as a “place [of] plurality of opinions, mutual appreciation and respect.”

The university also said that it asked the student council to review the advertisement but denied any legal responsibility for the incident. The student body is technically an independent structure that is not subject to legal supervision by the university administration, a spokesman for the educational facility told Die Welt newspaper.

The Student Council itself did not comment on the scandal. Instead, it changed the ad on Thursday evening and removed the controversial passage discouraging whites from applying for the job. Now, the ad says that the “counseling work has shown” that its goals are “best achieved by people” who experienced racist discrimination themselves. It also says that the council wants to “particularly encourage” victims of racist discrimination to apply for this position.

A similar ad for another “anti-discrimination counselling” job published by the council in May still features a passage that says it is “desirable” that the future counselor have a “relevant background (is black or a person of color).” 

Please don't write me nasty letters. I am not the least concerned about this issue; I just enjoy the irony.

War on Christianity - Pakistan Christians Denied Food Aid in CV-19 Lockdown

Christians yet again denied food aid, coronavirus relief distribution for Muslims only

Mordechai Sones 
Arutz Sheeva

Karachi, Pakistan coronavirus lockdown food distribution Reuters

International Christian Concern (ICC) reports Pakistani Christians were denied food aid amid the COVID-19 crisis in the fourth incident ICC has documented since Pakistan was placed on lockdown by authorities seeking to combat the pandemic.

According to a video post on Facebook, Christians were denied food aid on April 2 in a village situated on the Raiwind road, near Lahore. A local pastor confirmed the incident to ICC.

In the Facebook video, a young Christian man claims that a local mosque committee distributed food on April 2, however, village Christians were told to leave the mosque compound because the food aid was meant for only Muslims.

“If this is the situation, then what are the arrangements for Christians?” the Christian asked in the Facebook video. “Who is going to feed them? Are we not citizens of the same country?”

“Denying food aid and discriminating among citizens is a crime,” Aftab Hayat, a Pakistani NGO leader, told ICC. “Christians often face discrimination and are victims of religious hatred. However, the situation for Christians in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis is alarming and becoming worse. Therefore, the authorities must take note of the developing situation.”

Jihad Watch previously reported on two other such incidents, one on April 1st and one on April 7th, as well as on April 11th an incident in which Christians were forced to make the Islamic profession of faith to get food aid.

Can't Discriminate Against Devout Muslims in Sweden

Muslim woman wins handshake discrimination

case in Sweden

By Susan McFarland

(UPI) -- A Swedish court has ruled in favor of a Muslim woman who was cut short at a job interview because she wouldn't shake hands for religious reasons.

Farah Alhajeh, 24, was called to the interview with a company that offers interpretation services via telephone or video. When she declined to shake hands with a male interviewer, he terminated the meeting.

Alhajeh placed her hand over her heart instead, hoping he wouldn't take offense.

The court ruled the company discriminated against Alhajeh and ordered it to pay her $4,350.

Sweden's discrimination ombudsman took the case to court last year to argue for Alhajeh.

The company, whose policy asks employees to treat all colleagues the same regardless of gender, considers germophobia and autism legitimate reasons for not shaking hands.

The company said the move was not directed at Muslims as a whole, noting most male and female Muslims do shake hands.

The court ruling criticized the company's policy "for excluding those people who interpret Islam in the same way" as Alhajeh, but said it doesn't believe the employer's action was intentional.

In other words, devout Muslims. Devout Muslims are far more liable to be redicalized and therefore become possible terrorists. Employers now have to gamble with their employees.

“I came to the absolute conviction that it is impossible…impossible…for any human being to read the biography of Mohammed and believe in it, and then emerge a psychologically and mentally healthy person.” - Syrian Psychiatrist Dr. Wafa Sultan

Corruption is Everywhere - Japan, S. Korea, Malaysia, and Argentina

Ex-Malaysian PM Najib Razak charged with money laundering

By Daniel Uria

(UPI) -- Former Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak was charged with three counts of money laundering Wednesday in relation over alleged links to multibillion-dollar state fund scandal.

Razak didn't enter a plea to the three new charges under the anti-money-laundering act, which are related to SRC International, a former subsidiary of the 1Malaysia Development Berhad state development fund, the South China Morning Post reported.

Each of the new charges carry a maximum sentence of 15 years in jail and a fine.

On Dec. 26, 2014 Razak received two transfers of $6.6 million and $1.2 million to two different accounts at AmIslamic Bank Bhd, the first two charges allege. The third charge alleges he received an additional $2.4 million from illegal activities on Feb. 10, 2015, Bloomberg reported.

Razak was arrested by anti-corruption officials on July 3 and charged with three counts of criminal breach of trust and one count of abuse of power.

He pleaded not guilty to the first set of charges, which each carry a maximum 20-year jail sentence.

Razak set up the 1MDB fund in 2009 to assist in transforming Kuala Lumpur into a financial hub and boost the economy through strategic investments, but it missed payments for $11 billion it owed to banks and bondholders in early 2015.

Billions of dollars are missing from the 1MDB fund, which was set up by the former prime minister and since losing re-election in May he has been under investigation and banned from leaving Malaysia.

Argentina's former VP sentenced to nearly 6 years for corruption

By Ray Downs

Former Argentinian Vice President Amado Boudou attends his trial at the tribunals of Buenos Aires, Argentina, on Tuesday before he was found guilty and sentenced to nearly 6 years in prison. Photo by David Fernandez/EPA-EFE

(UPI) -- Former Argentinian Vice President Amado Boudou was found guilty on corruption charges Tuesday and sentenced to five years and 10 months in prison.

Boudou's arrest was ordered immediately and he also was fined 90,000 Argentinian pesos -- about $3,300.

The former vice president, who served during the administration of former President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner between 2011 and 2015, maintained his innocence and said he was a victim of political persecution by current President Mauricio Macri.

"This trial has been strange from the beginning, in that the responsibility of proof was inverted. I have had to prove I didn't know someone, prove I didn't attend a meeting," Boudou said, according to the Buenos Aires Times.

Prosecutors said Boudou lifted a bankruptcy declaration against Ciccone Calcografica, a money-printing company, in 2010, when he was Argentina's economic minister. In exchange for lifting that declaration, Boudou received a piece of the company, prosecutors said.

The trial ends a four-year saga for Boudou, who was charged in June 2014, becoming the country's first sitting vice president to face criminal charges.

But more convictions could be coming for former officials in the Fernandez administration in another corruption case. Last week, Argentinian newspaper La Nacion published a series of documents that allegedly detail bribes and payoffs to various officials, including Fernandez, who prosecutors plan to speak with this week.

Japanese medical school changed scores to limit admittance of women and to get bribes

By Danielle Haynes

(UPI) -- A medical school in Japan admitted Tuesday it altered the results of entrance exams to limit the number of women admitted to the university.

Officials at the Tokyo Medical University offered an apology after an internal investigation revealed the manipulated results starting in 2006.

The probe found that the school subtracted points for female applicants while padding the scores for men. School officials did so out of the belief that women would discontinue their medical careers or take long periods of absence if they got married or had children, Kyodo News reported.

The practice was "nothing but discrimination against women," one of the lawyers involved in the investigation said.

The probe found that former Chairman Masahiko Usui and former President Mamoru Suzuki each accepted bribes from the parents of students whose scores had been increased.

University officials said the school would no longer manipulate entrance exam scores and offered to accept potential students whose original scores would have earned them a spot.

"We sincerely apologize for the serious wrongdoing involving entrance exams that has caused concern and trouble for many people and betrayed the public's trust," said Tetsuo Yukioka, the school's managing director, who said he was not involved in the altering of scores.

"I suspect that there was a lack of sensitivity to the rules of modern society, in which women should not be treated differently because of their gender," he added.

Ex-South Korea president 'thankless' after accepting bribes

By Elizabeth Shim

Former President Lee Myung-bak has denied recent charges of bribery and embezzlement, and was recently hospitalized. File Photo by Yonhap

(UPI) -- Former South Korean President Lee Myung-bak "showed no gratitude" after accepting bribes of millions of dollars, according to a wealthy local banker who reportedly provided proof of graft.

Lee Pal-sung, the former chairman of Woori Financial Group in Seoul, released his personal memos to South Korea prosecutors that provide details of his meetings with the former president, the Segye Ilbo reported Tuesday.

According to his memos, Lee Pal-sung had delivered a total of $2.7 million in bribes to Lee Myung-bak and his inner circle.

Lee Myung-bak has been accused of accepting more than $2 million in cash from the Woori Group chairman from 2007 to 2011, through relatives and a son-in-law. Lee Pal-sung was hoping to curry favors with the newly elected president.

"Met with MB [Lee Myung-bak]. He said things are moving in a positive direction for me; [to be nominated] head of the Financial Supervisory Commission, president of the Korea Development Bank, or a member of the National Assembly," Lee Pal-sung wrote in a memo dating to Feb. 23, 2008.

But in a memo dating March 28, 2008, Lee Pal-sung had turned against the former president. "I am frustrated because of the possibility of having to end my relationship with Lee, and starting life over. I gave him [$2.7 million]. His clique is all unscrupulous human beings. They do not even say thank you."

KBS reported Tuesday the banker also complained the ex-president himself did not express gratitude for the money.

Lee Pal-sung has 41 pages of memos regarding his meetings with Lee Myung-bak from January to May 2008.

The former president has denied recent charges of bribery and embezzlement, and was recently hospitalized.

So, if he had only said 'thank-you', he might have gotten away with his corruption.

Doctors Group: Trudeau is Making Canada a ‘Totalitarian State’

War on Christianity - State Attack on Christian Doctors in Canada

NEWFOUNDLAND, (LifeSiteNews) – An international doctors’ group has asked Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to stop persecuting doctors for their religious beliefs.

Trudeau’s policies are transforming Canada into a “totalitarian state” and corrupting the integrity of its medical profession, MaterCare International executive director Dr. Robert Walley told the prime minister in a June 8 open letter.

The Newfoundland-based MaterCare is an international association of obstetricians and gynaecologists working to improve maternal health in developing countries, presently in Kenya.  

Walley's letter castigated Trudeau for his “overbearing attitude against religious people and their employment in our country.”

And it urged the prime minister to “end the discrimination of religious people and support equality in the workforce” in Canada.

“We want Trudeau to lift the lid on this pressure cooker he has created around our profession,” Walley elaborated in an email to LifeSiteNews.

“We are asking that he, at the very minimum, not actively pursue and persecute people who have religious beliefs and live them.”

Walley told Trudeau in his letter that the prime minister’s “dictatorial policies” have led to active discrimination against doctors who believe in the sanctity of human life.

“Medical students, residents, and physicians have begun to experience discrimination through denial of their right to practice according to their consciences if they do not accept your government’s dictatorial policies,” he wrote.

As a consequence, “fewer young doctors are entering certain specialties and others sadly compromise their moral integrity in order to sustain their careers,” wrote Walley.

“The covenant relationship that used to exist between doctor and patient, second only to religious advisors, is being corrupted such that doctors are now becoming simply technicians with contractual agreements as service providers.”

And Trudeau is responsible for this state of affairs, having “created a climate in this country that encourages discrimination of those with open religious beliefs,” Walley told LifeSiteNews.

Canada is “quickly becoming, ethically and morally, a totalitarian state, created in the image of Justin Trudeau,” he contended.

The prime minister has also “transformed the Liberal Party into something of a hate group that deliberately targets, among other faiths, the practice of Christianity,” added Walley.

That began with Trudeau’s 2014 edict as Liberal leader that all party candidates must support abortion. It continued with the Liberal policy denying Canada Summer Job funding to groups that refused to sign an attestation supporting abortion, as well as gender ideology.

“Organizations across the country are following his lead, coercing professionals to cooperate with his ideals and, in essence, renounce their faith or fear loss of their livelihood,” Walley told LifeSiteNews.

Notably, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) issued a policy requiring physicians and surgeons make “effective” referrals to an accessible colleague willing to do the act “when their consciences will not allow them to cooperate with a particular procedure or treatment.”

A group of Christian doctors challenged the CPSO policy, but Ontario Superior Court upheld it, ruling that although the policy infringed Charter rights, it was justified to allow equal access to healthcare “services.” The doctors’ groups are appealing the ruling.

“Healthcare workers will either become initiated into this climate through the process of gradualization, or they will leave to find somewhere where they can practice their faith and medicine freely. Healthcare will lose its credibility among patients,” Walley observed.

“Justin Trudeau is trying to change our profession, which he knows little or nothing about, including the practice of abortion. He simply has no legitimate authority to speak to these issues,” Walley told LifeSiteNews.

“It is a profession that some feel called to take on because they want to help people and save lives.”

International Day of the Girl and Iran Jails Girl for Showing Hair in Public

Iran sentences ‘Girl of Enghelab Street’ to 24 months

for removing headscarf in public

Women showing their hair in public in Iran are usually

sentenced to two months or less and fined $25

The protests are inspired by the actions of a 31-year-old woman, now dubbed the "Girl of Enghelab Street" who was arrested in December when she took off her headscarf and held it in the air while standing on a pillar box in Central Tehran.Video grab of "The Girl of Enghelab Street", allegedly identified as Vida Movahed.

The Associated Press

TEHRAN, Iran — A Tehran prosecutor says a woman who removed her obligatory Islamic headscarf in public in late December has been sentenced to 24 months in prison.

Girls showing hair corrupts Islamic men

Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency on Wednesday quoted prosecutor Abbas Jafari Dolatabadi as saying the unidentified woman took off her headscarf in Tehran’s Enghelab Street to “encourage corruption through the removal of the hijab in public.”

In February, police detained 29 women who removed their headscarves as part of an anti-hijab campaign known as “White Wednesdays.”

The police say the campaign, advocated by Farsi-language satellite TV networks based abroad, purportedly encourages women participants to take their white headscarves off on Wednesdays.

Women showing their hair in public in Iran are usually sentenced to far shorter terms of two months or less, and fined $25.

God help women if they should ever become visible in Islamic society!

Sex Segregation in Islamic-Faith School Ruled Unlawful by UK Court

This will be interesting to watch

FILE PHOTO: © Ben Stansall / AFP

The policy of segregating girls and boys at an Islamic-faith school has been deemed unlawful in a landmark ruling by the Court of Appeal in the UK.

Judges ruled on Friday that the separation of boys from girls constituted sex discrimination. The decision could have huge ramifications across the country.

Al-Hijrah School in Birmingham had challenged a critical report by schools watchdog, Ofsted. However, the High Court upheld the regulator’s findings.

Last year, Justice Robert Jay ruled that the Ofsted inspectors were wrong to penalize the mixed-sex school, which orders complete segregation of pupils from year five.

But three Court of Appeal judges in London have now overturned that decision.

At the school, all breaks, school trips and clubs are held separately for all children aged over nine. The findings from Ofsted said the children were separated to the point that they used separate corridors. Inspectors insisted the practice left them “unprepared for life in modern Britain.”

Books in the library advocated husbands beating their wives and forced sex, the report said.

Ofsted will now be able to give schools that separate children based on their gender a lower rating.

That's it? A lower rating? Wow, that will really teach them. They will wear that like a badge of honour!

Sir Terence Etherton, Lady Justice Gloster and Lord Justice Beatson unanimously found that the actions of the school had contravened the 2010 Equality Act.

“It is common ground that the school is not the only Islamic school which operates such a policy and that a number of Jewish schools with a particular Orthodox ethos and some Christian faith schools have similar practices,” the appeal judges said.

“The relevant central government authorities should not pivot in the way they have gone about this without recognising the real difficulties those affected will face as a consequence.”

Ofsted's Chief Inspector Amanda Spielman said the watchdog’s job is to make sure that all schools “properly prepare children for life in modern Britain.”

“Educational institutions should never treat pupils less favorably because of their sex, or for any other reason,” she said.

“The school is teaching boys and girls entirely separately, making them walk down separate corridors, and keeping them apart at all times.

“This is discrimination and is wrong. It places these boys and girls at a disadvantage for life beyond the classroom and the workplace, and fails to prepare them for life in modern Britain.

“This case involves issues of real public interest, and has significant implications for gender equality, Ofsted, government, and the wider education sector. We will be considering the ruling carefully to understand how this will affect future inspections.”

A number of schools may now have to stop segregating pupils, or split into single sex schools.

DOJ to Appeals Court: LGBT Employees Not Protected by Federal Discrimination Law

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions © Aaron Bernstein / Reuters

In an unprecedented move, the Justice Department intervened in a private New York employment discrimination case to remind the court that gay employees are not protected from discrimination under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a 36-page friend-of-the-court brief on Wednesday, telling the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York that Title VII, which prohibits employers from discriminating based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin, should not extend to include sexual orientation. 

“The sole question here is whether, as a matter of law, Title VII reaches sexual orientation discrimination. It does not, as has been settled for decades. Any efforts to amend Title VII’s scope should be directed to Congress rather than the courts,” the Justice Department wrote.

The brief was out of the ordinary since the department, which had no previous involvement in the case, does not usually get involved in private employment lawsuits.

The discrimination case was filed by Donald Zarda, a skydiving instructor who accused his employer of terminating him for his sexual orientation. Zarda said he lost his job after he told a customer that he was gay and the customer’s husband made a complaint to the company.

In their brief, the Justice Department argued that sex discrimination only occurs when employers treat male and female employees differently.

“The essential element of sex discrimination under Title VII is that employees of one sex must be treated worse than similarly situated employees of the other sex, and sexual orientation discrimination simply does not have that effect,” the department wrote. "Of course, if an employer fired only gay men but not gay women (or vice versa), that would be prohibited by Title VII, but precisely because it would be discrimination based on sex, not sexual orientation."

The department also said that the decision to add sexual orientation to Title VII should be left to the courts, saying that despite “notable changes in societal and cultural attitudes” every Congress since 1974 has declined to add a provision to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

“When adopting Title VII’s ban on sex discrimination in 1964, and especially when amending it in 1991, Congress was well aware of the distinct practice of sexual orientation discrimination and chose not to ban it also,” the department wrote.

Devin O'Malley, a spokesman for the DOJ, told The Hill that the brief “reaffirms the Department’s fundamental belief that the courts cannot expand the law beyond what Congress has provided.”

“This Department remains committed to protecting the civil and constitutional rights of all individuals and will continue to enforce the numerous laws Congress has enacted that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

Under US Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the department has changed course from the previous administration.

In 2014, former Attorney General Eric Holder issued a memo, telling attorneys that Title VII “encompasses discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status.”

On Thursday, Holder noted that the department's brief was filed the same day that President Donald Trump announced that the military would ban transgender people from serving.

In 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ruled that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was illegal. The decision did not bind the courts, however, many courts have based their rulings on that decision.

In the brief, the DOJ said that the EEOC, which oversees enforcement of Title VII and filed court papers supporting Zarda, was “not speaking for the United States.”

RISKY FAITH: RISING INTOLERANCE FOR CHRISTIANITY

BY BOB JONES


A 65-year old man “became” a woman and everyone from the President of the United States to ESPN applauded this as “courageous.” Freedom of speech has its obvious liabilities but until recently, to say the least, free speech was tolerated.

Anyone who expressed contrary opinions about this story were instantly demonized and dehumanized. If the commentator had any association with Christianity they were not only dismissed as deluded but derided as oppressively intolerant.

Increasingly, Christianity is not tolerated because of the need for greater tolerance.



Intolerance for Tolerance

The word ‘tolerant’ as it is used today, seldom, if ever, includes opposing arguments or competing worldviews.

Being tolerant used to mean, “I may disagree with you completely, but I will treat you with respect.”

Today, tolerant means “you must approve of everything I do and if you do not agree with me you must hate me.”

“Tolerance, ” according to Professor Matthew Staver, “has become decidedly intolerant.”

This is no more apparent than for all things Christian.


Trending in Europe

In January 2015, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – politicians representing 800 million citizens – acknowledged that Christians are facing increasing intolerance and discrimination.

* 74 percent of those surveyed in the United Kingdom affirm that there is more discrimination directed at Christians than persons of other faiths.

* 84 percent of vandalism in France was committed against Christian places of worship.

* 95 percent of the anti-religious violence in Scotland is directed against Christians.

In February 2015, The Council of Europe, which represents 47 European countries, stressed that Christians in particular need to be protected so that they are not penalized for their beliefs. Read more here.



A Different Drummer

Christians in Canada have always marched to the beat of a different drummer. There is a growing awareness that the drums of Christians are becoming unwelcome in the parade of opinions.

Professor David Seljak, believes that “Canada is not a secular society but a secularizing society and, more precisely, a de-Christianizing society.”

Michael Coren calls anti-Christian behaviour the “last acceptable prejudice.”

This is a significant shift in our culture.

Having the freedom to search for answers to questions of meaning and value and to live publicly and privately in accordance with the answers of faith is an essential part of human fulfillment and happiness.

Christians should not be treated as a tolerated and divisive minority whose rights must always yield to the secular agenda.


3 Responses to Intolerance

1. Ed Stetzer points out, “as Canadian culture shifts to intolerance, Christians will be seen as increasingly unlike the world around them. Be aware of the shifts and be ready for a new reality.“

Let's hope so, otherwise it means we will become more like the world, and that is apostasy.

2. See the new reality as an opportunity not to “curse the darkness, but to light a candle.” “Let your light shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.” Jesus Christ

3. Christians can alienate or illuminate what pollster Angus Reid recently identified as the “mushy middle” in Canadian society.  These are Canadians who “do not see themselves as particularly devout; but they also have not abandoned religion.”

Christian authenticity is a needed light for a culture shifting towards intolerance.

* Matthew Staver, Dean and Professor of Law at Liberty University School of Law.
* David Seljak, Department of Religious Studies, St. Jerome’s University in the University of Waterloo

APPLICATION: Have you observed an intolerance for Christian values and faith? Have you felt it in the school system? In the workplace? Please leave a comment below. Thank you.

Full-out Assault on New Front in War on Christianity

Democrats, LGBT activists’ sinister plan

to crack down on Christian schools

By Todd Starnes (The Associated Press)

If California Democrats have their way, Christian colleges and universities will no longer be allowed to require students attend chapel services or require them to profess a relationship with Jesus Christ.

Senate Bill 1146 would close a loophole that lawmakers say allows Christian universities to discriminate against students based on their gender identity, gender expression or sexual orientation.

“All students deserve to feel safe in institutions of higher education, regardless of whether they are public or private,” said Senator Ricardo Lara, the author of the legislation. “California has established strong protections for the LGBTQ community and private universities should not be able to use faith as an excuse to discriminate and avoid complying with state laws.”

We knew this was coming, it was just a matter of when. This is, of course, not about discrimination against LGBTQs. It is a malicious attack on Christianity! How many LGBTQs are registered in Christian universities? Probably not enough to use up all your fingers counting, if any. 

Lara is trying to destroy Christian education in California and shame on the government for endorsing it. You are trading this possibility of a handful of LGBTQs being offended for the certainty that tens of thousands of Christians will be offended and have their education interfered with significantly. - GWM

The legislation has already passed the Senate and is expected to clear hurdles in the Assembly. Thus far, Lara has refused to compromise with the state’s Christian colleges and universities.

“No university should have a license to discriminate,” he said in a statement.

If the loophole is closed, it would only exempt schools that prepare students for pastoral ministry. 

“It discriminates against religious colleges, said John Jackson, the president of William Jessup University. “If we don’t play ball with state — the state will attempt to drive us out of existence.”

The president of the Sacramento-based university

called the proposed legislation chilling

“The passage of this bill would destroy the foundation upon which this university was founded,” said Jackson. “Systematically discriminating against religious institutions and preventing student access and choice to Christian higher education is bad policy and will have a negative effect on the state of California.”

Lee Wilhite, vice president of university communications at Biola University, said they, too, have serious concerns with the bill.

“It functionally eliminates the religious liberty of all California faith-based universities,” he told me. “It really does infringe on how we carry out our mission.”

Like most Christian universities, Biola integrates the Bible through all of their courses — something they’ve been doing for more than 100 years.

If the loophole is closed, it could have a devastating impact on faith-based institutions.

“We would no longer be able to require a profession of faith for students,” Wichita said. “That’s something Biola requires of all incoming students.”

Schools would no longer be allowed to integrate faith throughout their teaching curriculum, he added.

Leaders at three universities I spoke to say that they would not be allowed to require mandatory chapel attendance or mandatory core units of Bible courses.

“The danger for Biola University is that it prevents us from carrying out our mission the way we have for 108 years,” Wilhite said. “It would eliminate our ability to continue our mission. That’s why it has our attention.”

The legislation would also give students a right to sue if — for example -- they were offended by a prayer in a class.

Biola and William Jessup refute the notion that LGBT students are discriminated against on their campuses.

“We don’t tolerate harassment or bullying of any of our students,” Wilhite told me.

Many of the schools are working with the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities to urge Lara to amend his bill to include a religious exemption.

“If passed without amendments, the new law would also very likely disqualify students attending California Christian colleges and universities from eligibility for Cal Grants, a key state-level student aid program,” wrote Kurt Krueger, president of Concordia University Irvine.

Azusa Pacific University president Jon Wallace, penned a passionate op-ed for the San Gabriel Valley Tribune.

“Sen. Lara wants to safeguard LGBT students. We want the same protection for all students, including members of the LGBT community. The bill calls for more transparency from schools about their beliefs and recourse for unfair treatment. We share his concerns about student safety, transparency and recourse. With every prospective student, we share who we are, we provide the framework for how we build community and do life together and we ask those who enroll to uphold our student standards of conduct. Right now the proposed bill would invite challenges to required chapel attendance and public and communal observation of Christian sacraments such as the Eucharist and baptisms, among other activities central to our identity.”

Several of the universities I contacted said they are going to respectfully stand their ground -- even if it means taking their case to the Supreme Court of the United States. 

“We are not willing to change our policies,” Jackson said. “There is a very intentional attempt to marginalize those who don’t accept the notions of sexual orientation and gender identity as the government has framed them.”

And Jackson warned that what’s happening in California could happen in other parts of the country.

“Religious freedoms are in play in California,” Jackson told me. “Ultimately, I’m concerned that what begins in California rolls across the nation.”

Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

'Whatever It Takes': Missouri Democrats Try To Block Anti-gay, Religious Freedom Bill

The LGBTQI war on Christianity 

is skirmishing in the Missouri State capitol today

Missouri State Capitol © / Wikipedia

Senate Democrats in Missouri are filibustering in hopes of halting the advance of a constitutional amendment that would allow businesses and individuals in the state to refuse goods or services for same-sex marriages based on religious beliefs.

The filibuster of Senate Joint Resolution 39 began at 4:00 p.m. local time on Monday. The eight-member Democratic Caucus has maintained the filibuster since then, currently going on for over 20 hours.

Some senators said they plan to go at least 24 hours in their effort, as the minority party in the Missouri Senate, to block the resolution backed by the Republican majority.

“I can do this all day,” said Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal at 8 a.m. Tuesday, according to Think Progress. “This is my prime time.”

Senate President Pro Tem Ron Richard said he would let the filibuster go on for 24 hours. "Maybe even longer. Whatever it takes," he said, according to statehouse reporter Crystal Thomas.

The longest filibuster in recent Missouri history was a 30-hour effort by Democrats in 2003 to halt legislation that aimed to limit high-amount civil lawsuits.

Republican state lieutenant governor Peter Kinder tweeted that Senate Democrats should "stand down and allow religious liberty to thrive in Missouri."

Joint Resolution 39 would prohibit "the state from imposing a penalty on a religious organization who acts in accordance with a sincere religious belief concerning same sex marriage, which includes the refusal to perform a same sex marriage ceremony or allow a same sex wedding ceremony to be performed on the religious organization's property."

The state could not penalize "an individual who declines, due to sincere religious beliefs, to provide goods of expressional or artistic creation for a same sex wedding ceremony" if the resolution is passed by the state Senate, then later approved by Missouri voters in the form of an amendment to the state constitution.

For instance, if a Missouri business or individual refuses, on religious grounds, to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, they could not be penalized for outright discrimination.

The resolution is similar to Indiana's religious freedom restoration act, a religious exemption law that attracted boycotts and business efforts in the state last year, costing Indiana as much as $60 million in economic benefits, according to a tourism group survey.

Critics have pointed out that the resolution is ultimately unnecessary, as Missouri's Human Rights Act protects from discrimination based on race, gender, and religious, but not sexual orientation or gender identity. Furthermore, state and local government agencies cannot curb a person's actions based on religious beliefs without a compelling reason.

There-in is the problem. At some point in time, religious freedom will manifest in what will appear as discrimination, and, sooner or later, discrimination will become a compelling reason.

Thus, lesbian, gay, transgender, and bisexual people in Missouri are already allowed to be discriminated against in a host of ways, in employment, housing, or simply when patronizing a restaurant.

There are no known cases of the state penalizing anyone in relation to a same-sex marriage service, according to the Riverfront Times.

The resolution was introduced by Republican Senator Bob Onder on February 17, quickly finding its way to the Senate floor by the evening of March 7. Onder characterized the resolution as safety net against state encroachment on religious beliefs.

“This amendment is entirely defensive, in that it prevents state and local governments from imposing penalties,” Onder said, according to the Kansas City Star. “It is a shield, not a sword.”

Missouri Democrats say the bill reminds them of when it was legal to discriminate on the basis of a person's skin color.

“A lot of the arguments I’m hearing of proponents of this bill harken back to the same arguments we heard back in 1964 when people were fighting for segregation in Mississippi,” said Senator Jason Holsman.

When reading the measure through the eyes of an LGBT person, “I see a mean spirited attempt to try to make the laws apply differently to me than they do to you," Holsman added.

Onder said the measure was not driven by"bigoted motivation."

“Their is no desire to discriminate against anyone,” Onder said. “This would simply protect people from being persecuted based on their religious beliefs.”

And there is the reason why there is a war on Christianity, because religious freedom cannot co-exist with equal rights for gays and lesbians. There will always be confrontations, often deliberately arranged as gays and lesbians see Christianity as an obstacle in their path to credibility. They think they can bring an end to Christianity, but they haven't read the end of the Book.

The resolution could shield an adoption agency from penalty should it discriminate against same-sex couples, ThinkProgress noted, adding that local municipalities could be prohibited from enforcing a nondiscrimination law based on the resolution's language.

Business groups have come out against the resolution in fear of the kind of lost profits that Indiana suffered after enactment of its own religious exemption bill.

“While we understand the desire to protect clergy and religious institutions from having to perform ceremonies counter to their beliefs, expanding protections to individuals and private businesses that voluntarily enter the stream of public commerce sends the message to the rest of the country that Missouri condones discrimination,” the St. Louis Regional Chamber of Commerce said on Monday.

Filibusters are essentially efforts by opponents of certain legislation to delay a final vote. Famous filibusters in the US Senate include Senator Strom Thurmond's 24-hour filibuster that sought to thwart the Civil Rights Act of 1957. In Texas, state Senator Wendy Davis successfully filibustered a state law in 2013 that restricted abortion access, speaking alone for more than 11 hours. The legislation was eventually passed and is now the subject of a US Supreme Court case.

Sharia Courts Creating Dual Justice System in UK?

Creeping Sharia?

© / RT

The rising popularity of Sharia courts in the UK is increasing concerns of a parallel justice system emerging. Authorities say they are conducting a review of the process. RT’s Eisa Ali looks at the arguments of those against and in favor of the system.

Sharia councils in the UK say they deal strictly with family matters, such as marriage and child custody battles, but there is concern that they constitute a parallel legal system.

“We believe that Sharia courts discriminate against women and especially against Muslim women,” Nazira Mahmari, of the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation, told RT.

“We want all women to have the right to access the mainstream system,” she added. Mahmari says she would like to close down all Sharia courts in the UK.

This view is shared by Robin Tilbrook, the founder of the English Democrats Party, who says the British government should be doing more to tackle the problem.

“I think more effort needs to be made by the authorities so that it is simply not allowed that divorce, criminal matters and inheritances are dealt within Sharia courts, particularly where the requirement for women to take part in these is basically being forced on them,” he told RT.

However, there are fears that if all Sharia courts were to be closed down, they would just appear underground, making it harder for them to be regulated.

They are regulated now?

It is said there are some 85 such courts in Britain, but the actual number is unknown, Reuters reports.

So much for regulation! They don't even know how many are operating - they might as well be underground.

Their supporters say much of the criticism concerning these justice systems is due to ignorance about how much power they wield.

Khola Hasan, a scholar from the Islamic Sharia Council defended the need for Sharia courts, saying the English legal system is not interested in certain matters that affect Muslim families.

“English courts are not interested in religious marriages or religious divorces, so we are working alongside the English legal system and all we are doing is providing a religious aspect that English law does not provide,” she told RT.

Home Secretary Teresa May launched an inquiry into these religious councils last month. The Islamic Sharia Council does admit there are issues and say they would welcome government input and regulation of the system.

“There are many Sharia councils that are operating under the radar who do not have any kind of transparency. There is not even a staff sitting [sic], as there is just one person in a backroom,” Hasan said.

© / RT

The minister for Countering Extremism, Lord Ahmad, (a Muslim is Minister for Countering Extremism? Seriously?) said the UK government is looking into whether Sharia courts are misusing the law and are in the process of compiling a report.

"The government is committed to an independent review to understand the extent to which Sharia may be being misused, or applied in a way which is incompatible with the law in the UK. This review will be formally established shortly and we expect an initial report to be issued to the home secretary in 2016,” he said in December.

So, they are not reviewing whether or not the concept of a parallel judicial system is lawful. So, I guess Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Satanists can all start their own judicial system.

Sharia law, practiced in many Middle Eastern countries, is the Islamic legal system, which has been derived from the Koran, as well as taking into account rulings of Islamic scholars. Aside from providing rules for living, such as prayers and fasting, Sharia law can hand down punishments, which can be as severe as cutting off limbs or being beheaded for certain crimes.

In 2014, the Law Society published guidelines under which High Street solicitors would have the ability to write Islamic wills, which can exclude non-believers completely and deny women an equal share of an inheritance.

“The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir of the same class. Non-Muslims may not inherit at all, and only Muslim marriages are recognized,” the document states.

There is nothing moderate about Sharia. It is evil, it comes from a Satanic religion, and it has no business in a society where people are equal regardless of sex, colour or religion. The UK and all European countries must have a ZERO tolerance policy toward Sharia. If we give them a little authority, they will abuse it and assume more and more authority and we may not even be aware of it until people start showing up missing a hand or with scars from lashes on their backs. If Muslims want to live under Sharia, there are plenty of countries where they can do that; the UK should not be one of them.

Insanity Reigns as Trinity Western University & B.C. Law Society Face Off in Supreme Court

The case centres around a covenant students have to sign 

that rejects same-sex marriage

CBC News

The B.C. Law Society initially accredited Trinity Western University's law
program, but then reversed its position. (Trinity Western University)

A B.C. Supreme Court judge will hear arguments this week about whether future graduates of a Christian university's law school should be able to practise in the province.

At issue is the covenant Trinity Western University's law students must sign, which says marital sex can only happen between men and women. 

"It's not for everyone, but it is important for those who would like to attend such a school," said Earl Phillips, the law school's executive director.

Phillips said not allowing the accreditation of the program would be discriminatory against the school's students.

The B.C. Law Society initially accredited the program, but then reversed its position after members voted against accreditation.

Can you say: gay lobby?

The judicial review is expected to last five days.

An Ontario court has already upheld the Ontario law society's refusal to accredit TWU graduates, while Nova Scotia's law society is appealing a court ruling that stopped it from denying accreditation to graduates.

The proposed law school has yet to open.

It's tragically funny how much society has changed in just one generation. 20, 30, 40 years ago, Trinity's standards would have been considered excessively moral. They haven't changed, but they are now considered immoral, discriminatory against gays. Even though 99.9% of gays wouldn't be caught dead in Trinity Western University - they feel discriminated against. How absurd is that? And how absurd is it that law societies and courts agree with them? Insanity reigns!

Open Season on Christian University Students

Public colleges and universities are taking the gloves off when it comes to Christian students on their campuses. Gone are the days of surreptitious slights against Christians; now it is open season on faith. Blatant, in-your-face, anti-Christian discrimination is the new norm.

Christians students now face their applications being rejected because they let it slip out that they are a person of faith, receiving failing grades for daring to allow their religious beliefs to outweigh the omniscience of the educational elites, or being outright expelled for having the audacity to live in accordance with their faith.

The rise of anti-Christian discrimination on public university campuses is astounding in its breadth and shocking in its shamelessness.

The American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ) is currently representing two students who were denied admission to the Radiation Therapy Program at the Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC): Brandon Jenkins and Dustin Buxton. These students, who were acting out their Christian faith by seeking to serve the hurting and the sick, were brazenly refused admission because of their professed belief in God.

One student, Brandon, was denied admission because when asked in an admissions interview what was the most important thing in his life, he replied simply, "My God." In rejecting his application, Radiation Therapy Program Director Dr. Dougherty informed Brandon, "I understand that religion is a major part of your life ... however, this field is not the place for religion. ... If you interview in the future, you may want to leave your thoughts and beliefs out of the interview process." The college unapologetically doubled down on this sentiment, stating that Dr. Dougherty's statement "is not bad advice," and that students, when interviewing for secular positions, would be better advised to "have a concrete reason for wanting to undertake the training at hand than to say only that God directed one to do it." (For more on Brandon's case, click here). This situation is almost unbelievable, but unfortunately Brandon isn't alone.

Dustin was similarly denied admission to CCBC's Radiation Therapy Program because when asked about the guiding principle in his life during his interview process, he answered simply, "My faith." Dr. Dougherty scored the Christian student's interview low because "He [Dustin] also brought up religion a great deal during the interview." When we notified the college of its discriminatory conduct, rather than apologizing for their clearly discriminatory decision, CCBC instead retaliated by placing an 85-year hold on Dustin's account, forbidding him from registering for any classes. (For more on Dustin's case, click here).

We're in federal court in both of these cases. This college's anti-Christian discrimination is not only unconscionable, it's unconstitutional. However, this college is far from alone in its attack on Christian students.

Sadly, we are seeing a rise of instances across the country in which students at public universities and colleges are being unjustly discriminated against because of their professed Christian faith. Audrey Jarvis, a student at Sonoma State University in California, was asked by a university administrator to remove her cross necklace during orientation because it could potentially offend others. In Florida, at Polk State College, a professor gave a student zeros on several assignments because the student refused to agree with the professor's anti-Christian bias. The course syllabus even stated, "[t]he point of this is not to 'bash' any religion, we should NEVER favor one over another, they all come from the same source, HUMAN IMAGINATION ... ."

So, that was my imagination that hung on the cross 2000 years ago. All the miracles that have happened in and around my life, apparently, didn't happen, or were a series of astounding coincidences. Pretty weird, when you pray for someone to be healed of a fatal disease and they are healed instantly, and it's just a coincidence. Maybe my imagination healed her. 

Pity the day when these 'brilliant' men have to stand before my imagination. May my imagination have mercy on their souls.

At Florida Atlantic University, a student was reportedly ordered to write the name of "Jesus" on a piece of paper and stomp on it. A student at Eastern Michigan University was expelled for expressing her faith in a counseling program.

Likewise, a student at the University of Wisconsin was informed by her professor that "[r]eligious contemplations and the bible [sic] belong to a different realm and not academic sources. So your argumentation along Christian lines ... are [sic] inappropriate for this presentation. I will not allow you to present unless you change this. You will also fail your presentation if your [sic] discuss religion in connection with it."

Additionally, Christian organizations are being removed from public university campuses. California State universities have effectively evicted Christian organizations from university campuses by refusing to recognize Christian organizations in college directories and university websites, increasing their room rental fees, and forbidding them from representing themselves at campus-wide open houses, until the Christian organizations accept California State University's "all-comers" policy. That is, all-comers except Christians.

In light of the prevalent rise of hostility towards religion by public universities and colleges, and the unapologetic discrimination against those professing Christian beliefs, we at the ACLJ are addressing the problem, and we are working towards gaining greater protections for religious liberties. The ACLJ has launched a new public advocacy campaign, joined by tens of thousands of Americans. Along with our representation of students like Brandon and Dustin in court, we're sending a message to state colleges and universities across America: stop anti-Christian discrimination now.

These lawsuits demonstrate to public universities and colleges that discrimination against students because of their profession of Christian beliefs is unacceptable—the American public will not support such blatant, unconstitutional discrimination against, and suppression of, religious freedoms. In short, we won't tolerate it.

The ACLJ's efforts are appreciated, but they will not significantly reverse the anti-Christian discrimination in secular universities. It's a sign of the times. It will get worse before it gets better. It won't get better 'til Jesus comes. The situation is not helped by the very unChrist-like behavior of a lot of American Christians - read, Republicans.

Indiana Governor Wants Changes to Controversial Religious Objections Law

Gov. Mike Pence does not believe lawmakers intended 'to create a license to discriminate'

A major development in the ongoing battle of supremacy of rights between Christians and the LGBT lobby. An indication of the losing trend that will not reverse itself - partly because many of us Christians have a rather unChrist-like attitude toward gays and lesbians. Fighting them rather than praying for them is always going to result in loss.

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence said he wants new legislation on his desk this week that would ensure businesses are not allowed to discriminate against gays and lesbians based on religious grounds.

Gov. Mike Pence defended the measure as a vehicle to protect religious liberty but said he has been meeting with lawmakers "around the clock" to address concerns that it would allow businesses to deny services to gay customers.

The governor said he does not believe "for a minute" that lawmakers intended "to create a license to discriminate."

I wouldn't bet the farm on that, Mike!

"It certainly wasn't my intent," said Pence, who signed the law last week.

But, he said, he "can appreciate that that's become the perception, not just here in Indiana but all across the country. We need to confront that."

Religious Objections Protest

A crowd of at least 2,000 people, including Democratic elected officials,
rallied outside the Indiana Statehouse against the state's new Religious
Freedom Restoration Law. (Rick Callahan/Associated Press)

The law prohibits state laws that "substantially burden" a person's ability to follow his or her religious beliefs. The definition of "person" includes religious institutions, businesses and associations.

Although the legal language does not specifically mention gays and lesbians, critics say the law is designed to protect businesses and individuals who do not want to serve gays and lesbians, such as florists or caterers who might be hired for a same-sex wedding.

'Fix this now'

In Washington, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Indiana officials appeared to be in "damage-control mode" following an uproar over the law.

Earnest also took issue with Pence's claim that Indiana's law was rooted in a 1993 federal law. He said the Indiana measure marked a "significant expansion" over the 1993 law because it applies to private transactions beyond those involving the federal government.

Businesses and organizations including Apple and the NCAA have voiced concern over the law, and some states have barred government-funded travel to Indiana.

Also Tuesday, the Indianapolis Star urged state lawmakers in a front-page editorial to respond to widespread criticism of the law by protecting the rights of gays and lesbians.

The Star's editorial, headlined "FIX THIS NOW," covered the newspaper's entire front page. It called for lawmakers to enact a law that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of a person's sexual orientation or gender identity.

The newspaper says the uproar sparked by the law has "done enormous harm" to the state and potentially to its economic future.

Arkansas could pass similar law

Meanwhile, Arkansas was poised to follow Indiana in enacting a law, despite increasing criticism from businesses and gay-rights advocates.

The Arkansas House could vote as early as Tuesday on a proposal that would prohibit state and local governments from infringing on a person's religious beliefs without a "compelling" reason. And unlike in Indiana, Arkansas lawmakers said they will not modify their measure.

"There's not really any place to make any changes now," Republican Rep. Bob Ballinger of Hindsville said about his proposal. "If there are questions in two years, we can fix it."

Hundreds of protesters filled Arkansas' Capitol to oppose the measure, holding signs that read "Discrimination is not a Christian Value" and "Discrimination is a Disease," and chanting "Shame on You" at Ballinger after the measure was endorsed by a House committee.

"I believe that many people will want to flee the state, and many people will want to avoid our state," said Rita Jernigan, a protester and one of the lead plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit challenging Arkansas' gay marriage ban.

Similar proposals have been introduced in more than a dozen states. Nineteen other states have similar laws on the books.

Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson, who had expressed reservations about unintended consequences of an earlier version of the bill, has said he will sign the current measure into law.

"But I am pleased that the Legislature is continuing to look at ways to assure balance and fairness in the legislation," Hutchinson said Monday in a statement.

In a letter released Tuesday, Little Rock Mayor Mark Stodola urged Hutchinson to veto the proposal, which he said would hurt the state's economic-development efforts because it "sends the message that some members of our community will have fewer protections than others. Our city and our state cannot be limited to only certain segments of society."

Apple CEO opposes measures

Sexual orientation and gender identity are not included in Arkansas' anti-discrimination protections. Last month, Hutchinson allowed a measure to go into law that prevented local governments from including such protections in their anti-discrimination ordinances.

Opponents of the bill hoped to target Hutchinson's promise to be a "jobs governor." The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights group, has run ads in Silicon Valley aimed at the same technology firms Hutchinson has said he wants to lure to Arkansas.

Apple CEO Tim Cook wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post over the weekend opposing the Arkansas and Indiana measures. Wal-Mart has said the proposal sends the wrong message about its home state. Little Rock-based data services company Acxiom also urged Hutchinson to veto the bill, saying the measure would enable discrimination and open the state up to ridicule.

"This bill is at direct odds with your position that 'Arkansas is open for business,"' CEO Scott Howe and Executive Vice President Jerry C. Jones wrote Monday in a letter to the governor.

Seriously? What kind of business is it not open to?