Freedom
All posts tagged Freedom
http://www.mrctv.org/blog/couple-finds-their-own-stolen-suv-holds-thieves-gunpoint
Believe it or not ‘In a case of classic American vigilante justice, a couple found the people 
who stole their SUV and held them at gunpoint until the police arrived.
HOWEVER, ‘Q13Fox notes that while the couple is not facing charges for pulling out their gun, Snell said the man can be charged with assault.
The couple called 911 before apprehending the passengers.’ http://www.mrctv.org/blog/couple-finds-their-own-stolen-suv-holds-thieves-gunpoint
Unbelievable, but is it?
- ‘The implication is that Muslims too love Jesus — an approach that is bound to attract Christian passers-by (including priests and nuns) if only out of curiosity. But
the Jesus of the Qur’an is not the Jesus of the New Testament. For Muslims, he is not the Son of God, not one third of the Trinity, did not die on the cross, was not resurrected after death, and is not God incarnate. He is simply one of a long line of prophets, important — yet inferior to Muhammad. - “We call them stinking kafir [non-Muslims], dirty. But, of course, akhi [brother], if that’s going to run them away from al-Islam, we don’t say that to them in front of their face.” — Abu Usamah, an imam at the Green Lane Mosque in Birmingham.
- No one loves the kuffaar. No one loves the kuffaar! [unbelievers] … Whether these kuffaar are from the UK, or from the US … We love the people of Islam and we hate the people of the kufr. We hate the kuffaar. Whoever changes his religion from al-Islam to anything else kill him in the Islamic state. — Abu Usamah al-Thahabi, Channel 4 documentary, 2007.’ https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10385/hoodwinking-kuffar
Islam is diametrically opposite Bible Christianity. These poor saps that seek to dialogue with the Devil will be the first on the chopping block. Again, as I wrote yesterday not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists for many years now have claimed that they are Muslims.
What is the answer? There MUST be questions asked of migrating Muslims concerning Sharia and many other Islamic beliefs that are in total opposition to a free society. Even then there is great danger in such a mass migration of Muslims into a free society. May our political leaders get their heads out of the sand and into reality.
‘Silence from us pesky Christians is what elites want.
We have no business putting forward an alternative vision for marriage and gender, we were told not once, but twice this week.
The new Australia they are trying to create excludes a Christian worldview from the public square.
First there was Labor Senate Leader Penny Wong asserting that separation of church and state meant Christians should stay out of the marria
ge and “safe schools” debates.
Really? Why should one group of Australians be disbarred from debate about laws which affect children and freedoms while other Australians are allowed to participate?
Separation of church and state is important but it was never designed to exclude religious people from public policy debates. Penny Wong should know better.
All Australians should be free to have their say on any issue – especially marriage and “safe schools”.
But it is frightening for free speech in this country that no-one pulled her up.
Media were quite happy to report her critique of ACL, but our reply was ignored.
Secondly, news broke at the weekend that the Australian Medical Association is campaigning to redefine marriage because it is a mental health issue.
Dr John Hayes kindly provided me a copy of this letter he has sent to a major newspaper.
Dear Sir,
The Federal AMA leadership has lost credibility by claiming that denying homosexuals the right to marry is detrimental to their mental health. This is pure spin and has no scientific basis. The truth is the AMA has capitulated to intense Media pressure from the Gay Lobby, led by former AMA president, Dr Kerryn Phelps, whose comment that “Christians now have nowhere to hide” is sectarian bigotry unbecoming of a former AMA president.
Ordinary AMA members were denied a vote on this issue, whereas in 2016, members were given a say and overwhelmingly rejected Euthanasia.
Regards,
Dr John Hayes, AMA member
I’ve met Dr Kerryn Phelps. We were on the ABC1’s Q&A program together. Off camera, we got along well despite our disagreement about redefining marriage.
Her comment at the weekend that “Christians have nowhere to hide” is a worry.
We need to be determined not to hide. This is a time to have courage and to speak up for the truth about marriage and why gender diversity in it matters.’ http://www.acl.org.au/why_we_need_to_speak_up_while_we_can?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=eNews%2023%20May%202017&utm_content=eNews%2023%20May%202017+CID_825f846005b996499a64ace7f659ec7f&utm_source=CreateSend&utm_term=Read%20Lyles%20blog
‘Mr Dreyfus has confirmed that if Labor is elected to government he will be considering
imposing a general standard for speech that infringes anti-discrimination law.
Under Labor’s proposal, advocates of same-sex marriage would be empowered, for example, to take legal action under 18C-style laws if they felt offended or insulted by those who publicly defended the traditional definition of marriage. Those at risk would include priests, rabbis, imams and other religious leaders who publicly oppose same-sex marriage.
Labor’s 
proposal also opens the prospect that debate over the cost of the National Disability Insurance Scheme could be truncated because of the risk of litigation by those who might feel offended or insulted.
Mr Dreyfus outlined Labor’s thinking during a panel discussion on Wednesday last week with Liberal backbencher Tim Wilson, hosted by the Jewish Community Council of Victoria.
In the video of the event, Mr Dreyfus said a Labor government hoped to consolidate all federal anti-discrimination legislation and would consider whether there should be a general standard for the type of speech that would attract liability under that law. At the moment, separate federal laws make it unlawful to discriminate against people because of their race, age, sex and sexual orientation, disability and indigeneity.
When Mr Dreyfus was asked by an audience member if section 18C should be extended to cover gender and disability, he said Mr Wilson had reminded him of the “failed project which I hope to return to of consolidating the five anti-discrimination statutes when we are next in government”.
“One of the things we’ll be looking at is this very point of whether or not we should set a standard about speech generally,” Mr Dreyfus said.
“I want to have standards set in a community which respect the dignity of every Australian. I think it’s very important and something to be fought for.”
When asked yesterday about his remarks, Mr Dreyfus said Labor would never support changes to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.
“The consolidation of discrimination law was a policy of the Gillard Labor government,” he said. “My discussion of this issue last week was clearly hypothetical, and is not relevant to the current proposed changes to section 18C which will do nothing but weaken protections against racial hate speech in this country.”
Labor’s proposal has come to light at a time when the Australian Human Rights Commission is dealing with a surge in complaints by those claiming to have been offended and insulted under section 18C. Section 18C makes it unlawful to do anything that causes people to feel offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated because of their race, colour or national or ethnic background.’ http://freedomwatch.ipa.org.au/
This video pushing sodomite marriage is described as ‘Acceptance and belonging are at the heart of Airbnb. Which is why we felt compelled to throw our support behind marriage equality in Australia by creating the Acceptance Ring. This incomplete ring symbolises the gap in marriage equality that we need to close. Until the day comes when two people who love each other can celebrate that love through commitment, we want Australians to wear this ring and show their acceptance of marriage equality.’
That day when sodomites are allowed to call their sin ‘marriage’ will be another nail in the free speech/thought coffin. Airbnb ‘is an online marketplace and hospitality service, enabling people to lease or rent short-term lodging including vacation rentals, apartment rentals, homestays, hostel beds, or hotel rooms.’ https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Airbnb&rlz=1C1CHFX_enAU685AU685&oq=Airbnb&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
I believe Qantas is one of the best airlines flying but it is pushing this agenda as are other corporations. Sadly but not surprisingly ‘As one Qantas employee said in an email: “I’d hate to be a Christian flight attendant explaining to their manager why I wasn’t intending on wearing the ring… or to a gay colleague on the other end of a cart doing a meal service. Talk about a bad initiative for crew cohesion and its impact on service, let alone safety.
“Of course Qantas would say they’ll never force someone to wear the ring. But the spokesperson and the CEO are not the ones at a safety critical coalface being forced to deal with the potential fallout of rainbow ideology being shoved down people’s throats and potential conflict in an environment where teamwork is critical.”’ http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/miranda-devine-if-you-dont-wear-this-ring-youre-a-bigot-what/news-story/e3d8097796866e7ecb98c8991dc5c0bb
Photo by AAP/Paul Miller of Alan Joyce CEO of Qantas
This push for so-called same-sex marraige is really a slap in the face of the Creator God who said He ‘…also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet’ Romans 1:24-27.
There is always a price to be paid for standing for truth!
‘No government entity has the authority to license, commission, accredit, and certify any Christian ministry–unless said groups go hat in hand asking for state or federal funds. A license is permission to do what would be illegal without it. No preacher should ever permit the government to license his work. Even in other professions, a license does not guarantee quality but does provide control and income for the government. In some states, a license is required to use your truck to haul dirt, rocks, etc.; to shampoo hair in a beauty shop; to own a gun; to teach school, and on and on and on.
It is obvious that a medical doctor’s license does not protect patients from sexual abuse or unnecessary medical procedures; nor protect students from incompetent or predatory teachers; nor guarantee a reasonable-looking haircut from barbers; nor assure a fair, reasonable defense by attorneys; nor, but then you get the idea.
In the mid-400s, Theodosius II, Eastern Roman Emperor from 408 to 450, made it a punitive offense for a man to teach the public without a state license; and soon such licenses were given only to “Christians.” Now that the Church was in control, they decided to keep the unbelievers out of teaching by requiring permission from the church-controlled government.
As early as 1534, the English clergy were forbidden to preach without a government license and John Bunyan got caught up in government machinery that tried to control preachers and teachers.
John Bunyan has been one of my major heroes all my adult life. But, I recently discovered that 
John, after spending more than 12 years in jail for preaching the Gospel, finally accepted a license to preach! While that was wrong in my opinion, it does not diminish Bunyan’s courageous stand against King Charles II and the king’s demand that John and other dissidents (those who disagree) not preach the Gospel. Preaching the Gospel was very costly to all except the Church of England preachers and even they did not have total freedom of conscience since they had to obey the King and Parliament regarding religious matters.
In the seventeenth century, all religious groups hated the Roman Catholics who like all dissidents met in homes. Everyone in England and Europe remembered the Inquisition where “the papists” mangled, mauled, and murdered hundreds of thousands of “heretics.” All the dissidents and the Church of England preachers agreed–“No popery, no popery!” Of course, everyone should have had freedom of conscience–Catholics, Anglicans, Quakers, Baptists, Presbyterians, and even the religious weirdos. Moreover, all the groups were against the Baptists because of their insistence on baptism by emersion of only those who had trusted Christ as Savior. No babies under any circumstance.
King Charles I had feuded, fussed, and fought with Parliament and ended up being beheaded in 1649 followed by Oliver Cromwell becoming Lord Protector until his death in 1658. Although a strict Puritan, Cromwell provided religious freedom for everyone. Into this religious mix, mess, and maelstrom walked two men who would make their mark on English history–a preacher and a king.
When Charles II restored the monarchy in 1660, he reneged on his promise of religious freedom he had made in his Declaration of Breda a few weeks earlier (a mistake I hope Trump does not make). The people had experienced about twenty years of freedom of worship but now nonconformist (Baptist, Presbyterian, Independent, etc.) services were banned, and ministers were rounded up and arrested. The major hero in this religious mix was a born-again tinker, a Baptist preacher named John Bunyan. The resultant clash was titanic.
Soon after his conversion, Bunyan began preaching in 1655 and was arrested in 1660 while preaching in an unapproved religious meeting (conventicle). He served a prison stretch until 1672 when he was released with other dissidents. He was jailed again for a few months in 1675.
The Act of Uniformity 1662 required every preacher to adhere to and accept the doctrine of the Church of England or leave the country. That included all preachers of the Church of England (many of them Puritans) and all the various independent groups. Everyone had to attend the Church of England regularly with fines, banishment, and then hanging for a third offense. (That would sure help one decide whether or not to sleep in on Sunday morning!) The act required all clergymen to use the Book of Common Prayer; consequently, about 2,000 Puritan clergymen were forced to resign. Some of them recanted while others became dissident preachers, others got other employment.
As to unbiblical ceremonies in the Church of England, Puritans (and all dissidents) objected to kneeling during the Lord’s Supper, the observation of holy days, the use of the surplice (outer garment worn by priests), and the signing of the cross in baptism.
The noose got tighter when the Conventicle Act 1664 became law forbidding more than five people, not members of the same family, to meet for worship. This was followed the next year by the Five Mile Act that forbade any preacher from coming within five miles of any incorporated town or their former place of abode. The noose was now tight and the preachers were standing on a very fragile, shaky platform.
The Baptists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and other dissidents from the Church of England continued to meet surreptitiously in homes, barns, and abandoned buildings while the Quakers very bravely continued to meet openly. This was a time of persecution without parallel as Protestants (Anglicans) persecuted Protestants (Puritans and dissidents).
However, Charles and the Anglicans did not have it easy in hounding, hunting, and harassing the dissidents. In 1668, the Bawdy House Riots proved that sane citizens recognized the insanity of persecution of decent people. London crowds attacked brothels as they protested against a government which had tolerated prostitution while persecuting devout, principled preachers!
Present day parallels are numerous as the state asserts its authority to control religious colleges, license Christian counsellors, certify Christian teachers, regulate school curriculum, prohibit anti-homosexual regulations, restrict military chaplains, etc.
The modern state is as arrogant, asinine, and aggressive as King Charles II was and it’s time for principled Christians to resist to the point of jail.’ http://donboys.cstnews.com/government-cannot-license-a-ministry-john-bunyan-was-wrong
- ‘In 1990, the “Gayssot law” was passed, stipulating that “any discrimination based
on ethnicity, nation, race or religion is prohibited”. Since then, it has been used to criminalize any criticism of Arab and African delinquency, any question on immigration from the Muslim world, any negative analysis of Islam. Many writers have been fined and most “politically incorrect” books on those topics have disappeared from bookshops. - The French government asked the media to obey the “Gayssot law.” It also asked that history textbooks be rewritten to include chapters on the crimes committed by the West against Muslims, and on the “essential contribution” of Islam to humanity. All history textbooks are “Islamically correct.”
- In hospitals, Muslims are increasingly asking to be treated only by Muslim doctors, and refusing to let their wives be treated by male doctors.’ https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10007/france-death-spiral
‘10,000 supporters of Turkey’s president Erdogan gathered in the König-Pilsener-Arena in Oberhausen, Germany, on Saturday to attend a speech by Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim. Yildirim was campaigning for a “Yes” vote to Erdogan’s constitutional reform 
which is set to abolish the office of prime minister and strengthen Erdogan’s one-man rule. “Those who love their country say yes” was the slogan of Saturday’s event.
Three million Turkish citizens live in Germany. 60 percent of those who cast a vote in Turkish elections support Erdogan and his Islamist party. Campaign stops by Erdogan and other senior figures of the ruling AK Party in Germany have become a political tradition in recent years. In 2010, Erdogan held a rally in Cologne in which he called assimilation a “crime against humanity“.’ https://gatestone.eu/turkey-pm-germany/
Perhaps Muslims immigrating to another country need to be asked; “Do you wish to live in a democratic nation or do you support an Islamist dictatorship?” Those who hold to the Islamic faith must ALSO be asked as to whether they can live by the laws of the nation in which they are immigrating or will they seek to have the whole of Sharia Law implemented?
Islam is a theocracy as was Israel in the Old Testament. If Jews today sought to impose the Old Testament laws onto society today it would not be acceptable. Neither should the Islamist Sharia Law be accepted. In the New Testament we find that the Lord Jesus Christ has given man freedom from the Law of the Old Testament as it says in Romans 10:4 “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”
Recently ABC’s Q & A had Muslim Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Yassmin Abed-Magied
and Senator Jacqui Lambie on the show. Part of the show may be viewd at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdfpaftrOwc or the entire show at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gINbYZFZoA.
Senator Jacqui Lambie
The conversation became quite heated with Magied defending Sharia law and proclaiming how much freedom women have within the Islamic faith. Hmmmm.
Interestingly Muslims are holding their 2017 Australian Islamic Peace Conference (AIPC) March 11-12 in Melbourne. Now, this is interesting because one of the flyers distributed has the faces of the women who will be speaking blackened out. Another has the photos of the male speakers but not the photos or names of the women speakers. Why? 
There are over fifty Islamic nations in the UN’s Organization of Islamic Cooperation; http://www.oic-oci.org/states/?lan=en. One of the member Islamic states is Iran. How do women fare in Iran under Sharia? In fact go through the entire list and be honest, which of these OIC countries would offer a woman the freedom Yassmin has in Australia?
Why does a woman have more freedom in Australia and the USA? It is mainly because they were both established on the Scriptures of Christianity. In Australia and the USA both men and women have freedom not known to women in Sharia compliant countries .
Sadly, freedoms are being stifled in Australia and other Western nations due to the immigration of those from Islamic countries. For instance the Q Society recently held a dinner at Victoria Univesity. When those who disagree with the stand of the Q Society they had the freedom to protest, which they did. What was it about the Q Society that was so distasteful that they had to protest? “The Q Society’s platform opposes Islamic immigration and halal certification.” http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-13/victoria-university-apologises-for-hosting-q-society-fundraiser/8266646?pfmredir=sm
Do these people really understand Islamic Sharia law?
Even “Inside the building, a strong police presence patrolled downstairs, while guests upstairs had their ID checked and were issued with wristbands before entering.” So opposing Islamic immigration and halal certification is worthy of a protest?!
Well, the Q Society is such a threat that “Victoria University staff and students have lodged a letter of protest with vice-chancellor Professor Peter Dawkins, saying the society goes against the university’s values of openness, and of welcoming students from all backgrounds.’ Of course ‘Professor Dawkins apologised to staff and students on Monday, saying the university regretted “inadvertently” taking the Q Society’s booking.’ He said ‘”Victoria University is a proudly diverse and multicultural institution,”‘ but that diverseness does NOT seem to include the Q Society! Is there a bit of hypocrisy here?
So, to conclude this post, Yassmin has her liberty as a woman because she lives in Australia which was founded on Christianity and not one of the OIC countries! MAY HER AND OUR FREEDOM CONTINUE!
