‘Having been politically active while in the employment of housing provider L&Q since 2015, I was perplexed to suddenly find myself facing disciplinary action for political activity.
I had stood four times for Parliament, including in the Lewisham East by-election, as well as being No.1 on the list for the Christian People’s Alliance (CPA) for the London Assembly last year.
None of this activity caused any problems for L&Q.
The only problem arose when I stood this year to be mayor of Lewisham. As part of the process, each candidate is granted a full page in the mayoral booklet which goes out to every resident of Lewisham — over 200,000 people. For my contribution I produced a six-point plan which, along with plans to tackle knife crime and fly tipping, included the following statement:
I pledge to cut through political correctness and simply state the truth that natural marriage between a man and a woman is the fundamental building block for a successful society, and the safest environment for raising children.
Of the 200,000 residents, one of them decided this was “hate speech” and put forward a complaint to Lewisham Council demanding that the booklet be withdrawn. Lewisham Council politely informed them that it is up to each candidate to write what they like and they do not dictate the wording.
Next, however, came a complaint to my employer. Constant vicious posts were going up on social media with cries of feigned outrage and accusations of “hate speech”. Elements of the media began to pick them up and to contact the party headquarters and then myself.
An article appeared in the Guardian which was quite mild, followed by another much more forthright article in Pink News. Its article was headed “Christian candidate attacks same sex marriage in disgusting election leaflet”. My leaflet was called “anti-gay bile” though I didn’t actually mention homosexuality in the manifesto.
Pink News contacted my party’s office demanding answers. We sent a series of research pieces with evidence that demonstrated how children need a father and how married couples are significantly better parents, as well as some research which examined graduation rates and concluded that children of same-sex parents are significantly worse off. We also gave clear testimony from children who have grown up in same-sex households, demonstrating the detrimental effects it had on their lives. We asked Pink News to provide some research to back up its position that children are better off with same-sex parents — or at least no worse off. It couldn’t come up with anything at all.
This publicity, however, provoked a total of three complaints to my employer. The complainants accused me of being “homophobic” and discriminatory towards the LGBT community. All three demanded that I should receive “anti-oppressive training” and face disciplinary action.
I was immediately suspended pending investigation, but I still felt confident as I assumed Christian beliefs were protected under the Equality Act as much as homosexuality is. After all, I had not insulted or even criticised anyone — I had merely stated a clear Christian value.
Prevented from campaigning while suspended, I was investigated by L&Q and told that my case had nothing to do with Christianity. Although I outlined how L&Q was breaching articles 9 and 10 of the European Court of Human Rights, my employer was simply not interested.
Article 9 gives me the right to freedom of thought, belief and religion, and Article 10 the right to hold my own opinions and to express them freely without interference. These articles take precedence over companies’ diversity and inclusion policies.
Nonetheless, L&Q acted quickly. As soon as the election was over, it told me I was dismissed with immediate effect for defying the company’s inclusion policy, which appears not to include Christianity.
This is the first time that a political candidate has been penalised by their employer for political speech which is protected for very obvious reasons. The ramifications of this case cannot be overstated. Free speech is being attacked and eroded by cancel culture rapidly in the UK and around the world.
I believe free speech and Christian freedoms are fundamental aspects of democratic societies and must be protected at all costs. Our ability to freely express our views and openly disagree with each other is the core essence of democracies. The alternative is forced censorship and the threat of losing everything if you don’t comply.
What has happened to me does not bode well for the ordinary citizen who hopes to make a difference in their community and nation. What message does this vicious attack on a Christian politician and my Christian values send to other Christians who want to engage with politics? I am deeply concerned that what has happened will deter them, and that is why I have no choice but to fight for justice.
My case illuminates how cancel culture intimidates dissenters into silence by making examples of employees so that anybody else who considers being openly honest about their views on controversial subjects will think twice or face a similar fate.
Corporations such as L&Q are willing participants in the erosion of free speech. They do the dirty work of the woke mob under the guise of internal inclusion and diversity policies. This is not diversity, but a narrow commitment to progressive social values.’https://thecritic.co.uk/sacked-for-christian-beliefs/
The West has lost any sense of justice. The society we once knew in the West is in its last days. The mob rules! 2Timothy 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
‘Last year, the incredibly brave Christian evangelist Hatun Tash was brutally stabbed at Speakers’ Corner, in what was evidently an attempt on her life. I wrote about the incident for The Critic at the time, and indicated that this was not the first time that she had been assaulted there.
Hatun was not deterred. She continues to bravely preach at Speakers’ Corner — the place known as “the home of free speech” — every Sunday. Just days ago, on Sunday, 26 June, she was arrested by police there after having her Qur’an forcibly stolen from her.
Yes, you read that right, she was arrested after her copy of the Qur’an was stolen from her. She had done nothing wrong herself. You can watch the footage of how the Qur’an was ripped out of her grip here. Shortly afterwards she was arrested. This is the third time she has had her Qur’an stolen from her at Speakers’ Corner. No one has ever been arrested for stealing her Qur’an, and her copies of the Qur’an have never been returned. This means that the robbers know they can get away with it and are therefore emboldened to steal again.
It is well-known that Hatun carries a copy of the Qur’an with holes drilled through it as a visual aid when engaging with Muslims at Speakers’ Corner. I have explained before that this reminds the Muslims there that one of their leading apologists admitted that the Muslim narrative about the origins of the Qur’an “has holes in it”. ‘https://thecritic.co.uk/the-police-are-enabling-islamic-intolerance/
‘Labour MP Rupa Huq is making another attempt to introduce new legislation that would ban any sort of prayer, protest or support offered to people outside of abortion clinics across the country.
In an amendment to the Public Order Bill, the proposed text suggests that anyone found within these censorship zones – which constitute a 150m radius around abortion clinics – could face a fine or six months’ imprisonment, and if found for a second time, could even face up to two years in prison.
To be clear, these punishments are reserved for anyone who “interferes with any person’s decision to access, provide or facilitate the provision of abortion services in that buffer zone.”
However, ‘interferes with’ is further broken down, making it clear that it targets anyone who might be there to offer appropriate support and advice to women looking for help. The amendment lays out that ‘interferes with’ can be defined as:
“(a) seeks to influence; or (b) persistently, continuously or repeatedly occupies; or (c) Impedes or threatens; or (d) intimidates or harasses; or (e) advises or persuades, attempts to advise or persuade, or otherwise expresses opinion; or (f) informs or attempts to inform about abortion services by any means, including, without limitation, graphic, physical, verbal or written means; or (g) sketches, photographs, records, stores, broadcasts, or transmits images, audio, likeness or personal data or any person without express consent.”
The growing use of ‘buffer zones’
The effort to shut down the pro-life voice by any means is sadly not new. In fact, the proposed amendment is simply the re-tabling of the same amendment brought forward by Ms Huq in 2021, which ended up not being put to a vote after opposition from Parliament and the public.
However, an increasing number of local councils have gone out of their way to enact Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs), which essentially have the same legal effect as creating a so-called ‘buffer zone’.
Most famously, in October 2019, Christian Hacking became the first person to be arrested for publicly praying in front of an abortion clinic, in violation of the UK’s first ‘buffer zone’ in Ealing, West London. Since then, two more ‘buffer zones’ have been created in the UK, effectively silencing the pro-life voice outside abortion clinics.
More recently, Birmingham City Council has consulted on creating a new PSPO around another abortion clinic, arguing that it was in the ‘public interest’ to protect residents from allegedly ‘violent protestors’. Pro-life group 40 Days for Life, which regularly sets up peaceful prayer vigils outside abortion clinics (far enough away from the entrance so as not to cause disturbance), was accused by the council of sending ‘violent protestors’ to the Robert Clinic, Birmingham, who allegedly harass and interrogate the public. Yet the council failed to recognise that in reality, it is the pro-life volunteers who regularly face harassment from the public.
Yet in reality, these zones are really ‘censorship zones’. The real purpose of them is shut down any form of pro-life action, prayer or support, outside of abortion clinics. In effect, this gives priority to a pro-abortion viewpoint over a pro-life viewpoint.
Even pro-abortion MP Kit Malthouse seemed to point out the hypocrisy of so-called ‘buffer zones’ during the second reading of the Public Order Bill in the House of Commons, commenting:
“I am honestly and genuinely perplexed by the argument about buffer zones … I understand the sensitivity in that particular situation, but why is it that we object to and are willing to restrict that particular form of protest, but not others?”
The pro-life presence outside abortion clinics in the UK is a peaceful one, with most groups setting up prayer vigils or silent demonstrations, with the occasional leaflet or booklet being offered to those who pass by.
Many women – and men – have been helped by these pro-lifers outside abortion clinics, being shown there are other options to abortion. For example, Danny and Carla were helped by 40 Days for Life outside an abortion clinic when they felt they had no other choice than to terminate Carla’s pregnancy. They are now proud parents to baby Betsy.
Similarly, the testimonies of those helped by abortion pill reversal suggest a growing number of women who regret choosing abortion, and point to a much-needed pro-life presence outside abortion clinics.
It makes sense for the pro-life movement to be present outside the very place it objects to; much as you might find animal rights’ protestors outside shops that sell fur or products tested on animals. The difference is, those with a pro-life point of view are effectively being told their views aren’t valid and must be shut down, even when they cause no disruption.
In turn, this essentially allows ideological abortion providers to hide all opposition to what they’re doing to where no one can see it. It lets them keep women, who may be being coerced or uncertain about their decision, on the abortion conveyor belt that always ends in the ‘choice’ to abort.
Breach of human rights
These censorship zones effectively breach freedom of religion and belief by banning a pro-life viewpoint from being expressed within a certain area. They are also a wildly disproportionate response to the activity that generally goes on outside abortion clinics.
Article 9 of the Human Rights Act in the UK protects freedom of thought, belief and religion, which Article 10 protects the right to freedom of expression. Similarly, Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights provides freedom of assembly, meaning that everyone, no matter the cause, has a right to protest, demonstrate or march in a public space – which includes outside abortion clinics.
The universal introduction of so-called ‘buffer zones’ would inhibit these freedoms and may well be ruled to breach human rights.
‘Buffer zones’ not supported by Parliament or public
I don’t know anything about the movie but the Muslims won the night by getting it cancelled! Another win for the Islamists! Hmm, I wonder if this was a film that Christians were protesting what would be the outcome?
‘Jeremy Corbyn, the one time leader of the UK’s left-wing Labour Party and the head of the opposition, was barred from being reinstated as a member of parliament after a 23 – 14 internal party vote.
“Today’s…vote and Keir Starmer’s ongoing decision to bar me from sitting as a Labour MP is disappointing,” Corbyn wrote in a Twitter statement on Tuesday.
“I am grateful for and humbled by the support I’ve received, especially from my Islington North constituents. The struggle for peace, justice and sustainability goes on.”
Corbyn was suspended from the party in October 2020, on the heels of a report that found widespread antisemitism within the Labour party.
He did not accept the findings of the report and suggested it was essentially a conspiracy aimed at ousting him from power, which led to him being barred from sitting as an MP for the party.
The UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) wrote that party leaders, including former London mayor Ken Livingstone and councillor Pam Bromley, used antisemitic tropes and smears freely, and that Jewish members of the party were regularly harassed and intimidated into silence.
“We found that the Labour Party’s response to anti-Semitism complaints has been inconsistent, poor and not transparent, in terms of the process used, reasons for decisions, record-keeping, delay and failures to communicate with complainants. Some complaints were unjustifiably not investigated at all,” the EHRC wrote.
Rather than take responsibility for the issue, Corbyn said that those complaining about antisemitism within the party were doing so not out of genuine concern, but to achieve strategic goals.
He downplayed the seriousness of the issue by saying that antisemitism exists everywhere in the world and that whistle-blowers were acting in bad faith.
“The scale of the problem was…dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media,” he wrote in a Facebook post at the time.
‘Last weekend, a British Muslim invaded a Texas synagogue and held the rabbi and four members of his flock at gunpoint while demanding the release from prison of a biochemist known as ‘Lady Al Qaeda’. The drama flared briefly across news sites before vanishing from sight. As the Australian Jewish News observes, the assault
…failed to make even the world headlines on the ABC digital media platforms for the 12 hours the stand-off with police was taking place.
Since then, if the ABC’s internal search engine is any guide, there has been only one follow-up. Some stories, it seems, are of little but passing interest. There are terrorists, and then there are those other terrorists, the ones whose motives and religious background are best not mentioned. Diversity, don’t you know, enriches us all, so team-player journalism ignores the sand that grates in the gears of the multiculturalists’ narrative.
Daniel Greenfield, however, indulges his curiosity to report what mainstream media might have done were it actually interested in getting to the nub of a story rather than papering over unfortunate and disconcerting truths. Of Faisal Akram (above), who will never again interrupt Shabbat gatherings thanks to a sharp-shooting Texas SWAT team, he writes:
Back home, the Blackburn Muslim Community page announced that “Faisal Akram has sadly departed from this temporary world” and prayed that Allah “bless him with the highest ranks of Paradise”….
…The town has produced no shortage of Jihadists, including the youngest terrorist in the UK, as well as a number of Jihadis who traveled to join ISIS, an associate of shoe bomber Richard Reid, and a terrorist who played a key role in an Al Qaeda plot that targeted New York and D.C.
Blackburn is one of the most segregated towns in the country and has been described as a “no-go zone”. The area that produced the Temple Terrorist has one of the highest Muslim populations outside of London and some claim that flying the English flag has been effectively outlawed.
The setting couldn’t be any better for the media to whitewash the murderous terrorist with the familiar excuses that he was the victim of failed integration in the United Kingdom. His family, in an even more familiar excuse, is claiming that he “was suffering from mental health issues”.‘https://quadrant.org.au/
Australia along with the UK is becoming more and more anti-God and antagonistic toward God’s Word!
‘After facing arrest and detention for preaching that homosexuality is a sin, an American evangelist is warning that “things are getting very bad” in the United Kingdom and other Western countries, suggesting that the situation has deteriorated to the point where they are “becoming communist.”
Ryan Schiavo, who describes himself as an “evangelist and missionary,” was arrested in London on July 22 for preaching that homosexuality is a sin. While Schiavo is an American, he spends a considerable amount of time in London and frequently ministers to British youth and others gathered in the public square.
In an interview with The Christian Post, Schiavo recounted the events leading up to his arrest and warned about its implications for free speech and freedom of religion in the U.K. and Western civilization as a whole.
“I was preaching the Gospel on the streets as I frequently do, but it was about a 30-minute message, and in the course of a long message I can touch on many topics that I believe are pertinent,” he said. “At one point, I talked about the issue of homosexuality and transgenderism. I said that homosexuality is a sin; I talk about how it’s destructive, and the damage the transgender agenda is doing to children right now in the schools because it’s being pushed on children at a very young age here.”
Schiavo told CP that one of the things he said while preaching was that “the churches that have rainbow flags on them” were “not real churches.” His message drew the ire of one young woman, whom he believed was a lesbian. According to Schiavo, she was “very upset at what I had said, and so she called the police and the police came.”
Ryan Schiavo, an American street preacher, is arrested by Metropolitan Police for asserting that homosexuality is a sin, July 22, 2021. | Courtesy of Ryan Schiavo
As documented in a video of his arrest, Schiavo was detained for purportedly violating Section 4A of the Public Order Act, which bans people from causing “intentional harassment, alarm, or distress.”
The law declares that “a person is guilty of an offense if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm, or distress, he — (a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior, or disorderly behavior, or (b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting.”
As Metropolitan Police officers moved in to arrest him, Schiavo declared, “It is an honor to suffer for Jesus Christ.” He predicted that “God is going to judge this country so severely” because of its embrace of LGBT ideology.
“This is because I am a Christian!” he exclaimed. “That’s why this is happening.”
Schiavo told CP that when he was taken to jail, he was “put in a cell for 10 hours and given a mental health evaluation by the National Health Service before being released in the middle of the night.” He lamented that situations like his “egregious” detention were becoming “all too common.”
Describing the mental health evaluation to CP, Schiavo maintained that he was asked “personal questions about my family and about my work and how I was doing physically.” Schiavo cited the fact that he had to undergo a mental health evaluation as evidence that “things are getting very bad” in the U.K. regarding freedom of speech and religious expression.
“All these institutions are working together with each other; they’re anti-Christ,” he added. “It’s time for the church to wake up and to be prepared for persecution. Freedom of speech and expression are very much under attack in the Western world, and I’m concerned that many of these Western countries are becoming communist.”
Elaborating on his mental health evaluation, Schiavo recounted that he “did talk about the issue of homosexuality and transgenderism” with the man who was questioning him. “I said to him, ‘Would you call a banana a carrot?’ And the point I was making was this is what we do with people now. We call men women and women men.”
“I didn’t say that to him. I just said, ‘Would you call a banana a carrot?’ And he looked at me and he said, ‘If somebody was offended, I would.’ And I looked at him and I said, ‘I should be the one asking you the questions.’”
Schiavo contended that his mental health evaluation, which lasted for 30 minutes, was an effort to “convince me not to talk about homosexuality in public anymore.” He told CP that “he (the mental health evaluator) wanted me to affirm him and just say, ‘OK,’ and agree, and I never did.”
The evangelist attributed his hostile treatment by the police to the fact that British law enforcement officials are “so trained to hear ‘homosexuality’ or ‘Islam’ because those are the two most protected demographics in Britain right now.” He stressed that in the U.K., “you cannot speak against homosexuality or transgenderism and you can’t speak against Islam.”
“So if they hear those words, their antennas are up because they go through all of this pro-LGBT training … in their schooling, … at every other level of society people do here, it’s being pushed on them,” he continued. “And so when they hear that word, they’re immediately thinking ‘hate crime,’ ‘hate crime.’”
Although he wasn’t formally charged with a crime, Schiavo’s arrest puts him “in the national police records for three years.” He’s now working with the U.K.-based Christian Legal Centre to “get this overturned.”
“I did not commit a crime,” Schiavo insisted. “It is not a crime in the U.K. to say homosexuality is a sin in public or to say that churches with rainbow flags on them are not churches. This is protected speech.”
In a separate interview with CP, Linda Thacker, who attends church with Schiavo when he’s in the U.K. and videotaped the arrest, explained why she decided to document his interaction with law enforcement officials on camera: “I didn’t like the security guard’s attitude toward Ryan. He seemed very hostile.”
“We wanted to make sure that there was no kind of false accusation,” she said.
Thacker characterized Schiavo’s arrest as “a bit of a wake-up call for me,” expressing concern that “the right to have free speech and to express how we feel personally about … anyone else’s lifestyle … will put you in the position of being called a domestic terrorist or some kind of hater.” Like Schiavo, Thacker fears that the U.K. is “heading toward a communist state.”
Before his arrest, Thacker said there had been confrontations between Schiavo, his supporters and LGBT individuals that weren’t captured on camera.
“The lesbian was very threatening and kicked his drink down the road. [She] also tried to tear my husband’s Bible out of his hands, which she didn’t manage to do, but she got a leaflet out of his Bible … and flung it into the street.”
While Schiavo did face hostility following his comments about homosexuality, he also received support, including from an atheist, who was featured in Thacker’s video. Schiavo told CP that while the man “said that he disagreed with 99% of what I said,” he nonetheless argued to the police that ‘This man has not done anything warranting … an arrest, he’s just exercising his freedom of speech.’”
In spite of the man’s impassioned defense of Schiavo, the street evangelist lamented that the police “never even took a statement from him.” Instead, Schiavo said, “the police only took one formal statement on the street … and it was from this young girl … [who] was upset with what I said.”
“From the beginning, they weren’t interested in getting to the truth. … It was just this one girl’s testimony that they listened to.”
Thacker seconded Schiavo’s accusation that police had conducted a one-sided investigation: “All they were interested in doing was arresting him on the grounds of this lesbian that said that she had been distressed by what was said.”
Schiavo is not the only street evangelist to face legal consequences for sharing Christian teachings about marriage and homosexuality with the British public. As CP previously reported, British Pastor John Sherwood was arrested by police in April for emphasizing the biblical definition of marriage as he preached from a step ladder in the Northwest London town of Uxbridge.’https://www.christianpost.com/news/american-evangelist-jailed-in-uk-its-getting-very-bad-here.html
whatyareckon 