The arrogance of some Muslims is galling, as they seek special protection for their false religion.

The incitement to hatred of Islam should be considered a crime against humanity, TurkeyÂ’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in a speech before the Council of Europe in Strasbourg yesterday.

“Just as anti-Semitism is a crime against humanity, so should Islamophobia be regarded,” Erdogan said. Erdogan warned against the growing phobia against Islam and foreigners in the world in which “we Muslims feel increasingly under siege.”

Excuse me! Muslims feel under siege? Seems to me it is the rest of us, who are being shot at, blown up, beheaded, or having planes crashed into our buildings who ought to be feeling under siege by Islam, not the other way around. And I will point out to you that anti-Semitism is not treated as a crime against humanity – indeed, if the Caliphate were ever re-established we would see mullahs declaring anti-Semitism to be the national sport, if the current level of active anti-Semitism among Muslims is any indication.

But beyond that we are back to the Mohammad Cartoon flap again.

Referring to the row over blasphemous cartoons that were originally printed in a Danish newspaper, he said freedom of expression should not be confused with the freedom to insult.

The row showed not only a “lack of respect for religious convictions,” but was also a sign of a “growing and dangerous polarization between the Western and Islamic world.” The Turkish prime minister called on Western countries to integrate the Muslims living among them to a much greater degree.

“With a (Muslim) population of between 10 and 25 percent in Europe’s largest cities, it is important to follow a policy of social integration to ensure a peaceful coexistence,” Erdogan said. This was a “great challenge” that could, however, be overcome “with the joint efforts of the host countries and Muslim communities.”

So what you are saying is that the presence of Muslims in Christian countries requires submission of those countries to dhimmi status. Not a chance. Indeed, the path of social integration that must be taken here in the West ought to be to mandate that Muslims in the West conform to Western values of liberty of speech, press, and religion – and that Muslims elsewhere recognize the human rights of the non-Muslims in their midst.

And the rights of religious minorities in Turkey (the most “liberal” and “secular” of Muslim countries) was a topic Prime Minister Erdogan sought to avoid at all costs.

Erdogan did not deal with questions from members of the European Parliament about the protection of human rights and religious minorities within Turkey. The parliamentary session of the Council of Europe was debating a decision on freedom of expression and religious tolerance in connection with ErdoganÂ’s visit.

Yeah, that would have meant admitting that “secular” Turkey still enforces many of the practices of dhimmitude against its non-Muslim minority.

Indeed, perhaps we need to deal with the issue of whether or not Islam, as it currently exists, is a crime against humanity.

Posted by: Greg at 09:30 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 517 words, total size 3 kb.

If this is representative of mainstream Episcopal theology, I'd have to say that the Episcopal Church USA is a post-Christian denomination.

While addressing a morning Eucharist at the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church, Presiding Bishop-elect Katherine Jefferts Schori declared, "Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation. And you and I are His children."

With Jefferts Schori as the leader-to-be of the Episcopal Chuch, it seems that the church will move beyond gender-inclusive language to transgender-inclusive language.

Yesterday however, the Episcopal Church's House of Bishops refused to even consider a resolution that would affirm the exclusive Lordship of Jesus Christ as "the only name by which any person may be saved." The Rev. Canon Eugene McDowell of the Diocese of North Carolina explained, "This type of language was used in 1920s and 1930s to alienate the type of people who were executed. It was called the Holocaust."

Perhaps Episcopalians would be more receptive of a resolution affirming the supreme transexuality of Jesus.

So let me see if I have this straight (forgive the exclusive language) -- the ECUSA will not affirm a fundamental point of the historic Christian faith contained in Scripture, but it will fiddle around with Jesus' genitals. How can a Christian actually stay a member?

UPDATE: More in The Times of London.

Posted by: Greg at 10:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 2 kb.

I've got no problem with inclusive language translations of Scripture where they are appropriate. I understand the desire for inclusive language liturgies, provided that the sense of the sacred is not lost.

But when the scriptural is simply jettisoned our of a desire to be sensitive and inclusive, folks enter into an area that approaches heresy -- if it does not cross the line.

Take this Presbyterian proposal.

The divine Trinity -- "Father, Son and Holy Spirit" -- could also be known as "Mother, Child and Womb" or "Rock, Redeemer, Friend" at some Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) services under an action Monday by the church's national assembly.

Delegates to the meeting voted to "receive" a policy paper on gender-inclusive language for the Trinity, a step short of approving it. That means church officials can propose experimental liturgies with alternative phrasings for the Trinity, but congregations won't be required to use them.

"This does not alter the church's theological position, but provides an educational resource to enhance the spiritual life of our membership," legislative committee chair Nancy Olthoff, an Iowa laywoman, said during Monday's debate on the Trinity.

The assembly narrowly defeated a conservative bid to refer the paper back for further study.

A panel that worked on the issue since 2000 said the classical language for the Trinity should still be used, but added that Presbyterians also should seek "fresh ways to speak of the mystery of the triune God" to "expand the church's vocabulary of praise and wonder."

The problem is that one of the proposals -- "Mother, Child, Womb" -- ignores the relational aspect that already exists. Jesus had a mother -- the Virgin Mary -- and it was her womb -- as in "blessed is the fruit of thy womb" -- from which Jesus was born. The new construction gives us a strange "Jesus Has Two Mommies" theology that ought to be avoided at all costs.

A number of those in attendance saw other problems with the recommendations.

Youth delegate Dorothy Hill, a student at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Massachusetts, was uncomfortable with changing the Trinity wording. She said the paper "suggests viewpoints that seem to be in tension with what our church has always held to be true about our Trinitarian God."

Hill reminded delegates that the Ten Commandments say "the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name."

The Rev. Deborah Funke of Montana warned that the paper would be "theologically confusing and divisive" at a time when the denomination of 2.3 million members faces other troublesome issues.

So what we see at this time is another denomination struggling with the question of fidelity to the traditional faith of Christianity. Sadly, infidelity may win in the Presbyterian Church, as it did in the Episcopal Church over the weekend (and in the United Church of Christ years ago).

OPEN TRACKBACKED TO Stop The ACLU, Conservative Cat, Mark My Words, Third World County, Blue Star Chronicle, Dumb Ox

Posted by: Greg at 12:55 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 502 words, total size 4 kb.

The ordination of women and homosexuals -- especially to the episcopacy -- have been of concern to the worldwide Anglican Communion for years. This weekend's selection of a pro-homosexual female bishop to head the Episcopal Church in the United States can only serve to exacerbate the divisions.

The Episcopal Church chose Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as its leader yesterday, making her the first woman to head any denomination in the Anglican Communion worldwide.

The decision by delegates to the Episcopal General Convention in Columbus, Ohio, to choose a female presiding bishop for the 2.3 million-member denomination, 30 years after the church first allowed women to become priests, may exacerbate tensions between Episcopalians and other branches of the Anglican church. Three years ago, Episcopalians angered many conservatives in the United States and abroad by electing an openly gay man from New Hampshire, V. Gene Robinson, as a bishop.

Jefferts Schori, 52, a former oceanographer, backed Robinson's election. The runner-up in the race for presiding bishop, Alabama Bishop Henry Parsley, opposed consecrating Robinson.

Before Robinson's consecration in 2003, no openly gay priest had become a bishop in the Anglican church's history, which extends back more than 450 years. Only the United States, Canada and New Zealand have female bishops, although some other provinces allow women to qualify for the position. The Church of England does not allow female bishops.

With outgoing Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold by her side, Jefferts Schori told the delegates yesterday that she was "awed and honored and deeply privileged to be elected." She was chosen on the fifth ballot, getting 95 votes to 93 for six male candidates.

The historic vote shocked many delegates who had gathered at the convention, where they were also debating whether to temporarily halt the appointment of gay bishops to make amends with other Anglican leaders. Gasps escaped from some members when Jefferts Schori's name was announced, according to the Associated Press.

While the American branch of Anglicanism is among the most liberal, the worldwide Anglican community is relatively conservative -- and thatose conservative areas are where it is growing. In the United States, there has already been a series of efforts to place more traditionalist congregations under the control of foreign bishops who are more faithful to the teachings of Scripture and tradition.

This move will continue -- and will likely see the expulsion of the Episcopal Church USA from the Anglican Communion, and with the traditionalist remnant remaining a part of worldwide Anglicanism.

Posted by: Greg at 10:54 PM | Comments (77) | Add Comment
Post contains 417 words, total size 3 kb.

Muslims go insane when they believe there has been disrespect shown to those things that they hold sacred.

A couple of guys post pictures on the internet of Koran's used for target practice, and they receive death threats around the internet. Someone reports a Koran in a toilet, and there are riots around the world. Newspapers publis pictures of the false prophet Mohammad and there is international chaos.

But somehow, this elicits no outrage from the Muslim world.

I guess it is acceptable to desecrate a Koran by blowing up a mosque and killing worshipers -- resulting in the Muslim holy book being burned and spattered with innocent blood.

So I guess that the next time jihadis hole up in a mosque and attack American troops, it will be just fine to send an a couple of al-Zarqawi specials crashing down on the place, regardless of the number of Koran's inside.

After all, such things don't offend Muslim sensibilities at all.

(Hat Tip: Tammy Bruce)

Posted by: Greg at 02:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 175 words, total size 1 kb.

The latest attempt to intimidate those who support letting the people speak on homosexual marriage is coming from a faux-church in Florida.

A Florida church launched a campaign this week to identify supporters of a proposed state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage by publishing the names and addresses of 400,000 Florida residents in 60 counties.

The Internet campaign by Christ Church of Peace, a nondenominational church in Jacksonville, has been denounced by groups that support a state ballot initiative that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Gary Debusk, pastor of Christ Church of Peace, said the church began the ''Know Thy Neighbor'' effort Monday to encourage dialogue and prevent voter-signature fraud. As the head of a congregation that supports same-sex marriage, Debusk said he also wanted to add a new perspective to a debate that he said has been dominated largely by religious conservatives. ''It's time for another voice that is Christian to be heard,'' he said.

The problem is that their voice is not a Christian one -- it speaks in a manner that is antithetical to the clear message of the bible.

And I do like this point, made by supporters of traditional marriage.

Christian groups such as the Fort Lauderdale-based Center for Reclaiming America and the Florida Family Policy Council have denounced the Web site as a misguided effort to intimidate activists.

''It's a gross invasion of people's privacy,'' said John Stemberger, president and general counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council, an offshoot of James Dobson's national Christian conservative group Focus on the Family.

Stemberger argued that, if Christian conservatives published the names and addresses of gay-rights activists, they would likely be condemned as hatemongers.

''A lot of people would be outraged and say it's a hateful, un-Christian gesture,'' he said.

I'd have to agree -- and would like to remind folks that the Klan and other groups sought public records back in teh 1950s and 1960s so that folks could "Know Thy Neighbor" if they were supporters of the civil rights movement. Such methods are not designed to foster dialogue -- they are designed to intimidate, harrass, and target those with whom the sponsors disagree.

Posted by: Greg at 02:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 380 words, total size 2 kb.

Michael Newdow, the militant atheist, has lost a round in court regarding the use of the motto "In God We Trust" on our coinage.

A federal judge on Monday rejected a lawsuit from an atheist who said having the phrase "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins and dollar bills violated his First Amendment rights.

U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said the minted words amounted to a secular national slogan that did not trample on Michael Newdow's avowed religious views.

Newdow, a Sacramento doctor and lawyer, also is engaged in an ongoing effort to have the Pledge of Allegiance banned from public schools because it contains the words "under God."

* * *

Newdow's "In God We Trust" lawsuit targeted Congress and several federal officials, claiming that by making money with the phrase on it the government was establishing a religion in violation of the First Amendment clause requiring separation of church and state.

The phrase "excludes people who don't believe in God," he claimed.

Damrell disagreed, citing a 9th Circuit decision from 1970 that concluded the four words were a national motto that had "nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion."

Newdow said Monday he would appeal.

Now this should be interesting -- the Ninth Circuit will have to overturn its own precedent to decide in his favor. Not that such an outcome is inconceivable, given the overturning of long-standing precedents by other courts to reach decisions favorable to consensual sodomy, homosexual marriage, and other pet notions of the Left. This will end up in the Supreme Court -- and if previous precedents hold, Newdow and his suit wil get rejecected.

MORE AT Right on the Left Coast, Stop the ACLU

Posted by: Greg at 10:55 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 294 words, total size 2 kb.

I've despised Fred Phelps and his pseudo-Christian cult for many years -- long before his anti-war protest brought him to the attention of most Americans. So I was pleased to see information on this WorldNetDaily article over at Stop the ACLU, about an exchange between FoxNews host Julie banderas, who said what most decent Americans really think about the hatemongers from Westboro Baptist Church (which is made up almost entirely of Phelps family members),

Banderas: “The Bible says ‘the fear of the Lord is hatred of evil,’ [from the Book of] Proverbs. ‘Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate.’ Perverted speech like yours: ‘God hates fags.’ You are preaching absolute B.-., and you know the final letter.”

Phelps-Roper: “If you don’t tell them that this nation is full of idolatry, full of adulteries …

Banderas: “Full of insane people like yourself, ma’am.”

Phelps-Roper: “You’re proud. You’re proud of your sins. You can’t do enough sinning. You think ‘gay’ pride, bimbo. You have sinned away your day of grace.”

Banderas: “OK, you are an abomination.”

Phelps-Roper: “America is doomed. America is doomed. … Before your eyes, missy, you’re gonna see the destruction of America.”

Banderas: “If America is doomed, then why don’t you get out? Why are you in this country? Why are you an American? Are you an American?”

Phelps-Roper: “I am exactly where my God put me to tell you plainly, that you are going to hell, and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

Banderas: “Why don’t you take your church to another country, then, ma’am? Thank you so much. You should not be proud to be an American, and thank you. Good-bye.”

Go Julie -- it is time that the media quit treating these low-lifes like just one more group expressing a valid opinion that merits hearing and equal consideration.

Posted by: Greg at 10:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 319 words, total size 2 kb.

You may remember my post about Tim Bono, an Alexandria, VA businessman who refused to accept a job reproducing pro-homosexual videos for a lesbian activist at his video reporduction business.

Hving been found guilty of discrimination for abiding by his Christian moral principles in his day-to-day business activities, Bono decided to take legal action to vindicate his First Amendment rights. The suit was filed by the Liberty Counsel, a conservative civil liberties group, yesterday.

The lawsuit filed today challenges the authority of the Commission to enter the order. The so-called “Dillon’s Rule,” under Virginia law, prohibits local government from passing or enforcing nondiscrimination laws that are not authorized by the state. The state does not list “sexual orientation” as a protected civil right or class. The suit would take away all authority from the Commission to enforce “sexual orientation” nondiscrimination laws. The lawsuit will also affect several other Virginia counties that have illegally passed “sexual orientation” antidiscrimination laws. The suit also alleges violations of Mr. Bono’s freedom of speech, free exercise of religion, and sections 12 and 16 of the Virginia Constitution.

Erik Stanley, Chief Counsel of Liberty Counsel, stated: “As a newspaper is not required to run every proposed ad, so a duplicator or printer is not obligated to reproduce every proposed copy. Mr. Bono does not have to reproduce a customer’s hate speech, obscenity or pornography, nor may a customer hijack Mr. Bono’s business and force him to promote a homosexual agenda. Since the state of Virginia does not recognize ‘sexual orientation’ as a civil right, neither Arlington County nor any other county may enforce such laws. This lawsuit will rein in renegade counties that have intentionally violated state law. Neither Arlington County nor any other local government entity is above the law.”

Several years ago, the Virginia Attorney General issued an opinion concluding that local “sexual orientation” laws violated state law.

May justice be done, and religious freedom be indicated.

Posted by: Greg at 12:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 339 words, total size 2 kb.

This incredible quote comes from Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Theological Cafeteria).

“A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry, pure and simple.” Thus spoke Sen. Ted Kennedy in reference to the Marriage Protection Amendment being debated in the Senate today.

Senator – does this mean that your own Archbishop is a bigot for supporting this amendment? Does this mean the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the Catholic Church – both in the US and in the Vatican – are bigots for insisting that the traditional definition of marriage should be enshrined in law worldwide and that homosexual marriage should be rejected wherever it rears its head?

And what of this quote, Senator?

Americans believe in tearing down the walls of discrimination and inequality, not creating new barriers for civil rights

Is it your belief that the Catholic Church is an un-American, anti-civil rights church? If so, do you now repudiate the supposed lessons of the 1960 presidential election, which supposedly dispelled for all time the notion that one cannot be a good Catholic and a good American at the same time? In short, do you repudiate the position taken by your late brother, President John F. Kennedy, and instead take the position held by the KKK and other religious bigots of that day?

If no, how can you make such brazen statements attacking your own Church?

If yes, do you now declare that you are taking a formal act to separate yourself from the Catholic Church – an institution which your words appear to brand as bigoted and opposed to American values?

After all – you cannot have it both ways. Either you believe in and embrace the teachings of the Catholic Church, or you reject both them and the Church.

Decide – and speak out as clearly and forcefully as you did in the quotes above.

Oh, and by the way, Senator – in every state -- 19 in all, most likely 20 after a vote in Alabama tomorrow -- in which the people have been given a chance to speak directly on the matter, they have overwhelmingly rejected homosexual marriage and embraced the traditional definition of marriage this amendment would promulgate. In several cases, judges have thwarted the clear will of the people. In all, 45 states have acted to prevent homosexual marriage from being imposed upon them by renegade courts or the actions of other states. No state has ever voluntarily adopted homosexual marriage – and Massachusetts was forced to do so by a court which ruled that for over 200 years the people of Massachusetts, including the generation that adopted it, misunderstood their own constitution when they repeatedly adopted the traditional definition of marriage as one man and one woman. Given the evidentiary weight of such facts, how can you possibly make the claim that those who support efforts to protect the definition of marriage from judicial reinvention are un-American?

And Senator -- is your own governor, Mitt Romney, an un-American bigot? If so, do you have the political courage to state so publicly. Would you argue that the mormon Church is a bigotted organization for its opposition to homosexual marriage -- especially given your history of attacking Romney for his religious beliefs.

UPDATE -- 6/7/2006: Senator Kennedy -- Alabama passed a state constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage by a 4-1 margin. Is over 80% of labama un-American?

Posted by: Greg at 06:07 AM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 570 words, total size 4 kb.

This incredible quote comes from Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Theological Cafeteria).

“A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry, pure and simple.” Thus spoke Sen. Ted Kennedy in reference to the Marriage Protection Amendment being debated in the Senate today.

Senator – does this mean that your own Archbishop is a bigot for supporting this amendment? Does this mean the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the Catholic Church – both in the US and in the Vatican – are bigots for insisting that the traditional definition of marriage should be enshrined in law worldwide and that homosexual marriage should be rejected wherever it rears its head?

And what of this quote, Senator?

Americans believe in tearing down the walls of discrimination and inequality, not creating new barriers for civil rights

Is it your belief that the Catholic Church is an un-American, anti-civil rights church? If so, do you now repudiate the supposed lessons of the 1960 presidential election, which supposedly dispelled for all time the notion that one cannot be a good Catholic and a good American at the same time? In short, do you repudiate the position taken by your late brother, President John F. Kennedy, and instead take the position held by the KKK and other religious bigots of that day?

If no, how can you make such brazen statements attacking your own Church?

If yes, do you now declare that you are taking a formal act to separate yourself from the Catholic Church – an institution which your words appear to brand as bigoted and opposed to American values?

After all – you cannot have it both ways. Either you believe in and embrace the teachings of the Catholic Church, or you reject both them and the Church.

Decide – and speak out as clearly and forcefully as you did in the quotes above.

Oh, and by the way, Senator – in every state -- 19 in all, most likely 20 after a vote in Alabama tomorrow -- in which the people have been given a chance to speak directly on the matter, they have overwhelmingly rejected homosexual marriage and embraced the traditional definition of marriage this amendment would promulgate. In several cases, judges have thwarted the clear will of the people. In all, 45 states have acted to prevent homosexual marriage from being imposed upon them by renegade courts or the actions of other states. No state has ever voluntarily adopted homosexual marriage – and Massachusetts was forced to do so by a court which ruled that for over 200 years the people of Massachusetts, including the generation that adopted it, misunderstood their own constitution when they repeatedly adopted the traditional definition of marriage as one man and one woman. Given the evidentiary weight of such facts, how can you possibly make the claim that those who support efforts to protect the definition of marriage from judicial reinvention are un-American?

And Senator -- is your own governor, Mitt Romney, an un-American bigot? If so, do you have the political courage to state so publicly. Would you argue that the mormon Church is a bigotted organization for its opposition to homosexual marriage -- especially given your history of attacking Romney for his religious beliefs.

UPDATE -- 6/7/2006: Senator Kennedy -- Alabama passed a state constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage by a 4-1 margin. Is over 80% of labama un-American?

Posted by: Greg at 06:07 AM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 578 words, total size 4 kb.

When Christians protest on public streets during pro-homosexual events, tehy face harrassment and arrest. If they attempted to actually interfere with the event, there would be oputrage.

When will we hear the condemnation of this disruption of Pentecost Sunday Mass in Minnesota?

More than 50 gay rights activists wearing rainbow-colored sashes were denied Holy Communion at a Pentecost service yesterday at the Roman Catholic Cathedral in St. Paul, Minn., parishioners and church officials said.

In an act that some witnesses called a "sacrilege" and others called a sign of "solidarity," a man who was not wearing a sash received a Communion wafer from a priest, broke it into pieces and handed it to some of the sash wearers, who consumed it on the spot.

Ushers threatened to call the police, and a church employee burst into tears when the unidentified man re-distributed the consecrated wafer, which Catholics consider the body of Christ. But the Mass was not interrupted, and the incident ended peacefully, said Dennis McGrath, a spokesman for the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis.

"It was confrontational, but we decided not to try to arrest the guy," he said.

Disrupting the service and profaning the Eucharist -- they need to be arrested next year.

More importantly, participants should be excommunicated next year.

And as far as condemnations -- who wants to bet that the only ones we hear are of the Church, not those who violated the sanctity of the cathedral.

Oh, and here's a suggestion -- why don't you try something like that at a Muslim house of worship? Oh, yeah, they will stone you or decapitate you, not just deny you communion.

Posted by: Greg at 11:32 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 288 words, total size 2 kb.