Saturday, July 22, 2006

The Thought Police

See Iain Dale's post yesterday and the BBC catch up today for the background. Essentially the Gay Police Association (GPA) has put out an advert accusing the Bible of being linked to attacks on gay people ( a pool of blood next to a bible - want to try that with the Quran eh ? ).

I posted a response to Iain's post here which ended saying the secular world doesn't understand the religious world. ( incidentally a lot of mostly good and thoughtful comments from bloggers there, and Iain adds to his reputation is his handling of this issue. )

The poster the GPA have created is deeply offensive, but not surprising given the slow build up of anti-Christian pressure via government and NGO organisations. Imagine the impact if another religion was chosen as the victim of such a hate campaign ? ( Personally I think the advert is likely to provoke hatred. ) They perhaps realise they have gone to far as there is at time of posting no reference to the advert on the GPA web site that I can find.

I know of a good family who volunteered as foster parents but were persecuted due to their Christian beliefs. ( Which disagreed with the state's approved beliefs. )

Its seems only those with No Faith are acceptable to the modernising NuLabour establishment. ( I say that as the government provides funds to the GPA, but not the CPA as an example. )

See also today's Daily Mail for an article where a entirely voluntary Christian criminal rehabilitation scheme has been vetoed by the establishment - despite its support from another religion.

Our modernised state religion now appears to be to say no to any religion, whose block vote isn't needed by NuLabour in elections, that disagrees with those who run the state.

Tags InnerChange GPA Christian Hate NuLabour

1 comment:

Man in a Shed said...

Hi Cucumber sandwiches,

My post was really about tolerance of religious view points and religious freedom. ( In the UK the tolerance is getting very patchy ).

The world is full of studies and surveys on just about everything - which often contradict each other. (Today for example I'm doing some research on visual perception - there appear to be two main schools of thought which often contradict each other, but both of whom have evidence for each of their cases.)

The article you quote seems to identify potential short comings in its own data. (Which is of course good practice.)

Our views on things change so much and are not often as scientific as we would like to believe. I took interest in a recent UK programme on memories being stored in hearts ( and hence transferred in heart transplants ) - if only as my Father had the same procedure. Yet not long ago everyone would have said that was rubbish and conciousness was in the brain.

You don't even want to think about if cholesterol is good for you or now these days ! I wouldn't be too swayed by the type of experiment you quote.