LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) Index du Forum


 FAQFAQ   RechercherRechercher   MembresMembres   GroupesGroupes   S’enregistrerS’enregistrer 
 ProfilProfil   Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés   ConnexionConnexion 

Aller à la page: <  1, 2, 318, 19, 2047, 48, 49  >
Sujet précédent :: Sujet suivant  
Auteur Message

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Jeu 9 Oct - 02:17 (2014)    Sujet du message: RELIGIOUSLY OMNIGENDER BATHROOM JUSTICE Répondre en citant


Recently Harvard Divinity School posted signage outside one of its bathrooms advertising it as transgender/omnigender friendly. The sign inclusively included icons for male, female, and a combo of the two, plus handicapped. Harvard Divinity proudly tweeted its embrace of gender fluidity.

“Awesome!” tweeted back Reconciling Ministries Network, the unofficial LGBTQ caucus of United Methodism. Awesome indeed.

They say that, historically, what happens in Harvard’s bathrooms will soon sweep bathrooms nationwide! So expect gender neutral bathroom justice to spread as the urgent cause du jour among justice-minded United Methodists.

After all, how much longer can we tolerate gender exclusivity in our church bathrooms? United Methodist seminaries will be the first to embrace this crusade. Likely some have already. If so, they should claim public credit! Surely Claremont, Iliff and Drew will not close their bathrooms to anyone based on a mere social construct.

And bishops need to speak out too. Not just speak, but also act! Look for Bishop Melvin Talbert to courageously enter a women’s room, and Bishop Minerva Carcano to storm a men’s room. God is doing a new thing! = You will see, soon, if God is doing new thing. God never change one iota of His laws.

Will the next General Conference offer bathroom equality to the transgender/transsexual/omnigender community? Or will it remain chained to the oppressive mindsets of the past?

Confession: At the 1996 General Conference in Denver I may have unconsciously but prophetically foreshadowed transgender bathroom inclusion when I inadvertently entered a women’s room at the convention center, chasing out women entering behind me, until I embarrassingly realized the stifling reality. In a moment of true shalom, of course, the ladies and I would have joined arms TOGETHER to claim that space for all persons, irrespective of gender.

As bathroom gender equality spreads like revival throughout United Methodism, it will become a source of increasing division between the reactionary and enlightened wings of the church. Adam Hamilton, in pursuit of church unity, will amicably propose a local option policy on gender neutral bathrooms. Local congregations, and annual conferences, can decide for themselves whether to truly make their bathrooms open to ALL people. That way, the divisive issue of bathroom access will not distract from ministry, until a new generation emerges for whom inclusive bathrooms are no longer an issue.

So full inclusion of all genders in all bathrooms will eventually prevail, bringing greater heights of justice, grace and true equality to United Methodism and, hopefully, all of Christendom, and the world. Until every bathroom is fully open to every gender, the very stones will cry out! The Kingdom will not be stopped!

Some day we all will be truly liberated from archaic religious teachings, from nature, from physical reality, and each of us can instead be a self generated hologram that projects our own imagination and desires over all else. Such truth will make us free indeed. Awesome!


Revenir en haut

MessagePosté le: Jeu 9 Oct - 02:17 (2014)    Sujet du message: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Ven 10 Oct - 01:07 (2014)    Sujet du message: ARCHISHOP GEORG GAENSWEIN REAFFIRMS CHURCH DOCTRINE ON MARRIAGE Répondre en citant


Says He Sees Pope Francis Following the Line of His Predecessors

Vatican City, October 09, 2014 (Zenit.org) Staff Reporter 

As the first week of the Synod of Bishops on the family is underway at the Vatican, Archbishop Georg Gänswein has reaffirmed Church doctrine on Holy Matrimony.

The prefect of the Pontifical Household and private secretary of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI insisted not only that marriage cannot be dissolved, but also that "starting a new union contradicts what the Lord has indicated," reported Italian News Agency ANSA.

In an interview with Chi magazine, the senior prelate made the remarks, in an interview in which he also commented on homosexuality.

"Gays must be received with respect but their [sexual] acts are contrary to natural law," he said.

Moreover, he added, “The Church must have the courage to express its convictions as otherwise it would not be in the service of truth."

When asked about possibly allowing divorced people who are civilly remarried receive Communion, the German archbishop said, "This is a very delicate question, at stake is the sacramental matrimony that according to Catholic doctrine cannot be dissolved, just like the love of God for man."

"As far as I can see,” Archbishop Ganswein said, “Pope Francis is following the line of his predecessors, whose teaching on matrimony is very clear."

(October 09, 2014) © Innovative Media Inc.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 15 Oct - 00:27 (2014)    Sujet du message: CITY OF HOUSTON DEMANDS PASTORS OVER SERMONS Répondre en citant


By Todd Starnes
Published October 14, 2014

What role should religion play in politics?

The city of Houston has issued subpoenas demanding a group of pastors turn over any sermons dealing with homosexuality, gender identity or Annise Parker, the city’s first openly lesbian mayor. And those ministers who fail to comply could be held in contempt of court.

“The city’s subpoena of sermons and other pastoral communications is both needless and unprecedented,” Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Christina Holcomb said in a statement. “The city council and its attorneys are engaging in an inquisition designed to stifle any critique of its actions.”

ADF, a nationally-known law firm specializing in religious liberty cases, is representing five Houston pastors. They filed a motion in Harris County court to stop the subpoenas arguing they are “overbroad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and vexatious.” 

“Political and social commentary is not a crime,” Holcomb said. “It is protected by the First Amendment.”

The subpoenas are just the latest twist in an ongoing saga over the Houston’s new non-discrimination ordinance. The law, among other things, would allow men to use the ladies room and vice versa.  The city council approved the law in June.

The Houston Chronicle reported opponents of the ordinance launched a petition drive that generated more than 50,000 signatures – far more than the 17,269 needed to put a referendum on the ballot.

However, the city threw out the petition in August over alleged irregularities.

After opponents of the bathroom bill filed a lawsuit the city’s attorneys responded by issuing the subpoenas against the pastors.

The pastors were not part of the lawsuit. However, they were part of a coalition of some 400 Houston-area churches that opposed the ordinance. The churches represent a number of faith groups – from Southern Baptist to non-denominational.

“City council members are supposed to be public servants, not ‘Big Brother’ overlords who will tolerate no dissent or challenge,” said ADF attorney Erik Stanley.  “This is designed to intimidate pastors.”

Mayor Parker will not explain why she wants to inspect the sermons. I contacted City Hall for a comment and received a terse reply from the mayor’s director of communications.

“We don’t comment on litigation,” said Janice Evans.

However, ADF attorney Stanley suspects the mayor wants to publicly shame the ministers. He said he anticipates they will hold up their sermons for public scrutiny. In other words – the city is rummaging for evidence to “out” the pastors as anti-gay bigots.

Among those slapped with a subpoena is Steve Riggle, the senior pastor of Grace Community Church. He was ordered to produce all speeches and sermons related to Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality and gender identity.

The mega-church pastor was also ordered to hand over “all communications with members of your congregation” regarding the non-discrimination law.

“This is an attempt to chill pastors from speaking to the cultural issues of the day,” Riggle told me. “The mayor would like to silence our voice. She’s a bully.”

David Welch, pastor of Bear Creek Church and director of the Houston Area Pastor Council, also received a subpoena. He said he will not be intimidated by the mayor.

“We’re not afraid of this bully,” he said. “We’re not intimidated at all.”

He accused the city of violating the law with the subpoenas and vowed to stand firm in the faith.

“We are not going to yield our First Amendment rights,” Welch told me. ‘This is absolutely a complete abuse of authority.”

Tony Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council, said pastors around the nation should rally around the Houston ministers.

“The state is breaching the wall of separation between church and state,” Perkins told me. ‘Pastors need to step forward and challenge this across the country. I’d like to see literally thousands of pastors after they read this story begin to challenge government authorities – to dare them to come into their churches and demand their sermons.”

Perkins called the actions by Houston’s mayor “obscene” and said they “should not be tolerated.”

“This is a shot across the bow of the church,” he said.

This is the moment I wrote about in my book, “God Less America.” I predicted that the government would one day try to silence American pastors. I warned that under the guise of “tolerance and diversity” elected officials would attempt to deconstruct religious liberty. 

Sadly, that day arrived sooner than even I expected.

Tony Perkins is absolutely right. Now is the time for pastors and people of faith to take a stand.  We must rise up and reject this despicable strong-arm attack on religious liberty. We cannot allow ministers to be intimidated by government thugs.

The pastors I spoke to tell me they will not comply with the subpoena – putting them at risk for a “fine or confinement, or both.”

Heaven forbid that should happen. But if it does, Christians across America should be willing to descend en masse upon Houston and join these brave men of God behind bars.

Pastor Welch compared the culture war skirmish to the 1836 Battle of San Jacinto, fought in present-day Harris County, Texas. It was a decisive battle of the Texas Revolution.

“This is the San Jacinto moment for traditional family,” Welch told me. “This is the place where we stop the LGBT assault on the freedom to practice our faith.”

We can no longer remain silent. We must stand together - because one day – the government might come for your pastor.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. Sign up for his American Dispatch newsletter, be sure to join his Facebook page, and follow him on Twitter. His latest book is "God Less America."


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 15 Oct - 02:07 (2014)    Sujet du message: VATICAN DOCUMENT URGES MERCIFUL APPROACH TO GAYS Répondre en citant


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBKMcrLec7U

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Jeu 16 Oct - 01:43 (2014)    Sujet du message: JOEL OSTEEN BLESSES HOUSTON'S NEW (GAY) MAYOR ANNISE PARKER Répondre en citant



Jan 05, 2010

By Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY

Updated 2010-01-05 3:16 PM

By David J. Phillip, AP

Annise Parker, the newly-elected happens-to-be-lesbian mayor of Houston was sworn in Monday and the opening prayer was given by ... Rev. Joel Osteen.

Is your head spinning? Osteen heads the nation's most mega of evangelical non-denominational megachurches, Lakewood Church in Houston where about 45,000 people cycle through a revamped sports stadium for services every weekend.

Osteen has been all over telling folks (Larry King, Whoopi Goldberg) for years that homosexuality is not "God's best." I presume he means "God's best choice" because otherwise I'm lost in the dropped or implied rest of the sentence. But "God's best" is phrase Osteen never finishes so I'm just guessing.
Yet, Osteen hasn't joined the more strident wing of the religious right in damning gays. Indeed, Osteen takes heat from other evangelicals who condemn him for not laying down a line of fire about sin of any kind. That's not his style, says the preacher known for his broad smile and sermons that God wants you to be happy. Osteen's best seller was titled, Your Best Life Now.

By Jessica Kourkounis, AP

Now (hat tip to Mark Silk for pointing me to the Box Turtle Bulletin) writer Timothy Kincaid suggests to his gay readership that they look at Osteen more fully and fairly. Kincaid's post (which carries a disclaimer that others on the staff of the webzine don't necessarily agreed) says:

I think it would be useful for our community to adopt a more nuanced view of religious leaders. By doing so, we might find ourselves with unexpected allies.


Joel Osteen does not agree with my understanding of Scripture; but his disagreement does not make him a hater or a bigot. And I recognize the value in having a lesbian politician -- elected despite her opponent's religion-based homophobic campaign -- being given blessing by the pastor of the largest congregation in the nation.

Does this change your idea of Osteen? For better or for worse?

See photos of: Houston


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Ven 17 Oct - 02:21 (2014)    Sujet du message: GILBERT ABAS - UN EX-AGENT DE LA DCRI DENONCE LES RESEAUX PEDO SATANISTES - META TOUR Répondre en citant


Jeudi 16 octobre 2014

Dans cette étape toulousaine nous sommes allés à la rencontre de Gilbert Abas ancien membre des renseignements généraux (devenu la DCRI) dénonce les réseaux pédo-sataniste qui agissent en toute impunité en France.

Son expérience au sein des services de police en tant qu'agent de renseignement l'a poussé à continuer son combat maintenant qu'il est  à la retraite.

VIDEO : http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x27slsn_gilbert-abas-un-ex-agent-denonce-l…

Gilbert Abas - Un ex-agent  dénonce les réseaux... par metatvofficiel https://www.blogger.com/null
Une entrevue explosive pour comprendre le problème de ces réseaux qui prolifèrent en toute impunité avec le consentement de certains membres de l’institution judiciaire.

Le Meta Tour à Toulouse.

Meta Contrib : Flo / Stef / Mika /tepa


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Ven 17 Oct - 03:18 (2014)    Sujet du message: PRACTICE THE GOVERNMENT'S THEOLOGY OR LOSE ACCREDITATION Répondre en citant


Photo courtesy of Gordon College Facebook page

By Todd Starnes

I’m in Los Angeles this weekend to speak about the war on religious liberty. A theme I write about in my latest book God Less America and from Massachusetts comes another example of intolerance.
The New England Association of Schools and Colleges has given Gordon College 18 months to change their standards for sexual behavior or risk losing their accreditation.

Follow Todd on Facebook for conservative news you can trust! Click here!

The Christian college requires students to abstain from practicing sex outside of marriage along with practicing homosexuality.

I’m going to take a wild gander here and say the egg heads were more  upset about the latter than the former. Seeing how the only folks you can discriminate against in this age of tolerance are people of faith.

And I suspect this will only be the first of many Christian schools that will be forced to renounce their faith and pledge their allegiance to the government’s theology.

Get your copy of Todd’s new book – “God Less America”. It’s endorsed by Sean Hannity, Phil Robertson, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin and Kirk Cameron. Click here!

Related posts:
  1. College Orders Student to ‘Dumb Down’ Religious Show
  2. Florida College Says Christian Group Can’t Have Christian Leaders
+ VIDEO : http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/todds-commentaries/practice-the-govern…

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Sam 18 Oct - 01:26 (2014)    Sujet du message: BANGLADESH LOWERS MINIMUM AGE FOR MARRIAGE TO ACCORD MORE CLOSELY WITH ISLAMIC LAW Répondre en citant


Bangladesh: Jihadi war Women and children in Islam

But remember, kiddies, Islamic law is not Islamic.

Where’s George Harrison when you need him? We need a Bangladesh II, organised to raise international awareness and fund relief efforts for victims of jihad. This time, let’s identify the cause of the misery: Islamic supremacism and sharia.

In Bangladesh, an estimated 65 per cent of girls are married before the age of 18.


“Bangladesh lowers minimum age for marriage to accord more closely with Sharia,” 

By Robert Spencer Oct 14, 2014

Few things are more abundantly attested in Islamic law than the permissibility of child marriage. Islamic tradition records that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage:

“The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).

Another tradition has Aisha herself recount the scene:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah”s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah”s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Bukhari 5.58.234).

Muhammad was at this time fifty-four years old.
Marrying young girls was not all that unusual for its time, but because in Islam Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur’an 33:21), he is considered exemplary in this unto today. And so in April 2011, the Bangladesh Mufti Fazlul Haque Amini declared that those trying to pass a law banning child marriage in that country were putting Muhammad in a bad light: “Banning child marriage will cause challenging the marriage of the holy prophet of Islam, [putting] the moral character of the prophet into controversy and challenge.” He added a threat: “Islam permits child marriage and it will not be tolerated if any ruler will ever try to touch this issue in the name of giving more rights to women.” The Mufti said that 200,000 jihadists were ready to sacrifice their lives for any law restricting child marriage.
Likewise the influential website Islamonline.com in December 2010 justified child marriage by invoking not only Muhammad’s example, but the Qur’an as well:

The Noble Qur’an has also mentioned the waiting period for the wife who has not yet menstruated, saying: “And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women, if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated” [Qur'an 65:4]. Since this is not negated later, we can take from this verse that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl. The Qur’an is not like the books of jurisprudence which mention what the implications of things are, even if they are prohibited. It is true that the prophet entered into a marriage contract with A’isha when she was six years old, however he did not have sex with her until she was nine years old, according to al-Bukhari.

Other countries make Muhammad’s example the basis of their laws regarding the legal marriageable age for girls. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: “Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. Marriage contracted before reaching puberty with the permission of the guardian is valid provided that the interests of the ward are duly observed.”

According to Amir Taheri in The Spirit of Allah: Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution
(pp. 90-91), Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl “a divine blessing,” and advised the faithful to give their own daughters away accordingly: “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” When he took power in Iran, he lowered the legal marriageable age of girls to nine, in accord with Muhammad’s example.
“Proposed law on “child brides” bows to conservative Islam,” by Sumon Corraya, Asia News, October 14, 2014:

Dhaka (AsiaNews) – The Bangladeshi government is “considering” lowering the minimum age for marriage (16 years for women, 18 for men), to please conservative Islam. In a country where 80% of girls are already married long before they reach adulthood, according to human rights activists and social scientists, this decision would be “dangerous” because it seems to “let go the idea that phenomena such as child brides is acceptable” because “acknowledged” by the state.
The current law sets the minimum age at 18 years for women and 21 for men and has always been considered a tool to change the prevailing mentality. Under shari’a, Islam – which in Bangladesh is the state religion, practiced by 89.9% of the population – a girl can get married as soon as reaches puberty.

The proposed change has caused a sensation among the more “independent” newspapers, particularly because it is being out forward by the government, led by the Awami League : historically this was a secular party, whose founder Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, led the nation to independence from Pakistan (1971). Some newspapers have also conducted a “campaign” against this proposal, bringing the testimonies of students and young people who had defended their classmates when they were in danger of being given too soon in marriage.

The AL could be attempting to “appease” the more “conservative” Islamic component for the population, which – in the last year and a half – the radical Islamic party Jamaat-e-Islami has repeatedly appealed to, labeling the government “atheistic” and contrary to the true principles of Islam. This is also why, according to some commentators note, the government recently decided to declare Ramadan a public holiday….


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Lun 20 Oct - 00:34 (2014)    Sujet du message: MEGACHURCH PASTOR SIGNALS SHIFT IN TONE ON GAY MARRIAGE Répondre en citant



Brian Houston is senior pastor of the church Hillsong, which has campuses in a dozen major cities, including New York. Credit Victor J. Blue for The New York Times

The pastor of one of the more influential global megachurches has declared that his church is in “an ongoing conversation” about same-sex marriage — saying that it is appropriate to consider the words of the Bible alongside the changing culture and the experience of people in the pews.

The comments by Brian Houston, the senior pastor of Hillsong, immediately attracted concern from the right and applause from the left, coming as many Christian denominations and congregations are struggling with how to respond to rapid expansion of gay rights and legalization of same-sex marriage.

Mr. Houston’s church, which is based in Australia, is known largely as a musical powerhouse because of the popularity of its recordings of contemporary Christian worship music, but its youthful congregation is vast — about 100,000 weekly worshipers at campuses in a dozen major cities, including New York and Los Angeles — and its cultural reach broad.

Leaders of Hillsong have been avoiding condemnation of homosexuality for some time, and the pastor of Hillsong’s New York City campus, Carl Lentz, has declined to take a public position on same-sex marriage. But Mr. Houston’s comments, made at a news conference Thursday in New York, were striking for their assertion that Christian churches have caused pain for some gay Christians, and for their suggestion that the issue of same-sex marriage is not settled.

“The world we live in, whether we like it or not, is changing around and about us,” he said. “The world’s changing, and we want to stay relevant as a church, so that’s a vexing thing.”

Mr. Houston, as he has done in sermons, ruefully noted the experience of gay children growing up in Christian churches, saying that some feel rejected by their youth pastors or even their parents, and that as a result, some young people “literally are depressed, maybe even suicidal, and, sadly, oftentimes grow up to hate the church because they feel that the church rejected them.”

He said he lived by “what the Bible says,” and his spokesman said on Friday that the pastor personally agreed with traditional Christian teaching on sexuality. But Mr. Houston said he did not think it would be constructive to delineate a public position on same-sex marriage.

“It’s very easy to reduce what you think about homosexuality to just a public statement, and that would keep a lot of people happy,” he said, “but we feel at this point, that it is an ongoing conversation, that the real issues in people’s lives are too important for us just to reduce it down to a yes or no answer in a media outlet. So we’re on the journey with it.”

Some of Hillsong’s churches appear to be open to gays and lesbians. Josh Canfield and Reed Kelly, a gay couple featured on the current season of “Survivor;” worship and sing in the choir at Hillsong New York; Mr. Canfield is a volunteer choir director at the church.

Mr. Houston’s comments were welcomed by Matthew Vines, a young gay evangelical who is trying to persuade the evangelical world that faith in the Bible is not at odds with openness to gays and lesbians.

“Is Hillsong influential primarily for doctrine and theology? No, it’s not, but its music is as evangelical as you’re going to get, in terms of reach and impact, and that’s very significant,” Mr. Vines said.

But Andrew Walker, the director of policy studies for the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, expressed concern about Mr. Houston’s remarks, blogging for the journal “First Things,” “let’s be clear that this is not the route of faithfulness,” and calling Hillsong “a church exchanging compassion for cowardliness before culture’s consistory.”

Mr. Houston’s remarks on same-sex marriage were one of several instances this week in which he and his church differentiated themselves from some other segments of the evangelical world.

His wife, Bobbie Houston, who is also a senior pastor of Hillsong, responded to a question about women’s roles in evangelical churches by saying, “Really, the church needs to come of age sometimes, and just grow up.” Hillsong allows women to preach and teach; many evangelical churches do not.

And in an era when many religious leaders are defensive about the issue of clergy sexual abuse, Mr. Houston offered several searing, and at times self-critical, descriptions of how he handled the realization 15 years ago that his own father, also a Pentecostal pastor, was a pedophile. The episode has returned to the public eye because last week Mr. Houston testified about it before a royal commission investigating institutional response to child sexual abuse in Australia; in New York he talked with the press about the subject on Thursday and then with 5,500 people attending a Hillsong conference on Friday at Madison Square Garden.

He said he believed he did the right thing by removing his father from ministry as soon as he became aware of an abuse allegation. However, he said, in hindsight he should have informed the police at the time, even though the victim had asked him not to.

“There’s a difference between being pitiful and being transparent,” he said Friday, explaining why he chose to speak about the issue. “Authenticity always works, in every situation.”


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Lun 20 Oct - 00:47 (2014)    Sujet du message: CATHOLIC SYNOD : POPE FRANCIS SETBACK ON GAY POLICY Répondre en citant


Link with Caritas Internationalis and the World Social Forum (WSF) - The secret agenda and hypocrisy will continue...

... “The World Social Forum is fully committed to the spread of abortion, homosexuality and communism,” Michael Hichborn, the main researcher from ALL behind the report, told LifeSiteNews. “There is simply no way that a Catholic in good conscience can have anything to do with it at all. But for a Catholic agency to actually participate in such an organization’s governance is a gross betrayal of Holy Mother Church!”...



18 October 2014 Last updated at 21:11 GMT

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ectaYoVni8A

Pope Francis has suffered a setback as proposals for wider acceptance of gay people failed to win a two-thirds majority at a Catholic Church synod.
A draft report issued halfway through the meeting had called for greater openness towards homosexuals and divorced Catholics who have remarried.
But those paragraphs were not approved, and were stripped from the final text.

The report will inform further debate before the synod reconvenes in larger numbers in a year's time.

Correspondents say the text welcoming gay people and remarried Catholics had been watered down in the final version that was voted on - but it appears that they still met with resistance from conservatives.

All other parts of the draft report were accepted by the synod.

'Let God surprise'

Speaking after the vote, Pope Francis told attendees that he would have been "worried and saddened" if there had not been "animated discussions" or if "everyone had been in agreement or silent in a false and acquiescent peace", AP news agency reported.

He also cautioned against "hostile inflexibility, that is, wanting to close oneself within the written word, and not allowing oneself to be surprised by God".


Pope Francis's closing speech at the synod received a four-minute standing ovation

While the earlier draft had said that homosexuals had "gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community", the revised document only said that discrimination against gay people "is to be avoided".

The Pope said the full draft document, including the rejected paragraphs, should be published.

"Keep in mind this is not a magisterial document….the Pope asked for it to be made available to show the degree of maturity that has taken place and that which still needs to take place in discussions over the coming year," Holy See press officer Tom Rosica said on Vatican Radio.

The two-week synod has revealed a fracture line in church opinion over how to adapt traditional church teaching on human sexuality towards 21st-Century attitudes, says the BBC's David Willey in Rome.

Pope Francis had made a powerful appeal to traditionalists not to lock themselves within the letter of the law, but conservative cardinals and bishops carried the day at the end of the synod, our correspondent adds.

Analysis: David Willey, BBC Vatican correspondent

Voting figures for the final document at the end of the synod show that Pope Francis received a rebuff in his attempt to persuade Church leaders to support his more merciful attitudes towards gay and divorced people. However, more than half still voted in favour of his proposed reforms.

Three crucial paragraphs in the final document all received more than 50% of the vote, although they failed to get the necessary two-thirds majority.
This allows the necessary leeway for further discussion before the synod reconvenes in Rome in an expanded form in a year's time.

Paragraph 55 of the final report, which has been rewritten many times during the past week, insists that although there can be no analogy between same-sex unions and marriage between a man and a woman, "men and women with homosexual tendencies must be welcomed with respect and delicacy".

About 200 bishops attended the synod on family issues at the Vatican.

The New Ways Ministry, a Catholic gay-rights group, said it was "very disappointing that the synod's final report did not retain the gracious welcome to lesbian and gay people that the draft of the report included".

'New language needed'

Christopher Lamb, from British Catholic journal The Tablet, told the BBC that the discussion at the synod was "a huge achievement in itself".
He said it was important to remember that many of the bishops at the synod were from countries where homosexuality is illegal.

The synod was attended by about 200 bishops

"We have now got an acceptance that we need a new language in the Church when talking about gay couples and homosexuality in general," he added.
Conservative groups had described the earlier draft as a "betrayal".

Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier of South Africa told Vatican radio on Friday that "there were two issues that got people 'hot around the collar'. One was presenting homosexual unions as if they were a very positive thing."

The second issue related to broken marriages "and the fact that people should be facilitated to get access to the sacraments", he added.

+ VIDEO : http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29677779

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Lun 20 Oct - 00:54 (2014)    Sujet du message: PC ALERT : TED CRUZ SAYS PASTORS AT “REAL RISK” OF BEING JAILED FOR PREACHING AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY Répondre en citant


"We will not go quietly into the night..."

Justin KoskiOctober 17, 2014

While being interviewed for the Brody File, Rep. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said that pastors are at “real risk” of being imprisoned for preaching against homosexuality.

“I think that is a real risk… Some in the media ridicule that threat and say, “There’s no danger of government coming after pastors,'” Cruz began. “The specter of government trying to determine if what pastors preach from the pulpit meets with the policy views or political correctness of the governing authorities, that prospect is real and it’s happening now.”

This comes after news that in Houston, Texas, officials have been asking for and trying to subpoena the sermons of pastors to see if there were any that spoke out against the LGBT community. The pastors have refused to give in, and rightly so.

Advertisement-content continues below

The First Amendment gives the pastor the right to speak, and as it is a biblically based viewpoint, they are right to speak the truth of God’s Word.

“When you subpoena one pastor, you subpoena every pastor. If government has the power to force the pulpit to knuckle under, if government has the power to insist that pastors hand over their sermons to government for government approval, then we’ve lost the very first freedom that begins our Bill of Rights,” Cruz said.

“We’ve lost the freedom that this country was built on. That’s what this fight is and I very much hope that this serves as a wakeup call…to pastors to speak out and make abundantly clear that we will not give up our religious liberty, we will not go quietly into the night, but we will stand and fight for principles that are right and true and will speak the truth, and the pastors of this country will not be muzzled.”

H/T CBN News

Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/pc-alert-ted-cruz-issues-statement-pastors…


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Lun 20 Oct - 01:01 (2014)    Sujet du message: SYNODE : PAS DE CONSENSUS SUR DIVORCES ET HOMOSEXUELS Répondre en citant


Lien avec Caritas Internationalis et le World Social Forum (WSF) - L'agenda secret et l'hypocrisie continuera...

Traduisez ceci qui nous montre que le Vatican via Caritas marche main dans la main avec Le Forum Social Mondial pour l'avancement de l'avortement, de l'homosexualité et du communisme.

... “The World Social Forum is fully committed to the spread of abortion, homosexuality and communism,” Michael Hichborn, the main researcher from ALL behind the report, told LifeSiteNews. “There is simply no way that a Catholic in good conscience can have anything to do with it at all. But for a Catholic agency to actually participate in such an organization’s governance is a gross betrayal of Holy Mother Church!”...


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSz-CQN09gQ

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Lun 20 Oct - 01:17 (2014)    Sujet du message: CITY THREATENS TO ARREST MINISTERS WHO REFUSE TO PERFORM SAME-SEX WEDDINGS Répondre en citant


Photo courtesy of Alliance Defending Freedom

By Todd Starnes

Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to $1,000 in daily fines, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court.

Alliance Defending Freedom is representing Donald and Evelyn Knapp, two ordained ministers who own the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel in Coeur d’Alene.

“Right now they are at risk of being prosecuted,” attorney Jeremy Tedesco told me. “The threat of enforcement is more than just credible.”

The wedding chapel is registered as a “religious corporation” limited to performing “one-man-one-woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.”

However, the chapel is also a for-profit business and city officials said that means the owners must comply with the local nondiscrimination ordinance.

That ordinance, passed in 2013, prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and it applies to housing, employment and public accommodation.
City Attorney Warren Wilson told The Spokesman-Review in May that the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel likely would be required to follow the ordinance.

“I would think that the Hitching Post would probably be considered a place of public accommodation that would be subject to the ordinance,” he said.
He also told television station KXLY that any wedding chapel that turns away a gay couple would in theory be a violation of the law “and you’re looking at a potential misdemeanor citation.”

Wilson confirmed to Knapp in a telephone conversation that even ordained ministers would be required to perform same-sex weddings, the lawsuit alleges.

“Wilson also responded that Mr. Knapp was not exempt from the ordinance because the Hitching Post was a business and not a church,” the lawsuit states.

And if he refused to perform the ceremonies, Wilson reportedly told the minister that he could be fined up to $1,000 and serve up to 180 days in jail.
Now all of that was a moot point because until last week gay marriage was not legal in Idaho.

The Ninth Circuit issued an order on May 13 allowing same-sex marriages to commence in Idaho on Oct. 15. Two days later – the folks at the Hitching Post received a telephone call.

A man had called to inquire about a same-sex wedding ceremony. The Hitching Post declined – putting them in violation of the law.

City officials did not respond to my requests for an interview nor did they respond to requests from local news outlets.

“The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines,” Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Jeremy Tedesco said. “The city is on seriously flawed legal ground, and our lawsuit intends to ensure that this couple’s freedom to adhere to their own faith as pastors is protected just as the First Amendment intended.”

 Alliance Defending Freedom also filed a temporary restraining order to stop the city from enforcing the ordinance.

“The Knapps are in fear that if they exercise their First Amendment rights they will be cited, prosecuted and sent to jail,” Tedesco told me.

It’s hard to believe this could happen in the United States. But as the lawsuit states, the elderly couple is in a “constant state of fear that they may have to go to jail, pay substantial fines, or both, resulting in them losing the business that God has called them to operate and which they have faithfully operated for 25 years.”

The lawsuit comes the same week that the city of Houston issued subpoenas demanding that five Christian pastors turn over sermons dealing with homosexuality and gender identity.

What in heaven’s name is happening to our country, folks. I was under the assumption that churches and pastors would not be impacted by same-sex marriage.

“The other side insisted this would never happen – that pastors would not have to perform same-sex marriages,” Tedesco told me. “The reality is – it’s already happening.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told me it’s “open season on Americans who refuse to bow to the government’s redefinition of marriage.”

“Americans are witnesses to the reality that redefining marriage is less about the marriage altar and more about fundamentally altering the freedoms of the other 98 percent of Americans,” Perkins said.

Why should evangelical Christian ministers be forced to perform and celebrate any marriage that conflicts with their beliefs?

“This is the brave new world of government sanctioned same-sex unions – where Americans are forced to celebrate these unions regardless of their religious beliefs,” Perkins told me.

As I write in my new book, “God Less America,” we are living in a day when those who support traditional marriage are coming under fierce attack.
The incidents in Houston and now in Coeur d’Alene are the just the latest examples of religious intolerance.

“Government officials are making clear they will use their government power to punish those who oppose the advances of homosexual activists,” Perkins said.

Related posts:
  1. City of Houston Demands Pastors Turn Over Sermons
  2. Churches Fear Lawsuits over Gay Weddings
  3. Texas Attorney General Tells Houston City Hall: Stop Bullying Christians
  4. Gay Couple Wants to Force Church to Host Gay Weddings
  5. San Antonio Proposal Could Bar Christians From City Council

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 22 Oct - 23:59 (2014)    Sujet du message: HOUSTON, WE HAVE A PROBLEM Répondre en citant

HOUSTON, WE HAVE A PROBLEM Texas mayor goes on offense, seeking to censor voices of Christian pastors

ALARMING — Mayor Annise Parker garnered national attention for her brazen attack on religious liberty. Google Images

Even though they say everything is bigger in Texas, Annise Parker, Houston’s first openly lesbian mayor, has decided it just is not big enough for anyone’s opinion but her own, and, if you disagree, you could be held in contempt of court.

Earlier this month, Houston’s City Hall subpoenaed five local Christian pastors, demanding they turn over any sermons pertaining to homosexuality or
gender identity.

The language has since been changed, no longer including the word “sermons,” instead referring to them as “speeches.” I guess an attack on sermons was too harsh for City Attorney David Feldman. Granted, they are in the Bible Belt.

Although it must have been a while since the attorney cracked open a dictionary, since the definition of a sermon is — you guessed it — a speech.
No matter what you call it, this Texas two-step is an attempt to portray pastors preaching the Bible as homophobic bigots slashing human rights. Parker is not the first to take this position, just among the first to go on the offensive.

Whether they are “sermons” or “speeches,” nitpicking the topic list is a quick way to neuter the Church, leaving it culturally irrelevant.

Should this position become the law of the land, the rules of the game will be drastically changed, putting the Church on the defensive. This move stands in direct opposition to the freedoms outlined and solidified by the Constitution.

“This tramples on (the pastors’) First Amendment rights to free speech and the exercise of religion,” Erik Stanley, an attorney defending the pastors, said.
However, the mayor and her legal team have been very direct. From where they stand, pastoral instruction that critiques culture is out of bounds for the Church.
“If the five pastors used pulpits for politics, their sermons are fair game,” Parker tweeted.

Feldman seemed flabbergasted by the mere suggestion that First Amendment rights had been challenged.

“It’s unfortunate that (the subpoenas have) been construed as some effort to infringe upon religious liberty,” Feldman said when the pastors challenged the subpoenas.

The sacred has always ruffled the secular world’s feathers. That tension is not new, nor immediately detrimental, as long as freedom to disagree remains intact.

The problem is Parker’s latest offensive has told the religious that they just need to shut up or accept the consequences.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has warned Parker and Feldman that they might not want to do that.

“No matter what public policy is at stake, government officials must exercise the utmost care when our work touches on religious matters,” Abbott wrote in a letter to Feldman. “If we err, it must be on the side of preserving the autonomy of religious institutions and the liberty of religious believers. Your aggressive and invasive subpoenas show no regard for the very serious First Amendment considerations at stake.”

This is not the first rodeo pitting religion against government. Back in Bible times, Caesar did not care much for “speeches,” either. But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was quick to put things into perspective.

“Caesar has no jurisdiction over the pulpit,” Cruz said at a rally supporting the Houston pastors. “When you subpoena one pastor, you subpoena every pastor.”
Pastor Hernan Castano, one of the five subpoenaed leaders, believes this punch to the pulpit could set a new precedent for the United States.

“They want to intimidate the pastors of America and they want to use us five to send a message to … anyone who would oppose their way of governing,” Castano told Fox News columnist Todd Starnes in an interview. “This is very dangerous if we allow this to go on … from Houston to the rest of the nation.”

If this attack on religious freedom stretches past Texas and spreads into higher chambers of government, the United States could become a nation where wrong opinions are rewarded with court battles and prison sentences.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Dim 26 Oct - 02:17 (2014)    Sujet du message: MARIAGE HOMOSEXUEL ILLEGAL EN FRANCE : VOTE TRUQUE A L'ASSEMBLEE Répondre en citant


Catégorie parente: Actualités France Catégorie : Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité... Créé le samedi 25 octobre 2014 04:25 Publié le samedi 25 octobre 2014 04:25 Écrit par folamourre on Thumblr

Avouez, c'est énorme quand même. L'Assemblée nationale est une véritable cours de récréation, ces députés agissent comme des gamins de 12 ans qui ne se feront jamais prendre, ça en dit long sur le reste, car des textes bien plus graves ont été votés... Je pense notamment au MES ou d'autres choses... Merci à Paul de Brujitafr.fr et à Chalouette d'avoir pointé la chose, ça vous donnera de quoi polémiquer à l'apéro ce week end ; )



Les apparences sont parfois trompeuses, et elles trompent parfois tout le monde. Qui sait aujourd’hui que le « mariage homosexuel » est en fait encore illégal en France ? Qui sait aujourd’hui que la loi Taubira n’a pas été votée ? Qui sait aujourd’hui que des fraudes prouvées et reconnues ont eu lieu pendant le processus électoral de la loi Taubira à l’Assemblée nationale, annulant de facto la légalité et la légitimité du vote ?
Avec ce genre d’information, il y a de quoi non seulement faire tomber le gouvernement, mais surtout de quoi mettre un coup d’arrêt à la marchandisation de l’humain qui se prépare : PMA, GPA, commerce des enfants et « location du ventre des femmes » (dixit Pierre Bergé). Toute affirmation réclame des preuves. Quelles sont-elles ? On les trouve étalées aux yeux de tous dans les comptes-rendus officiels des séances à l’Assemblée nationale des 3 et 5 février 2013.

Une vidéo de l’Assemblée et quelques articles de presse les rapportent également. Qu’y lit-on, qu’y voit-on ? Les interventions de Christian Jacob, président du groupe UMP à l’Assemblée, et les réponses des présidents de séance, Claude Bartolone et Christophe Sirugue. Dans des « rappels au règlement », Christian Jacob signale avoir vu des parlementaires dans l’hémicycle appuyer sur plusieurs boîtiers de vote, ce qui revient à « bourrer les urnes », et les présidents de séance, loin de nier les faits, les reconnaissent volontiers.

Nous proposons ci-dessous plusieurs pièces à conviction prouvant le trucage et le laisser-faire des présidents de séance :

Mariage homosexuel : Quand les députés socialistes trichent à l’Assemblée !

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgGYalqI63c

(NDLR : par EXPÉRIENCE j'ai sauvegardé la vidéo...)

Mariage homosexuel : les députés trichent-ils en votant à plusieurs reprises ?

Dénaturation du mariage : avec 60 députés présents, la gauche arrive à obtenir 148 votes favorables

Assemblée nationale - XIVe législature – Session ordinaire de 2012-2013 :

Extrait :

Christian Jacob : Mon intervention se fonde sur l’article 58 du règlement. Monsieur le président, j’appelle votre attention sur le bon déroulement des votes par scrutin public. Je souhaite que vous puissiez le faire vérifier par le service de la séance, grâce notamment aux enregistrements vidéos. Ce n’est pas la première fois que j’ai compté quelque 60 députés de la majorité présents pour un total de 148 votes. Je voudrais qu’on reste très attentif au fait que chacun vote uniquement à partir de son propre boîtier et seulement celui-ci.

(Exclamations sur les bancs du groupe SRC)

Claude Bartolone, président de l’Assemblée nationale : Je demande à chacun des présents de n’appuyer que sur le bouton de son boîtier. (…)

Christian Jacob : …et vous l’aurez noté, monsieur le président : depuis que vous avez invité chacun à ne voter que sur son boîtier, les votes de la majorité ont singulièrement baissé.

- Troisième séance du dimanche 3 février 2013 – Article 1er quater (partie 1)

- Troisième séance du dimanche 3 février 2013 – Article 1er quater (partie 2)

Extrait :

Claude Bartolone, président de l’Assemblée nationale : La parole est à M. Christian Jacob, pour un rappel au règlement.

Christian Jacob : Il a trait au bon déroulement de nos travaux, sur la base de l’article 58 alinéa 1. Dimanche, j’ai signalé au président de notre assemblée que certains collègues de la majorité utilisaient plusieurs boîtiers de vote.

Pascal Deguilhem : Cela ne se fait pas de votre côté, bien sûr !

Christian Jacob : Le président a fait remarquer que chacun devait se concentrer et ne voter que sur un seul boîtier, le sien. Le vote suivant, les résultats ont chuté d’une vingtaine de voix.

(Protestations sur les bancs du groupe SRC)

Vous vérifierez cela dans le compte rendu. À nouveau, lors du dernier vote, l’un de mes collègues a vu un député de la majorité appuyer sur trois boîtiers.

(Vives protestations sur les bancs du groupe SRC)

Marie-Françoise Clergeau, rapporteure pour avis : C’est acrobatique !

Audrey Linkenheld : Nous n’avons que deux mains ?

Christian Jacob : Monsieur le président, je vous demande officiellement de saisir le bureau afin qu’il puisse visionner le dernier vote, pour s’assurer qu’aucun député n’a appuyé sur trois boîtiers. Si les couplages sont bien faits – et je fais confiance au groupe SRC sur ce point –, cela représente un écart de six voix pour un seul député, ce qui peut être très grave pour les résultats.

(Applaudissements sur les bancs du groupe UMP – Protestations sur les bancs du groupe SRC)

Claude Bartolone, président de l’Assemblée nationale : Monsieur le président Jacob, la demande sera transmise au bureau. Je me suis permis de faire la remarque tout à l’heure, pour avoir observé de chacun des côtés ce type de pratique, que je trouve déplorable. J’observe néanmoins qu’un regard rapide sur les députés présents montre que, de toute façon, cela ne serait pas de nature à remettre en cause le sens du vote.

– Deuxième séance du mardi 5 février 2013 – Article 4 (suite)

Comment un tel scandale peut-il passer inaperçu ? La dernière phrase de l’extrait ci-dessus nous met sur la piste : le président de séance y reconnaît ouvertement les fraudes mais les tolère sous prétexte que cela ne remet pas en cause « le sens du vote ».

Une décision jurisprudentielle du Conseil constitutionnel a rendu possible cette anomalie, la décision 86-225 DC publiée dans le JO du 25/01/1987, dont voici l’extrait litigieux sur Légifrance :

« 4. Considérant que pour l’application de ces dispositions, la circonstance que, dans le cadre d’un scrutin public, le nombre de suffrages favorables à l’adoption d’un texte soit supérieur au nombre de députés effectivement présents au point de donner à penser que les délégations de vote utilisées, tant par leur nombre que par les justifications apportées, excèdent les limites prévues par l’article 27 précité, ne saurait entacher de nullité la procédure d’adoption de ce texte que s’il est établi, d’une part, qu’un ou des députés ont été portés comme ayant émis un vote contraire à leur opinion et, d’autre part, que, sans la prise en compte de ce ou ces votes, la majorité requise n’aurait pu être atteinte ; (…) »

On trouve un commentaire critique de ce tour de passe-passe juridique dans un article titré « Que se passe-t-il en cas de fraude électorale ? » sur un site officiel consacré à la vie publique :

« Un juge électoral, une fois saisi, peut sanctionner les fraudes, mais ce n’est pas systématique. En effet, la jurisprudence veut qu’une élection ne soit annulée, ou les résultats modifiés, que si les fraudes constatées ont eu pour effet de déplacer un nombre suffisant de voix pour fausser les résultats. Ainsi, des atteintes aux règles définies par le Code électoral peuvent rester impunies si elles n’ont pas eu pour conséquence de modifier les résultats. Certains spécialistes du droit électoral contestent cette ligne jurisprudentielle, qui ne participe pas, selon eux, à la moralisation des comportements à l’occasion des campagnes électorales. »

Il y a donc un scandale dans le scandale : non seulement des fraudes électorales ont lieu en toute impunité à l’Assemblée nationale, mais encore une jurisprudence datant de 1987 rend ces tricheries « légales » sous certaines conditions, notamment « si elles n’ont pas eu pour conséquence de modifier les résultats ». Il faut certainement comprendre : les résultats prévisibles. La question qui se pose tout de suite : si le résultat d’un vote est à ce point prévisible, alors pourquoi tricher ?

En outre, le bon sens le plus élémentaire veut que toute tricherie soit sanctionnée, quel que soit le résultat. Et un droit qui ne serait pas conforme au bon sens serait simplement illégitime. De plus, le droit et la philosophie du droit sont des disciplines précises du point de vue sémantique. Si, dans certaines circonstances, des fraudes électorales reconnues comme telles par le législateur ne sont pourtant pas dénoncées comme telles, avec pour conséquence l’annulation du scrutin, cela signifie que ces fraudes sont tolérées par le législateur et qu’elles sont donc devenues miraculeusement « légales ».

Cette jurisprudence revient donc à introduire discrètement dans le droit français le concept de « fraude légale ». Ce concept de « fraude légale » étant contradictoire dans les termes, donc inconsistant du point de vue strictement logique et linguistique, donc vide de sens (comme le concept de « cercle carré »), il est aussi de valeur nulle en philosophie du droit, et donc irrecevable en pratique du droit. Sauf à frauder à son tour avec le sens des mots et la réalité. Mais ce n’est pas parce que le Conseil constitutionnel dit que 2+2=5 que cela devient vrai…

Les faits sont là : la loi Taubira n’a pas été votée « légalement », c’est-à-dire sans fraude ; elle n’a donc pas été votée tout court. Au-delà des débats pour ou contre le « mariage homo », pour ou contre l’objection de conscience des maires, pour ou contre l’abrogation de la loi Taubira ou son remplacement par un pacte d’union civile, il faut donc rappeler simplement que la loi Taubira n’a pas été votée, et que le « mariage homosexuel » est en fait encore et toujours hors la loi dans notre pays.

La diffusion maximum de la vérité sur le non-vote de la loi Taubira pourrait bien être l’une des priorités de l’époque. Cette vérité encore confidentielle doit être rendue publique sur la plus large échelle, afin de l’ancrer dans les esprits et qu’elle devienne une vérité commune et sue de tous. Conserver présent à l’esprit qu’il y a eu des fraudes et que la loi autorisant le « mariage homo » n’est donc pas votée en France ne pourra que renforcer la détermination de tous les militants qui luttent contre la dénaturation et l’artificialisation du vivant. La révélation des fraudes à l’Assemblée permettra de déstabiliser profondément le mondialisme et ses représentants en France, le lobby LGBT et les idéologues de la confusion des genres et du pinkwashing, tactique d’influence israélienne consistant à porter des jugements de valeurs politiques sur la base du clivage (gay friendly or not).

Pour conclure, lançons un avis à tous les maires de France : en 2013, il vous est toujours interdit de « marier des homosexuels » car aucune loi n’a été votée qui l’autorise ; invoquer l’objection de conscience pour refuser de « marier des homosexuels » est donc superflu car les homosexuels n’ont pas le droit de se marier en France.

Et un avis à la population française et à tous ceux qui luttent pour l’humain, le mariage, la famille et la protection de l’enfance (Manif pour tous, Civitas, Printemps français, Fils de France, Veilleurs et Sentinelles, Hommen et Antigones, Avenir pour tous, Radio Courtoisie, etc.) : la loi Taubira sur le « mariage homo » n’a pas à être abrogée, ni annulée, ni remplacée par un pacte d’union civile car la loi Taubira autorisant le « mariage homo » n’a pas été votée.

Lucien Cerise

Source(s) : Scriptoblog.com via Brujitafr.fr sur la piste de Chalouette


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Dim 26 Oct - 02:42 (2014)    Sujet du message: LE PAPE FRANCOIS DENONCE LA THEORIE DU GENRE ET L'OFFENSIVE MONDIALE DE LA CULTURE DE MORT Répondre en citant


La masculinité et la féminité  est aussi celle de Satan qui androgine se présente tantôt sous les traits d'un homme et tantôt sous les traits d'une femme. C'est pourquoi Lucifer se présente aussi en Vierge Marie. Ce sont eux qui répandent cette culture de la mort dans tous les domaines de la société, et qui pour ceux et celles qui leur apporte adoration, votre énergie sera transférée à cette entité. Ce n'est pas pour rien que le Pape, un fidèle serviteur du prince des ténèbres, va de pays en pays, sous la gouverne de la Vierge Marie (rien à voir avec la vierge Marie de la Bible), pour "récupérer" cette énergie spirituelle afin de la transférer à Lucifer, et qui lui donnera encore plus de pouvoir dans son désir de destruction.

Cette culture de la mort, c'est le Vatican et tous ses groupes satanistes religieux soumis, qui sont le problème, par leur magie blanche et noire, par leurs incantations, etc. Ce n'est pas pour rien que le Yoga prend autant d'ampleur et est de plus proposé et imposée dans certaines écoles. Satan étant le destructeur et ayant dans son coeur, le désir de corrompre et de détruire toute la race humaine pour la remplacer par ses créatures maléfiques, qui font de plus en plus leur apparition via la Darpa et autres institutions rattachées à la Darpa, pour tout ce qui concerne les robots et le transhumanisme.

Voilà pourquoi cette théorie du genre s'étend et est encouragée dans le curriculum dans les institutions scolaires, afin de "réhabiliter" les enfants selon cette corruption spirituelle, dont le Vatican et les Jésuites sont les dépositaires des valeurs lucifériennes pour ce XXIe siècle. 

Un ou une androgyne est un être humain dont l'apparence ne permet pas de savoir à quel sexe ou genre il/elle appartient. Ceci est un mensonge qui vient directement de l'enfer pour corrompre et détruire la famille et une attaque contre les lois et commandements que Dieu a donné à tous les humains pour la famille. D'ailleurs, le Synode sur la famille, dont je vous ai mis quelques documents sur le dernier Synode, montre bien que ces derniers se croient au-dessus de Dieu et de Son plan, en voulant réformer toutes ces lois de Dieu. Dieu ne change pas, ses lois sont toujours en vigueurs pour l'éternité. Si la "Sainte Eglise catholique" était vraiment de Dieu, elle ne prendrait pas plaisir à corrompre tout ce que Dieu a mis à notre disposition pour l'adapter à la nouvelle vision de ce Nouvel Ordre Mondial occulte. 


Catégorie parente: International Catégorie : Ça s'est dit par là... Créé le jeudi 17 avril 2014 13:04 Mis à jour le jeudi 17 avril 2014 14:16 Publié le jeudi 17 avril 2014 13:04 Écrit par folamour

Share on Thumblr


Jorge Mario Bergoglio (Pape Francois)

Vendredi dernier devant le Bureau international catholique de l’enfance et le Mouvement catholique italien pour la vie, le Pape François s’est exprimé sur un certain nombre de problématiques auxquelles les catholiques sont confrontés de par le monde.

A l’occasion de ces prises de paroles publiques, le souverain pontife a  bien montré qu’il prenait la mesure de l’offensive mondiale sans précédent de la « culture de mort » qui vise notamment à détruire la famille via les tentatives de légalisation de la dénaturation du mariage ou bien qui vise également à pervertir la jeunesse via l’enseignement de la théorie du genre dès le plus jeune âge dans les écoles de certains pays.

Les enfants ne sont pas « des cobayes » a ainsi rappelé François, insistant sur le fait qu’ «on ne joue pas avec les enfants».

Rappelant la position de l’Église sur le « crime abominable » de l’avortement et sur le « mariage » homosexuel, le pape a bien insisté sur le fait qu’un enfant avait besoin « d’un papa et d’une maman » pour s’épanouir :

« Il importe de redire le droit des enfants à croître dans une famille, avec un papa et une maman capables de créer une ambiance adaptée à son développement et à sa maturation affective. Au cœur de cette relation, l’enfant continue à mûrir vis-à-vis de ce que représentent la masculinité et la féminité d’un père et d’une mère. Il se prépare ainsi à la maturité affective. »

Mais le pape a également insisté sur un point important de la doctrine de l’Église à savoir « le droit des parents à l’éducation morale et religieuse de leurs propres enfants », il en a profité pour dénoncer sans ambages la théorie du genre et son enseignement dans les écoles : « Je voudrais à ce sujet manifester mon refus de tout type d’expérimentations éducatives avec les enfants. On ne peut rien expérimenter avec les jeunes et les enfants ! Ce ne sont pas des cobayes de laboratoire ! ».

Estimant au passage que ces velléités d’enseigner la théorie du genre dans les écoles sont  « la voie dictatoriale de la pensée unique » le pape n’a pas hésité à dire qu’ « on ne sait pas si avec ce genre de projets, on envoie les enfants à l’école ou dans un camp de rééducation ! »

Prenant à nouveau la défense de l’enfant à naître le pape François conclut : « Il convient de rappeler la plus ferme opposition à toute atteinte directe à la vie, spécialement innocente et sans défense: le bébé dans le ventre maternel est l’innocent par excellence. »

Ces prises de positions tranchées ont surpris le monde médiatique qui ne s’attendait  visiblement pas à cela de la part du pape qui va canoniser Jean XXIII et Jean Paul II.

Pourtant encore récemment le souverain pontife avait surpris à plusieurs reprises la petite caste médiatique qui aime à le qualifier de « révolutionnaire ».

En effet d’une part, bien qu’ayant dénoncé sans ambiguïté les dérives de la haute-finance, il n’a pas hésité à résister aux pressions de ceux qui voulaient la fermeture de l’Institut des œuvres de religion (IOR ).  En conservant sa banque à l’Église, l’évêque de Rome a montré qu’il comprenait bien que l’Église avait besoin de ce nerf de la guerre pour remplir sa mission apostolique.

D’autre part encore récemment, il a aussi créé la surprise en démontrant de sa volonté, inattendue depuis Vatican II, de réhabiliter la pratique du sacrement de Pénitence en lançant dans toute l’Église les « 24h de la confession ».

Pour introduire ces « 24h de la confession », illustrant encore sa préférence pour l’action plus que pour le discours, le souverain pontife s’est confessé en public pour donner l’exemple.

Le Pape insista également sur le « choix radical  » que chacun doit faire entre Dieu et « l’esprit du monde  », pour finalement appeler à la « conversion  », demandant pour provoquer la réflexion : « qui d’entre nous peut prétendre ne pas être un pécheur ? » la réponse ne se faisant pas attendre « Personne. Nous le sommes tous  ».


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Dim 26 Oct - 03:06 (2014)    Sujet du message: L'ART CONTEMPORAIN, SON « DISCOURS » ET SA MISSION « PROVOCATRICE » Répondre en citant


Cet art "sexuel" et tant d'autres que l'on voit s'ériger un peu partout, sont d'une laideur pas possible. Un art pour la petite classe que l'on considère comme plus bas que des animaux. Dans cette nouvelle renaissance culturelle, cette culture va bien dans le sens des valeurs que l'on veut transmettre.

vendredi 24 octobre 2014

Selon Radio-Canada qui se veut sarcastique :
tr_bq a écrit:

« Ne vous fiez pas à son aspect rigolo, un plug anal, ça peut être très effrayant. En France, cette œuvre d’art représentant un de ces jouets [sic] sexuels géants a valu à son créateur de se faire attaquer dans la rue. Des gens s’en sont même pris directement au plug en lacérant ses câbles. Alors oui, un plug anal, ça génère des scènes dignes d’un film d’Hitchcock. »

« L’arbre », objet anal

Rappelons que « l’emploi du plug présente des risques, notamment celui de déchirure des tissus rectaux » et que « l’objet peut être vecteur d’infections sexuel­lement trans­mis­sibles » (Wikipédia).

La controverse est née de l’érection d’un « sapin » en forme de bonde anale sur une place prestigieuse de Paris en marge d’une autre foire de l’art contemporain mas­sive­ment sub­ven­tion­née. Nous connaissons au Québec ces mêmes manifestations subventionnées qu’il faut sans cesse financer « afin de faire découvrir l’art contemporain à un plus vaste public ». Alors que ce grand public ne veut tout simplement pas de cet « art comptant pour rien ». Plus à ce sujet, ci-dessous.

Mais d’abord, un court débat sur le « sapin anal » et puis quelques lignes sur l’art contemporain et enfin un entretien avec un artiste d’avant-garde roumano-franco-argentin des années 80.

De l'art ou du cochon ? Entrez les artistes ! (5/5) - Ça se Dispute

Textes extraits du Suicide français d’Éric Zemmour :

Carré noir sur fond blanc de Malevitch

« L’art abstrait a depuis un siècle privilégié l’individualisme pictural, exalté la souveraineté de l’artiste, et contraint le nouveau public à suivre le parcours du créateur davantage que la beauté de son œuvre. Depuis Malevitch et son fameux Carré noir sur fond blanc, la beauté ne s’impose plus naturellement ; elle n’est plus, selon le beau mot de Nicolas Poussin, une « délectation » mais a besoin d’être accompagnée d’explications théoriques. L’art conceptuel cher à Daniel Buren doit incarner une idée avant de susciter une émotion. Dans les années 1980, [le ministre de la Culture français] Jack Lang a conduit cette révolution à son terme : la coquetterie iconoclaste de Pompidou est devenue religion d’État ; l’art subversif, art officiel ; les adversaires méprisants de l’art pompier du XIXe siècle se transmuent en « pompiers » de leur époque. L’académisme a changé de camp. Le slogan « L’art ne doit pas chercher à plaire » est modifié en « L’art, pour plaire, doit chercher à déplaire ». Le refus de l’esthétique du goût s’est mué en « esthétique du dégoût », selon la formule de Jean Clair. Il faut sans cesse provoquer, déranger, subvertir les esprits. L’art contemporain est pris dans une infinie surenchère de la laideur. Défigurer, c’est figurer.

Ce nihilisme éradicateur traduit en profondeur un refus d’hériter et de poursuivre ; l’hubris folle d’un créateur démiurge qui réinvente l’art dans chaque œuvre ; l’art comme ultime moyen de salir et saccager toute trace du passé. L’art comme quintessence du capitalisme et la « destruction créatrice » chère à Schumpeter. L’art comme fondamentale ligne de fracture entre classes sociales, les classes populaires rejetant un art contemporain qu’elles n’aiment ni ne comprennent, opposées à une microclasse d’« élites mondialisées » qui en ont fait l’étendard de leur nouvelle puissance.


Le peuple se rebelle, mais peut-être trop tard. Il lutte contre l’ultime destruction de sa civilisation, gréco-romaine et judéo-chrétienne, mais ses armes sont des épées de bois. Il se rue aux expositions sur les impressionnistes, et reste indifférent aux beautés cachées d’un art contemporain qui ne séduit que le snobisme des milliardaires. Il n’écoute que des reprises aseptisées des « tubes » des années 1960 et 1970. Il érige Les Tontons flingueurs en « film culte », et chante les louanges de Louis de Funès, dont la franchouillardise spasmodique se voit désormais rehaussée, aux yeux des critiques de gauche qui le méprisaient de son vivant, par ses origines espagnoles. Il dédaigne la plupart des films français, alourdis par un politiquement correct de plomb, mais fait un triomphe aux rares audacieux qui exaltent les valeurs aristocratiques d’hier (Les Visiteurs), le Paris d’hier (Amélie Poulain), l’école d’hier (Les Choristes), la classe ouvrière d’hier (Les Ch’tis), la solidarité d’hier (Intouchables) et l’intégration d’hier (Qu’est-ce qu’on a fait au bon Dieu ?) À chaque fois, la presse de gauche crie au scandale, à la ringardise, à la xénophobie, au racisme, à la France rance ; mais prêche dans le désert. À chaque fois, les salles sont remplies par des spectateurs enthousiastes qui viennent voir sur pellicule une France qui n’existe plus, la France d’avant.

Dans les années 1970, les films qui avaient un grand succès populaire dénonçaient, déconstruisaient, et détruisaient l’ordre établi ; ceux qui remplissent les salles quarante ans plus tard ont la nostalgie de cet ordre établi qui n’existe plus. Les œuvres des années 1970 étaient d’ailleurs d’une qualité bien supérieure à leurs lointaines rivales. Comme s’il fallait plus de talent pour détruire que pour se souvenir. Comme si le monde d’hier – avec ses rigidités et ses contraintes, son patriarcat et ses tabous – produisait une énergie et une vitalité, une créativité que le monde d’aujourd’hui, celui de l’extrême liberté individuelle et du divertissement, de l’indifférenciation féminisée, ne forge plus. Comme si la liberté débridée des années 1970 avait tourné au catéchisme étriqué des années 2000.

Il y a quarante ans, un ordre ancien, patriarcal, paysan et catholique n’était plus, tandis que le nouvel ordre n’était nouvel ordre, urbain, matriarcal, antiraciste, n’était pas encore. Profitant de l’intervalle, s’ébroua une révolte jubilatoire et iconoclaste, mais qui devint en quelques décennies un pouvoir pesant, suspicieux, moralisateur, totalitaire. Le jeune rebelle de L’Éducation sentimentale a vieilli en Monsieur Homais, cynique, pontifiant et vindicatif. »

Entretien avec l’artiste d’avant-garde des années 80 Juan Romano Chucalescu


L'art contemporain se moque-t-il de nous...?

Émission StarMag diffusée sur TPS Star le 29 janvier 2009.

+ VIDEOS : http://www.pouruneécolelibre.com/2014/10/lart-contemporain-et-sa-mission.ht…

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 29 Oct - 03:03 (2014)    Sujet du message: '10,000 SCHOOLGIRLS' VICTIMS OF U.K. SEX GANGS Répondre en citant


Report: Political correctness condemns thousands to torture

Published: 03/24/2014 at 8:22 PM

  Bob Unruh

Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially.

Under pressure from political correctness, authorities have allowed Muslim pedophile gangs in the United Kingdom to groom underage girls for sexual abuse for decades, victimizing as many as 10,000 schoolgirls, according to a report by an organization calling for an investigation.

“What we believe is required is a full-scale public inquiry,” the Law and Freedom Foundation said in the conclusion of its 300-plus page report, “Easy Meat: Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery.”

The group said the public inquiry “must look into the failures of national agencies, child-care charities, and academics to study this problem.”

“The inquiry must look into what police forces knew and when they knew these things. Is it true that Lancashire police knew about grooming gang activities in the 1970s? How much information did they have, and how credible was it? Why has the problem of the grooming of Sikh girls by these gangs been kept off the national agenda from 1988 to 2013? Did Islamic fundamentalist organizations encourage Muslim men to go out and deceive and groom non-Muslim women?”

The foundation said its report examines the grooming gangs activities, the connection to Islam and the scale of the problem.
The report says that 20 years ago, child-care professionals dealing with the victims made recommendations that could have protected the victims, but the steps have never been implemented.

The report, authored by Peter McLoughlin, says all sexual abuse of children is horrible, but the “phenomenon of gangs of men who loiter with impunity around schoolgirls, luring them into a life of addiction and prostitution is a distinct category of child sexual abuse, but a category that the authorities in Britain have deliberately ignored for 25 years.”

The report says the Muslim community has refused to condemn the crimes and to inform police that they were going on.

“Political correctness would be used to make sure that people did not speak about this phenomenon, enabling the perpetrators free rein to sexually abuse schoolgirls for decades. Yes, decades. We know that in an age where parents are not allowed to smack their children, this sounds unbelievable,” the report says.

Even though some details have appeared in reports over the last year or two, the full extent of the problem is stunning, the report says.
“In England, this epidemic of child-rape by grooming gangs has been going on since at least 1988,” it says. “Despite more than a decade of disinformation by child-care professionals, academics, and political activists, the earliest claims (1988 to 2003) were that the gangs were overwhelmingly Muslim. This massive over-representation of Muslim men in this crime spree has been borne out by the prosecutions of the last three to four years, but it is clear that it must have been known long ago and should have been made public.

“Because the predators were Muslims, the agencies who are responsible for child-protection have almost entirely failed in their job to protect vulnerable children. From a fear of being called ‘racist,’ police forces across the country have buried the evidence,” the report says.

The organization believes its analysis “will show that there are indeed prima facie reasons for considering Islamic doctrine to be at the root of this problem, both in Britain and in the Netherlands.”

Schoolgirls are lured by money and presents, flattered by compliments and by being taken into a world of adults.

The girls then are introduced to drugs and alcohol.

“And one she is manipulated into considering the initial, alluring youth as her ‘boyfriend,’ she will be persuaded/coerced into having sex with his relatives/friends,” the report says. “From there it is a downward spiral of rape and prostitution, often with the schoolgirl suffering severe mental and physical pain, even torture.”

The girls stay because of threats that their homes will be bombed or their mothers will be gang-raped or worse.

The report cites a counselor who told of a girl who had her tongue nailed to a table when she told a grooming gang that she would go to the police.
The pimps often end up making more than $1,000 a day from the girls they prostitute, the report says, or up to about $300,000 a year.

Many of the victims, for a time, were Sikh girls, and it was alleged police knew but did nothing, so Sikh men took the law into their own hands.

“The convicted men were Muslim, the girl was Sikh, and some of the abuse had indeed taken place at the restaurant the Sikhs attacked,” the report says. “Furthermore, if the police did know about the crimes, it is clear that nothing was being done about this, before the Sikhs attacked the restaurant: the predatory Muslim men were only prosecuted once the Sikhs had drawn attention to these crimes by taking the law into their own hands.”

In fact, Sikhs were prosecuted for trying to stop the Muslim grooming gangs.

However, there is no sign that the police, the media or the child-care professionals took any notice of the Sikh’s allegations of sex slavery, the report says.

The report also said it has not been revealed where there was “one case where it was non-Muslim men grooming Muslim girls” … despite the fact 95 percent of men in Britain are not Muslims.

The report traces the gangs to Islamic doctrine, stating that not only “are Muslim men permitted legally and morally to rape their slaves, but they are also forgiven if they turn a slave girl into a prostitute,” citing the Quran, which says “do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, when they desire to keep chaste, in order to seek the frail goods of this world’s life; and whoever compels them, then surely after their compulsion Allah is forgiving, merciful.”

The report concludes it’s clear that “these kind of Islamic views easily lend themselves to Muslim men seeing women as objects, to be controlled and dominated by men.”

“It would lead them to believe that if some non-Muslim woman within their control could be prostituted, there would be no moral or legal consequences for them within an Islamic worldview,” the report says.

It notes that over the last five decades,  the Muslim population of the U.K. has on averaged doubled every 10 years.

“Assuming that nothing happens to deter Muslims from committing this form of crime (and remember, it is very lucrative and there is a 25 year history of most of the perpetrators escaping justice), then every decade we can assume that the number of grooming gangs will be double the number of the previous decade.”

According to the Gatestone Institute, the report was “meticulously documented” and warned that it makes clear the “massive over-representation of Muslim men in this crime spree.”


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Sam 1 Nov - 02:12 (2014)    Sujet du message: GUSHEE ENDORSES LGBT AGENDA Répondre en citant


October 28, 2014

David Gushee

Jonathan Merritt at Religion News Service is reporting that prominent evangelical ethicist David Gushee is set to enter the gay rights fray by publicly announcing a change of mind on the full inclusion of LGBT people in the church. The announcement coincides with the release of his new book Changing Our Minds: A Call from America’s Leading Evangelical Ethics Scholar for Full Acceptance of LGBT Christians in the Church. Gushee’s work is the latest example of a new literary genre—a sort of “conversion narrative”—that marries an account of intellectual epiphany with a political manifesto designed to cause the church to rethink centuries of settled doctrine.

Despite his self-appointed status as “America’s leading evangelical ethics scholar” it’s unclear whether Gushee’s change of heart will impact the evangelical world much at all. Jonathan Merritt’s rather sensational lede suggests that the evangelical world will be rocked: “At a moment when American churches and politicians are warring over gay rights and same-sex marriage, each side needs every soldier it can muster. Conservatives are about to learn that one of America’s leading evangelical ethicists is defecting to the opposition.”[1] Yet, it’s far from clear whether the evangelical world will even pay heed despite HuffPo’s salivation at the prospect.

In reality, this shift is the latest in a series of intellectual shifts that has moved Gushee increasingly out-of-step with the evangelical mainstream. Recently, in 2012, Gushee participated in a conference called “Sexuality and Covenant” cosponsored by the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and Mercer University. The validity of same sex relationships and marriage was a prominent theme despite Gushee himself not–at that time–explicitly stating a view on the matter. The paper he presented argued for the priority of covenant while not explicitly limiting to a man and a woman only. It’s impossible to tell why he did this, but it seems likely that his participation in the conference came during his period of discernment.

In addition, at the height of the war in Iraq Gushee was a vocal critic of the Bush administration’s use of “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which Gushee characterized as torture. He founded an evangelical organization dedicated to protesting the use of torture by American forces and security services. Reasonable minds can disagree on whether the practice Gushee described constitute torture, yet its fair to say that—for good or ill—the issue of torture didn’t attract much evangelical attention at the time. In addition, his views on the environment and especially on man-made climate change differ from the evangelical consensus, which is skeptical of human causation.

Consequently, it remains to be seen just what the effect will be on the evangelical movement. Since Gushee has increasingly moved into the progressive side of the broadening evangelical camp its likely that this move will affect only those already firmly in the progressive camp and always looking for another celebrity scholar to endorse their view.

Gushee is, however, an influential voice in the academy having established himself as a leading ethicist. Kingdom Ethics, a textbook he coauthored with the late Glen Stassen of Fuller Seminary, was named a 2004 Christianity Today book of the Year. His change of views will undoubtedly be noted across the secular academy where eyes will likely roll that it took so long for his intellectual capitulation and where the fall out can only be positive. = Christianity Today is an ecumenical organization founded by Billy Graham.

At the same time, evangelicals are—for better or for worse—not a people inclined to make much of the prognostications of academics. Had he been a prominent preacher the story might have been different. In reality Gushee is well known among progressive evangelicals and obscure among the movement’s mainstream. He is associated with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, a denomination widely acknowledged to be more progressive than it is evangelical. He teaches at a university known for its periodic conflicts with the conservative Georgia Baptist Convention (affiliated with Southern Baptist Convention), which voted in 2005 to sever ties with the university.

An advance copy of Gushee’s remarks for an upcoming GLBT event states: “I will join your crusade tonight…. I will henceforth oppose any form of discrimination against you. I will seek to stand in solidarity with you who have suffered the lash of countless Christian rejections. I will be your ally in every way I know how to be.” He intends to make himself available to the GLBT movement, especially to parents seeking to understand their homosexual children.

It is interesting to regard the event that precipitated Gushee’s change of mind. According to the RNS report, in 2008 Gushee’s sister came out as a lesbian. A Christian and a single mother, his sister experienced periodic severe depression and had been hospitalized. Gushee’s conclusion, “traditionalist Christian teaching produces despair in just about every gay or lesbian person who must endure it.”

It’s important to not too quickly skip over this sentence.

If traditional Christian teaching produces despair it is likely that such teaching has somehow been pressed or malformed to obscure the gospel. Whether one identifies as homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual, the hope of the gospel is the same. In the words of Tim Keller, “We are more sinful and flawed in ourselves than we ever dared believe, yet at the very same time we are more loved and accepted in Jesus Christ than we ever dared hope.” The profound experience of grace in the gospel provides the onus to a life of faithful discipleship. The homosexual need not stop experiencing same sex attraction in order to “earn” salvation just as straight people need not stop experiencing opposite-sex attraction. What he must do is remain chaste, an ancient word with little currency in today’s culture.

There can be little doubt that traditional Christians often communicate to gays that they must somehow stop experiencing same sex attraction in order to make themselves acceptable to God. This is not the gospel. There is nothing than we can do to make ourselves acceptable to God. What the Bible asks of us is, however, to recognize that sexual relationships with people of the same sex violates God’s intention for human sexuality. The Christian tradition directs us in one of two equally valid directions: celibacy or heterosexual marriage.

Reasonable people ought to respect Gushee’s right to change his mind and to do so publicly. However, it’s important to note that Gushee’s capitulation is not the only possible response to the precipitous change in cultural attitudes toward sexuality.

A more faithful response is for orthodox Christians to gently and humbly insist that ‘baptizing’ our sexual appetites (gay or straight)—that is affirming them without condition—does not redeem them nor does it lead to human flourishing. In the end our sexual appetites must be ordered and rightly expressed in the God-given covenant relationship of marriage between a man and a woman. The other option, just as valid, is the commitment to live a celibate life. What is more, traditional Christians have a powerful opportunity to simply continue to affirm what the church has always affirmed and yet to do so with generous grace toward those who struggle with same sex attraction. By acknowledging this as a real and legitimate experience for some Christians, the church need not endorse homosexual practice as normative. However, it does provide opportunity both for the pastoral care and for modeling a faithful alternative to culture. In responding to Gushee’s announcement Pittsburgh seminary professor Robert Gagnon echoed this alternative stating: “All of us have one or more areas of life (some of an even more serious nature than same-sex attractions) where we are called on by God to let the “dying of Jesus” become manifest in our body so that the “life of Jesus” might likewise become manifest (as Paul mentions in 2 Cor 4:7-11). Nobody gets a pass from a cruciform life, out of which resurrection follows.” Amen.

[1] Available online at: http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/10/24/david-gushee-lgbt-homose… (accessed October 25, 2014).


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Dim 2 Nov - 13:44 (2014)    Sujet du message: SUEDE : LE REPRESENTANT DE LA LIGUE DE DEFENSE LGBT CONDAMNE A 5 ANS DE PRISON POUR VIOL Répondre en citant


La presse révisée

Un homme de 44 ans a été condamné à cinq ans en prison pour trafic de drogue et viols de jeunes hommes à son domicile. Il s’agit d’un représentant de la Fédération suédoise pour les défenses des droits des Lesbiennes, Gays, Bisexuels et Transgenre (RFSL).

L’homme a été condamné pour avoir violé plusieurs hommes qu’il faisait venir chez lui. Il a aussi été reconnu coupable d’avoir forcé ses victimes à s’offrir sexuellement en échange de drogues et de logement, et pour détournement d’argent du compte bancaire du RFSL.

L’homme a utilisé sa position au sein du groupe de pression LGBT pour profiter de ses victimes, rapporte un journal télévisé suédois. Un porte-parole de RFSL a déclaré qu’il regrette que ce cas isolé puisse porter préjudice à l’image de l’association.

« C’est une affaire qui ne concerne qu’un membre isolé de notre groupe et nous devons restaurer la confiance des bénévoles qui travaillent avec nous » a précisé Mattias Uhrberg, responsable presse du RFSL.
Envoyez lui des oranges et le livre de Farida

Papa porte un pantalon et maman porte une robe

Les éditions REID vous présentent le premier livre pour enfants rédigé par Farida Belghoul et dessiné par Hugo. Il comporte 52 pages illustrées pour le plaisir des enfants et des parents.

Source : NOVOpress


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Lun 3 Nov - 00:51 (2014)    Sujet du message: ANGLETERRE — STATUE DE LA « VRAIE » FAMILLE : DEUX MERES MONOPARENTALES ET LEURS ENFANTS Répondre en citant


dimanche 2 novembre 2014

La statue de 180.000 $ représentant une « vraie famille » de Birmingham

La ville de Birmingham et le Conseil des arts d’Angleterre ont organisé un concours pour représenter sous forme de sculpture « une vraie famille de Birmingham ».

Plus de 370 familles se sont portées candidates. Un comité composé de personnalités locales, culturelles et religieuses ont désigné la « famille Jones » deux sœurs métisses et leurs deux garçons comme la « vraie famille ».  La statue a coûté 100.000 £, soit 180.000 $ C’est l’œuvre de la sculptrice Gillian Wearing. Pour celle-ci « La famille traditionnelle est une des formes de la famille parmi de nombreuses et cette œuvre souligne le fait que ce qui constitue une famille ne devrait pas être fixe. »

Toutefois, de nombreuses personnes remettent en question l’opportunité de cette statue qui représente une famille qu’elles considèrent comme peu typique.

Les sœurs métisses vivent séparément et n’ont pas révélé de détails quant à la présence ou nom des pères de leurs enfants. Ce silence intrigue un grand nombre de personnes qui se demandent pourquoi les pères ne sont pas représentés dans la sculpture.

Le député libéral local, John Hemming, a déclaré : « Il n’y a absolument rien de mal avec les familles monoparentales, mais je trouve toujours cela triste lorsque les pères ne sont pas impliqués dans la vie de leurs enfants. » John Hemming s’est également demandé pourquoi l’argent public a été dépensé sur une telle sculpture controversée. « Alors que le conseil ne parvient pas à garder les rues propres, 100.000 £ c’est une somme », a-t-il ajouté.

Les modèles : les sœurs Roma et Emma Jones avec leurs fils à côté de la statue qui représente « leur famille » modèle

Craig Pickering, de l’organisme de bienfaisance Les Familles ont besoin des pères, a déclaré : « Tout le monde sait qu’il existe toutes sortes de familles, mais désigner ces personnes comme une famille semble très bizarre. C’est inexact et déplacé. Les enfants réussissent mieux quand à la fois leur mère et leur père jouent un rôle actif dans leur vie. »

Patricia Morgan, une chercheuse de pointe en matière de politique familiale, a déclaré que la décision de l’artiste de dépeindre une famille sans père était «une honte». «Nous devons savoir si oui ou non il y a un ou plusieurs hommes dans ces familles », dit-elle. « Est-ce qu’il prend ses responsabilité et vit avec la mère, oui ou non ? Ils présentent cette sculpture comme une sorte d’idéal que les gens doivent imiter, mais elle représente moins de un pour cent de la population », de conclure l’universitaire.

Source : Daily Mail


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Lun 3 Nov - 00:59 (2014)    Sujet du message: LE PRONOM PERSONNEL NEUTRE « HEN » FAIT SON ENTREE DANS LE DICTIONNAIRE SUEDOIS Répondre en citant


mercredi 30 juillet 2014

Le prochain dictionnaire de l’Académie suédoise fera une place au pronom neutre « hen », dès avril 2015.

Le rédacteur en chef du dictionnaire, Sven-Göran Malmgren, a reconnu que l’Académie a débattu le sujet pendant plusieurs années. « Nous voulions être sûrs que ce n’était pas seulement un effet de mode », a-t-il déclaré à la Radio suédoise (Sveriges Radio), avant de revenir sur l’usage désormais commun du terme, et sur la fonction qu’il remplit.

Couverture du premier livre suédois qui utilise le pronom neutre « hen »  :
Kivi et le chien monstrueux

Le pronom a déclenché une vaste controverse quand il a été utilisé en 2012 par un éditeur dans le livre pour enfants, Kivi et le chien monstrueux par Jesper Lundqvist. Dans l'ouvrage, « hen » remplace «  on » (elle) et « han » (il). Son livre introduisait également des termes neutres tels que « mappor » (mapa) et « pammor » (paman) en lieu et place de « maman » et « papa » (mammor et pappor en suédois).

Toujours en 2012, un catalogue publié par l’une des plus grandes chaînes de jouets en Suède représentait des garçons jouant à la poupée et des filles avec des répliques de mitrailleuses, le tout pour briser les stéréotypes sexués dans la société suédoise. Notons que plusieurs études tendent à prouver que cette distribution des jouets pourrait bien avoir une origine biologique dès la prime enfance.

Même si le mot « hen » rentre dans le dictionnaire, plusieurs critiques s’opposent encore à son emploi selon Lena Lind Palicki qui a rédigé cette entrée du dictionnaire : « Des personnes âgées et des ruraux n’aiment pas le mot », a-t-elle déclaré à la Radio suédoise (Sveriges Radio). « Beaucoup de locuteurs n’utiliseront pas le mot, même s’il se retrouve dans le dictionnaire. Je ne pense pas qu’il y ait eu un autre mot aussi controversé de l’histoire ».

Le dictionnaire de l’Académie donnera deux sens au terme « hen ». Le premier décrira des situations ou le genre est indéterminé. Le second permettra de parler d’un « troisième genre ».

Selon le site Ijsberg, le pronom suédois serait inspiré du finnois parlé dans la Finlande voisine. En finnois, le pronom « hän » signifie « il » ou « elle », « se » étant le pronom neutre (« it » en anglais, « es » en allemand). Ironiquement, des études indiquent que les jeunes Finnois associent le plus souvent « hän » au sexe mâle quand on leur demande d’illustrer la personne mentionnée. Le finnois n'est pas une langue germanique, mais finno-ougrienne. Son pronom « hän » n'est pas une invention récente.

Désormais, « hen » sera considéré par certains comme une manière de se référer à une personne sans avoir à mentionner son genre, dans le cas où le genre est inconnu, considéré non pertinent ou si cette personne est transgenre.

Sources : IJSBERG et RT


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Jeu 6 Nov - 02:18 (2014)    Sujet du message: POPE, CURIA GATHERING INTELLECTUALS TO STUDY MAN-WOMAN COMPLEMENTARITY Répondre en citant


This is their right hand, the left hand is pushing for the LGBT socialist agenda. Nothing is absolute (ying-yang) to them.

Colloquium This Month Hosted by Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Vatican City, November 04, 2014 (Zenit.org) Staff 

Top Vatican congregations are going to gather intellectuals from around the globe, representing various religious beliefs, to consider the complementarity of man and woman in marriage.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will host the colloquium in Vatican City this Nov. 17-19, in cooperation with the Pontifical Council for the Family, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

The global, interreligious meeting will feature representatives from 14 religious traditions and 23 countries. The colloquium will be opened by Pope Francis. 

Sessions will be opened successively by the leadership of each of the cooperating Vatican offices, followed by the presentations and witness testimonies of leading religious figures and scholars. 

Each session will also premiere one of six short films treating men and women and marriage the world over.

Each film features a variety of interviews with young and old, single and married, women and men, lay and religious, from many cultures, continents and religions. 

Topics range from the beauty of the union between the man and the woman, to the loss of confidence in marital permanence, to the cultural and economic woes that follow upon the disappearance of marriage.

The colloquium Web site is http://www.humanum.it

The site contains information about the agenda, the presenters and the films.

(November 04, 2014) © Innovative Media Inc.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Ven 7 Nov - 23:42 (2014)    Sujet du message: KEVIN ANNETT_ CANADA PM HARPER CABINET MINISTER DENIS LEBEL IN NINTH CIRCLE CHILD SACRIFICE IN ROME Répondre en citant


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TybPu74hhvc

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238



ENGLISH : Canadian Inquiry reveals possible west coast wing of Ninth Circle sacrificial cult – “Twelve Mile Club” involves top judges, clergy and politicians

Chers amis,

Via les articles que je vous ai précédemment postés, vous êtes sans doute désormais familiers avec le Neuvième Cercle (Corona Novem), cette secte satanique catholique créée par les Jésuites et qui viole, torture et tue des enfants à travers le monde entier...

Désormais, une secte soeur du Neuvième Cercle a été découverte à l'ouest du Canada : le « Twelve Mile Club » (Club des Douze Miles). Le nom de cette secte ignoble qui, elle aussi, viole, torture et assassine des enfants, vient du fait que la limite territoriale légale du Canada est de 12 miles au-delà des côtes, et que ces fumiers se débarrassent des cadavres des enfants en franchissant cette limite (ce qui leur assure qu'aucune enquête ne sera menée par les autorités), et jettent les corps des petites victimes dans l'océan ! Abject...

La bonne nouvelle, dans tout cela, c'est qu'une action de l'ITCCS a commencé contre les bourreaux d'enfants de cette secte !

Comme par le plus grand des « hasards », nous retrouvons non seulement des prêtres, mais aussi des juges puissants et des politiciens au sein de cette clique satanique ! Le nom d'un ministre canadien, Denis Lebel, est d'ailleurs clairement cité dans l'article ci-dessous, parmi d'autres crevures du même genre !

L'enquête continue, et nous pouvons être certains que de nouvelles actions seront menées prochainement, ainsi que de nouveaux articles sur le sujet.

L'article, traduit pour vous en français, ci-dessous...


Source: http://itccs.org/2014/11/08/itccs-breaking-update-november-8-2014/ 


Publié le 8 novembre 2014

Une mise à jour de l’actualité de l’ITCCS: le 8 novembre 2014


Un ancien employé de la cathédrale catholique Holy Rosary (le Saint Rosaire) a révélé les détails d'un culte sacrificiel de la côte ouest impliquant le viol rituel et l’assassinat d’enfants.

Cette secte, connue sous le nom de Twelve Mile Club, opère à partir de yachts privés appartenant à des hommes d'affaires catholiques et amarrés à l’ouest de Vancouver. Les enfants enlevés et torturés sont emportés en dehors de la limite territoriale de douze miles du Canada, et leurs corps sont jetés dans l'océan.

Le témoin a partagé son témoignage cette semaine avec les membres d’une enquête spéciale de l’ITCCS formée à la suite de la découverte de la participation du ministre du cabinet gouvernemental canadien, Denis Lebel, à un meurtre rituel d'un jeune garçon, meurtre commis au sein du Neuvième Cercle à Rome, le 22 février 2014. (voir www.itccs.org , le 4 novembre 2014).

Ce témoin a assisté à des réunions en 2007 et 2008, réunions durant lesquelles l'ancien archevêque Raymond Roussin et le curé supérieur de la paroisse, Glen Dion, avaient planifié, avec des avocats de l'église, la dissimulation de leur propre implication au sein du Twelve Mile Club.

Selon ce témoin, l'archevêque et Glen Dion ont nommé des juges et d’autres membres du clergé comme étant membres du Club, y compris l'ancien juge en chef de la Cour provinciale de la Colombie-Britannique, Hugh Stansfield, le juge William Esson ainsi que Terrance Warren de la Cour suprême de la Colombie-Britannique,le pasteur de l'Église Unie et actuel modérateur de cette église, Gary Paterson, et les responsables nationaux de l'Église Unie, Brian Thorpe et Jon Jessiman.

Le juge en chef Hugh Stansfield décéda subitement en mai 2009, après avoir été reconnu comme violeur présumé d'enfant. ( http://www.waterwarcrimes.com/6-chief-judge-hugh-stansfield—provincial-court-of-british-columbia—suspected-pedofile—suspected-murder-victim.html )
Mgr. Roussin démissionna brusquement de son poste en janvier 2009 en raison d'une "dépression nerveuse", selon l'archidiocèse de Vancouver.

Se référant à l'archevêque, le témoin a déclaré :

"Lors de la dernière réunion à laquelle j'ai assisté avant sa retraite, cela se déroulait au printemps 2008, son Excellence était très inquiet au sujet des protestations effectuées à la cathédrale par les Indiens et par le groupe de Kevin Annett. Il avait peur que tous les journalistes couvrant ces manifestations puissent découvrir le Twelve Mile Club et tous les enfants qui avaient disparu. Tout cela est devenu trop pour lui".

Des mandats d'arrêt citoyens de droit commun ont été délivrés l'an dernier contre trois autres membres présumés du Twelve Mile Club - le modérateur de l’Eglise Unie, Gary Paterson, et les responsables de l'église, Brian Thorpe et Jon Jessiman - pour leur rôle dans la dissimulation de la traite et des meurtres d'enfants dans les pensionnats indiens de leur église. ( http://itccs.org/2013/02/25/guilty-final-verdict-is-rendered-in-first-common-law-court-case-against-the-vatican-and-canada-for-genocide/b ).

Interrogé sur sa connaissance de tout lien entre le Twelve Mile Club et la secte du Neuvième Cercle, le témoin a déclaré aux agents de l’ITCCS :

« Etant francophone lui aussi, l’archevêque Roussin était un ami proche de  Mgr. Gérald Cyprien Lacroix (lui-même membre du Neuvième Cercle). Ils ont écrit un livre ensemble, ils se sont associés lors du vote à la CECC (Conférence canadienne des évêques catholiques). Vous n’obtenez pas la possibilité de devenir archevêque à moins de savoir garder les secrets des uns et des autres. Combien d’éléments supplémentaires de connexion leur faut-il ? ».

Les déclarations d'autres témoins concernant le Twelve Mile Club et l'enlèvement d'enfants sur la côte ouest du Canada, arriveront bientôt.

Publié par l’ITCCS Central,
Le 8 novembre 2014.

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 12 Nov - 03:07 (2014)    Sujet du message: POPE FRANCIS REMOVES CONSERVATIVE US CARDINAL BURKE FROM VATICAN POST Répondre en citant


in opposition to gay rights and abortion.


By Anugrah Kumar , Christian Post Contributor
November 10, 2014|7:55 am

 (Photo: Reuters/Giampiero Sposito)

Pope Francis leaves after leading a thanksgiving mass for Canadian Saints in St.Peter's Basilica at the Vatican, October 12, 2014.

Pope Francis has removed conservative U.S. Cardinal Raymond L. Burke, who was the Vatican's highest ranking American, as head of its highest court. The move could be seen as reflecting the changing stand of the Catholic Church on some key social issues.

The Vatican announced Saturday that Cardinal Burke, formerly prefect of the Apostolic Signature, will now serve as cardinal patron of the Knights and Dames of Malta, according to Catholic News Service.

The 66-year-old cardinal and the former archbishop of St. Louis has been known as an advocate for denying communion to Catholic politicians who back abortion. Burke has also openly criticized the pope for his accommodation approach to the faith.

The news service says it's highly unusual for a pope to remove an official of Cardinal Burke's stature and age without assigning him comparable responsibilities elsewhere. The Vatican did not give a reason for his reassignment.

According to church law, cardinals in the Vatican are required to offer resignation when they reach the age of 75, however, it's common practise for them to continue in office for several more years.

"The position of Patron of the Order of Malta is usually given to a retired cardinal, or as a second task to an active cardinal," writes Michael Sean Winters for National Catholic Reporter. "It has almost no responsibilities."

The Vatican's move comes about a year after Burke was removed from the Congregation for Bishops, a group that appoints new bishops around the world.

Just a week ago, the cardinal appeared to be criticizing Francis' leadership style.

"Many have expressed their concerns to me. … There is a strong sense that the Church is like a ship without a rudder," Burke told a Spanish Catholic magazine in an interview.

Some believe he only said that some Catholics believe the Church is not being led properly, and that he doesn't thinks so, necessarily. However, the Vatican decision is being seen as linked to his vocal conservative stand on social issues.

"The conservatives had it all their way for about 30 years, and now the shoe might be on the other foot," USA Today quoted the Rev. Paul Sullins, a priest who teaches sociology at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., as saying. "Now they feel on the outside a little bit, which is exactly how the progressives used to feel."

Burke had also urged the Vatican not to move toward a greater acceptance of gays and lesbians.

Last month, a range of "pastoral challenges of the family" were discussed at a synod in St. Peter's Square in preparation for a larger world synod in October 2015.

An interim report of the synod used conciliatory language toward same-sex unions and other non-marital relationships. In response, Burke said a statement from Pope Francis reaffirming traditional doctrine on such issues was "long overdue."


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 12 Nov - 03:21 (2014)    Sujet du message: COURT TOLD : HUMANS COULD MARRY ANIMALS Répondre en citant


'This is not just a slippery slope ... it is a bottomless pit'

Published: 18 hours ago

  Bob Unruh

 Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially.

Just days after the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the right of states to define marriage as one man and one woman, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court is being urged to affirm the decision, because if it doesn’t, states might not even be able to regulate the “species” of marriage partners.

“If ‘marriage’ means fulfilling one’s personal choices regarding intimacy, as the appellants insist, it is difficult to see how states could regulate marriage on any basis,” said a friend-of-the-court brief filed in a Louisiana case. “If personal autonomy is the essence of marriage, then not only gender, but also number, familial relationship, and even species are insupportable limits on that principal and they all will fall.

“This is not just a slippery slope on which the appellants wish to set us, it is a bottomless pit into which they desire to throw us. It is clearly within a state’s right to define marriage between and man and a woman when that licensing restriction passes rational basis review.”

The warning isn’t new.

It was in 2008 when the nation was in the midst of a series of more than 30 state elections in which voters chose to affirm traditional marriage that the California Supreme Court, on its own initiative, created “same-sex marriage” in the state.

In a dissent from that opinion, State Supreme Court justice Marvin Baxter said: “The bans on incestuous and polygamous marriages are ancient and deeprooted, and, as the majority suggests, they are supported by strong considerations of social policy. … Our society abhors such relationships, and the notion that our laws could not forever prohibit them seems preposterous.

“Yet here, the majority overturns, in abrupt fashion, an initiative statute confirming the equally deeprooted assumption that marriage is a union of partners of the opposite sex. The majority does so by relying on its own assessment of contemporary community values, and by inserting in our Constitution an expanded definition of the right to marry that contravenes express statutory law.”

His warning?

“Who can say that, in 10, 15 or 20 years, an activist court might not rely on the majority’s analysis to conclude, on the basis of a perceived evolution in community values, that the laws prohibiting polygamous and incestuous marriages were no longer constitutionally justified?”

The newest warning comes in a brief filed in the Louisiana case by the Thomas More Law Center.

The case developed when voters in Louisiana, by a 78 percent to 22 percent margin, defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Homosexual activists sued, but the law was affirmed at the district court level by Judge Martin C. Feldman, who said the state was under no constitutional obligation to recognize same-sex marriage.

The brief explains: “If ‘marriage’ means whatever a political activist, a cherry-picked plaintiff, or an appointed judge wants it to mean, it means nothing. If it has no fixed meaning, it is merely a vessel for a judge’s will. It is used as a subterfuge for judicial legislation. And as Montesquieu observed: ‘There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.’”

The filing represents tens of thousands of churches and ministries including more than 3 million members in the United States.

“Same-sex attracted individuals have never lawfully been forced to attend different schools, walk on separate public sidewalks, sit at the back of the bus, drink out of separate drinking fountains, denied their right to assemble, or denied their voting rights. The legal history of these disparate classifications, i.e., immutable racial discrimination and same-sex attraction, is incongruent. Yet, courts continue to mistakenly draw upon this incongruence as the basis for what they now deem ‘marriage equality,’” the brief says.

The appellants wish to replace the morality of the Judeo-Christian tradition on which our country was founded with the trendy, relativist morality of political correctness.”

Another brief, from the Alliance Defending Freedom, outlines the benefits to society of the traditional family of a married mother and father and their children.
“Man-woman-marriage laws substantially further the state’s interest in linking children to both of their biological parents. Therefore, those laws easily satisfy the deferential rational-basis standard that applies here,” the brief says.

“The people of Louisiana – and every state – should continue to have the freedom to affirm marriage as the union of a man and a woman in their laws,” said ADF Senior Counsel Byron Babione. “The district court in this case was right to conclude, as the U.S. Supreme Court did in its Windsor decision last year, that marriage law is the business of the states. States that choose to affirm marriage as a man and a woman have vital reasons for doing so.”

Headed for Supreme Court?

WND reported last week a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the rights of voters in four states – Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee – to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

The decision followed a long list of federal court decision that have adopted the premise that “equality” of marriage means there is no difference between the sexes.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently had refused to take on any same-sex marriage cases, allowing the movement to expand into about 30 states, but the 6th Circuit decision may change that, according to analysts.

Mat Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel, which has fought on behalf of traditional marriage, said, “With a divide in the appeals court rulings, the Supreme Court will likely take up the issue.”

Previous rulings from the high court on the issue have found that the institution is necessarily defined as the union of one man and one woman. In 1942, it said marriage is “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.” In 1888 it ruled, “An institution in the maintenance of which in its purity the public is deeply interested, for it is the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.”

Staver said marriage “is not merely a creation of any one civilization or its statutes, but is an institution older than the Constitution and, indeed, older than any laws of any nation.”

The 6th Circuit said no federal judges should be making such a decision.

“Of all the ways to resolve this question, one option is not available: a poll of the three judges on this panel, or for that matter all federal judges, about whether gay marriage is a good idea. Our judicial commissions did not come with such a sweeping grant of authority, one that would allow just three of us – just two of us in truth – to make such a vital policy call for the thirty-two million citizens who live within the four states of the Sixth Circuit.”
The pro-homosexual Marriage Equality organization called the ruling “out of step with the decisions of 40 other courts.”

The organization said states as diverse as “Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Utah” recently have “embrace[d] marriage equality.”

But the organization did not note that a vast majority of the states that have “embraced” same-sex marriage have done so largely by judicial decree, after voters in many of those states specifically chose to define in their laws or even constitution marriage as one man and one woman.

Before federal judges stepped in, the wave of state affirmations of traditional marriage was virtually unstoppable, with victories in 31 of 31 elections.
The 6th Circuit said: “A dose of humility makes us hesitant to condemn as unconstitutionally irrational a view of marriage shared not long ago by every society in the world, shared by most, if not all, of our ancestors, and shared still today by a significant number of the states. … One starts from the premise that governments got into the business of defining marriage, and remain in the business of defining marriage, not to regulate love but to regulate sex, most especially the intended and unintended effects of male-female intercourse. Imagine a society without marriage. It does not take long to envision problems that might result from an absence of rules about how to handle the natural effects of male-female intercourse: children.”
Traditional marriage logical

And the judges wrote: “Once one accepts a need to establish such ground rules, and most especially a need to create stable family units for the planned and unplanned creation of children, one can well appreciate why the citizenry would think that a reasonable first concern of any society is the need to regulate male-female relationships and the unique procreative possibilities of them. … People may not need the government’s encouragement to have sex. And they may not need the government’s encouragement to propagate the species. But they may well need the government’s encouragement to create and maintain stable relationships within which children may flourish. It is not society’s laws or for that matter any one religion’s laws, but nature’s laws (that men and women complement each other biologically), that created the policy imperative. And governments typically are not second-guessed under the Constitution for prioritizing how they tackle such issues.”

There is a logic behind traditional marriage, they said.

“What we are left with is this: By creating a status (marriage) and by subsidizing it (e.g., with tax-filing privileges and deductions), the states created an incentive for two people who procreate together to stay together for purposes of rearing offspring. That does not convict the states of irrationality, only of awareness of the biological reality that couples of the same sex do not have children in the same way as couples of opposite sexes and that couples of the same sex do not run the risk of unintended offspring. That explanation, still relevant today, suffices to allow the states to retain authority.”

Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton, described by USA Today as one of the Republican Party’s most esteemed legal thinkers and writers, issued the 42-page decision. Deborah Cook concurred.

Sutton noted a one-sentence Supreme Court ruling from 1972 also “upheld the right of the people of a state to define marriage as they see it.”
The result of the “gay marriage” campaign already is being felt across America, where business owners are being ordered by courts to violate their religious faith regarding the Bible’s characterization of marriage, or be fined for not doing so.

One prominent case that made headlines recently was the case against Cynthia and Robert Gifford, owners of Liberty Ridge Farm in Schaghticoke, New York.

They were fined $13,000 and ordered to start serving same-sex clients by the courts in New York after a lesbian couple wanted to use the Giffords’ farm for their “wedding,” and were refused.

“We have decided not to hold wedding ceremonies at all and we are not going to hold them on the farm until we are allowed to choose who we contract with,” Cynthia Gifford told WND. The couple, who are devout Christians, hired an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom, which specializes in religious liberty cases.

Their lawyer, James Trainor, said the state of New York is stomping all over the First Amendment rights of Christian business owners.

“The end result of it, if a state agency is compelling them to host these ceremonies, it’s a form of compelled speech where the state is saying ‘you must do this’ and a casual observer (of the ceremony) would think ‘oh they must believe in this’ when in fact they don’t,” he said.


They are not the only Christians in the bull’s-eye.

Jack Phillips owns and operates Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado, and has been in business since 1993. He pours his creative spirit into each cake, which he considers a form of artistic expression.

Two local men approached him in 2012 and asked for a wedding cake, which Phillips said was against his conscience. He told them he had no problem making them birthday cakes, cookies, brownies, shower cakes – anything but a wedding cake, which he believes should be only for a man and a woman.

“The most important thing I think about when I wake up and go to work is I want to know that what I’m doing is pleasing to Him,” Phillips told CBN News in a recent interview. “I want to honor Him because that’s the most important thing.”

The Colorado Civil Rights Division ordered him to reverse his policy, educate his employees on how to serve all clients equally and submit quarterly compliance reports to make sure he has fully removed his religious views from his business decisions.

Here’s a list of recent cases in which people of faith have been targeted by homosexual activists:
  • New Mexico Christian photographers Jon and Elaine Huguenin were sued by two lesbians under the state’s “sexual orientation” law after declining to photograph the lesbians’ “commitment ceremony.”
  • The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association in New Jersey, was convicted of “discrimination” after two lesbians, Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster, decided to hold their commitment ceremony on the Methodist-run association’s popular family friendly boardwalk. After that, Ocean Grove quit the wedding-hosting business.
  • The Aloha Bed & Breakfast in Hawaii, a Christian business, was forced to “accommodate” two Southern California lesbians after a judge ruled the B&B violated state law when the owner told Taeko Bufford and Diane Cervelli she wasn’t comfortable having them stay together in her home due to her religious beliefs. Aloha has since been ordered by the state “to provide a room to any same-sex couple that wishes to stay there.”
  • In Illinois, Christian B&B owners Jim and Beth Walder are being sued by homosexual activist Todd Wathen, who demands monetary damages, attorneys’ fees and “an order directing [the Walders] to cease and desist from any violation” of the state’s Human Rights Act.
  • Vermont’s Wildflower Inn paid a settlement and shut down its wedding reception business after the ACLU won a $10,000 civil penalty for two lesbians. The settlement also requires the inn’s owners to place $20,000 in a charitable trust for the lesbians.
  • Oregon’s “Sweet Cakes by Melissa” bakery shut down after declining to bake for a “gay wedding.”
  • The owners of Indiana’s “Just Cookies” were charged with “discrimination” under the city’s “sexual orientation” law for refusing to fill a special order for “rainbow cookies” for an LGBT group.
  • Iowa’s “Victoria’s Cake Cottage,” whose owner Victoria Childress refused to provide a wedding cake for a homosexual couple out of “convictions for their lifestyle.”
  • Oregon’s “Fleur Cakes,” joined “Sweet Cakes” in refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple and is being boycotted by homosexual activist groups.
  • Washington state’s “Arlene’s Flowers,” whose owner Barronelle Stutzman declined to provide flowers for the wedding of a same-sex couple who had long frequented her shop, faces two lawsuits after refusing to fill an order because of her “relationship with Jesus Christ.”
  • Texas’ “All Occasion Party Place,” a Fort Worth venue, refuses, on religious grounds, to rent out a banquet hall for same-sex wedding receptions.
  • A Christian T-shirt maker in Kentucky was targeted by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission for refusing to print “gay pride” designs for a local homosexual group.
  • Chris Penner, owner of the Twilight Room Annex bar in Portland, was fined $400,000 under the Oregon Equality Act for excluding transsexual men who, dressed as women, had been alienating other customers by using the women’s restroom. According to the Seattle Times, 11 people – calling themselves the “T-girls” – “will get the money, with awards ranging from $20,000 to 50,000.”
  • The Catholic Church was forced to shut down successful adoption agencies in several states because it opposes adoption by homosexual couples.
  • Christians have been kicked out of college counseling programs because they oppose homosexuality and therapists are prohibited by law from helping young people overcome unwanted same-sex attractions.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 12 Nov - 03:42 (2014)    Sujet du message: RUSSELL MOORE, RICK WARREN TO JOIN 'POPE FRANCIS' WITH MUSLIMS, BUDDHISTS FOR INTERFAITH CONFERENCE Répondre en citant


Russell Moore, Rick Warren to Join ‘Pope Francis’ With Muslims, Buddhists for Interfaith Conference.
Russell Moore, the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, and Saddleback megachurch leader Rick Warren will team up with Roman Catholic Pontiff Francis later this month for an interfaith Vatican conference on marriage and family.

“Complementarity of Man and Woman,” will be held Nov. 17-19 at the Vatican, and is expected to feature more than 30 speakers from over 20 countries. According to the Catholic News Service, those of the Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, Jaina Shasana, Taoist and Sikh religions will be present, as well as Roman Catholics and professing Christians.

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcNwimwBSUM

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Mer 12 Nov - 04:02 (2014)    Sujet du message: RICK WARREN : I REGRET COMING OUT IN SUPPORT OF CALIFORNIA'S ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE PROPOSITION Répondre en citant


Statement from Rick Warren in 2012. He was lying to all the evangelical christians at that time. If you listen carrefully the interview here http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/rick-warren-purpose-driven-life_n_…, you will found a man who change the words of God, a guy who promote the global CATHOLIC agenda, and now he going to join interfaith Vatican conference on marriage and family. He lies about the faith of Bush and Obama, etc. The ultimate goal of this conference, they don't telling us, in the last article, will be the same-sex unions and other non-marital relationships as Cardinal Burke says. The pro-LGBT agenda is back by the Jesuit and it's completely satanic. This false LOVE is bestial and demonic. You just can check all the articles who are coming out and you will see by yourself. The new law of the land and antiterrorist laws now criminalize peoples who stand against all these perversions.  

by Zack Ford
, Annie-Rose Strasser

Posted on November 28, 2012 at 2:14 pm Updated: November 28, 2012 at 3:32 pm

"Rick Warren: I Regret Coming Out In Support Of California’s Anti-Gay Marriage Proposition"

On Wednesday, conservative Evangelical Pastor Rick Warren expressed regret for instructing his congregation to support Proposition 8, California’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. During an interview with HuffPost Live’s http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/rick-warren-purpose-driven-life_n_…  Marc Lamont Hill, Warren attempted to downplay his endorsement of the provision, claiming that he intended to communicate his private support to church members and was not trying to take a “public” position on the issue. Warren expressed regret for ever backing the measure:

WARREN:  I never made a single statement on Prop 8 until the week before. In my own church, some members say, “Where do we stand on this?” I released a video to my own members. It was posted all over like it was an advertisement. [...]
HILL: When your have a church of 20,000 people and you have a book that 32 million people have read and that 60 million people have accessed, to say, “I was just giving a message”—

WARREN: You’re exactly right, Marc, and I learned a lesson from that. What I learned from that is that anything I say privately is now public. And I actually learned from that mistake… Everyone took that to mean I was pontificating to the whole world.

HILL: If you could do it again, would you not have made that statement a week before Prop 8?
WARREN: I would not have. I would not have made that statement. Because I wanted to talk to my own people. As a duty, as a shepherd, I’m responsible for those who put themselves under my care. I’m not responsible for everybody else.

During the interview, Warren reiterated his opposition to same-sex couples — arguing that “It’s not a sin to love somebody, it might be a sin to have sex with them” — and suggested that he still backs the spirit of Proposition 8, just as he did in 2008. Then, Warren published his “private” video on his “News & Views” website for all of his followers to see and his comments were unsurprisingly picked up by the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow. The video is still preserved thanks to The American Prospect and RightWingWatch. Here again is that “private” video supposedly intended only for his 20,000 church members, in which Warren says, “If you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8″:

Warren seemed to back away from his endorsement in 2009, telling Larry King that he “never once even gave an endorsement” of the proposition. Now that a majority of Americans consistently support marriage equality, he regrets that people actually paid attention to his anti-gay views.


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o4QqGbQmU0


Dernière édition par maria le Mar 2 Déc - 01:15 (2014); édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 238

MessagePosté le: Dim 16 Nov - 02:19 (2014)    Sujet du message: RUBRIQUE DOMINICALE : REUNION ODIEUSE SUR LE GENRE AU VATICAN (DU 17 AU 19 NOVEMBRE 2014) Répondre en citant


Sans commentaire, voici la traduction de cet excellent texte en français.

Bonne lecture et bon dimanche ! Vic.

Source: http://vkpatriarhat.org.ua/en/?p=9350


Gender meeting in the Vatican (17-19 November 2014)


Ukraine, le 13 novembre 2014

Secrétariat d'État du Vatican

François a convoqué une réunion avec les dirigeants païens afin de discuter de la question du genre. Qu'est-ce que l'idéologie du genre? C'est une idéologie amorale qui soutient que l'homme a le droit de déclarer qu'il est une femme, et que tout le public doit accepter cela. Il a également le « droit » de subir une opération afin de changer de sexe. Le terme « genre » inclut l'homosexualité et environ 50 autres formes de schizophrénie liée au sexe.

Le Vatican et les dirigeants païens ne diront pas de mots clairs qui favoriseraient la nature humaine et un esprit sain, mais par le biais de phrases pieuses et de manipulation psychologique, ils vont ouvrir la porte à cet esprit d'immoralité, afin qu'il pénètre à l'intérieur de l'Eglise. Tel est l'objectif de la réunion sur le genre au Vatican.

Cette année, François a de facto approuvé le darwinisme en déclarant que celui-ci est plus qu'une simple théorie. En revanche, les vrais scientifiques considèrent le darwinisme comme une idéologie athée et une pseudo-science.

Par sa déclaration équivoque, le pape François a ouvert la porte à l'homosexualité qui détruit la famille et conduit à l'auto-destruction du christianisme. Au Synode des évêques concernant les questions relatives à la famille, au lieu de mettre l'accent sur les principes chrétiens, qui sont le fondement d'une famille saine, il a ouvert la porte à l'esprit opposé. Au cours du mois suivant, François appelle les dirigeants païens à Rome afin de discuter avec eux de la question des valeurs morales, qui ont toujours été fondées sur le Décalogue et l'Evangile du Christ. Le paganisme et l'homosexualité nient la loi naturelle et divine. Quelles peuvent être les fruits de cette réunion? Une nouvelle métastase de néo-paganisme. On donnera aux croyants du poison au lieu du remède de Dieu, et ils deviendront les esclaves de démons impurs et de crimes au lieu d'être délivrés par le Christ. Commettre ce crime au nom du Christ est un signe clair de péché contre le Saint-Esprit, et un signe clair de l'esprit de l'antéchrist!

Le Corps du Christ - l'Eglise – saigne, aujourd'hui! Les Etats-Unis ont élevé la promotion de l'homosexualité en tant que leur priorité de politique étrangère. Il en est de même dans l'Union européenne. Le Vatican reste muet sur ce fait ou ne prononce que des déclarations évasives.

L'homosexualité élimine toutes les valeurs morales et est entremêlée avec le vol des enfants via le système de la justice pour mineurs. Le Vatican reste silencieux à ce sujet, donc il l'approuve! Des enfants sont psychologiquement torturés dans des familles dites d'accueil, y compris des « familles » d'homosexuels et de pédophiles. En fait, c'est du trafic d'enfants, et tout est déguisé avec des phrases hypocrites sur les « droits des enfants ». La couverture médiatique des véritables destins de ces enfants est strictement interdite. 59 de ces enfants se suicident chaque année. Ces enfants sont victimes d'abus et, qui plus est, de la vente d'organes. Ce sont des crimes qui hurlent vers le Ciel! Le Vatican est silencieux à ce sujet.

Les francs-maçons du Club de Rome ont créé un projet de réduction de l'humanité afin d'atteindre le soi-disant milliard doré de personnes vivant sur Terre. En fait, ceci est un programme de génocide progressif de l'humanité, dans lequel le rôle clé est joué par la légalisation progressive de l'immoralité sexuelle, du vol des enfants, de l'inceste, de la vaccination obligatoire des enfants (qui a pour résultat des perturbations du système immunitaire, l'infertilité et plusieurs maladies nouvelles, par exemple l'autisme...). Actuellement, l'euthanasie pour les enfants est en train d'être légalisée. Le puçage avec le nombre 666 - même dans la main ou le front - est en cours de préparation, puçage contre lequel Dieu met strictement en garde dans le livre de l'Apocalypse (voir Apocalypse, 13-14). Non seulement le Vatican n'avertit pas contre ceci, mais il montre lui-même le mauvais exemple.

De nos jours, les lois de Dieu et les lois naturelles sont abolies, et des anti-lois sont introduites à la place. Le Vatican soutient même ce moyen de diabolisation. L'apostasie avait déjà commencé auparavant. L'esprit de Vatican II a ouvert la porte aux hérésies de la théologie historico-critique, hérésies qui nient les fondements de la foi, la divinité du Christ, le surnaturel, et l'inspiration divine de l'Ecriture. Dans la Déclaration Nostra Aetate, Vatican II a promulgué un respect envers le paganisme et donc, par ce fait même, un respect envers des démons païens. Ainsi Vatican II a-t-il promulgué le mépris de Dieu.

La prochaine étape de cette auto-destruction a été franchie par Jean-Paul II qui a ouvert l'Eglise à ce qu'on appelle l'esprit d'Assise. Il a exprimé par son geste que les mythes païens sont d'autres voies de salut. Aujourd'hui, nous en récoltons les fruits. C'est une trahison de Dieu, de l'Évangile et de l'Église.

L'apostasie par rapport à l'Esprit du Christ a été achevée par Benoît XVI le 1er mai 2011, lorsqu'il a béatifié Jean-Paul II. Il a confirmé par ce fait même que l'esprit d'Assise, l'esprit du syncrétisme avec le paganisme, était devenu la position officielle de l'Eglise. Encore une fois, c'était un geste. En substance, c'était l'haeresis maxima (la plus grande hérésie) à cause de laquelle la malédiction de Dieu - l'anathème - selon Galates 1:8-9, tomba sur Benoît XVI et Jean-Paul II. La déclaration de cet anathème constitua la première étape pour le salut du reste des catholiques par rapport à cette infection mortelle. Ce fut aussi une chance pour ceux qui furent personnellement identifiés (environ 5.000 évêques catholiques qui déclarèrent leur unité aux hérésies de la méthode historico-critique et à l'esprit d'Assise). La seule voie de salut pour eux, mais aussi pour tout autre personne, est la véritable repentance, tant de façon extérieure qu'intérieure.

Les paroles de Jésus sont vraies aujourd'hui encore: « A moins que vous ne vous repentiez, vous périrez tous ». (Luc, 18:3)

+ Elie
Patriarche du Patriarcat Catholique Byzantin,

+ Timothée et + Méthode, Ordre réformé de St Basile-le-Grand,
évêques secrétaires.

Copies envoyées:

aux Présidents des Etats membres de l'UE ainsi qu'aux membres du Parlement européen,
aux mass média.

Revenir en haut
Contenu Sponsorisé

MessagePosté le: Aujourd’hui à 03:03 (2018)    Sujet du message: HOMOSEXUALITÉ/PÉDOPHILIE, ETC.... (PARTIE 2) - P.1

Revenir en haut
Montrer les messages depuis:   
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet    LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) Index du Forum -> ORGANISATION DES NATIONS-UNIES/UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION -> HOMOSEXUALITÉ - PÉDOPHILIE... THE FAMILY - LA FAMILLE(PARTIE 2) Toutes les heures sont au format GMT + 2 Heures
Aller à la page: <  1, 2, 318, 19, 2047, 48, 49  >
Page 19 sur 49

Sauter vers:  

Index | Creer un forum | Forum gratuit d’entraide | Annuaire des forums gratuits | Signaler une violation | Conditions générales d'utilisation
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Traduction par : phpBB-fr.com