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, 320, 21, 2247, 48, 49  >
Sujet précédent :: Sujet suivant  
Auteur Message

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Dim 28 Déc - 05:52 (2014)    Sujet du message: ACEH AUTONOMY HITS LGBT LIFESTYLES Répondre en citant


LGBT lifestyles will be forced deeper underground as new sharia laws start to bite in Indoesia's Aceh province. Paul Chapman reports.

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BykJ1larcd4

Revenir en haut

MessagePosté le: Dim 28 Déc - 05:52 (2014)    Sujet du message: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 30 Déc - 03:07 (2014)    Sujet du message: ITCCS : PUBLIC LEGAL NOTICE OF CRIMINAL DEFAMATION AND LIABILITY !!! Répondre en citant


Chère Maria,

Eh voilà ! Comme par le plus malencontreux des "hasards", ce Webre reçoit un acte pour diffamation criminelle ! L'ITCCS a réagi au quart de tour, ce qui me semble bien normal. Je suis convaincu que Webre & co. se sont laissés acheter par le $ystème criminel (qui les a peut-être menacés, soit dit en passant).

L'article, ci-dessous. Vic.

Source : PUBLIC LEGAL NOTICE OF CRIMINAL DEFAMATION AND LIABILITY | Welcome to ITCCS.ORG and The International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State

Posted on December 24, 2014



Issued against Alfred Webre, Alex Hunter and others

on 24 December, 2014
in the City of Vancouver, Canada

LET IT BE KNOWN that the contents of a public you tube broadcast issued on 22 December by Webre, Hunter and others constitutes a brutal and unprovoked act of deliberate criminal harassment and defamation, and incitement to hatred, against Kevin Daniel Annett by Webre, Hunter and others, who are accordingly liable for criminal prosecution under the law; and

LET IT BE FURTHER KNOWN that the You Tube corporation as well as any person who knowingly circulates the said broadcast is equally liable for prosecution under the law; and

LET IT BE FURTHER KNOWN that unless the offending broadcast is immediately removed from you tube and a public retraction and apology for its contents is issued, these persons and corporation can and will be named in a common law court action as part of a Citizens’ Grand Jury to be convened in the City of Vancouver on January 15, 2015.

Issued by the International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (ITCCS) and Kevin Daniel Annett, acting under the authority of the common law.

A broadcast will be forthcoming.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 30 Déc - 06:10 (2014)    Sujet du message: INVESTIGATOR : CIA, POPE JOHN PAUL II, BUSH SR & JR, BILL & HILLARY CLINTON DO RITUAL CHILD SACRIFICE Répondre en citant


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcHe7DtCkYg

Website : http://newsinsideout.com/2014/12/investigator-cia-pope-john-paul-ii-bush-sr…

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 30 Déc - 06:38 (2014)    Sujet du message: THE RISING SEX TRAFFIC IN FORCED ISLAMIC MARRIAGE Répondre en citant



by Mark Durie
Quadrant Online
March 2014

In 2008, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and Nicholas Phillips, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, both suggested that the UK could consider, in Lord Phillips's words, "embracing Sharia law" because "there is no reason why Sharia Law, or any other religious code should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution". Williams commented: "it's not as if we're bringing in an alien and rival system".

However, two recent widely reported cases of marriage between Muslim men and under-age girls raise troubling questions about these assumptions. One case in New South Wales where an imam married a twelve-year-old girl to a twenty-six-year-old man with her father's consent is before the court.

In another case involving a custody battle, however, a judgment has been made that questions the way Western jurisdictions interact with sharia marriage regulations, specifically in relation to the widespread practice of conducting private, unregistered religious marriages. A Sydney Muslim girl aged fourteen was forced by her parents to become the child "bride" of a twenty-one-year-old man. Her mother had told her she would "get to attend theme parks and movies and eat lollies and ice-cream with her new husband". Instead she endured years of sexual and physical abuse and intimidation before fleeing with her young daughter. Her story only saw the light of day ten years after her wedding when she pursued custody of her daughter through the courts.

This "marriage" was never registered with the state: it would have been impossible to do so because the girl was too young to marry under Australian law. A particularly troubling aspect of her story is that she reported her predicament to her school teacher, who under Australian law was a mandatory reporter of child sex abuse, but it seems no report was made, and no intervention attempted.

In passing judgment in favour of the woman, Judge Harman invited the authorities to take matters further: the "groom" could be presumably be charged by the police with sexual offences against a child and placed on the sex offenders register. He and the girl's father—who in accordance with Islamic tradition would have been the two parties to the marriage contract—could also be charged with trafficking offences. There would also almost certainly have been an exchange of money—the mahr—handed over by the man to the girl or her father in accordance with Islamic law.

The UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, defines people-trafficking as:

the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force, or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, [or] servitude … The consent of a victim of trafficking in persons to the intended exploitation set forth [above] shall be irrelevant where any of the means set forth [above] have been used.

The forced marriage of a fourteen-year-old girl, as reported in this Australian case, fits the definition of trafficking. The girl was transferred from the custody of parents to that of her "husband" by use of deception, and he then kept her for the purpose of sexual exploitation and servitude, controlling her by violence and threats.

Pru Goward, the New South Wales Minister for Community Services and Women, has reported that there are around a thousand cases a year across Australia of women and girls being trafficked into forced marriages. She stated, "No ethnic group has a monopoly on violence against women, but some groups experience violence against women disproportionately." Indeed. Some groups also perpetrate violence against women "disproportionately", and it might be more accurate to speak of "religious groups" rather than "ethnic groups". While there have been no official statistics reported on the religious affiliation of these victims of trafficking, it seems that a great many of the victims and the perpetrators involving in "marriage" trafficking have been Muslims.

Recent reports of a link between trafficking-for-marriage and Islamic marriages have not been limited to Australia. An investigation by ITV in the UK identified eighteen mosques—around one third of those approached by the reporter—where clerics were willing to conduct a wedding of a fourteen-year-old girl against her will.

Nazir Afal, Crown Prosecutor in the North of England, has reported that there are estimated to be 8000 to 10,000 forced marriages or threats of forced marriages of people against their will in the UK each year. Britain's Forced Marriage Unit handled 1485 cases in 2012, 35 per cent of which involved girls aged seventeen or younger, and 13 per cent where the girls were under fifteen. A British government survey found that hundreds of girls aged eleven to thirteen had simply disappeared from school rolls.

Governments have been very slow to tackle the trafficking of women and girls for the purpose of forced marriage. Kaye Quek, in a recent article in the British Journal of Politics and International Relations, argues that multicultural ideals prevalent in UK society have made the authorities reluctant to criminalise this practice: they have preferred instead to treat these liaisons as violations of the women's choice. Quek challenges the government's preference for seeking civil remedies to forced marriages, and suggests that this is giving rise to a two-tier system of rights, in which it is acceptable for Muslim women to be sexually assaulted through forced marriage.

In the case of forced Muslim marriages, a systemic problem is the widespread acceptance by the community of unregistered marriages: it is the lack of registration of such unions which makes marriage all the more dangerous for young women and girls, because registered marriages are subject to long-established age limits and procedures to establish consent, which provide a degree of protection to potential victims of marriage trafficking. The families and communities involved may consider such marriages to be legal, because they accord with their understanding of Islamic law, but the fact that these marriages are unregistered places the women and girls who undergo these ceremonies at higher risk of abuse.

Islamic marriage practices present multiple challenges to Western jurisdictions. The Koran states that men are the protectors of women (Sura 4:34). A marriage is normally a contract between two men: the male wali or guardian of the bride—usually her father—and the groom. In addition, to be lawful under sharia, a marriage must have two witnesses, and a sum of money, the mahr, must be given over by the groom. Marriage, thus contracted, is the transfer of a woman from the "protection" of one man to another.

If the wali is the woman's father or grand­father, he is considered to be a wali mujbir, literally a "forcing guardian", because he is permitted by Islamic law to force his daughter or grand-daughter into marriage. The word mujbir ("forcing") comes from an Arabic root which can mean "to set a broken bone", or, by extension, "to force". E.W. Lane, citing Arabic authorities, gives this explanation of the meaning of the word: "He compelled him, against his will, to do the thing … originally signifying the inciting, urging or inducing, another to restore a thing to a sound, right, or good, state." By this understanding, a forced marriage is an exercise of "therapeutic force", which is considered to be good for the woman. Like setting a broken bone, a forced marriage at a father or grandfather's behest "restores" the woman to her rightful state.

The Reliance of the Traveller, a manual of Sunni Islamic law from the Shafi'i school, states:

Guardians are of two types, those who may compel their female charges to marry someone, and those who may not. The only guardians who may compel their charge to marry are a virgin bride's father or father's father, compel meaning to marry her to a suitable match without her consent … Whenever the bride is a virgin, the father or father's father may marry her to someone without her permission, though it is recommended to ask her permission if she has reached puberty. A virgin's silence is considered as permission.

Note that The Reliance anticipates a context where a girl may be married off by her father before she reaches puberty; in this case it is not even recommended to ask her permission. In addition to fathers being permitted to force their virgin daughters into marriage against their will, Islamic law also permits polygamy and marriages of young girls, following the example of Muhammad, who consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was aged nine lunar years. (See Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234).

In several other respects Islamic laws which regulate marriage, divorce and the custody of children render women vulnerable to abuse by their husbands and families.

Many Muslim states have enacted laws which limit the application of Islamic family law, for example by extending women's custody rights beyond those granted by the religion, requiring that a man seek permission from his current wife or wives before contracting further marriages, or limiting a husband's right to divorce his wife merely by a private pronouncement against her.

Because many features of Islam's marriage laws are incompatible with internationally accepted human rights standards, and some Muslim communities consider that Islamic law takes precedence over the law of the land in which they live, it is in the best interests of Muslim women living in the West if governments suppress unregistered religious marriages, and strictly regulate the conduct of Islamic marriages. All too often governments have legitimised and even rewarded unregisterable marriages through additional state benefits.

The phenomenon—and challenge—of unregistered Muslim marriages is by no means limited to Western states. The emergence of unregistered marriages as a social issue in the West is paralleled by the popularity of various kinds of marriage in the Middle East which evade the control of the state (see Consuming Desires by Frances Hasso). Although some Islamic countries require marriages to be registered with the state, many marriages go unregistered. For example, marriages known as nikah ufr ("customary marriages") have become popular among young Egyptian students who choose to live together as couples without the legal and social complications of a registered, public marriage. In Egypt a nikah ufr is in effect a clandestine religious ceremony, which normally takes place without the knowledge or consent of the bride's guardian, and without the husband having to pay a dowry. By this means a couple can protect themselves legally and religiously, for example against a serious charge of fornication, but not without risk to the woman. If the marriage contract is lost or destroyed, a woman may not be able to prove that the marriage has taken place, and if she becomes pregnant she may have no legal means of compelling her partner to support her and her child. A woman in an urfi marriage may also find it difficult to obtain a divorce, leading to the possibility that if she contracts a later marriage with another man, she could be convicted of polyandry or adultery, which are criminal offences in Egypt. In contrast, the man can marry again without risk, even if his urfi marriage is of unclear legal status, because Islam permits polygamy.

One of the challenges of the way sharia works in Islamic states is that the trend over recent decades has been to reinforce the principle that Islamic law takes precedence over state jurisprudence. In some cases national constitutions enshrine sharia law as above the constitution and the power of the state of legislate. For example, article three of the Afghan constitution states that "no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam". This means that although a state may pass laws to regulate marriage, courts may not be able to declare unregistered Islamic marriages invalid, because official registration is not one of the recognised conditions in Islam for a marriage to be legitimate, and state law has no authority to overrule Islamic law. While states can discourage unregistered marriages in various ways—for example by denying certain kinds of legal privileges to unregistered couples—they are not able to deny the religious and hence social legitimacy of these contracts in a nation whose constitution grants sharia law precedence over laws made by the state, which Islamists call "man-made" laws.

A further difficulty with the ascendancy of sharia law in Islamic states is the complication of legal uncertainty, because issues in Islamic law are often subject to conflicting interpretations. For example, while the Hanafi school of jurisprudence states that a woman can marry without the approval of her guardian, subject to certain conditions, other Sunni legal schools consider such a marriage to be null and void. Thus a man and woman who contract a marriage without the permission of the bride's parents may or may not get the marriage recognised by the court, depending upon the legal opinion the judge chooses to follow.

In Western jurisdictions the regulation of marriages by the state is of comparatively recent origin. However, the idea of regulating religious marriages is hardly a new one. Public regulation of marriages in Europe was first enacted through canon (church) law: the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 required all marriages to be announced in advance in a church by a priest, "so that if legitimate impediments exist, they may be made known". The Council of Trent (1545–63) refined the requirements further: weddings had to be conducted by the parish priest of one of the two parties; banns—an announcement of the wedding—had to be "published" during three major public worship services; there had to be at least two witnesses apart from the priest; and clergy had to keep a marriage register, a book in which they recorded every wedding they performed. Both Councils' rulings on marriage were expressly designed to prevent "clandestine" marriages. The Council of Trent justified its provisions by citing the case of a man, having conducted a clandestine marriage, abandoning his first wife, and marrying another woman publicly.

In England state regulation of marriage was first introduced in 1753, also for the reason of preventing the notorious abuses of clandestine marriage, which were to the detriment of women. The legal recourse was to target unscrupulous clergy, some of whom had been making a handsome living from conducting such marriages.

The Marriage Act of 1753, formally named "An Act for the better preventing of clandestine Marriages", took over some of the provisions of canon law, such as the requirement for witnesses, the publication of banns, and the recording of marriages in a parish register "for publick use".

The purpose of the 1753 Act was to ensure that marriage was a well-documented public event which helped protect vulnerable women and children from unscrupulous men by curtailing the practice of people marrying secretly. Clandestine marriages were considered objectionable because women who entered into them were more vulnerable to desertion and sexual exploitation. Their secret character meant that there was no public process of testing of the man and woman's marital status before the ceremony. It could also turn out later that there was inadequate documentation of the clandestine ceremony, leaving a woman without legal recourse if she was abandoned after becoming pregnant or bearing children. In the famous 1748 case of Creswell v Creswell a wealthy heiress, Anne Warneford, discovered that her husband had been clandestinely married twice before, which rendered her public marriage to Thomas Creswell void and their several children illegitimate, with no entitlement to their father's estate.

Under the 1753 Act, a minister of religion who conducted a clandestine marriage was punishable by transportation "to some of His Majesty's Plantations in America for the space of fourteen Years". To forge, alter or destroy a marriage register became a hanging offence.

Such draconian punishments as deportation, hanging, or cropping the ears of offending clergy—the latter penalty applied on the Isle of Man from 1757—may seem repugnant today, but the point is that imposing harsh penalties upon those who conduct unregistered marriages has a long-standing precedent in law. First the church and then the state introduced penalties to help ensure that marriages took place as public events and were officially registered, in order to protect vulnerable women and their children.

Unfortunately in recent years Western jurisdictions have been largely indifferent to the damaging implications for Muslim women of the creeping acceptance of sharia marriage practices, including the proliferation of unregistered marriages. Forgetting the hard-learned lessons of the past, a misplaced multicultural benevolence has caused authorities to turn a blind eye to the dangers of illegal religious marriages.

An example of such blindness was reported in 2001, when the Australian radio and television host Geraldine Doogue interviewed Sheikh Fehmi, a leading Australian imam, the Grand Mufti of Australia from 2007 to 2011. Sheikh Fehmi claimed that the Australian government had accepted unregistered polygamous marriages when it granted the right to Muslims to conduct weddings in 1968: previously the Muslim practice of polygamy had made the government reluctant to grant Islamic clerics status as marriage celebrants. Sheikh Fehmi reported coming to an understanding with the then Attorney General, Bill Snedden, that a Muslim man's first marriage would be registered, but the authorities would turn a blind eye to further marriages as long as they were unregistered:

Narrator: Muslims rarely marry outside their religious group and while this couple probably take it for granted they can have a wedding according their custom, in Australia this is a relatively new occurrence. Islam recognises polygamy so prior to 1968 Imams like Sheikh Fehmi were not permitted to celebrate marriages.

Sheikh Fehmi: It used to be at the time the late Mr Snedden he was the Attorney General. So I had a good meeting with him one day and tried to convince him that it is important for the Muslim to marry their own people. But he used to say to me, Well you know Sheikh Fehmi that you Muslims may marry more than one and when we are not allowed to let anybody here for have only one wife. I said to him, Listen to me please you may register the first one and don't worry about the second one. He laughed and said, All right we won't have anything to do with the second one. I stopped at the idea and at the time we had gained recognition from the Attorney General for all our Imams around Australia from that year onward.

Western jurisdictions originally legislated for public registration of marriages in order to prevent the very practice which Bill Snedden allegedly agreed to condone. This indifferent attitude to marriage is one reason why forced marriages are running out of control in the West, to the detriment of thousands of young Muslim women.

The reasons for preventing the practice of unregistered Islamic marriages are as valid today as they were in thirteenth-, sixteenth- and eighteenth-century Europe: to ensure that vulnerable women and girls are not coerced into marriages against their will, and to reduce the vulnerability of women to sexual exploitation and abandonment.

Many feminist scholars have criticised the institution of marriage and called for its abolition altogether. There is a decline in confidence in the institution of marriage across the West, and perhaps this is one reason why Western jurisdictions have become lackadaisical about policing illegal religious marriages. However, the fact remains that some forms of marriage are worse for women than others: these include concubinage, polygamy, and forced marriages in which girls are compelled to marry older men against their will. Such "marriages" stand worlds apart from the long-established ideal in Western jurisdictions of two adults entering into a publicly registered lifelong exclusive marriage covenant of their own free will. The reasons for the state to regulate marriages apply equally well to unregistered unions contracted by minority religious groups today as they did for Church of England marriages in the mid-eighteenth century.

Western nations need to take firmer measures to deter a variety of marriage-related practices condoned by specific interpretations of Islamic law, including polygamy and the trafficking of under-age girls into forced marriages. Such measures must not only target the "grooms" and the walis; they also need to target marriage celebrants, as in the Marriage Act of 1753. It should be illegal—with criminal penalties—for a registered marriage celebrant to conduct unregistered religious marriage ceremonies.

Governments should also make it illegal for marriages—even unregistered ones—to be conducted by anyone except in conformity to the marriage laws. Celebrants who conduct extra-judicial marriages should be stripped of their licence to conduct marriages and they should be denied tax-deductible charitable status as ministers of religion. Those who conduct unregistered forced religious marriages should feel the full force of the law by being charged with criminal offences under anti-trafficking and anti-paedophilia legislation. Male relatives who act as walis for forced marriages should likewise be prosecuted for sex trafficking. Furthermore, religious organisations who employ someone found guilty of conducting an illegal religious marriage should be made criminally culpable and stripped of their charitable status if they cannot show due diligence in preventing their staff from conducting illegal marriages. The witnesses of illegal marriages should also be made culpable for their actions: if witnesses are aware that the bride is under-age, or being married against her will, they should be prosecuted for aiding and abetting sex trafficking or paedophilia.

Modern states once again need to find the will to protect women from abusive "marriages" solemnised under the guise of religion by targeting those who conduct illegal Islamic marriages. There can be no place for complacency driven by multicultural political correctness. The Australian feminist academic Sheila Jeffries has rightly called the privileging of Islamic religious perspectives on women's rights "reverse racism". It is an unacceptable and dangerous fallacy that second-class human rights for Muslim women are good enough for them, simply because they happen to be Muslim. It would be grotesque if those who choose to speak up about the plight of Muslim women are accused of "Islamophobia". The true bigots are those who find the sexual abuse of Muslim women to be multiculturally acceptable.

Governments cannot afford to be negligent where Islamic marriages are concerned. The first victims of such negligence will be Muslim women. They are already being victimised in their thousands. Those who conduct or collaborate in conducting unlicensed religious marriages—whether they be the "husband", the woman's male guardian, the witnesses, or a cleric—must be made to suffer the full force of the law.

Mark Durie is an Anglican Vicar in Melbourne and a Shillman/Ginsburg Fellow at the Middle East Forum, Philadelphia.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mer 31 Déc - 10:40 (2014)    Sujet du message: HOMOSEXUALS, LESBIANS AND BISEXUALS “MORE LIKELY TO BE MENTALLY ILL”—CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY STUDY Répondre en citant


The Jesuits who promote this evil agenda for years, under the freedom of liberty, now, they're turning their back against all of you.  Cambridge University is a Jesuit/masonic university. They now accuse you to be mentally disturbed and sexually deviant. The Bible call that a sin. The Savior and Messiah came for you 2 000 years ago for each of us. If you repent of all your sins, He will forgive you if you decide to obey only to Him and His commandments.

The Vatican, the Pope and the Pontifical Council of the Family, who are also part of the secret agenda always claims that they protect the family (a man and a women). By this ruse, soon, you will see that they all stand against the LGBT agenda and will begin to persecute all homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals, etc, like they've done in WW2, were thousands and thousands of these peoples were send in reeducation camps or death camps.

This article is very important for all of you. You have to understand that they lie to you to achieve an other destruction plan against you. We all know that in the England clergy, there's a lot of homosexuals, but them are part of the elite, the ones who obey to their god, the Pope of Rome and are protect by the luciferian system.

Time is short for all of you. This article is showing you that they will come after you very soon. Repent, before it's to late for your soul and your eternity.

September 27, 2014 by TNO Staff— in Science http://newobserveronline.com/homosexuals-lesbians-and-bisexuals-more-likely…

In what may count as one of the more obvious statements of the year, a new report by researchers from Cambridge University in England has found that homosexuals, lesbians and bisexuals are “more likely to have mental health problems” than normal people.

According to the report, titled “Sexual Minorities in England Have Poorer Health and Worse Health Care Experiences: A National Survey,” bisexuals are the most mentally disturbed of all the sexually deviant groups.

The survey follows on from an earlier report from the former chief psychiatrist for the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Dr. Paul R. McHugh, who said that the trend of “transgenderism” was a mental illness as well.

The new survey, described as one of the “the biggest surveys of homosexuals in England,” found that homosexuals, lesbians and bisexuals are two to three times more likely to report having a longstanding psychological or emotional problem than their heterosexual counterparts.

According to the study, some 12 percent of lesbian women and almost 19 percent of bisexual women reported mental health problems, compared with six percent of heterosexual women.

Some 11 percent of homosexuals and 15 percent of bisexual men reported mental health problems, compared to five percent of heterosexual men.

The report further found that the sexually-deviant population was also more likely to report fair or poor general health: 22 percent of homosexuals and 26 percent of bisexual men, compared with 20 percent of normal men; and 25 percent of lesbians and 31 percent of bisexual women compared with 21 percent of normal women.

Lesbians, homosexuals and bisexual men and women were 50 percent more likely than heterosexuals to report negative experiences with primary care services, according to the study which was published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

The researchers used more than two million responses to the 2009–10 English General Practice Patient Survey to create the study.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Jeu 1 Jan - 02:55 (2015)    Sujet du message: STATE SUPREME COURT RULES FIREFIGHTERS MUST PARTICIPATE IN ‘GAY PRIDE PARADES’ DESPITE OBJECTIONS Répondre en citant


December 30, 2014 | Filed under: Law & Government,Life & Society,Top Stories | By: Heather Clark

PROVIDENCE, R.I. – The Supreme Court of Rhode Island has unanimously ruled that the religious rights of two firefighters were not violated when they were forced to participate in a “gay pride parade” a decade ago despite their objections.

Theodore Fabrizio and Stephen Deninno were assigned by city officials to drive a fire truck in the 2001 parade, but when the men asked if they could be reassigned as they do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle, they were refused. The men then carried out their assignment against their will, but state that they experienced sexual harassment, including sexual propositions and “at least 60 profanity-laced anonymous phone calls,” from parade attendees and their co-workers both during and after the event.

They filed suit against then-Mayor Buddy Cianci and Fire Chief James Rattigan in 2004 after their complaints to the city remained unresolved. During the legal battle, Mayor Cianci asserted that the assignment was just like any other as the city regularly sends fire trucks to a variety of parades.

“Our policy was to send a fire truck to any parade that made the request, if one was available and the truck’s participation did not compromise public safety,” he contended. “Why should the gay-pride parade be any different than the St. Patrick’s Day Parade, the Purim Parade, or any parade in Providence? It shouldn’t, and it wasn’t.”

But Fabrizio and Deninno asserted that their constitutional rights—namely their rights to freedom of religion and freedom of speech—had been violated by being forced to participate in an event that conflicted with their convictions.

The litigation dragged out over the past decade, and the battle eventually made it to the state supreme court, which was to rule on whether the two city officials had immunity from being sued.

But on Friday, the court threw out the firefighters’ lawsuit altogether, unanimously ruling that the city did not violate the men’s constitutional rights because the assignment was “legitimate.”

“The [firefighters’] appearance in the parade, solely as members of the Providence Fire Department, did not constitute a form of expression on their part,” wrote Justice William Robinson on behalf of the five-judge panel. “Rather, it was simply the accomplishing of a task assigned to an engine company of the Providence Fire Department, and the individuals chosen to carry out that assignment cannot be said to have engaged in personal speech by carrying out their work as public servants.”

He opined that it was not necessary to reach the question of immunity since there was no constitutional infringement in the first place.

“[S]ince there was no deprivation of a constitutional right, our analysis rightly can come to an abrupt halt since ‘the need for [invocation of the doctrine of qualified immunity] no longer exists,'” Robinson stated.

He said that there was no case law that supported “the proposition that, in such specific circumstances, employees’ rights are violated if they happen to possess religious objections to the beliefs of the group with which an otherwise legitimate work assignment requires brief interaction.”

It is not known whether the Febrizio and Deninno will further appeal the case at this point.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Sam 3 Jan - 08:56 (2015)    Sujet du message: ETATS-UNIS : LE PRINCE ANDREW CITE DANS UNE AFFAIRE D'ESCLAVAGE SEXUEL Répondre en citant


- Publié le 02/01/2015 à 23:45


Le prince Andrew, le 30 juillet 2011 à Edimbourg © AFP/Archives - Ben Stansall
Le prince Andrew, cinquième dans l'ordre de succession pour le trône britannique, a été cité dans une plainte déposée en Floride aux Etats-Unis par une femme affirmant avoir été retenue, alors qu'elle était mineure, comme "esclave sexuelle" par un riche homme d'affaires de Wall Street.

Dans la plainte "Jane Doe #3", la plaignante affirme avoir été "forcée d'avoir des relations sexuelles" avec le duc d'York à Londres, New York et dans les Caraïbes durant une orgie avec d'autres jeunes filles mineures, sur ordre de Jeffrey Epstein, condamné en 2008 pour avoir eu recours aux services de prostituées mineures.

Dans un communiqué vendredi, Buckingham Palace a nié ces allégations: "Toute suggestion selon laquelle des actes inconvenants ont été commis avec une mineure est catégoriquement fausse".

"Jane Doe #3" (un pseudonyme) a rapporté ces faits dans un témoignage qui doit être versé à un dossier civil dans lequel les procureurs fédéraux sont accusés d'avoir passé un accord avec M. Epstein sans avoir consulté les victimes au préalable.

Jeffrey Epstein a été condamné à 18 mois de prison après avoir plaidé coupable pour la seule charge d'avoir sollicité les services de prostituées.

"M. Epstein a ordonné à Jane Doe #3 de donner au prince ce qu'il demandait et de lui raconter les détails de ces abus sexuels", souligne la plainte récemment déposée.

Aucune date n'a été précisée pour ces relations sexuelles prétendues, mais Jane Doe #E affirme avoir été l'esclave sexuelle de Jeffrey Epstein entre 1999 et 2002.

D'autres personnalités sont citées dans la plainte, comme Alan Dershowitz, un des avocats de M. Epstein et un des juristes américains les plus en vue, avec qui la plaignante aurait aussi été forcée d'avoir des relations sexuelles à plusieurs reprises. Une accusation farouchement rejetée par M. Dershowitz.

Le prince Andrew, 54 ans, est le second fils de la reine Elizabeth II. Il a été le représentant spécial du gouvernement britannique pour le commerce international, mais a dû quitter cette fonction en 2011, déjà en raison de ses relations douteuses avec Jeffrey Epstein.

En 2007, il avait aussi été au centre d'une polémique sur les conditions de la vente d'une de ses propriétés à un milliardaire kazakh à un prix beaucoup plus élevé que celui initialement demandé.

Les écarts de conduite de son ex-épouse Sarah Ferguson, de laquelle il a divorcé en 1996 mais avec laquelle il est resté en bons termes, ont ajouté à la polémique.

02/01/2015 23:44:34 - Washington (AFP) - © 2015 AFP


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Sam 3 Jan - 10:32 (2015)    Sujet du message: BOGUS “JURORS” SPREADING MISINFORMATION AND FALSE CLAIM REGARDING THE COMMON LAW COURT OF JUSTICE Répondre en citant


Posted on December 24, 2014

from the ITCCS Central Directorate
24 December, 2014 (GMT, Brussels)


As part of the enormous black ops campaign now being waged against the ITCCS and Kevin Annett, two opponents of the ITCCS are posing as former “jurors” in the court cases conducted against Pope Benedict and others, and are falsely claiming that no such trial ever occurred. They made their claim today in a you tube broadcast posted by Alfred Webre and other misinformation specialists.

For the record, neither of the two individuals making this claim, Alex Hunter and Watsek, have ever been jurors with either court case conducted by the International Common Law Court of Justice in Brussels. Their claims are false because they never had access to either the court process or the central ITCCS bodies.

Both men live in Vancouver, Canada and for about a year in 2011-2012 were active with our ITCCS branch there and Kevin Annett. Both Hunter and Watsek became suddenly hostile to ITCCS and Kevin Annett, without cause or explanation, and dropped away from ITCCS over a year ago.

The simple truth is that none of these supposed “insiders” have ever had access to the ITCCS courts or leaders, as they claim. In the same manner as Alfred Webre and other libelous critics, they are fabricating their story, relying on peoples’ ignorance to blacken our work and reputation.

Kevin Annett will be issuing a full statement about this latest misinformation in a you tube broadcast and interview tomorrow.
Please stay tuned to www.itccs.org for more information.

ITCCS Central Directorate, Brussels
24 December, 2014 (GMT)


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Dim 4 Jan - 07:37 (2015)    Sujet du message: SEQUEL TO KEVIN'S MESSAGE : THE COURTS Répondre en citant


In this addendum to Kevin Annett's 2015 New Year's Message, he clarifies why the common law court record and the identity of the judges are confidential for now. Kevin points to the evidence that has been published from both common law court cases that convicted the pope and queen for crimes against humanity. www.itccs.org

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X81TmryDJw


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iyfm8eceAm8

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Lun 5 Jan - 04:58 (2015)    Sujet du message: CATHOLIC BELIGIAN BISHOP CALLS FOR ‘FORMAL RECOGNITION’ OF GAY COUPLES IN THE CHURCH Répondre en citant


By  Zoe Mintz @ZoeMintz z.mintz@ibtimes.com on December 31 2014 12:25 PM

Bishops and cardinals attend a synod of bishops led by Pope Francis in Paul VI's hall at the Vatican, Oct. 6, 2014. Francis opened the Roman Catholic assembly that will discuss marriage, gay couples, birth control and other moral issues, telling his bishops to speak frankly and not be afraid of upsetting him. Reuters

A Catholic bishop in Belgium has called for ecclesiastical recognition of same-sex couples within the Roman Catholic Church. Bishop Johan Bonny of Antwerp, Belgium, shared his thoughts in an interview for De Morgen, a Belgian newspaper, on Dec. 27.

Indeed, we need to seek a formal recognition of the kind of relationship that exists between many gay and lesbian couples,” Bonny said according to the National Catholic Reporter. “Does that recognition have to be a sacramental marriage? Perhaps the church could much better reflect on a diversity of forms of relationships. One has the same kind of discussion about civil marriages. In Belgium the same model (for civil marriages) exists for man-woman relations as well as for same-sex relations.”

He noted, "The intrinsic values are more important to me than the institutional question. The Christian ethic is based on lasting relationships where exclusivity, loyalty and care are central to each other."

While other Catholic bishops, cardinals and the pope have expressed support for same-sex couples before, Bonny is the first known bishop to make an explicit statement for gay couples to receive the same recognition in the church as their heterosexual counterparts.

“Bishop Bonny’s statements are the first time a Catholic bishop has explicitly called for ecclesiastical recognition of same-gender couples,” Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry, an advocacy group for gay Catholics, said in a statement. “Bishop Bonny’s statements will have a profound effect on this discussion, because he is raising an idea which has too long been suppressed but which many in the Church have desired.”

Bonny’s stance toward the issue has been known for some time. In September, ahead of the synod of bishops in Rome, Bonny published a 22-page letter in which he described a gap between “the moral teachings of the church and the moral insights of the faithful.” He pointed to modern forms of the family including divorced, remarried and same-sex couples.

According to professor Rik Torfs, canon law expert and rector of the Catholic University of Leuven, Bonny’s comments are weighty. "Do not underestimate the significance of this," Torfs told the National Catholic Reporter. "Bonny advocates a change from principles long held as unshakable, something no bishop could have done under the dogmatic pontificates of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI."


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Lun 5 Jan - 05:02 (2015)    Sujet du message: ITALIE : RENZI DEPENALISE LA NECROPHILIE ET L'INCESTE, ENTRE AUTRES. Répondre en citant


Article publié le 29.12.2014

La liberté sexuelle est la plus grande conquête de l'époque contemporaine : grâce à Renzi, quiconque à l'avenir désirera consommer l'acte sexuel sur un cadavre à des fins hédonistes pourra le faire sans craindre de finir en prison. En Italie, le conseil des ministres a décidé que le délit de nécrophilie ne sera plus passible de prison. (En Allemagne ces derniers mois, on avait pensé à dépénaliser l'inceste. [...])

Le gouvernement a dépénalisé 112 délit "mineurs", parmi lesquels l'homicide involontaire, l'inceste et la dissimulation de cadavres. Ces décisions auraient été prises afin de résoudre le problème des prisons bondées.

Plutôt que de renvoyer les criminels étrangers dans leurs pays respectifs, le nouveau décret allégera les prisons en laissant des pervers, des violeurs et des assassins en liberté.


Liliane Tami  

Source en italien (trad. D. Borer)

Ci-dessous, la liste des crimes qui, depuis 2015, seront considérés comme des hobbies normaux:

-  Abandon de personnes mineures ou handicapées - art.591 c.p. co.1
-  Abus de moyens de correction ou de discipline - art.571 c.p.
-  Abus dans un bureau - art.323 c.p.
-  Accès abusif d'un système informatique ou télématique - art.615 ter
- Invasion arbitraire et occupation d'une agence agricole ou industrielle. Sabotage - art.508 c.p.
- Exercice abusif d'une profession - art348

Suite de la liste en italien : (Utilisez un traduction pour la traduction française)

- Adulterazione o contraffazione di cose in danno della pubblica salute – art.441 c.p.–- -Appropriazione indebita – art.646 c.p.
– Arresto illegale – art.606 c.p.
– Assistenza agli associati (anche mafiosi) – art.418 co.1 c.p.
– Attentato a impianti di pubblica utilità – art.420 c.p.
Attentati alla sicurezza dei trasporti – art.432 c.p.
Atti osceni – art.527 c.p.
– Atti persecutori (stalking) – art.612 bis co.1
– Commercio o somministrazione di medicinali guasti – art.443 c.p.
Commercio di sostanze alimentari nocive – art.444 c.p.
– Contraffazione di indicazioni geografiche o denominazioni di origine dei prodotti agroalimentari – art.517 quater
Corruzione di minorenne – art.609 quinquies co.1 c.p.
– Crollo di costruzioni o altri disastri dolosi – art.434 co.1 c.p.
– Corruzione – art-318 c.p.
– Danneggiamento – art.635 c.p.
– Danneggiamento a seguito d’incendio – art.423 c.p.
– Danneggiamento seguito da inondazione,frana valanga – art.427 co.1 c.p.
– Danneggiamento di informazioni e programmi informatici – art.635 bis c.p.
– Danneggiamento di sistemi informatici o telematici – art.635 quater c.p.
– Detenzione di materiale pornografico – art.600 quater c.p.
– Deviazione di acque e modifiche dello stato dei luoghi – art.632 c.p.
– Diffamazione – art. 595 c.p.
– Divieto di combattimento tra animali – art.544 quinquies
– Esercizio arbitrario delle proprie ragioni con violenza – artt.392-393 c.p.
– Evasione – art 385 c.p.
Fabbricazione o detenzione di materie esplodenti – art.435 c.p.
– False informazioni al P.M. – art.371 bis
– Falsità materiale del P.U. – art.477 c.p.
– Favoreggiamento personale – art-378 c.p.
– Favoreggiamento reale art.379 c.p.
– Frode informatica – art.640ter co.1-2 c.p.
– Frode in emigrazione art.645 c.p.co.1
– Frode nelle pubbliche forniture – art.356
– Frode processuale – art.374 c.p.
– Frodi contro le industrie nazionali – art.514 c.p.
– Frode nell’esercizio del commercio – art.515 c.p.
Furto – art.624 c.p.  (vol à l'étalage)
– Gioco d’azzardo – art.718-719 c.p.
– Impiego dei minori nell’accattonaggio – art.600 octies c.p.
Incesto – art.564 1 co. C.p.
– Inadempimento di contratti di pubbliche forniture art.355 c.p.
– Indebita percezione di erogazioni a danno dello Stato – art 316 ter
– Ingiuria – art.594 c.p.
– Ingresso abusivo nel fondo altrui – art.637 c.p.
– Insolvenza fraudolenta – art.641 c.p.
– Interferenze illecite nella vita privata – art. 615 bis
– Interruzione di pubblico servizio – art.331 c.p.
– Intralcio alla giustizia – art.377 c.p.
– Introduzione nello Stato e commercio di prodotti falsi – art.474 c.p.- Introduzione o abbandono di animali nel fondo altrui – art.636 c.p.
Invasione di terreni o edifici – art.633 c.p.
– Istigazione a delinquere – art.414 c.p.
– Istigazione a disobbedire alle leggi – art.415 c.p.
Lesione personale – art.582 c.p.
– Lesioni personali colpose art.590 c.p.
Maltrattamento di animali – art.544 ter
Malversazione a danno dei privati – art.315 c.p.
– Malversazione a danno dello Stato – art.316 bis
– Mancata esecuzione dolosa di un provvedimento del giudice – art.388 c.p.
– Manovre speculative su merci – art.501 bis c.p.
– Millantato credito – art.346 c.p.
– Minaccia – art. 612 c.p.
– Occultamento di cadavere – art.412 c.p.
– Oltraggio a P.U. – art.341 bis
– Oltraggio a un magistrato in udienza art.343 c.p.
– Omessa denuncia di reato da parte del P.U. – art.361
Omicidio colposo – art.589 c.p. co.1
– Omissione di referto – art.365 c.p.
– Omissione di soccorso – art. 593 c.p.
– Patrocinio o consulenza infedele – art.380 c.p.
– Peculato mediante profitto dell’errore altrui – art.316 c.p.
– Percosse – art. 581 c.p.
Possesso e fabbricazione di documenti di identificazione falsi – art.497 bis co.1.
– Procurata evasione – art.386 co.1
– Procurata inosservanza di pena – art.390 c.p.
– Resistenza a P.U. – art. 337 c.p.
– Rialzo e ribasso fraudolento di prezzi sul pubblico mercato o nelle borse di commercio – art.501 c.p.
– Rimozione od omissione dolosa di cautele contro gli infortuni sul lavoro – art.437 c.p.
– Rivelazione ed utilizzazione di segreti d’ufficio – art.326 c.p.
– Rivelazione di segreti inerenti ad un procedimento penale – art.379 bis
– Rifiuto di atti d’ufficio.Omissione – art.328 c.p.
– Rissa – art.588 c.p.
– Simulazione di reato – art.367 c.p.
Sostituzione di persona – art.494 c.p.
– Sottrazione o danneggiamento di cose sottoposte a sequestro – art.334 c.p.
– Sottrazione di persone incapaci – art.574 c.p.
– Sottrazione e trattenimento di minori all’estero – art.574 bis
– Stato d’incapacità procurato mediante violenza – art. 613 c.p.
– Traffico d’influenze illecite – art.346 bis
– Truffa – art.640 c.p.
– Turbata libertà degli incanti – art.353
– Turbativa violenta del possesso di cose immobili – art.634 c.p.
– Usurpazione di funzioni pubbliche – art.347
Uccisione di animali – art.544 bis
Uccisione o danneggiamento di animali altrui – art.638 c.p.
– Vendita di sostanze alimentari non genuine come genuine – art.516 c.p.
Vilipendio delle tombe – art.408
Vilipendio di cadavere – art.410 co.1
– Violazione, sottrazione e soppressione di corrispondenza – art 616 c.p.
Violazione di domicilio art.614 c.p.
– Violazione di domicilio commessa dal P.U. – art. 615 c.p.
– Violazione di sepolcro – art.407 c.p.
– Violazione di sigilli art.349
– Violazione degli obblighi di assistenza familiare – art.570 c.p.
– Violenza o minaccia a P.U. art.336 c.p.
Violenza privata – art.610 c.p.
– Violenza o minaccia per costringere taluno a commettere un reato – art.611 c.p.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Lun 5 Jan - 13:07 (2015)    Sujet du message: POPE CRIMINALIZES THE REPORTING OF SEX CRIMES - NEWSLO Répondre en citant



When we know this fact, we can ask ourself : Is Kevin Annett under attack by the Vatican? Still don't know but there's a big possibility. And all the murders of the peoples who reports these sexuals rituals and who're murder. We can clearly who's behind all that with this article.

Sunday, July 21, 2013

Pope Criminalizes the Reporting of Sex Crimes - Newslo

(Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons)

VATICAN CITY — Few eyebrows were raised last week when Pope Francis brought the Vatican’s legal system up to date by criminalizing leaks of official information and formalizing laws against sex crimes. But now that the laws have been made public, a closer look revealed that the pope has made it illegal to report sex crimes against children.

According to the new laws, revealing or receiving confidential Vatican information is now punishable by up to two years in prison, while newly defined sex crimes against children carry a sentence of up to twelve years. Because all sex crimes are kept confidential, there is no longer a legal way for Vatican officials to report sex crimes.

“We didn’t mean for this to happen, obviously,” lamented Vatican foreign minister Monsignor Dominique Mamberti. “It’s quite the papal pickle that His Holiness has placed upon our heads. Sex crimes are more illegal than ever, but technically it’s illegal to report them.” Mamberti said that the simultaneous passing of each law is merely a coincidence and insisted that the Church is not trying to protect itself against further embarrassment, but critics outside the Vatican are skeptical.

“They know exactly what they’re doing,” claims Fabrizio Perona of Italy’s La Repubblica newspaper. “They just thought nobody would notice. The Church wants to impress the world by getting tough on sex crimes, but they criminalized leaks, which is the only way anybody would ever discover their crimes. It’s genius, if you stop and think about it.”

Mamberti says plans are already being made to eliminate the loophole, but change often comes slowly to antiquated Vatican law, which is based on the 1889 Italian code. “We’re not going to let a dangerous law like this stand, but people need to understand that this is the Vatican, and there is a process here. Voting, incense, prayer. We ask the minors at risk to please be patient with us.”

Fortunately, only clergy and lay people who live and work in Vatican City are subject to the new legislation, which differs from the canon law governing the universal Catholic Church.

As the Holy See moves to clarify the law, Mamberti has warned would-be offenders within Vatican walls that they “are still subject to the most watchful eye of all: the eye of God. His judgment is greater than—oh, who am I kidding? For now, there is nothing we can do.”

- See more at: http://www.newslo.com/pope-criminalizes-the-reporting-of-sex-crimes/#sthash…
Posted by Judith Narz at 2:32 AM


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 6 Jan - 00:32 (2015)    Sujet du message: "IL EST INTERDIT DE SE DESHABILLER PENDANT L'ACTE CONJUGAL", LA NOUVELLE FATWA D'ALI ROBAI QUI CREE LE BUZZ Répondre en citant


Une autre loi de Dieu de bafouée. Rien n'arrête ses satanistes pour détruire TOUS les fondements de la société. La folie et la haine contre les lois divines se précisent de jour en jour. Le problème, je le rappelle, n'est pas l'islam, c'est Satan qui se cache derrière cette religion pour mener à bien la guerre qui a été déclarée contre Dieu par l'Empire Romain. Tout ce qui prend place est le côté obscur de cet empire qui lui se présente comme la seule alternative pour amener à la lumière, ceux et celles qui ne lui sont pas soumis. Espérant que les coeurs et l'esprit de milliers de gens s'ouvriront pour venir au seul Evangile qui peut sauver, par la foi en Jésus-Christ et en Sa Parole divine.

"Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité d’une femme de ton père : c’est la nudité de ton père."
Lévitique 18:8

Par La rédaction | janvier 5, 2015 3:15

VIDEO arabe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aHcZPgPlv8

Selon un imam salafiste : “se déshabiller pendant l’acte conjugal équivaut à un divorce”.  L’imam en question appelle les musulmans à “ne pas se comporter comme les mécréants”. “Ne vous déshabillez pas complètement ! “, avertit-il.

La dernière fatwa étrange émise par le prédicateur Ali Robai vient de créer un véritable buzz sur la toile. Le Cheikh a appelé les femmes et les hommes mariés à ne pas se déshabiller durant l’acte conjugal car cela est  «haram» dans la religion musulmane et est considéré comme un acte équivalant à un divorce.  En effet, le prédicateur va plus loin, dans sa dernière sortie, en estimant que chaque homme qui se met nu devant sa compagne, ou le contraire, devrait divorcer.

«Oh musulmans, sachez qu’enlever tous les vêtements pendant l’acte sexuel est interdit par la religion musulmane. Ce comportement indigne rend illégal le contrat du mariage», affirme ouvertement le Cheikh Ali Robai dans une fatwa, publié sur Twitter, le réseau social le plus influent après Facebook. Le prédicateur, s’adressant à tous les musulmans et les musulmanes, appelle à ne pas ressembler aux mécréants en «se pliant à la volonté de Dieu et en faisant preuve de pudeur lors des relations sexuelles dans le couple».

Partant de cette fatwa, chaque femme ou homme qui se dénude devant son partenaire au moment d’accomplir son devoir conjugal brise les liens sacrés du mariage et rend son union illégitime.  Il faut dire que cette nouvelle fatwa, très étrange, ne cesse de susciter la polémique sur les réseaux sociaux.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 6 Jan - 00:51 (2015)    Sujet du message: LOIS SUR LES MOEURS Répondre en citant


Nous pouvons voir, en lisant ces lois sur les moeurs, jusqu'à quel point le grand dragon et ses mignons sont en train de détruire les fondements même de la société par toutes ses pratiques abominables et honteuses. Vous croyez que Dieu restera sans bouger, encore longtemps, quand on bafoue ses lois divines ainsi?

01 " Le Seigneur parla à Moïse et dit :

02 Parle aux fils d’Israël. Tu leur diras : Je suis le Seigneur votre Dieu.
03 N’agissez pas comme on agit au pays d’Égypte où vous avez habité ; n’agissez pas comme on agit au pays de Canaan vers lequel moi, je vous mène. Vous ne suivrez pas leurs lois ;
04 vous mettrez en pratique mes ordonnances et vous observerez mes décrets ; c’est eux que vous suivrez. Je suis le Seigneur votre Dieu.
05 Vous observerez mes décrets et mes ordonnances ; l’homme qui les mettra en pratique y trouvera la vie. Je suis le Seigneur.
06 Nul d’entre vous ne s’approchera de quelqu’un de sa parenté, pour en découvrir la nudité. Je suis le Seigneur.
07 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de ton père, tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de ta mère ; elle est ta mère, tu ne découvriras pas sa nudité.
08 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité d’une femme de ton père : c’est la nudité de ton père.
09 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de ta sœur, fille de ton père ou fille de ta mère, née à la maison ou née au-dehors : tu ne découvriras pas sa nudité.
10 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de la fille de ton fils ou de la fille de ta fille : tu ne découvriras pas leur nudité car c’est ta propre nudité.
11 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de la fille d’une femme de ton père ; ton père l’a engendrée, elle est ta sœur : tu ne découvriras pas sa nudité.
12 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de la sœur de ton père : elle est la parente de ton père.
13 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de la sœur de ta mère, car elle est la parente de ta mère.
14 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité du frère de ton père en t’approchant de son épouse : c’est la femme de ton oncle.
15 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de ta belle-fille : c’est la femme de ton fils, tu ne découvriras pas sa nudité.
16 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité de la femme de ton frère : c’est la nudité de ton frère.
17 Tu ne découvriras pas la nudité d’une femme et celle de sa fille ; tu ne prendras pas la fille de son fils ni la fille de sa fille pour en découvrir la nudité : elles sont de la même parenté ; c’est une monstruosité.
18 Tu ne prendras pas pour seconde épouse la sœur de ta femme tant que cette dernière est en vie : en découvrant sa nudité, tu en ferais une rivale.
19 Tu ne t’approcheras pas d’une femme dans la souillure de ses règles pour découvrir sa nudité.
20 Tu n’auras pas de rapports sexuels avec la femme d’un compatriote, tu partagerais son impureté.
21 Tu ne livreras pas quelqu’un de ta progéniture pour le faire passer à Molek : ainsi, tu ne profaneras pas le nom de ton Dieu. Je suis le Seigneur.
22 Tu ne coucheras pas avec un homme comme on couche avec une femme. C’est une abomination.
23 Tu n’auras pas de rapports avec un animal, cela te rendrait impur ; et aucune femme ne s’offrira à un animal pour s’accoupler avec lui, ce serait une union contre nature.
24 Ne vous rendez impurs par rien de tout cela : c’est par tout cela que les nations que je chasse devant vous se sont rendues impures.
25 Le pays étant devenu impur, j’ai châtié son péché, et le pays a vomi ses habitants.
26 Mais vous, vous garderez mes décrets et mes ordonnances, et vous ne commettrez aucune de ces abominations, pas plus l’israélite de souche que l’immigré résidant parmi vous.
27 Toutes ces abominations, les hommes qui ont habité ce pays avant vous les ont commises, et le pays est devenu impur.
28 Ne rendez pas le pays impur, sinon il vous vomira comme il a vomi la nation qui était avant vous.
29 Car quiconque commettra n’importe laquelle de ces abominations sera retranché du milieu de son peuple.
30 Vous garderez mes observances et vous ne pratiquerez pas ces lois abominables que l’on pratiquait avant vous ; vous ne vous rendrez pas impurs par elles. Je suis le Seigneur votre Dieu."

Lévitique 18

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mer 7 Jan - 12:19 (2015)    Sujet du message: ANN COFFEY MP SAYS THE TERM ‘CHILD PROSTITUTE’ SHOULD NOT BE USED IN LAWS Répondre en citant


January 7, 2015

Ann Coffey wrote a report on child sexual exploitation in the wake of the Rochdale grooming case

An MP is campaigning to have the term “child prostitute” removed from legislation as it “protects abusers”.

Ann Coffey, Labour MP for Stockport, wants amendments to the Serious Crime Bill, being discussed in Parliament, as the phrase “belongs to another age”.

There are currently 16 pieces of legislation that use the term.

She said it “sets attitudes in public minds to the victims of sexual exploitation which means they are often blamed for what happens to them”.
Her move follows high-profile cases of child sexual exploitation in Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford and Telford.

The investigation by Alexis Jay, a former chief inspector of social work, uncovers a catalogue of offences, mostly by Pakistani men against white girls.

Ms Coffey said: “The attitudes of the [social] services saw them as child prostitutes rather than children who were sexually exploited.

“The idea of prostitution gives an image of an element of complicity or consensual contraction on which a child sells services for profit.

“Clearly that is incompatible with our notion of a child. A child is immature, a child is vulnerable to exploitation.”

In October last year, Ms Coffey said child sexual exploitation had become a “social norm” within some areas of Greater Manchester.

The Real Voices report, ordered after the Rochdale grooming case and written by Ms Coffey, suggested almost 650 children reported missing in Greater Manchester in 2014 were at risk of child sexual exploitation (CSE) or serious harm.

Related Stories source: BBC NEWS



Second Reading of the Serious Crime Bill, 5 January 2015

The Serious Crime Bill is an opportunity for Parliament to remove all references to child prostitution from legislation. Britain should lead the world in outlawing the term.

This would send out a powerful and unequivocal message in the wake of the shocking high profile street grooming cases in Derby, Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford, Oxford and Stockport, that there is no such thing as a child prostitute – only a sexually abused or exploited child.

The term child prostitute is inappropriate and is an insult to innocent victims – who have been robbed of their childhood and then stigmatised and blamed.

There are currently 16 pieces of legislation that use the term ‘child prostitute,’ which implies an element of complicity and gives the idea of a consensual contract of a child offering sex in return for gifts or money.

It is shameful that the offence of loitering or soliciting for prostitution (contrary to section 1 of the Street Offences Act 1959, as amended by section 16 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009) can still be committed by a child aged 10 or over.

There is also the offence of ‘controlling a child prostitute or child involved in pornography’. As recently as June 2014, a Bolton man was charged by Greater Manchester police and found guilty of ‘controlling a child prostitute for financial gain’.

There can be no doubt that much has been done in recent years to take the word “prostitute” in relation to children out of government guidance. This is important because language shapes attitudes. However it is incongruous and wrong that it still remains in statute.

I hope that there will be cross party support for amendments I am planning to table to this Bill which will consign the term child prostitution to the history books together with amendments that will make it much harder for defendants to argue consent in cases of child sexual exploitation.

There has been a significant cultural shift away from talking about child prostitution to child exploitation and underlying this change is the acknowledgment that a child cannot consent to exchanging sex for financial gain. Removing references to child prostitution in legislation is the final piece of the jigsaw.

We should remember that a child for these purposes is under18.

It seems surprising now that up until only six years ago, the sexual exploitation of children was still being referred to as child prostitution in statutory guidance.

Fresh guidance in 2009 was entitled “Safeguarding Children and Young People from Sexual Exploitation” whereas previous guidance in 2000 had been entitled: “Safeguarding Children involved in prostitution”.

The 2009 guidance said: “Sexually exploited children should not be regarded as criminals and the primary law enforcement response must be directed at perpetrators who groom children for sexual exploitation.”

However the offences referring to child prostitution still remained on the statute book and this affects attitudes. Describing a young person as a “child prostitute” means they are not seen as victims and their sexual abuse is seen as self-inflicted.

These attitudes were identified in the Rochdale Overview Report in December 2013.

Social workers talked about the victims making ‘lifestyle choices’. One Rochdale father described being told by social workers that his daughter was a ‘child prostitute’.

Figures provided by the House of Commons library for my recent report: ‘Real Voices – Child sexual exploitation in Greater Manchester’ which was commissioned by Tony Lloyd, the Police and Crime Commissioner for Greater Manchester – show that between 1992 and 1996 there were 1,449 cautions – about 300 a year – for prostitution for under-18-year-olds and 976 court proceedings for loitering, or soliciting for the purposes of prostitution (Street Offences Act 1959).

In the past four years between 2010 and 2013 there were 15 cautions issued to juveniles under the age of 18 and seven defendants under the age of 18 were proceeded against. Of those seven defendants, three were found guilty but none were imprisoned.

Last year there were five cautions for prostitution related offences for those aged 15-17 and two were proceeded against and found guilty. One received a £35 fine and the other a Youth Referral Order.

Although these figures show that attitudes are changing, it is wrong that we still have legislation referring to child prostitution on the statute books because of the message it sends out.

Referring to a young person as a child prostitute fuels old fashioned attitudes that have done so much harm to children over the years because it feeds the idea that the child is in some way to blame for their own abuse.

Even now, current CPS guidelines state that children should generally be treated as a victim of sexual abuse, but still add and ‘only where there is a persistent and voluntary return to prostitution and where there is a genuine choice should a prosecution be considered.’

In my Real Voices report I said it was vital that wider culture and attitudes were tackled and changed if we are going to protect children and young people from sexual exploitation. We have seen how the culture at the time protected very well-known high profile people, including celebrities like Jimmy Savile.

Young people are still too often being blamed for being a victim of crime. I was shocked that the Crown Prosecution Service highlighted the fact that a victim wore cropped tops as a reason for throwing out a case.

Police, social workers, prosecutors and juries, made up of ordinary people, all carry attitudes around with them and language used in legislation heavily influences those attitudes.

The more people I spoke to during my inquiry, the more I realised that although we can come up with more effective ways of working for agencies, the most important thing we can do to protect children is to tackle the cultural attitudes that cocoon sex exploiters and enable them to get away with what they are doing under our noses.

There has been a sea change in the public’s attitude towards same sex relationships and the decriminalisation of those was an important step in effecting changes in attitudes. We must effect the same change in attitudes to the sexual exploitation of children.

Changing Attitudes

The exploitation of children for sex has been around for centuries.

In 1885 child prostitution was described in the Pall Mall Gazette by a journalist called Stead a “veritable slave trade” where children are – quotes- “snared, trapped and outraged either when under the influence of drugs or after a prolonged struggle in a room”. His words could have been describing events in Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford and Derby more than 130 years later.

He campaigned for changes within the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885, commonly known as Stead’s act, which raised the age of consent to 16.

However, even as late as the interwar period, judges were commenting on the ‘wickedness’ of girls under 16 seducing men twice as old as themselves. In the same period there were two conflicting key organisations developed to address child abuse: the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene and the National Vigilance Association. The former group emphasised the promiscuity and therefore the blame of girls aged 14 and 15 and the latter emphasised the abuse and therefore the abstention from blame of the children.

This confusion is apparent in the Street Offences Act 1959, which gives no age distinction to the term “common prostitute” or to soliciting offences. This should be changed to 18, because by still allowing for conviction for offences relating to prostitution, children are given adult status as offenders responsible for their own actions.

The 1990s saw a renewed focus on issues facing children involved in sexual exploitation.

During that time that language began to change from using the term ‘prostitution’ to ‘exploitation’. In 1995 the Children’s Society produced a report entitled “The Games Up” which helped to raise awareness about the sexual exploitation of children and young people.

The report was most influential in its revelations of the high numbers of young people being punished through the criminal justice system for offences relating to prostitution, offences that the report claimed result from experiences of abuse, poverty and coercion.

The report argued that there was no evidence to suggest that criminalising the young person helped their plight.

Interestingly enough that report written in 1995 said young people were extremely unlikely to turn to the police for help and they also felt alienated from social workers.

Unfortunately more than 20 years later in my ‘Real Voices’ report I found the same reluctance of children to confide in the police or social workers because of a lack of trust in those services.

Barnardos was also a key player in raising awareness of sexual exploitation and its high profile campaign “Whose Daughter Next?”1998 influenced government development of guidance on safeguarding children.

Now is the time

In 2012 the Office of the Children’s Commissioner inquiry into sexual exploitation in gangs and groups “I thought I was the only one: The only one in the Word” Interim report, called for a government review of all legislation and guidance which makes reference to children as ‘prostitutes’ or involved in prostitution. The Home Affairs Select Committee report into ‘Child sexual exploitation and the response to localised grooming’ in June 2013 supported all of the OCCs recommendations.

In 2012 the joint APPG report on Children missing from care, which I chaired, called for changes to Schedule 5 of the Children’s Homes Regulations 2001, which related to the obligation for homes to notify agencies of ‘Involvement or suspected involvement of a child accommodated at the home in prostitution’ to be changed to ‘suspicion that a child accommodated in a home is ‘at risk of abuse or child sexual exploitation’. I am pleased to say that has now been done.

The Howard League for Penal Reform in “Out of place; The policing and criminalisation of sexually exploited girls and young women” highlighted in 2012 the importance of language and said: “To speak of girls and young women’s involvement in prostitution without also stating that they are emotionally, physically or economically coerced is now the same as saying ‘girls and young women’s involvement in their own abuse’. To state that they are involved in prostitution is regarded as denial that they are being abused.”

And in April 2013, Barnardos, The report of the Parliamentary Inquiry into the effectiveness of legislation for tackling CSE and trafficking within the UK, chaired by my honourable friend for Rotherham, also recommended the removal of all references to child prostitution in legislation as did my own Real Voices report in October last year.

The government supports the principle that the phrase” child prostitute” should not be used and Sara Thornton, the Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police, said: “We try not to use the term child prostitute and our absolute aim is that we don’t use it. I think that if Parliament were to set the standard and say we’re thinking of new legislation and we don’t have the term child prostitute in the legislation, I think that would be a good step.”

The office of Simon Bailey, the Chief Constable of the Norfolk constabulary, who is the national lead for child protection and abuse investigation, told me:
“It is our opinion that the term Child Prostitution is no longer appropriate and does not truly reflect acts which should always be considered as Child Abuse.  Child Prostitution implies complicity by the child when they should only be considered as a victim.”

I agree and feel that the continued use of the term by the criminal justice system gives out the wrong messages to those who are being abused; the adults who abuse them and to the general public.

It could be argued that those offences involving child prostitution are so little used that it is immaterial that they remain offences. However, I would argue that as long as they remain they influence attitudes to consent, which defence lawyers exploit.

They are a barrier to a better understanding and awareness of the nature of sexual exploitation of children.

It is shameful to us all that the term child prostitute remains in law. It is an outdated insult to victims, many of whose lives have been ruined. It is inappropriate; no one believes it any longer; it is plain wrong and it should go!!



Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Sam 10 Jan - 01:37 (2015)    Sujet du message: KEVIN ANNETT 2015 MESSAGE ILLUMINATI VATICAN ATTACKS AND MORE Répondre en citant


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


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


Alfred Lambremont Webre stand for the Palestinian State and ICC, an international organization who's run by many of the ones who are guilty of ritual sexual abuse. He also stateh in his videos against Kevin Annett that he will continue to fight for these crimes at the international level runs by the Jesuit/Vatican/Knight of Malta. So, for me, I can see that this man is not clear concerning these two issues. Here, the video concerning his stand for Palestine, and a organization runs by terrorists who clearly wants the destruction of Israel. I just can't trust him anymore.

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FRHr5YJ4MM


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Sam 17 Jan - 03:25 (2015)    Sujet du message: “GAY CHRISTIAN” CONFERENCE FEATURES “THIRD WAY” PASTOR Répondre en citant


January 13, 2015

“What if I’m wrong?” recalled Rev. Danny Cortez to over 1700 people gathered in Portland, Oregon for the annual Gay Christian Network Conference (GCN), January 9th. Remembering a time where he was conflicted about Christian teaching and homosexuality, Cortez said, “Then I realized maybe I no longer believe the things I use to believe. I think I no longer believe my traditional understanding of Scripture. And I thought oh dear God, did I just become liberal?

Cortez is the pastor of New Heart Community Church in La Mirada, California. Dubbed a “third way” church, Cortez and his congregation declare same-sex unions can be blessed by God. This unorthodox stance on marriage and sexuality landed Cortez and New Heart Community Church’s membership within the Southern Baptist Convention at odds, and ultimately, lead to the church’s dismissal in 2014.

The Eight Year Journey

The biggest question Cortez wrestled with before changing his mind in regards to traditional teachings on sexuality and marriage was, “are we applying Scripture correctly?” So the “third way” pastor went on an eight year journey to understand why, if we were following Christ’s teachings, did the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) community feel judged and marginalized.

“I went on this journey and I realized that I had a pretty homophobic upbringing. When I heard the word homosexual or thought about people who were homosexuals immediately I thought of disgusting, just sexual, perversion kind of things.” Cortez continued, “I knew that if I were going to engage in this study I needed to detox myself.”

To “detox” Cortez found himself in the middle of Hollywood’s gay community. According to Cortez, “Slowly but surely my stereotypes of the gay community began to change. I began to realize these were beautiful people. They were normal.”

The Bible apparently deserved a  detox too, because according to Cortez, “As I began through my study I decided that it would be good for me to not read into the Scriptures the Western understanding of what homosexuality is.”

He continued, “The more I read into [Greek and Roman antiquity] the more I realized this homo-erotic culture in antiquity was very perverse. I mean, there was pedophilia, there was cult prostitution, there was slavery, all these things and I remember thinking this was the reason why Paul and others condemned this because there was so much evil.” Cortez explained that because these “homo-erotic” characteristics did not reflect the gay people he knew, traditional Christian teaching must have got it wrong.

Cortez’s study, combined with his 15 year old son expressing his own same-sex attraction, encouraged he and his wife to attend the 2014 GCN conference in Chicago. It was after hearing the stories and perspectives of gay Christians that Cortez came to “realize that the theology was not as important as the aspect of family.”

The Break-Up

At the 2014 GCN conference, Cortez also believed his orthodox view of marriage had been “part of the problem.” Cortez recalled thinking, “I have been a part of the Evangelical community of pastors that had been bringing shame to [the LGBT] community.” At last year’s GCN open mic and to the GCN audience Cortez shared, “I’m so sorry. I am so sorry for the shame and the hurt that our teaching has caused you. I’m so sorry to make you feel like there was something wrong with you. For not valuing who you are.”

After the 2014 conference Cortez knew that he had to go back and tell his church that he no longer believed homosexuality was a sin. “The leaders of the church realized I had fallen off our statement of faith and traditional understanding of the Scriptures and there was this realization that I needed to be terminated,” said Cortez. “But they gave me one more opportunity to preach and I told my story.”

For four months the church listened to lectures and arguments from various sides of the same-sex theological debate. After that period, the New Heart Community Church went through a “painful split.” According to Cortez, approximately 50 percent of the congregation voted to keep him on as pastor while 40 percent of all members left the church.

But for Cortez, it wasn’t about tradition, nor theology. Instead, his new worldview rested upon the questions, “What gives life? What is more compassionate?”

Addressing the Critics

In the aftermath of his decision to move away from orthodoxy, Cortez shared that fellow Christians would ask him, “How can you as a pastor accommodate sin?” Cortez’s response was simply that “in the field” traditional Christian teaching on marriage “is not working.” Cortez said, “We need to think long and hard about the way we are interpreting Scripture, because when I look at Jesus interpreted Scripture it was to give life.”

Eventually, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) heard of Cortez’s “third way” teaching on same-sex issues. Cortez recalled traveling to the SBC headquarters in Nashville, Tennessee. He was invited to speak to the 83 Executive Committee directors. For two days, he met with Southern Baptist leaders and awaited the Executive Commitee’s vote on whether or not to dismiss Cortez’s church for abandoning the sanctity of marriage.

Ina final address to his Southern Baptist detractors Cortez said, “[I]n a couple of hours you will most likely move to dismiss our church, but I want you to know that the vote that will happen in a couple of hours will not matter in the eyes of God, because God will still see us as one Church.”

Cortez directed his last thoughts to his Evangelical friends, stating, “The goal of our faith is not marriage equality. The goal of our faith is not religious freedom. The goal of our faith is to love.”
It is unlikely that Cortez’s Evangelical brothers and sisters will take up his “third way” and deviate from 2,000 years of agreed upon teachings in the West and East on marriage. Not because Evangelicals have not love, but because we love with the firsthand knowledge that Jesus Christ’s transformation of our selves is, ultimately, what offers real life.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 20 Jan - 02:02 (2015)    Sujet du message: LE NOUVEAU SCANDALE DE L'ETAT ISLAMIQUE : ILS JETTERAIENT DES HOMOSEXUELS DANS LE VIDE POUR LES "PUNIR" Répondre en citant


Publié le Lundi 19 Janvier 2015 à 13h54


L’horreur du groupe islamiste Etat Islamique se dévoile de jour en jour. Selon des documents révélés via Twitter par le Daily Mail, les représentants d’EI en Irak auraient décidé de « punir » les homosexuels en les jetant dans le vide de plusieurs mètres de haut…

Capture Twitter

Un homme jeté dans le vide, les yeux bandés, par des membres de l’Etat Islamique en Irak. La vidéo n’est pas datée.

Comme le révèle le Daily Mail, les techniques barbares des membres du groupe terroriste Etat Islamique ne cessent de choquer au fil des jours. Selon des informations relayées via les médias sociaux par le groupe djihadiste, ces membres auraient mis au point une nouvelle punition publique pour « punir » les personnes homosexuelles.

Depuis plusieurs jours, ces photos font le tour du web dans les milieux djihadistes. On y voit des terroristes de Daesh en train de pousser du haut de toits ou de tours de plusieurs mètres de haut. Selon les informations disséminées, il s’agirait de personnes homosexuelles ou présumées homosexuelles, mises à mort sur la place publique.

Les photos montrent des places de la province de Ninive, en Irak, mais ces exécutions arbitraires auraient cours dans bien d’autres cités du pays, créant un mouvement de panique parmi les locaux, contraints de regarder ces morts… Certaines personnes jetées dans le vide seraient en outre crucifiées. Aucune photographie ne le prouve cependant.

Selon les codes de l’Etat Islamique, la simple présomption d’homosexualité suffit à déclarer la peine de mort. Et l’Etat Islamique compte bien profiter de ce climat de terreur pour menacer toute autre personne se disant homosexuelle d’une exécution pure et simple… Des clichés insoutenables, que le Daily Mail a décidé de publier (voir ici).


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 27 Jan - 01:35 (2015)    Sujet du message: VATICAN: BETGOGLIO RECOIT UN TRANS ESPAGNOL ET SA FIANCEE Répondre en citant


Article publié le 26.01.2015

Un transsexuel au Vatican.

C'est le pape François en personne qui, samedi 5 janvier dans l'après-midi a reçu, en audience privée, Diego Neria Lejarraga, un transgenre espagnol de 48 ans et son actuelle fiancée. Selon le quotidien ibérique Hoy, Lejarraga avait écrit au pontificat pour dénoncer sa condition de mise à l'écart de l'Eglise, en particulier dans la ville où il vit, Pladencia. Le pape, touché par la confession de cet homme lui aurait téléphoné pour l'inviter au Saint Siège.

Lejarraga est est croyant et pratiquant mais, depuis son opération pour changer de sexe, il aurait été tenu à l'écart de sa paroisse et le prêtre l'aurait appelé "fille du diable". Les autorité vaticanes, contactées par des journalistes espagnols ont décidé de ne pas faire de commentaires à ce sujet.

Source Imola Oggi


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mar 27 Jan - 01:55 (2015)    Sujet du message: GAYS & MUSLIMS UNITE! FIGHT ALL HATE Répondre en citant


Just wait, ISIS is coming for you!

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Jeu 29 Jan - 02:09 (2015)    Sujet du message: HOUSTON MAYOR CALLING OWN CITIZENS 'CRIMINALS' Répondre en citant


Trial begins for pastors suing government

Published: 21 hours ago
Jan. 28, 2015

Houston Mayor Annise Parker

By John Griffing

HOUSTON – Testimony in a trial for five Houston-area pastors suing the city to have an election on a transgender ordinance has begun, with one minister accusing the city of calling “an entire community of churches and citizens criminals.”

The lawsuit was brought by a coalition of pastors and groups in Houston who oppose an ordinance council members adopted at the urging of lesbian Mayor Annise Parker.

The measure requires Houston businesses and organizations to recognize transgenders with certain rights and privileges.

The pastors immediately collected signatures to overturn the ordinance, but the city’s lawyer, working on behalf of Parker, stepped into the dispute after the city secretary had affirmed there were enough valid signatures and disqualified pages and pages of names.

Pastor Dave Welch of the Houston Area Pastor Council was on the stand as the trial opened Tuesday, responding to claims  by the city that the names were not handled properly.

“Given the fact that we pre-verified over 30,000 signatures as being registered voters, and every single person went before a notary public, and swore and oath, before the law, that they indeed were the person who gathered those signatures, many of which came out of the churches, we had every reason to believe those were done honestly, ethically and properly before the law,” he told the court.

“Frankly,” he responded to city attorneys at one point, “what you are doing is calling an entire community of churches and citizens criminals. Fraud and forgery are crimes; that’s exactly what you are asserting, and I find that offensive.”

The city, which previously delayed the case, recently lost an argument in court in which officials demanded that a special master be assigned to the case and that a judge make the decision rather than a jury.

At the time, Parker has promised to do “whatever” is needed to defend the transgender ordinance, which she has described as “personal.” Her opponents say that’s not particularly surprising, since she has been deceptive “every step of the way” in the case.

The mayor at one point created a firestorm of negative publicity for her city by issuing subpoenas for copies of pastors’ sermons.

Welch told the court there may have been a mistake over the course of collecting tens of thousands of signatures.

“One petition page is far from being ‘rife with’ fraud. … These are citizens doing this, and someone may add on a signature not realizing something may not be notarized. It is a matter of investigative intent and process, and I have no issue with the process,” he said.

But when city attorneys started going through multiple pages of signed petitions, asking Welch to determine forgery, fraud or accident, he responded.

“I am not going to ascribe motives or intent to the individuals who collected these signatures,” he said. “Do you want me to keep repeating myself? This is a matter of process and enthusiasm of people getting out and getting signatures. A referendum drive like this has not been done in the city for many years.”

When the council adopted it, over the objection of a multitude of city groups, the coalition of pastors collected more than 50,000 signatures to reverse it.

City Secretary Anna Russell, who has served Houston for more than four decades, explained in a deposition she stopped counting signatures at about 19,000 because the minimum number of valid signatures had been surpassed. She explained she understood the city charter “provides that the city secretary determine the number of qualified voters who sign the petition.”

In her deposition testimony, she was asked: “And based on that understanding, you did that; and the result of your work was that 17,846 signatures had been validated. And that was more than the minimum number necessary, correct?”

“That’s correct,” she replied.

Her original report on the signatures said, “As of July 27, 2014, the number of qualified city of Houston voters who signed the petition had been verified with a margin of error.”

But city attorney David Feldman then simply added a statement to her report that disqualified most of the signatures.

Russell said in her 42 years of service as city secretary for the city of Houston she has never had a city attorney interfere with her validating and reporting duties.

Lawyers for Parker also asked Welch, who recently has been called to help in a similar dispute in Plano, Texas, why a “signature line” was included on those petitions.

“I was born at night, but I wasn’t born last night,” he said. “We decided not to give a city any excuse to be hostile to the voters and invalidate their signatures.

In Plano, we put a signature line there anyway, even though the Plano city charter doesn’t require it, so that we wouldn’t have another protracted legal fight as we now have in Houston.”

The plaintiff in the lawsuit, Jared Woodfill, released a statement saying: “Since last summer, we have been fighting to allow the people to vote on Mayor Parker’s liberal agenda for Houston and our state. The time has finally arrived when the mayor will be put on trial for unlawfully overturning the will of the people, for obstructing the proper counting of petition signatures and disenfranchising over 50,000 voters, for engaging in subversion of the rule of law, for attempting to take away our Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial, and for using the power of government to trample on the First Amendment religious freedoms enjoyed by pastors.

“The mayor clearly does not believe in the Constitution and the values of freedom it enshrines. Texas will not allow tyranny-by-bureaucrats to replace the peaceful, democratic discourse of the last century,” he said.

In a move that prompted a barrage of criticism nationwide, Parker subpoenaed the sermons of the five pastors, demanding copies of any communications related to her and “gay” issues. She promptly was criticized by commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, America’s top-rated radio host, who described the mayor’s actions as “vile.”

“I think what that mayor in Houston has done may be one of the most vile, filthy, blatant violations of the Constitution that I have seen,” Limbaugh said on his national broadcast. “And I, for the life of me, cannot figure out why law authorities are not pursuing this. I cannot understand it.”

Steve Riggle, one of the pastors targeted by the city’s subpoenas, at the time issued a statement to city council members, calling on them to decide whether they were supporting the mayor in her actions.

“As a citizen of Houston for over 30 years and a community leader, I feel our city has suffered enough national embarrassment over this issue when what we have asked for all along is to simply let the people decide,” he said.

WND broke the story about the city’s subpoenas to the “Houston 5″ pastors for copies of their sermons. The pastors later called for an investigation of city hall’s actions in the dispute.

WND also reported a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights wrote to Parker, urging her to back down from her demand for copies of pastors “speeches.”

“I write to express my concern regarding subpoenas requesting extensive information from pastors who are involved in the Equal Rights Ordinance Referendum,” wrote Commissioner Peter Kirsanow. “These discovery requests threaten to have a chilling effect on religious and political speech that is protected by the First Amendment.”

The mayor’s contact information:

Mayor Annise D. Parker
City of Houston
P.O. Box 1562 Houston, Texas 77251
Phone: (713) 837-0311
Email: mayor@houstontx.gov


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242




The SPLC today filed a judicial ethics complaint against Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore over his public statements urging the governor and Alabama judges to defy federal law and enforce Alabama’s ban on same-sex marriages.

The complaint was filed with the Judicial Inquiry Commission of Alabama, which could recommend that Moore face ethics charges in the Alabama Court of the Judiciary. That court removed Moore from the office of chief justice 12 years ago after he refused to comply with a federal court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building.

“Moore is once again wrapping himself in the Bible and thumbing his nose at the federal courts and federal law,” said SPLC President Richard Cohen. “As a private citizen, Moore is entitled to his views. But as the chief justice of Alabama, he has a responsibility to recognize the supremacy of federal law and to conform his conduct to the canons of judicial ethics.”

Moore vowed in the letter to stand with Gov. Robert Bentley to “stop judicial tyranny” following a federal judge’s ruling in Mobile last week that overturned the ban. The order is on hold until Feb. 9, but Moore’s letter encouraged probate judges to disobey it once it is in effect. The letter, which was written on state Supreme Court letterhead, was sent to the governor Tuesday and released to the media. In an interview with WSFA following the letter’s release, Moore threatened “a confrontation” with the federal courts.

The SPLC complaint describes how Moore has committed numerous ethics violations, noting that he is encouraging lawlessness by attempting to assemble a virtual army of state officials and judges to oppose the federal judiciary and its “tyranny” – the opposite of what is expected from the state’s chief judge.

The SPLC complaint also outlines other violations by Moore, including publicly commenting on a pending case – the federal case that overturned the ban – as well as impending cases: the same-sex marriage cases likely to come before state judges, including Moore, if same-sex marriage is legalized in Alabama.

“We have gone down this road before during the civil rights movement,” Cohen said. “The chief justice is trotting out the same tired – and disproven – states’ rights arguments that were used to disenfranchise African Americans. Even if Moore isn’t a student of history, you would think he would be a student of his own history. The opinion that removed him from the bench in disgrace more than a decade ago clearly explained why he can’t ignore the federal courts.”

That opinion stated that the oath of chief justice commands Moore “to support both the United States and Alabama Constitutions.” It also states that if there is a conflict between the documents, “the Constitution of the United States must prevail.”

The 2003 opinion followed a successful SPLC lawsuit to remove the judge’s Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Jeu 29 Jan - 05:46 (2015)    Sujet du message: DECISION OVERTURNING ALABAMA'S SAME-SEX MARRIAGE BAN A VICTORY FOR FAMILIES, CHILDREN OF SAME-SEX COUPLES Répondre en citant



Paul Hard

A federal judge’s ruling striking down Alabama’s same-sex marriage ban as unconstitutional will provide greater stability to the lives of same-sex couples and their children, but more work remains to eliminate anti-LGBT discrimination in the state, the Southern Poverty Law Center said today.

The judge in Mobile, Alabama, issued the ruling today in a case brought by two women seeking to have their marriage from California recognized. Cari Searcy and Kim McKeand needed the recognition so that both women could be recognized as legal parents of the child they conceived with the help of a sperm donor.

“This historic ruling is a giant step toward full equality for LGBT people in Alabama and does not harm anyone,” said David Dinielli, deputy legal director for the SPLC’s LGBT Rights Project. “It is a victory for Alabama families and the children of same-sex couples whose lives will have more stability and certainty now that they are afforded the same rights and privileges as other married couples.”

Alabama’s Marriage Protection Act, a law banning the recognition of same-sex marriages from other states, and the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment, which elevated the ban into the state’s constitution, prevented the recognition.

The same ban is at the center of an SPLC lawsuit filed in December 2013 on behalf of Paul Hard, an Alabama man who had married in Massachusetts and afterward lost his husband, David Fancher, to an automobile crash.

It prohibited recognition of the marriage, precluding Hard from receiving any proceeds from a wrongful death lawsuit even though Hard was the sole beneficiary in Fancher’s will. The marriage law also resulted in Fancher’s death certificate stating that he was “never married.”

“I am happy that justice has been won for same-sex couples across this state today,” Hard said. “I am especially happy for Cari Searcy and Kim McKeand, the couple at the center of the case that resulted in this great ruling. I understand how painful it can be for the state to tell you that your marriage is inferior in the eyes of the law. I am elated that other couples will no longer feel that pain. There is still a long road ahead for total equality of LGBT people, but this is a moment to celebrate.”

Hard’s suit, which is still pending, also seeks for him to receive his rightful share of proceeds from a wrongful death suit and a corrected death certificate for his deceased husband that lists Hard as the surviving spouse. A judge has yet to rule on motions for summary judgment. The case is in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama.

Hard and Fancher were married in Massachusetts in May 2011 but lived in Alabama. Fancher died the following August after an early morning car crash. When Hard arrived at the hospital in Prattville, an attendant refused to give him any information about Fancher or let Hard see his husband. Hard was told he was not a member of his husband’s “family” and that gay marriages weren’t recognized in Alabama.

After a half hour of inquiries, a hospital orderly finally told Hard, “Well, he’s dead.”

A wrongful death lawsuit was filed against the trucking companies involved in the wreck. Fancher had collided in the dark with a large truck strewn across the northbound lanes of Interstate 65 just north of Montgomery.

In Alabama, proceeds from a wrongful death case must be distributed pursuant to the laws of intestate succession (even though Fancher died with a will naming Hard as the sole beneficiary). Since Alabama refused to recognize lawful same-sex marriages from other states, it meant that Hard could not be deemed the surviving spouse and share in any proceeds that might be awarded.

Despite today’s ruling, the end of the same-sex marriage ban does not mark the end of legal obstacles facing Alabama’s LGBT community.

“More work remains on behalf of LGBT people,” Dinielli said. “They still face discrimination in the Deep South, including formal discrimination enshrined in the law. It is still a felony in Alabama for LGBT people to have sex. Teachers in Alabama are still required to teach that homosexuality is immoral and illegal. And, of course, there is the private discrimination that LGBT people face every day, but the law fails to prevent.”


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Jeu 29 Jan - 06:00 (2015)    Sujet du message: SPLC TO RNC MEMBERS: DON’T PARTICIPATE IN HATE GROUP-SPONSORED TRIP TO ISRAEL Répondre en citant



Media Inquiries

The SPLC has urged the 168 members of the Republican National Committee not to participate in a weeklong, all-expenses-paid trip to Israel sponsored by the American Family Association (AFA) and the American Renewal Project (ARP), an organization financed by the AFA and housed within its office.

According to an invitation sent by RNC Chairman Reince Preibus, the groups invited all RNC members to participate in the trip scheduled for Jan. 31-Feb. 8.

In a letter sent yesterday to RNC offices across the country, SPLC President Richard Cohen reminded RNC members of the AFA’s extremism and its demonizing attacks on minorities.

“Given the AFA’s public statements – including the false contention that gay men were responsible for the Holocaust, an idea undoubtedly offensive to Israelis – political leaders should not lend the prestige of their office to this event or to this organization,” Cohen wrote.

The AFA has been labeled a hate group by the SPLC since 2010 due to its persistent use of falsehoods to demonize the LGBT community.

The letter cites the following examples of the AFA’s defamatory attacks against the LGBT community, Jews and other minorities:

Bryan Fischer, who serves as the AFA’s spokesman and director of issue analysis, has suggested that Jews are second-class citizens that “we are a Christian nation, and not a Jewish or Muslim one.” He has further argued that the First Amendment applies only to Christians.

Fischer has also written: “Homosexuality gave us Adolph Hitler, and homosexuals in the military gave us the Brown Shirts, the Nazi war machine and 6 million dead Jews.” Fischer also promotes the views of those who endorse Uganda’s “kill the gays” bill.

Fischer has also said that African Americans “rut like rabbits” and has argued that women have no place in politics or the military. He has also claimed that Hispanics are “socialists by nature” and come to the U.S. to “plunder” the country.

“Given that the disease of anti-Semitism is flaring throughout the world, we certainly understand your desire to show your commitment to Israel at this time,” Cohen wrote to RNC members. “But accepting funding from an extremist group like the AFA would make a mockery of that commitment and legitimize its extremism.”


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Ven 30 Jan - 05:26 (2015)    Sujet du message: CONCERNED CATHOLICS LAUNCH WORLDWIDE PETITION TO POPE FRANCIS Répondre en citant


Who's behind this petition? God's laws on family in the Bible https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus 18&version=KJV . If peoples wants to please and be bless by the Lord, they have to send these laws to the Pope asking him to submit himself and the Universal church to these laws.

Contact: John Ritchie, TFP Student Action, 717-225-7147 ext 229

SPRING GROVE, Penn., Jan. 29, 2015 /Christian Newswire/ -- Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) and dozens of pro-family groups are gathering signatures on a worldwide petition to Pope Francis, asking him to defend marriage and family at the upcoming Synod in Rome.

In two weeks, 45,115 people have already signed on, including a king, cardinals, bishops, priests, civil leaders, dignitaries, and public figures. Petition sponsors hope to collect and deliver millions of signatures at the Vatican before the Synod starts in October.

Access the petition to Pope Francis here:

"Your Holiness," the petition reads, "in light of the information published on the last Synod, we note with anguish that, for millions of faithful Catholics, the beacon seems to have dimmed in face of the onslaught of lifestyles spread by anti-Christian lobbies."

The petition continues: "In fact, we see widespread confusion arising from the possibility that a breach has opened within the Church that would accept adultery -- by permitting divorced and then civilly remarried Catholics to receive Holy Communion -- and would virtually accept even homosexual unions when such practices are categorically condemned as being contrary to Divine and natural law."

"... a word from Your Holiness is the only way to clarify the growing confusion amongst the faithful. It would prevent the very teaching of Jesus Christ from being watered down and would dispel the darkness looming over our children's future should that beacon no longer light their way," the message to Pope Francis states.

"Holy Father, we implore You to say this word. We do so with a heart devoted to all that You are and represent. We do so with the certainty that Your word will never disassociate pastoral practice from the teaching bequeathed by Jesus Christ and his vicars -- as this would only add to the confusion."

Access the petition to Pope Francis here:


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Lun 2 Fév - 00:55 (2015)    Sujet du message: FRANCIS CALLS FOR FURTHER STREAMLINING OF ANNULMENT PROCESS Répondre en citant


Commemorates 10th Anniversary of "Dignitas Connubii"

Rome, January 26, 2015 (Zenit.org) Staff Reporter 

The Instruction "Dignitas Connubii" can help ministers of the court to streamline annulment proceedings that are "often perceived by married couples as long and tiresome". 

These were the sentiments expressed by Pope Francis in an audience with members of an international conference commemorating the 10thanniversary of the Instruction's release. The conference was organized by the faculty of canon law of the Pontifical Gregorian University of Rome.

Released in 2005, "Dignitas Connubii" (The Dignity of Marriage) was a set of norms compiled by the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts to serve as a practical guide to help make the canonical processes of marriage nullity more efficient.

The Pope commented on the document's importance for local tribunals, while noting that "experience teaches us that he who knows the path to follow travels more rapidly."

"The knowledge of and familiarity with this Instruction may in the future also help ministers of the courts to streamline proceedings, often perceived by married couples as long and tiresome," the Pope said. "The resources that this Instruction makes available for rapid proceedings, free of any formalism, have not yet been fully explored; similarly, the possibility of future legislation intended for the same purpose cannot be excluded."

Concluding his address, Pope Francis also highlighted the contribution of the defender of the bond in cases of marriage annulment. The defender's presence and fulfillment of his task, he said, "does not condition the judge, but rather allows and promotes the impartiality of his judgment by setting before him the arguments for and against annulment."

(January 26, 2015) © Innovative Media Inc.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Ven 6 Fév - 03:57 (2015)    Sujet du message: PEDOPHILIA IS A CORNERSTONE OF ISLAM Répondre en citant


...not just in islam. It's a common practice for all the black nobility. Now, they push this sin agenda everywhere. It's also part of the CIA mind control techniques to destroy the spirit of so many kids and many of them come to some level of demon possession. Demons love little children and love to destroy them by any means!

Dave Gibson 02/05/2015News, Opinion, Politics

Child molestation is not only widespread throughout the Muslim world, but is completely accepted as a standard practice by Muslim men. In fact, in 2012, Pentagon lawyers, at the request of the Obama administration drafted an Army manual which forbade any criticism of child molestation by troops serving in Muslim countries.

The 75-page handbook stated troops should avoid “making derogatory comments about the Taliban, advocating women’s rights, any criticism of pedophilia, directing any criticism towards Afghans, mentioning homosexuality and homosexual conduct” or “anything related to Islam,” Judicial Watch reported.

Of course, when speaking on the topic of pedophilia in Islamic culture, one cannot ignore the original ‘chomo’ (prison slang for child molester)…the prophet himself, Muhammad.

Muhammad married his bride, Aisha at age six, but reportedly waited until she was 9-years-old to deflower the youngster.

In 2011, Muslim cleric Dr. Salih bin Fawzan tried to rationalize Muhammad’s criminal behavior in the following (rather laughable text):

The story of the prophet’s marriage to Aisha reveals to us aspects like the prophet’s conduct with Aisha, and more importantly the aspect regarding the relationship between the husband and wife, to show how one should treat his wife, just as the prophet did with Aisha.

We know that Asia’s mother went to take her down from the swing that she was playing on to fix her hair and prepare her for the prophet so he could enter her [have sex with her]—and she did that all on the same day.

It gets even more sickening…

So you see, she was playing with her fellow playmates even though her day of consummation was that very same day—and all that they did was to fix her up for the prophet so he could have sex with her.

Now what do we see when the prophet married Aisha? Did he go to her and say “Okay that’s it, you’re married, you’re now a grown up, you’re supposed to be mature, you need to do this and that; you need to forget about your toys and your little friends; you are now a wife of a man, you have to see to my needs” and that’s it?

No. The prophet allowed her to continue playing with her toy dolls—indeed, the prophet even sometimes gave her such things to play with.

This same Saudi cleric issued a fatwa stating that there should be no minimum requirement age for girls to marry, “even if they are in the cradle,” and simply that “they are capable of being placed beneath and bearing the weight of the men.”

And, in the tradition of the pedophile prophet, several so-called ‘moderate Muslim’ countries have no minimum age for girls to marry, these include: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Yemen.

Several years ago, the minimum age for marriage in Yemen was 15, but that was abolished in 1999. Unofficially, Yemeni clerics agreed that puberty begins at the age of nine, therfore that is when husbands should begin having sex with their child brides, according to a Human Rights Watch report.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Dim 8 Fév - 03:31 (2015)    Sujet du message: OBAMA ORDERS KERRY TO APPOINT OPENLY GAY ENVOY TO SPREAD LGBT 'GOSPEL WORLDWIDE' Répondre en citant


NTEB News Desk | February 7, 2015

20 juin 2014

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UmF4km6sNY

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=30620#comments The United States will appoint an openly gay official as a special envoy to promote the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people overseas, the US State Department said Friday

“Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.” Luke 17:28,29 (KJV)

Having conquered America for the LGBT Movement, Obama and company now set their sights globally. US President Barack Obama has instructed Secretary of State John Kerry to appoint an openly-gay ambassador to take the LGBT “gospel” around the world.

Obama’s goal of turning America into Babylon seems to be well within reach at this point.

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said US Secretary of State John Kerry would “soon” make the appointment.  “It will be an openly gay foreign service officer. We don’t have a finalized name yet. But we will announce soon,” Harf said.

REMEMBER THIS?: “The White House on Friday issued a proclamation by President Barack Obama calling on people to celebrate the “great diversity of the American people” declaring June as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.”

Harf said the appointment reflected Kerry’s “commitment and the administration’s commitment to advancing the human rights of LGBT persons globally.”

President Barack Obama’s administration has repeatedly pressed foreign governments on the human rights of gays and lesbians, systematically drawing attention to rights abuses or repression in several African countries. source


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Mer 11 Fév - 05:42 (2015)    Sujet du message: CHRISTIAN BAKERY MUST PAY DAMAGES TO GAY COUPLE Répondre en citant


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MstelPo19aw

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 31 242

MessagePosté le: Dim 15 Fév - 07:39 (2015)    Sujet du message: SEX OFFENDERS INCLUDING PAEDOPHILES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT, THERESA MAY TOLD Répondre en citant


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpvorQR1jts

Rules which bar sex offenders from working with children are ‘unfair’ and even convicted paedophiles should have the right to adopt, a leading legal academic has said.

Theresa May was urged to allow sex offenders to adopt Photo: AFP

By Rosa Prince, Political Correspondent

6:00AM GMT 15 Dec 2010

Helen Reece, a reader in law at the London School of Economics, called on Theresa May, the Home Secretary, to relax rules which automatically ban sex offenders from caring for children, saying that this could breach their human rights.

In an article in the respected Child and Family Law Quarterly, Miss Reece suggested that reoffending rates were not high among sex criminals, adding: “despite growing public concern over paedophilia, the numbers of child sex murders are very low.”

A review is currently ongoing into the Vetting and Barring Scheme, introduced following the 2002 Soham murders, amid concerns by ministers that it is too heavy handed.

As well as banning certain offenders, the law currently requires adults coming into regular contact with children other than their own to be screened.

Mrs May ordered the review amid concerns about the vetting of ordinary volunteers such as parents who drive children to football practice and church flower arrangers.

Related Articles

In her article, Miss Reece suggested that the review should also introduce an assumption that sex offenders including child abusers posed no threat once they had served their sentence.

She said: "There is no reason why all sex offenders should not be considered as potentially suitable to adopt or foster children, or work with them.

“The Vetting and Barring Scheme and other legislative measures single out sex offenders for unfair special treatment and they destroy the principle that a prisoner pays his or her debt by serving their sentence before re-entering society on equal terms.”

Individuals are placed on the “Barred List” and banned from working with youngsters or vulnerable adults if they are convicted of a sexual or violent offence, or one involving the mistreatment of a child.

Miss Reece criticised the rules for leading all sex offenders to be “tarred with the same brush,” saying that while “careful screening” was “important,” the issuing of a “blanket ban” violated the rights of criminals who wanted to adopt or work with young people.

She highlighted the case of a grandfather with a conviction for having sex with a 15-year-old dating back to when he was 29, who was refused permission to adopt his own grandchildren.

The ban could contravene the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, and may leave the Government open to legal challenge, Miss Reece warned.

Comparing sex offenders to cohabiting couples, she suggested that if blanket bans on the former were allowed, it would make sense to bar those who were not married from adopting because parents who were wed were less likely to separate with harmful consequences for the child.

She also highlighted the case of four nurses who recently won a High Court challenge after being barred for having convictions. One of the nurses was banned over a police caution for leaving her own children alone in their home.

“Rather than presuming that everyone is a potential risk to children and must therefore be vetted, any vetting or barring should be based on very strong evidence that they are a risk,” the academic said.

“This would represent a victory not only for human rights but for protecting the best interests of children.”

Miss Reece has been at the LSE since September 2009, having previously worked at the University of London, University College London and Birkbeck College.

A trained barrister, she has an MSc in logic and scientific method, and was awarded the Socio-Legal Studies Association Book Prize in 2004 for a monograph called “Divorcing Responsibly.

She has also argued that rape victims should no longer be granted anonymity.

A Home Office spokesman said: “It is safe to say that the vetting review will not be considering allowing paedophiles to adopt. It wouldn’t exactly go down well with the public.

“The review is very much focused on seeing whether the rules have gone too far in stopping normal volunteering with children, while continuing to carry out criminal records checks on people in sensitive posts, such as in the NHS.”



Revenir en haut
Contenu Sponsorisé

MessagePosté le: Aujourd’hui à 13:17 (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, 320, 21, 2247, 48, 49  >
Page 21 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