Al Gore's Inconvenient LIE !

The United Kingdom court ruling, smacking down Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" as shameless political fantasy unfit for schoolchildren, elicited an interesting reaction from the former vice president.

Did he challenge the court's findings?

No.

Did he provide new evidence to bolster his case for any of the specific findings of falsehood and exaggeration by the court?

No.

Did he argue that the court itself was corrupt or incapable of understanding the "science" behind his film?

No.

He didn't do any of those things.

Instead, what Al Gore did was to make scurrilous and unsubstantiated accusations about the concerned parent who brought the case to court, at some personal sacrifice, to protect his child from the mental abuse of being forced to watch "An Inconvenient Truth."

The people who created and distributed this propaganda film throughout the world are among the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world. And here they are questioning the motives of one obscure parent who battled, like David vs. Goliath, the national education establishment in the United Kingdom and won!

Interestingly, Gore himself has publicly said nothing about the court case – nothing! Apparently, he hopes you won't learn about it. He hopes that by not commenting on it, the amazing story of one parent's battle for truth and justice in the United Kingdom will not be heard in the United States. And, he may have something there.

This story had no legs whatsoever – which is why we are writing about it in this space.

A reputable court of law has heard the facts on "An Inconvenient Truth" and found it seriously wanting. That court has determined that the movie is unfit for viewing in public schools in the UK without specific and explicit disclaimers explaining that the assertions offered by Gore are not supported by science. And the reaction in the U.S. is like nothing ever happened. The movie is still being shown in classrooms from coast to coast. It is, besides evolution, the very centrepiece of what passes for science education in American schools today!

This raises a number of important questions:

• Why isn't Al Gore being hounded in all his public appearances to address this court ruling and its implications?

• Why isn't he put on the spot in every venue to answer the specific findings of fact?

• Since Al Gore won't comment nor dispute the court's findings, why aren't his acolytes in Hollywood and elsewhere, all those involved in the film and supporting it, being asked to take up the challenge?

• Why aren't U.S. parents challenging the showing of this film in schools the way the British parent-hero, Stuart Dimmock, did?

• Is there not even one prominent school authority in America who is willing to re-examine his commitment to the educational value of this film in light of the UK court ruling?

Well done Stuart!

Thank you!

Alcohol ''hits young hard''

Doctors are seeing patients in their late teens and early twenties with severe alcohol-related disease.

More than a hundred specialists from around the UK have told the BBC of their concerns in response to a questionnaire.

They said their hospital wards are being filled by a growing number of young people, particularly women.

The warning comes as a new alliance calls for a rise in alcohol taxes, and a bar on advertising before 9pm.

Twenty-four organisations, representing doctors and charities, have joined together to form the Alcohol Health Alliance.

It wants government to make alcohol misuse a higher priority.

Public health minister Dawn Primarolo said the government had already drawn up a plan for concerted action.

Generational shift

The specialists who responded to the BBC believe the social acceptability of heavy drinking is the most important influence on young people.

Their comments reveal a generational shift on hospital wards around the UK.

Whereas before most hospital consultants would have seen patients in their fifties or sixties, they now describe patients in their early twenties with alcohol-related hepatitis, and women whose livers are permanently damaged with the scarring known as cirrhosis by the time they are 30.

If you look at the burden of damage to society, it's hugely greater for alcohol than for drugs.

Dr Jonathan Mitchell, a consultant hepatologist in Plymouth, is one of the specialists who contacted the BBC.

He said many of his patients don't realise the permanent damage to their health caused by regular heavy drinking.

Until it reaches a critical stage most liver disease is virtually without symptoms.

Dr Mitchell said: "I've seen patients who've been admitted with pretty catastrophic bleeding from stomach and oesophagus with no prior warning of a problem of their liver.

"Others may present with jaundice or swelling of the abdomen because there's a lot of fluid in the abdomen.

"All these three things are signs of quite advanced liver disease and can come out of the blue."

Fatty deposits gradually build up on the liver as alcohol interferes with the way it would normally be processed.

What follows is an inflammation within the liver which often leads to low grade hepatitis.

Although the liver has a remarkable capacity to regenerate the damage eventually reaches the stage where the scarring permanently alters the structure of the liver.

For some patients this will lead to an agonising wait on the liver transplant waiting list before they are forty.

He is not alone in his concerns that the normalisation of heavy drinking is putting a generation at risk from a silent killer.

Of the 115 consultants who contacted the BBC 101 said there had been an increase in the number of patients they were seeing for alcohol related disease.

The shift in the age profile of their patients is also very marked, with 77 saying they had treated a patient under the age of 25.

Worrying snapshot

The doctor's responses are a depressing snapshot of the ages and condition of the patients they see:

• 24-year-old woman with advanced cirrhosis who died
  
  
  
• 25-year-old with advanced alcoholic cirrhosis
  
  
  
• 19-year-old female with end stage liver disease
  
  
  
• 21-year-old who died from acute alcohol poisoning

While attention is often focused on the social disorder caused by binge drinking, many doctors say the serious health effects are not given enough attention.

Professor Ian Gilmore, president of the Royal College of Physicians, is one of the leading figures in the new campaign.

He said: "If you look at the burden of damage to society, it's hugely greater for alcohol than for drugs, but the majority of money has always gone on drugs, partly because of the strong link to crime."

The Bible warns us about the problem of alcohol in very clear, black and white terms; "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." (Proverbs 20:1).

Playground Shooter Avoids Punishment

A 73-year-old farmer who admitted he shot a five-year-old boy in the head at a school playground near Enniskillen has been fined £5,000.

.

.

.
.

.

.

.

Darragh Somers recovered from his wounds

Fergus Cleary of Ballydoolagh Road, Garvary admitted maliciously wounding Darragh Somers at a playground near Enniskillen more than two years ago.

After the court hearing, Darragh's family criticised the fine.

He was shot in the back of the head as he played at St Patrick's Primary School, Mullanaskea in April 2005. Darragh was critically injured and spent two months in hospital. Surgeons carried out two major operations to remove the .22 rifle bullet from his head.

Cleary was arrested two months after the shooting.

He had initially denied maliciously wounding the boy, but in a surprise move last month, his defence team requested the case come before a judge in Dungannon. It was at that hearing, with no journalists or members of the Somers family present, that he pleaded guilty.

.

.
Fergus Cleary changed his plea to guilty

Darragh's father Gerard said the fine was inadequate.

"I thought I was coming here today to get some closure, but it has just left me in a daze," he said.

"What we would have liked was for the man to come personally and apologise."

It is beyond belief that someone can "maliciously'' shoot a five year old child in the head and walk away with nothing more than a £5,000 fine. This is utter madness beyond description.

What value does our society place on our children? The legal answer appears to be around the £5,000 mark!

Government Slammed Over UK's "moral collapse"

The Conservative Party is pledging tougher sentences for rapists, as David Cameron slams the Government over society's "moral collapse".

Jail terms for those found guilty of rape have on average fallen to less than seven years, and according to the British Crime Survey, one in every 20 British women has been the victim of rape.

However, at least 75 per cent of these incidents are never reported, and only a tiny proportion of those actually result in a conviction.

Mr Cameron will claim offenders increasingly think they can "get away with it" and will unveil new research suggesting England and Wales have the lowest conviction rate of any European country - at just 5.7 per cent.

He will say: "Studies have shown that as many as one in two young men believe there are some circumstances when it's okay to force a woman to have sex. To my mind, this is an example of moral collapse."

He will tell the Conservative Women's Organisation conference in central London that Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Herbert is to carry out a review of punishments for rape to ensure they are "proportionate to the crime".

Additionally, ways of making it less harrowing for victims to testify in court will also be examined.

Calling for "widespread cultural change", Mr Cameron will also warn that society has become increasingly "sexualised" over the past decade - during which time treating women as sex objects has become viewed as "cool".

He will say: "The average custodial sentence handed to rapists in England and Wales has fallen over the last three years for which there is published data to around 80 months.

"We have a situation where rapists think they can get away with it, while victims fear not being believed and wonder what's the point of pursuing the criminal process."

He will add: "How can any civilised country accept these facts?"

Indeed, how can any civilised country accept these facts? Mr Cameron is right to point to the increasing sexualisation of our society, the general moral collapse of the nation, and the need for "widespread cultural change."

It remains to be seen whether or not this is mere rhetoric. The facts are the facts, and nothing short of a thorough root and branch reform will address this devastating problem.

Society should never tolerate weak, meaningless, short jail terms for rapists. Only the reinstatement of the death penalty would deliver the justice, punishment and deterrence that is so necessary for the continuance of civilized society.

Belfast Calls for a Zero Tolerance Policy to Drugs

Belfast councillors have called for a zero tolerance policy towards drugs in the city. The issue was debated at a special meeting of the council on Monday.

Councillors voted to call on the police and departments of health and education to take stronger action in tackling the rising problem. It follows figures from the Department of Health that show that more than 500 children under the age of 15 have tried to take own life in the last six years.

The department's statistics show that about 23,000 people have been treated in hospital after trying to kill themselves since 2001.

This common sense approach taken by the Belfast City councillors is to be welcomed, and stands in stark contrast to the dangerous, ineffective, immoral and irresponsible suggestions recently put forward by the chief constable of North Wales regarding the same issue.

Also today, a report by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics has sharply criticised the Government's strategy of using publicity campaigns and voluntary labelling schemes, saying they are ineffective.

It calls for an urgent study into the impact of 24-hour licensing on alcohol consumption after the annual number of alcohol-related deaths doubled to over 8,000 in 2005 from just over 4,000 in 1991.

Lord Krebs, who chaired the Nuffield Council committee which produced the report, said: "There is also an urgent need for an analysis of the effect of extended opening hours on levels of alcohol consumption, as well as on anti-social behaviour."

Excessive drinking among young people is a particular cause of concern, the Nuffield Council report says.

The Nuffield Council report also names obesity and smoking, as areas where more needs to be done to improve public health.

Clearly “tolerance” is not the way to effectively deal with these issues. The “if it feels good, then it can’t be wrong” idea may indeed be popular, but let’s not deceive ourselves by believing that it is anything other than an overspill of the deluded mistakes of the 1960’s counter-culture mindset. The reality is that great harm is being done to the citizens of the United Kingdom, especially the youth.

The demonstrable fact is that a zero tolerance approach is the only proper and effective way of dealing with certain issues in the real world. It is most regrettable that many today choose to ignore reality, preferring to regurgitate the harmful mistakes of a failed generation.

Legalise ALL drugs?

Controversial police chief Richard Brunstrom has called for the legalisation and regulation of all drugs in a new report.

Mr Brunstrom, the chief constable of North Wales, described the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 as "not fit for purpose" and "immoral" and urged its repeal. Mr Brunstrom, in a report to North Wales police authority, described the current UK drugs strategy as "unwinnable." He said: "The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 should be repealed and replaced by a new Substance Misuse Act based upon the legalisation and careful regulation of all substances of abuse in one consistent manner." Mr Brunstrom urged his authority to support the stance in its response to the Government's Drugs: Our Community, Your Say consultation paper.

In a 30-page document - Drugs Policy, A Radical Look Ahead - Mr Brunstrom said: "UK drugs policy for the last several decades has been based upon prohibition with a list of banned substances placed into three classes - the ABC system - and draconian criminal penalties for the possession or supply of controlled drugs. "This system has not worked well. Illegal drugs are now in plentiful supply, and have become consistently cheaper in real terms over the years. The number of users has increased dramatically. Drug crime has soared equally dramatically as a direct consequence of the illegality of some drugs and the huge profits from illegal trading have supported a massive rise in organised criminality. Most importantly, the current system illogically excludes both alcohol and tobacco. A new classification system, a 'hierarchy of harm' encompassing all substances of abuse and based upon identified social harms, should, in my opinion, be at the centre of a new substance misuse regime - one based upon evidence, not moralistic dogma."

Surely the consequences of such a system would include the following:
- ALL drugs would be legalised; further reducing any fear of the law (which may actually exist)
- Easier access to drugs?
- Little or no control of harmful substances
- Statistics could be abused eg a claim that drug abuse has reduced when it would actually have increased; immeasurably!

Christian, this is a no-brainer! Stand against such lawlessness!

So ironic that such a suggestion should come from a representative of the law.

Sunday Football

It was reported recently that the ban on Sunday soccer in Northern Ireland looks as though it is about to come to an end... after 60 years.

Currently, Northern Ireland is the only member of UEFA which does not allow soccer - at any level - to be played on a Sunday.

The Irish Football Association has said that the rule contravenes their own anti-sectarian policy, and they will make their latest attempt to overturn the ban at the end of October 2007.

Reaction to the possible lifting of the ban differs widely across the religious divide. For some, the ban is outdated and its removal will place Northern Ireland on a level playing field with other countries and other sports. They also argue that lifting the ban will increase domestic attendances by doing away with the playing or watching on a Saturday dilemma. But those who want the ban maintained argue Sunday should be kept football-free, and they doubt that Sunday games would increase attendances at all.

Howard Wells, the Irish Football Association's chief executive, believes they must move with the times. "We are trying to recognise that there are different communities in Northern Ireland now that have different views and beliefs," he said. "Sunday isn't a holy day for many of them, and we have to reflect the changing population. There are people with a desire to play and it'll be left to freedom of choice. "We're not trying to impose this on the community."

Reverend David McIlveen of the Free Presbyterian Church feels that his flock would be far from happy with any move to lift the ban. "Most people enjoy soccer, but to have it on the Lord's day is a step too far for many people," he said. "The Bible makes it clear that we are to remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy - and there are many involved in soccer who'd hold to that conviction. To have soccer on a Sunday would disenfranchise those who have very deep convictions about playing on Sundays. Why marginalise a section of the community, the Christian section, by playing soccer on a Sunday?"

Linfield are the biggest and most successful club in Northern Ireland, and their chairman Jim Kerr is happy to accept change - but not for his club. "I would not approve of Sunday football, but if the IFA wish to remove the ban then Linfield will not be playing at home on a Sunday," he said. "But if other clubs wish to play each other then I would not object. I like to go to my church on a Sunday and we have a support base here who'd be of the same opinion that Sunday is for worship, a family day for relaxation but not for sport."

Across the city, in West Belfast, they have a wholly different view. Donegal Celtic's manager Paddy Kelly believes lifting the ban could only be good for his club, and the game in general.
"Saturday football doesn't attract the crowds that should be going to see Irish football," he said. "From where we are in West Belfast, Sunday would attract a far bigger crowd - double or even treble what we get at present - and it would certainly benefit Donegal Celtic."

At F2A UK we believe that the Lord's Day should remain just that - The Lord's Day. Sunday has been set aside as a day of worship and the Christian point of view, particularly in Northern Ireland with is rich heritage of Gospel witness and freedom, must be taken into account.

Christian, it is once again time to lift the phone, pen the letter, have a voice - for Christ.

'Gays' Incite Hatred by Mocking Jesus with Last Supper Take

A taxpayer-supported "gay" celebration featuring a poster portraying Jesus Christ and his disciples as "half-naked homosexual sadomasochists," has come under heavy fire from major Christian groups demanding that California lawmakers condemn it.

The poster by organizers of the Folsom Street Fair, sponsored in part by Miller Brewing, features a black homosexual Christ and replaces the bread and wine representing Christ's blood and body with sadomasochistic sex toys.

"A picture's worth a thousand words," said Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues with Concerned Women for America.

Barber said his group wants California's elected officials – including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer – to "publicly condemn this unprovoked attack against Christ and His followers."

The annual street event, which includes displays of nudity and sexual activity – is scheduled for the end of September 2007.

"We further challenge the media to cover this affront to Christianity with the same vigour as recent stories about cartoon depictions of Muhammad and other items offensive to the Muslim community," he said.

Folsom Street Fair promotional poster

Barber said homosexual activists "disingenuously call Christians 'haters' and 'homophobes' for honouring the Bible, but then lash out in this hateful manner toward the very people they accuse."

He pointed out San Francisco taxpayers help foot the bill for the fair by providing police support – to shut down several city blocks and provide security.

A police lieutenant confirmed officers are on the clock during the event, not paid for by the organizers.

The Folsom Street Fair website also lists San Francisco's environment department and its Grants for the Arts – which comes out of the hotel tax fund – as sponsors.

"The most unimaginable and vile acts of debauchery are commonplace during the fair," Barber said.

"Senator Larry Craig was arrested and driven out of the Senate for allegedly soliciting public 'gay' sex, yet during this event the city of San Francisco suspends the law and allows 'gay' men and women to parade the streets fully nude, many having sex – even group orgies – in broad daylight, while taxpayer-funded police officers look on and do absolutely nothing."

Barber encouraged mainstream media to cover the event with cameras in hand.

"There's an unbelievable news story here," he said. "The Folsom Street Fair is reminiscent of biblical Sodom and Gomorrah, and the media should document exactly what the city of San Francisco is allowing to occur – in public – in the name of 'tolerance.'"

The Ten Big Myths of Pro-'Gay' Beliefs

Have you absorbed some of these unsupportable ideas? Check and see:

Myth #1: "Homosexuality is no more risky than heterosexuality."

On the contrary, public health studies reveal that homosexual practices are much higher-risk than those of heterosexuals-- and heterosexuals aren’t behaving all that well!

Homosexuals are at much higher risk for many sexually transmitted diseases, including not just HIV, but also syphilis, gonorrhea, human papilloma virus (HPV), hepatitis, chlamydia, and a whole group of infections called “gay bowel syndrome.” The promiscuous and often harmful sex practices of homosexuals are the cause. The legalization of “gay” bars and bathhouses has only accelerated this epidemic. No condom can ever make a practice like anal intercourse “safe,” despite the claims of advocates who say otherwise.

Also much more prevalent among “gays” and “lesbians” is use of alcohol and drugs. Mental health issues are also reported more frequently by homosexuals, including compulsive behaviors. Even though the comparative dangers of homosexuality are well-documented, very little public discussion occurs, so there’s a false impression that the picture can’t be too bad, when the reality is widespread infection and sometimes, early death.

Myth #2: "Hate crimes laws are needed to protect homosexuals against the constant threat of violence by ‘homophobic’ people."

Adding more penalties to laws when the crime involves a homosexual victim is ridiculous. Why? Simply because it sets up a system of inequality. Homosexuals become more “worthy” than other people who are victimized in the same way. A little old lady who is robbed and assaulted would see her attacker punished less than the attacker of a homosexual, for the exact same crime.

There are already laws in this country punishing harassment, assault, murder, and so on. Murder is always horrendous, no matter what thoughts or beliefs are behind it. Aren’t all crimes, especially murder, a product of some level of “hate”? Hate crime laws, by adding a layer of penalties if a crime involves homosexuals, are a back-door way to gain more status for homosexuality, and put an undeserved eye of suspicion on anyone who doesn’t approve of it. The fact is that the vast majority of Brits don’t approve of homosexuality, but also would never harm anyone who is a homosexual, either. There is no convincing evidence for an epidemic of violence against homosexuals.

Myth #3: "It’s been proven that homosexuality is genetic...in fact, about 10% of the population is homosexual."

Uh, no! The reality is that no such evidence exists. It’s true that some groups have officially accepted homosexuality, but the fine print reveals that no studies or verification is ever cited to back this up. It’s more a popular trend and wishful thinking than a proven fact---kind of like believing the earth is flat.

There is actually a lot of evidence that homosexuality cannot be inborn. Many people engage in homosexuality for a time, then leave it behind. Ex-homosexuals have told their stories and more are coming forward all the time. Some people live as heterosexuals for decades and then leave a spouse for a homosexual relationship. Also, certain celebrities (Anne Heche, Sinead O’Connor) have had well-publicized changes in preference. And bisexuality is choice, by definition.

Only when it suits political goals do homosexual groups insist that there are fixed, unchanging “orientations.” At other times, they are big promoters of “fluid” sexuality with no boundaries. If this is so, why can’t the best options be debated without antagonism?

Myth #4: "Same sex marriages do not threaten current British families in any way, so homosexuals should be given the chance to marry, just like everyone else."

If the definition of marriage changes legally, it would change for everyone. Many other forms of marriage like polygamy would also become legal. Group marriage is quietly supported now by “gay rights” groups, and is under serious consideration in Canada.

Because of the differing values of homosexuals, legalizing same sex marriage would substantially change what “marriage” means. As social and legal norms change, there would be many unwanted consequences for families. For instance, all children would be taught, against the laws of nature, that they can marry someone of the same or of the opposite sex when they grow up. Their parents would be unable to object to such immoral, unnatural and dangerous teaching. Experts predict such misinformation will cause developmental insecurity in many children and encourage experimental behaviour, with disastrous outcomes.

And, current homosexuals do have the right to marry, just like anyone else, i.e. they can marry a person of the opposite sex, because that’s what marriage is and has always been. Everyone has this right, equally; to marry one person from the opposite sex!

Myth #5: "Ex-homosexuals are fakes; it’s harmful to try to force someone to change their orientation."

Anyone who takes the time to actually read ex-homosexuals’ life stories would have trouble saying the experiences are not authentic. There are currently hundreds of organizations helping people leave the homosexual lifestyle. Not only are they not phony, they are having an amazing impact because (again), homosexuality is not an inborn condition. That’s why the “gay” lobby is desperate to create false and misleading impressions. It’s ironic that groups claiming to stand for “choice” and “tolerance” act like rigid bigots when discussing ex-homosexuals.

Myth # 6: "Only religions that are tolerant of homosexuality should be allowed to express their opinions in public venues like schools and campuses."

Think about the implications of this intolerant position, which is being adopted all across the United Kingdom by people who claim to be “unbiased” and “inclusive”. This sounds very much like fascism (“homo-fascism”?), yet many young people have embraced this view, which is built on some of the unfactual myths listed here. What are people afraid of? This flies in the face of what British Democracy has always stood for: religious freedom, impartial debate, and free speech. There are many excellent reasons to oppose homosexuality and it’s not just religious people who do so, but those who are willing to genuinely examine all the facts.

There are also many misunderstandings about what Christianity actually teaches. Read on.

Myth #7: "God loves everyone, so homosexuality is fine."

God does not love sin, which is the reason Christ died and rose again--to save us from sin. Homosexual activity is directly the opposite of positive, healthy choices, and scientists remain unconvinced that any humans are born to become homosexual. Plenty of evidence attests to the damage to the body, mind and spirit resulting from homosexual sex.

Myth #8: "The Bible does not oppose homosexuality."

If the Bible’s clear passages against homosexuality can’t be believed, it isn’t believable on anything. Consider: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22) And, “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.” (Romans 1:26-27) And these aren’t the sole passages, but the others are similar and convey the same message: Don’t!

Myth #9: "Real Christian love calls for acceptance of homosexuality."

On the contrary, the authentic Christian is characterized by devotion to truth and love as revealed by Christ, not mushy ideas formed by today’s worldly trends. While Christ is often merciful to those who have sinned, He never excuses sin or calls it less than what it is. John the Baptist’s primary message to the world to prepare for Christ was not a call for tolerance; it was a call to repentance. (Matthew 3:2; Mark 1:4) Christ told the woman caught in adultery, “go, and sin no more.” (John 8:11) Love as exemplified by Christ was always framed with His truth and righteousness. Christ said, “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me” (John 14:21) and “If a man love me, he will keep my words” (John 14:23) Real love starts with love of Christ and all He taught.

The passages, Matthew 7:1 - “Judge not, that ye be not judged”, and Matthew 7:20 - “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them”, taken together, caution us to judge carefully without hypocrisy, not to withhold judgment. In the very same chapter, Christ completes the thought with, “first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.” (Matthew 7:5)

Myth #10: "Jesus never said anything about homosexuality."

And Jesus is never quoted on the subjects of rape or wife beating either. Would that mean that these actions are okay? Christ was God on earth, and thus was and is the Author of all the Old Testament proclamations on sexual morality. The Jews were more than familiar with this, so there was a lot that didn’t need to be re-stated in the New Testament. And Christ specifically described marriage as being from the beginning between one man and one woman. (Matthew 19:4-6; Mark 10:6-9). Christ and the apostles still believed that sexual morality did not include homosexual acts.

Plans for Super Casinos "dead in the water"

The Christian Institute has issued the following update on the super-casino regulations:

Whitehall sources are now saying that plans for super-casinos are "dead in the water". The new Government has had the opportunity to review the plans because the House of Lords voted down the super-casino regulations.

We are delighted with this news. The House of Lords scuppered the super-casino regulations by only three votes. The Christian Institute specifically asked peers to vote down the Regulations. Many peers were contacted by the Institute and asked to attend the debate.
In addition to blocking super-casinos we also hope that the Government reviews plans for the 'large' and 'small' casino licences which both allow for premises far larger than any existing casino.
Gambling is morally wrong and profoundly damaging in its social effects.
Some thought that there was little point in trying to get the House of Lords to block the casino regulations. The Lords' vote created a window of opportunity for the new Government to think again. The news today shows how important this vote was. Even the narrowest of victories can be sufficient. You never know whether the stand you take may in God's providence turn out to be decisive.

Thank you for your support as we seek to take a Christian stand.

Visit and subscribe to the Christian Institute at www.christian.org.uk

Sex Jab - Solution to Problem or Licence to Sin?

A program to vaccinate pre-teenage girls against cervical cancer has moved a significant step closer despite concern that it could be seen as condoning under-age sex.

A committee of experts has recommended that all girls of 12 should have jabs against human papilloma virus (HPV) - the cause of most cervical cancer. While senior doctors warn that hundreds of women will die of cervical cancer because government advisers have delayed a decision to introduce the vaccination program, some ethical and religious groups oppose the scheme and believe girls should be taught to abstain from sex. They say that a vaccination program for 12-year-olds undermines that message.

Colin Hart, the director of the Christian Institute charity, said: "It's basically a sex jab, encouraging the view that girls can be sexually available. It is a disease that you can only get through being sexually promiscuous. The thing we should be doing is trying to stop kids being sexually active."

Many experts and charities disagree with criticism of the jab, pointing to research that suggests a vaccine could prevent more than 700 deaths a year. Cancer specialists have criticised the committee of advisers for taking a year to reach their decision, and said 300,000 girls would face a greater risk of developing cervical cancer as a result. Karol Sikora, professor of Cancer Medicine at Imperial College, London, said: "They have been looking at this for a year. It's too long. "The longer you delay, the more people will die. The issue is coloured by the association of HPV, cervical cancer and sexual activity. The argument that vaccination will encourage promiscuity is spurious."

Minutes from a September meeting of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) HPV sub group said a decision was expected in "early 2007". The Health Department refused to say how long it would take ministers to decide whether to take up its recommendations.

Doctors and health visitors will give jabs to girls in their first year of secondary school and there is expected to be a "catch-up" program for those of 13 to 16. Gardasil and Cervarix have been developed to protect against strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer. Gardasil, which was licensed last year, is being given to some teenagers under private treatment or a handful of GPs prescribing it on the NHS. A DoH spokesman said: "The Government is not dragging its heels. We do not set the timetable on JCVI decisions."

Surely such a health program, targeting girls as young as 10 or 12 will only create more problems; it sends out the message that promiscuity is expected and, even worse, normal!

“Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.” - Ephesians 5:6

'Gay'-Rights Leader Quits Homosexuality

Rising star in movement says God liberated him from lifestyle

He was a rising star in the "gay rights" movement, but Michael Glatze now declares not only has he given up activism – he's no longer a homosexual.

Glatze had become a frequent media source as founding editor of Young Gay America magazine.

Although Glatze cut himself off from the homosexual community about a year and a half ago, he says the column likely will surprise some people.

"This will actually be news to anybody I used to relate to."

The radical change in his life, Glatze recalls, began with inner "promptings" he now attributes to God.

"I hope I can share my story," he said. "I feel strongly God has put me here for a reason. Even in the darkest days of late-night parties, substance abuse and all kinds of things – when I felt like, 'Why am I here, what am I doing?' – there was always a voice there.

"I didn't know what to call it, or if I could trust it, but it said 'hold on.'"

Glatze said he became aware of homosexual feelings at about the age of 14 and publicly declared himself "gay" at age 20. Finally, after a decade in which his leadership role in the homosexual activist world grew – but alongside it, a mysterious inner conflict – he says he finally was "liberated."

In fact, he writes, "'coming out' from under the influence of the homosexual mindset was the most liberating, beautiful and astonishing thing I've ever experienced in my entire life."

Before "coming out" in his column today, Glatze contacted David Kupelian after reading his book, "The Marketing of Evil", which Glatze said "has given me so much help in my process of healing from the profound influences of evil in our current society."

"There is nothing that would give me more pleasure," he wrote to Kupelian, "than to say the Truth about 'homosexuality' and atone for my sins in that regard."
Glatze's transformation calls to mind that of another prominent "gay" magazine publisher who also has renounced her former lifestyle. Lesbian activist Charlene Cothran, longtime publisher of Venus magazine, became a Christian and gave her magazine a new mission "to encourage, educate and assist those who desire to leave a life of homosexuality." She adds: "Our ultimate mission is to win souls for Christ, and to do so by showing love to all God's people."

In his column, Glatze doesn't mince words, calling homosexual sex purely "lust-based," meaning it can never fully satisfy.

"It's a neurotic process rather than a natural, normal one," he writes. "Normal is normal – and has been called normal for a reason."

After becoming editor of Young Gay America magazine at age 22, Glatze received numerous awards and recognition, including the National Role Model Award from the major homosexual-rights organization Equality Forum. Media gravitated toward him, leading to appearances on PBS television and MSNBC and quotes in a cover story in Time magazine called "The Battle Over Gay Teens."

He produced, with the help of PBS affiliates and Equality Forum, the first major documentary film to address homosexual teen suicide, "Jim In Bold," which toured the world and received numerous "best in festival" awards. Young Gay America's photo exhibit, telling the story of young people across North America, toured Europe, Canada and parts of the U.S.

Time, 10th Oct. 2006, quotes Glatze as expert.

In 2004, Glatze moved from San Francisco to Halifax in eastern Canada where his partner, Young Gay America magazine's publisher, had family. The magazine, he said, sought to provide a "virtuous counterpart" to the other newsstand media aimed at homosexual youth.

But Glatze contends "the truth was, YGA was as damaging as anything else out there, just not overtly pornographic, so more 'respected.'"

In 2005, Glatze was featured in a panel with Judy Shepard, mother of slain homosexual Matthew Shepard, at the prestigious JFK Jr. Forum at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

"It was after viewing my words on a videotape of that 'performance,'" he writes, "that I began to seriously doubt what I was doing with my life and influence."

"Knowing no one who I could approach with my questions and my doubts, I turned to God," he says. "I'd developed a growing relationship with God, thanks to a debilitating bout with intestinal cramps caused by the upset stomach-inducing behaviours I'd been engaged in."

Toward the end of his time with Young Gay America, Glatze said, colleagues began to notice he was going through some kind of religious experience.

Just before leaving, not fully realizing what he was doing, he wrote on his office computer his thoughts, ending with the declaration: "Homosexuality is death, and I choose life."

"I was so nervous, it was like I wasn't even writing it myself," he said. Inexplicably, he left the words on the screen for others to see. "People who looked at it were stunned; they thought it was crazy," he said.

But he left his co-workers wondering about where he stood, never having fully explained his decision to step down.

Looking back on his old lifestyle, Glatze says he had a sense that he was doing something wrong, "I just attributed it to, 'that's just the way life is.'"

"If ever I were to question anything, [my colleagues] would say, 'You're such an idealist.'"

Glatze said he thought opponents of homosexual activism were "mean and crazy, and they wanted to hurt me." "I thought they were out to get me," he said. "They made me really, really mad – and scared, I think. I wanted them to go away."

Glatze said he couldn't allow himself to think they were sincere in their beliefs. But, he now has deep respect for a Christian aunt who always disapproved of his lifestyle.

.

1st Corinthians 6 : 9 - 11 ~ "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

The Partial Birth Abortion Procedure

1. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps.
   
2. The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.
   
3. The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head.
   
4. The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole...
   
5. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.