Monthly Archives: May 2021

Speaking on the show FlashPoint, which is part of Kenneth Copelands ministry, actress Sam Sorbo (a Christian Nationalist and wife of Hercules actor Kevin Sorbo) claimed that atheists were just making it all up.

Atheists do believe in God, she insisted, because they think they are God. Checkmate! And somehow, this is evidence of Christian persecution.

The greatest trick the Devil ever played was to convince the world that he didnt exist, right?

The greatest trick that the atheists ever played was to convince us that they dont believe in God. They do! They believe in God. They believe they are God. And guess what? Theyre a jealous God. Thats why you cant go to church.

I cant tell if Im more annoyed by the lie or the non sequitur at the end

Even if atheists accept theres no higher power, it doesnt mean were the equivalent of the myth. We dont have super powers. We dont perform miracles. To say thats treating ourselves as God requires redefining that word to the point of uselessness.

By the way if you listen to those remarks in context, around the 29:00 mark of this video, you can hear the other show guests as well as the host nodding in agreement to that last sentence about not being able to go to church because atheist-gods are stopping them.

You cant fix brainwashing that deep. You just have to hope some of the viewers recognize how idiotic her statements are.

(via Christian Nightmares)

Excerpt from:

Sam Sorbo: Atheists Think They're Gods and That's Why You Can't Go to Church - Friendly Atheist - Patheos

After a multi-year battle, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has successfully won its case against a Texas judge who opened each session with prayer.

To make sense of this story, it helps to realize that the one thing a judge should never do is make one side feel like its not getting a fair shake in the courtroom. Both sides should expect a fair hearing and anything that detracts from that is a problem. Obviously.

And yet that was precisely what Montgomery County Justice of the Peace Wayne Mack was doing for years. In 2014, FFRF even wrote him a letter condemning his actions when he opened a court session with a five-minute Bible reading followed by a formal prayer.

We understand that in August you opened one of your court sessions with the Christian prayer. We believe that this is regular practice in your courtroom. A concerned Montgomery County resident who had business before you contacted us to report that after you entered the courtroom you stated, We are going to say a prayer. If any of you are offended by that you can leave into the hallway and your case will not be affected. After that announcement, we understand that you introduced a pastor who read from the bible for more than five minutes. While the pastor was reading, our complainant says, I felt that the Judge was watching for reactions from the courtroom; bowed heads, indifference, etc. I definitely felt that our cases would be affected by our reactions [to the bible reading]. Our complainant further says, Once the Bible reading was over we were then asked to bow our heads to pray. I was very uncomfortable and certainly felt that I was being coerced into following this ritual and that the outcome of my case depended upon my body language.

It was meaningless that Mack said your case will not be affected when all of his other actions indicated otherwise. Mack never responded to that letter, but a month later, promoting a prayer breakfast he was speaking at, he sent an email to supporters saying this:

I will be addressing [FFRFs] demand that we immediately end the practice of court prayer at the Oct 23rd Prayer Breakfast. I am not seeking the potential controversy, as I will have to respond to these groups as well. We are on strong moral and legal ground.

I want to make a statement to show those that feel what we are doing is unacceptable, that not only is it acceptable to our community, but show them that God has a place in all aspects of our lives and public service, during times of tragedy and conflict, when we as a community need to bring peace to the storm. That it is reflected in how we as a community respond and treat each other during these times of tragedy.

In short, Mack is a judge who doesnt understand the First Amendment. He doesnt get to ignore separation of church and state just because the majority of the community shares his faith. Its the sort of thinking that ought to disqualify him as a judge and probably would if we were talking about any religion other than Christianity.

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct was eventually tasked with investigating Mack but they eventually did nothing. They just asked him to fall in line with the practices of other courtrooms without telling him explicitly to stop praying.

By 2015, Mack had changed his ways. Kind of.

After the introduction by the bailiff, Judge Mack enters the courtroom. While everyone remains standing, Judge Mack talks briefly about his chaplaincy program and introduces a religious leader from the program, who wears an official badge issued by Judge Mack.

After Judge Macks introduction, the chaplain leads a prayer, sometimes preceded by a short sermon. The prayers and sermons are directed to those in attendance in the courtroom and everyone present is asked to participate, or show obeisance, by bowing their heads.

During the bailiffs introduction, the chaplain-led prayer, and the courtroom business that follows, the courtroom doors remain magnetically locked. To exit, a person must push a button and reentry can only be granted by someone already inside the courtroom. Those seeking reentry after the prayers would need to draw attention to themselves by knocking on the courtroom doors.

So it wasnt really any better than before. Even with the revision, non-Christians were still made to feel like outcasts in the courtroom.

Thats when FFRF decided to sue Mack on behalf of several clients who had appeared in front of him. That case was dismissed on a technicality, but FFRF filed another lawsuit correcting that issue; they went after Mack both as an individual and in his official judicial capacity on behalf of the State of Texas.

And now, two years after that lawsuit was filed, theres a resolution. U.S. District Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt ruled that Mack was out of bounds by foisting his religion upon everyone.

The Court is of the view that the defendant [Mack] violates the Establishment Clause when, before a captured audience of litigants and their counsel, he presents himself as theopneustically-inspired, enabling him to advance, through the Chaplaincy Program, Gods larger purpose. Such a magnanimous goal flies in the face of historical tradition, and makes a mockery of both, religion and law. Accordingly, the plaintiffs are entitled to a summary judgment. Therefore, the Court declares that the defendants practice of opening regular court proceedings with religious prayers is unconstitutional Should the defendant violate this Courts declaratory decree, an injunction will issue.

In plain English, that means Mack must stop turning his courtroom into a church. And if he refuses to do so, the consequences will be much more severe.

FFRF celebrated the decision:

In a time where the wall of separation between state and church is continually chipped away, this decision is welcomed for its straightforward and accurate interpretation of the Establishment Clause, noting the prayer practice flies in the face of our traditions, comments FFRF Legal Director Rebecca Markert.

As always, it shouldnt take a lawsuit for a judge to follow the damn law. But if thats what it takes, so be it. Mack can be a pastor. He can be a judge. He cannot be both at the same time. He can whine about this ruling all he wants, but nothing about the decision should come as a surprise to him.

(Screenshot via YouTube. Large portions of this article were published earlier)

Continued here:

Atheists Win Case Against Texas Judge and His Coercive Christian Prayers - Friendly Atheist - Patheos

As the hammer blows rain down on the freedom to conduct business in Hong Kong, the people wielding the hammer busy themselves with assurances that there is nothing to worry about.

To do so involves some exquisite contortions, a choice example was offered up by Carrie Lam, the Chief Executive in Name Only (CENO) who went into battle with logic to assert that the freezing of tycoon Jimmy Lais assets on grounds of national security would give business a boost.

She said, the move would not undermine Hong Kongs status, but rather reinforce it, as no one can make use of the citys financial system to carry out political missions or acts that endanger national security.

In the CENOs exquisite double speak it is asserted that a law giving widespread and unspecified powers to freeze assets and allow the police to invade premises without a warrant, will lead to rejoicing among other business people who will believe that a more secure environment has been secured.

If the principle of rule of law has any meaning, it surely is that its application is conducted with equality and without prejudice. It is precisely because companies have long feared that this principle does not operate on the Mainland that they preferred to conduct business in Hong Kong where the rule of law used to be sacrosanct.

The apologists for the new order seem to believe that selective application of the law is justified as long as it is applied to people and companies who are identified as being dissidents. This is the equivalent of saying that a building only needs partial foundations because it will remain upright, possibly a bit shaky, but strong enough to withstand most pressure.

The rule of law is much like a building in as much as it can survive fractures but the fractures have a habit of multiplying at which point the foundations crumble. Anyone who seriously believes that freezing Jimmy Lais assets is a one off event will also be expecting the Pope to declare that he is a closet atheist.

The reality is sufficiently apparent to obviate the need to speculate over whether this process of undermining the foundations of commerce by selective application of law is already well underway.

A chain of stores owned by a dissident businessman suddenly found itself engulfed by law enforcers allegedly searching for mislabelled goods and names of customers were taken, presumably to discourage patronage. Another store daring to display symbols of the democracy movement was evicted from shopping malls and investigated by the police.

These are relatively small scale examples but make it clear that the conduct of business in the New Improved Hong Kong is now very much the subject of politics.

Anyone doubting this assertion should address their concerns to HSBC which, like other major companies, was forced to publicly endorse the National Security Law. Companies no longer have the option of being politically neutral, their active alignment with whatever the state proposes is now a requirement.

And then there is the more recent case of the US-based State Street, which is both the sole manager of the Tracker Fund of Hong Kong and, via an associate company, a fund trustee. Its role in these matters is now under investigation following a very short lived decision by its American parent to review investments in Hong Kong companies which might breach US sanctions on companies and individuals named by Washington.

State Street is caught between its responsibilities under US law and a newly politicised Hong Kong Monetary Authority which is considering ending State Streets role as fund manager for the Tracker Fund. Even though the company quickly backtracked on its decision it is now a marked entity that at best will cling onto its current business and is highly unlikely to gain any other new business from the government.

Unsurprisingly, these developments are fuelling an exodus from Hong Kong of overseas business people. A recent survey from the American Chamber of Commerce said that over 40 per cent of those questioned were either preparing to leave or contemplating leaving. Even if only half this number carry through on these intentions, this would be an unprecedented blow.

Meanwhile Hong Kong is experiencing a sharp downturn in its role as an international arbitration business centre. This is because questions over the rule of law have convinced companies that they would be served better by moving their business over to Singapore.

The apologists might admit that there is some loss of confidence but insist that business as usual remains the order of the day. Every departure is treated as an exemption, every movement of assets out of Hong Kong is declared to be temporary and so on.

The reality is that the SAR will not cease to be an international business centre overnight but the seeds of its destruction are being laid with relentless determination by those, like the CENO, who insist that Hong Kong is immune to reality.

SIGN UP to our mailing list

HKFP Dim Sum is a weekly email summary of our best content sent every Friday. Unsubscribe at any time. We will not share your details with third parties.

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

See the original post:

Its business as unusual in the new Hong Kong and people are voting with their feet - Hong Kong Free Press

This content was published on May 22, 2021 - 07:35May 22, 2021 - 07:35

BEIJING (Reuters) - China will uphold the leadership of the Communist Party in Tibet to further its economic development, and guide Tibetan society in accordance to socialism, the region's top official said on Saturday.

Chinese troops entered Tibet in 1950, and a year later, the Chinese government formally gained control over the region and its devoutly Buddhist Tibetans. The Dalai Lama fled Tibet in 1959 following a failed uprising against Chinese rule.

"First and foremost we must uphold the leadership of the Communist Party of China," said Tibet's Party Secretary Wu Yingjie at a news conference in Beijing.

"Since the peaceful liberation of Tibet in 1951, everyone has discovered that only with party leadership can Tibet continue on this road of prosperous development," Wu said.

International support for the Tibetan community has surged in the past year with renewed support from rights groups and international governments, led by the United States.

In December, Congress passed the Tibet Policy and Support Act, which calls for the right of the Tibetans to select the next Dalai Lama, as well as for the establishment of a consulate in the Tibetan city of Lhasa.

China has strongly condemned the act, saying it is an effort to meddle in the country's internal affairs.

China, which is officially atheist, also maintains it has the right to select the Dalai Lama's successor according to Chinese law.

"Tibet has been a part of China since ancient times. The Chinese nation must always maintain this," Wu said.

Officials did not take questions from Western news outlets at the press conference.

The Dalai Lama and the exiled government, also known as the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), have proposed what they call a "middle way" approach that would allow the exiled Tibetans to return to China on the condition of "genuine autonomy" for Tibet, though not full independence.

China has rebuffed attempts by the CTA to reopen a dialogue since 2010, and Beijing maintains that the Dalai Lama is a separatist.

There are as many as 150,000 Tibetans living in exile.

Penpa Tsering, who was this month elected president of CTA, told Reuters on Friday that they are committed to a peaceful resolution with China, but Beijing's current policies threaten the future of Tibetan culture.

"When it comes to religion we must adapt it to the Chinese context and also make clear that Tibetan Buddhism has always been inherently a part of Chinese culture," Wu said.

"Also, we need to maintain freedom of religious belief and worship and manage religion according to the law and guide society according to socialism."

(Reporting by Cate Cadell and Martin Pollard; Editing by Lincoln Feast.)

View original post here:

China says to uphold leadership of Communist Party in Tibet - swissinfo.ch

In October of 1992, singer Sinad OConnor was the musical guest on an episode of Saturday Night Live. She sang a cover of Bob Marleys War, and at the very end of the performance, unbeknownst to anyone on the show, she held up a picture of Pope John Paul II, said Fight the real enemy, and tore up his image on live television. (In dress rehearsal, she had held up a picture of a refugee child.)

It was her way of protesting the child abuse rampant in the Catholic Church, long before it was on anyones radar. But the outcry against her and NBC was intense, and she was treated like a pariah for a long time afterwards.

Its easy to see now that she was right all along. She understood the horrors inflicted by Catholic priests earlier than most everybody else at least in the U.S. and she used her platform to make a powerful statement about it. As she wrote in 2010, her only regret was that people assumed she was an atheist.

All I regretted was that people assumed I didnt believe in God. Thats not the case at all. Im Catholic by birth and culture and would be the first at the church door if the Vatican offered sincere reconciliation.

Now, in a profile by Amanda Hess of the New York Times, OConnor says that incident actually strengthened her despite the fact that it appeared to be poison for her career:

If you remember two things about her, its that she vaulted to fame with that enduring close-up in the video for her version of Nothing Compares 2 U and then, that she stared down a Saturday Night Live camera, tore up a photo of Pope John Paul II and killed her career.

OConnor doesnt see it that way. In fact, the opposite feels true. Now she has written a memoir, Rememberings, that recasts the story from her perspective. I feel that having a No. 1 record derailed my career, she writes, and my tearing the photo put me back on the right track.

Im not sorry I did it. It was brilliant, she said of her protest against abuse in the Catholic Church. But it was very traumatizing, she added. It was open season on treating me like a crazy bitch.

They treated her with contempt, but in hindsight, she knew damn well what she was talking about, and she used her platform to draw attention to the problem. History will give her the credit she deserves.

By the way, OConnor converted to Islam a couple of years ago and also goes by the name Shuhada Sadaqat. If that gives her a better sense of peace, well, she certainly deserves it.

(Portions of this article were published earlier)

Read the original here:

Sinad O'Connor: Ripping Up the Pope's Picture Put Me Back on the Right Track - Friendly Atheist - Patheos