There is an outright onslaught on Christianity in the Western world. The faith on which our civilisation was built is being mocked and regarded with contempt. This is painfully visible in the U.K. which suffers possibly the highest number of incidents of intolerance against Christians in the Western world.
It did not start out like that. The inclusion of ‘religion and belief’ as one of the ‘protected characteristics’ in the 2010 Equality Act should have boded well for Christians. But what emerged instead was a hierarchy of protected characteristics with Christianity at the bottom of the list.
This became apparent in research which Voice for Justice U.K. carried out into the experiences of Christians in British society. Christians were subjects of mockery, discrimination and harassment, kept in place by threats of job loss often supported by anti-discrimination law. Freedom of speech and conscience had been abandoned as Christians found they had to censor themselves, in schools, in their workplace, even within their church. If Christians expressed their views on sex and marriage they could find themselves on the wrong side of anti-discrimination policies.
Nowhere was this more conspicuous than with respect to LGBT ideology. Pushed to wear lanyards and adopt language and logos they disagreed with to make them voice opinions that are not their own, Christians sometimes pre-emptively left employment to avoid compromising their beliefs or being sacked.
Those working in education were most threatened. As schools have the responsibility for propagating this ideology, any hints of resistance meant loss of employment. Kwabana Peat, Olive Jones, Bernard Randall, Ben Dybowski, Keith Waters, Kristie Higgs, Glawdys Leger, Joshua Sutcliffe and many other Christians lost employment for falling foul of LGBT ideology. If pupils questioned this ideology they could be bullied by teachers. Faith schools were no better.
LGBT ideology has become the new global religion and in the U.K. this status is held in place thanks to the Equality Act.
LGBT ideology, by any metric, constitutes a significant belief system. It has clearly outlined dogmas, such as queer theory. It has its own holidays and festivals. It has propaganda, clothing, symbols and colours. It has its own blasphemy laws and it has its own degrees of belonging. LGBT+ dogma appears to be permitted a level of proselytisation not permitted to other beliefs.
How did this come about?
First homosexual behaviour was converted into an identity. Huge symbolic importance was attached to ‘coming out.’ In an early propaganda manual by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, the importance of turning homosexuality not just into an identity but into an ascribed characteristic was clearly outlined:
The mainstream should be told that gays are victims of fate, in the sense that most never had a choice to accept or reject their sexual preference. The message must read: “As far as gays can tell, they were born gay, just as you were born heterosexual or white or black or bright or athletic. Nobody ever tricked or seduced them; they never made a choice, and are not morally blameworthy. This twist of fate could as easily have happened to you!”
Twenty years later Ben Bradshaw explained that homosexuality was equivalent to race sex or disability. Without the belief that sexual orientation was an ascribed characteristic, subsequent discrimination legislation and same sex marriage could never have been achieved.
Initially, equalities legislation ignored sexual orientation. When in 2005 the Labour Party proposed an Equality Bill in its election manifesto, it focused on religion and belief. The party wanted to appeal to Muslim voters and believed that they might feel offended if they were ‘lumped together’ with homosexuals.
When the Sexual Orientation Regulations (SOR) were subsequently introduced there was little time for them to go through the same rigorous legislative processes. Instead they were drafted without opportunities for debate. The impact of sexual orientation on religion and belief was not given proper consideration. This resulted in legislation where, for example, Catholic adoption agencies had to shut down because they wouldn’t cater for same sex parents (even though plenty of other adoption agencies did). It set the pattern which we see holding sway today where there is a clear hierarchy of rights.
Key to this process was the National Secular Society (NSS), which realised it could use sexual orientation legislation to help suppress religion in the public realm. To this end the NSS issued 10 press releases championing the Sexual Orientation Regulations. Even Stonewall issued only three. The British Humanist Association similarly pushed for more gay rights while arguing against protections for religion and belief.
It did not end here. Kirk and Madsen in their propaganda manual discussed ways of undermining Christianity:
Use talk to muddy the moral waters, that is, to undercut the rationalisations that ‘justify’ religious bigotry and to jam some of its psychic rewards… This entails publicizing support by moderate churches and raising serious theological objections to conservative biblical teachings.
Conservative churches, defined by the authors as “homohating”, are portrayed as “antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology.”
The strategy proposed by Kirk and Madsen appears to have set the tone. For example, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission was so thoroughly infiltrated with anti-Christian sentiment that it even described Christian values as being like an “infection” that could harm children. Still today we are seeing due legal process threatened with virulently anti-Christian views.
This hostility towards Christianity is particularly problematic when, as we see in the Equality Act, legal processes are triggered not by objective actions but rather by what goes on in someone’s head. For example, harassment is defined as “unwanted conduct” which may have the effect of creating an “offensive environment” for the individuals. How the recipient ‘perceives’ this unwanted conduct is more important than the intention. Where Christians are perceived as “haters”, and workplaces are full of DEI initiatives telling us LGBT people are discriminated against, this can leave the door open to vexatious claims.
In fact, as research conducted by Voice for Justice U.K. showed, Christians frequently experience discrimination and a hostile, intimidating and offensive environment. But the employers who are supposed to protect them against this are often the perpetrators. And their weapon is the Equality Act.
Voice for Justice U.K. has recently published a report exploring the state of Christianity in British society today. It is also running a Commission of Inquiry into Discrimination Against Christians. For further information or if you think you would like to contribute to the Commission of Inquiry, see here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Big respect to the author for speaking up. I’ll bet money that the perv had done it before, probably to his own son, and has most likely done it after the incident described above. He was a paedophile and don’t they say paedos cannot be rehabilitated? It’s not just a passing fancy, get it out of your system and then all deviant impulses disappear. You’re either programmed that way or you aren’t. But back in those days many things went on behind closed doors that were not talked about out in the open, this type of incident being just one example.
Toby, Cooper’s criticism of Raymond Baxter tells us less about Baxter than it does about your would-be molester. I recall Baxter’s authoritative voice introducing ‘Tomorrow’s World’ in the 60s. Added to which he (Baxter) was a decorated Spitfire pilot during the WW2. To be thought a “complete c***” by Cooper was something of a badge of honour.
The BPC.
I’ve asked this question since 2012 and never received an adequate reply.
What is the evidence (excluding allegations) that Jimmy savile committed the crimes he’s accused of?
Yes I’ll get lots of down ticks but, almost certainly, no reply to the actual question.
Maybe they buried all their ( whoever they were/are) dirty washing with Savile
No evidence then?
Savile suffered from mass hysteria as you know.
I see what you did there.
Thanks for the msg BTW..
No evidence then?
Lots of witness statements, plus he was well known by people who knew him and knew of him to be a pervert. It is hard to bring a dead person to trial (I shouldn’t need to say that).
Lots of witness statements that turned out to be false, and “I always knew he was a wrong un (but did nothing)” hearsay allegations by the sort of celebs who on another occasion promoted COVID jabs; perhaps we should believe them about that too. There was a very lengthy and public trawling operation for evidence, with financial incentives from his estate and, for those who went public, from newspaper stories, with no downside for false testimony. The late lawyer Susanne Nundy (the “Anna Raccoon” blogger), who had been a resident at the Duncroft school for girls where the allegations started, took a strong interest in the case and her conclusion was that there was no evidence that was made public that he’d done what he was accused of.
Well I’m confident that either way, had he been alive today, he’d be allowed to keep his bank account.
And remarkably, although the allegations ran into the hundreds, not a single documented police complaint made at the time,
I was sexually abused, by a teacher at a Catholic school, I never complained to the police. So I understand why there was “not a single documented police complaint made at the time”, and you don’t. It was a very different time.
No evidence then?
The evidence is documented in “‘Giving Victims a Voice’ A joint MPS and NSPCC report into allegations of sexual abuse made against Jimmy Savile under Operation Yewtree”
https://library.nspcc.org.uk/HeritageScripts/Hapi.dll/filetransfer/2013GivingVictimsAVoiceSexualAllegationsMadeAgainstJimmySavile.pdf?filename=CC18C70DB7C8C3D49403BB94EB176F95207E5F66235DCA89651F5ED2BA5DA9311A3547010EB1745F9098C8189E66B54F16BBCA4419250DDAE584462476E362622BD259A20D1597309210AC995C99F449C7702D4CF7627CBCEC72291068BFEAFDDC8C9625B71658F22EAD1E815FED12FF6D0DEB5CDBB40AEA4EF5D058E57168353BEB2DA3730B57DF729865CC3271FEE73BB1D434AB645BB5&DataSetName=LIVEDATA
If you think more than 400 people, who don’t know each, making the same type of detailed serious allegations isn’t “evidence” because they could all be lying, then you need to explain why you don’t believe any of them and explain what you would regard as “evidence” for any sexual crimes.
“…more than 400 people, who don’t know each other,”!
I would regard correspondence, video, audio, photographic, forensic evidence, confession, police complaints at the time as evidence.
There is nothing for Jimmy saville.
Toby, well done for putting this on the recors.
What I have found amazing is how meny in the MSM and politics behave like that but are never reported. Why do they congregate there.
In all my year sin business at senior managerial level I only once ever had a similar situation. It eas a 3 something woman trying it on with a 20 year old woman whose mother called in to complain.
Wow, the BBC sure seems to be a really big magnet for creeps and nonces! You may recall one Jimmy Saville, for example.
I wonder if the reason his own son didn’t want to go on holiday to Skye was about a great deal more than boredom?
A very evocative account of the attitudes of the time. I was 14 in 1966, so a bit older, and fortunately do not recall a similar incident but I do remember the lack of questioning of motive, as well as the automatic deference to authority. A lot of people had the capacity to keep secrets, good and bad.
Fascinating story and glad you managed to avoid full-on sexual abuse by the sounds of it. I imagine many people can recount experiences of inappropriate behaviour if not full-on sexual abuse during that era. It does seem prominent people who one might describe as “larger than life” are prone to getting carried away (to use a polite term for such perverts) and taking advantage of vulnerable or impressionable youngsters. I’m not making excuses, just observations and I take the point make by a fellow commentator that evidence of Jimmy Saville’s abuses is thin on the ground. I wonder if anything has changed nowadays. It maybe that would-be abusers are more aware that they may get exposed if not brought to justice.
I also had this instinct to stay silent when similar things happened to me as a 16-17 year old – being driven back from a babysitting assignment or given a lift back to a campsite. I struggled and ran too, suffering little more than ruffled feathers – though it does, as you note, stick in the memory.
It is worth pondering this instinct to stay shtum. I suspect it is an evolutionary adaptation – better survival rates for those who did not tell tales on powerful people. When Trump famously observed that ‘it was amazing what you got away with once you were perceived as rich and powerful,’ I felt he was expressing honest surprise at his happy discovery as much as simply boasting. Better appreciation of this mechanism should help us stamp out the unacceptable exploitation of the young and powerless.
How many avuncular figures turned out to have WHT (wandering Hand Trouble) after drinking? Many women remember being groped by such men when they were young. It was such a surprise/shock (the switch from avuncular to groper) that you didn’t know what to do apart from try to distance yourself from them and keep your distance thereafter.
Groping is a strange thing – being groped so unpleasant, what do the gropers think they are doing apart from hurting their victim? It surely is a power thing.