Bradford muslim converts
Christian Persecution

Bradford ex-Muslim Christian converts "have given up on the Church of England"

 

“Muslim family are driven from their home… after they converted to Christianity.” “Neighbours vandalise car and call them ‘blasphemers'”; “windows are constantly smashed”; “family attacked in the street”; “Bradford ex-Muslim family persecuted for their faith”.

This is not Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria or sub-Saharan Africa. It is Bradford, England, and this is the the 21st century.

We read that Nissar Hussain, his wife Kubra and their six children all apparently left Islam and converted to Christianity in 1996. The testimony of their conversion is missing: the Daily Mail isn’t particularly interested in how they discovered that the Qur’an is full of lies, that Mohammed was a false prophet and that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. And if the Mail bothered to find out, they probably wouldn’t dare print it for fear of reprisal. So the journalist’s focus is on the Hussain family as “blasphemers” – apostates from Islam – and then on the apparently self-appointed sharia community in Bradford which is intent on meting out a particularly robust punishment, as demanded by a particularly robust interpretation of an equally robust school of sharia jurisprudence.

For some Muslims, “There shall be no compulsion in (acceptance of) the religion” (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2/256). For others, “Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief – except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith – but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty” (Surah An-Nahl, 16/106).

And so we read of the “dreadful Penalty” being meted out by the jihadi vigilantes of Bradford: harassment, bullying, intimidation, criminal damage and violence. It’s not quite death, but it’s not much a life, either. For some unexplained reason, the police “are reluctant to treat the abuse as a hate crime”. It’s just appalling.

Again, we aren’t told why. On the face of it, it is quite patently a hate crime, unless the Mail is intent on stirring the pot of police prejudice which designates ‘Islamophobia’ a ‘hate crime’, but any attacks on Christians cannot stem from hate because, well, this is England in the 21st century.

Forget that Jesus said, ‘And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake‘ (Lk 21:17), because only adherents of minority faiths are protected against ‘hate’: and the only significant problem in society is ‘hate’ expressed against Mohammed, the Qur’an and Allah, or to adherents and disciples thereof. There might be the occasional skirmish with other members of the pantheon and their followers, but usually no more than the measure of lawless capers committed in the name of Jesus.

But there’s something odd about this story.

Mr Hussain and his family are clearly suffering atrociously at the hands of their Muslim persecutors. They are enduring daily threats, terror and chronic coercion to try and ‘cleanse’ them from the land they have corrupted by their conversion to Christ. They are effectively prisoners in their own homes: “Mr Hussain, 49, has even given up his career as a nurse due to the effect on his health”; “..depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.. unable to work..”

But it’s not the local mosques or imams who are in the firing line:

He also criticised the Anglican Church for failing to provide any meaningful support.

..Although their faith remains strong, Mr and Mrs Hussain no longer attend church. ‘We have given up on the Church of England, they have done nothing for us,’ said Mr Hussain.

It’s easy to bash an abstract edifice, but who was approached for what, and when? What assistance was requested? What guidance was given? What process followed perceived inadequacy? Was the local vicar involved? Was the Bishop of Bradford made aware? Further:

The younger children from both families attended the local Church of England primary school, where a majority of pupils were Muslims of Pakistani heritage, but car sharing trips were soon stopped by the other family.

Mr Hussain said ‘word was spread around the playground’ about them being Christian converts and their youngest daughter was bullied.

The assertion appears to be that the local Church of England school tolerated chronic playground harassment or turned a blind eye to bullying. To read that a Church of England school failed in its duty of care to the extent that a young Asian convert to Christianity “was heartbroken and made to feel like a second class citizen” is, frankly, quite literally incredible. Teachers and headteachers bend over backwards to ensure that Every Child Matters: when it comes to children’s well-being, Church of England schools have rigorous anti-bullying policies, in accordance with statutory requirements on child protection and safeguarding. And they implement them.

If there were serious concerns, were these raised with the school’s child protection coordinator? Were meetings requested with the child’s teacher? Headteacher? Were complaints escalated to the governing body of the school? Or to the Church of England’s education service?

Bradford’s churches and schools are now under new management: the Diocese of West Yorkshire & the Dales. The new Bishop of Bradford is the Rt Rev’d Dr Toby Howarth, and his boss is the Bishop of Leeds, the Rt Rev’d Nick Baines, who had been Bishop of Bradford for the preceding three years.

If it be the case (and it may well be) that no ministry team in Bradford has provided “any meaningful support” to the Hussain family, might we have a few more details? If it be true (and it may well be) that the Church of England has “done nothing for us”, could we please know a few specifics and particulars, so that Bishop Toby and Bishop Nick might learn from the Church’s past errors, shortcomings and pastoral deficiencies? Instead of just trashing the entire institution (though it may well deserve it) in the Daily Mail, might someone who knows something please get in touch and explain why a brave family of Bradford ex-Muslims has been so terrorised and persecuted by gangs of devout Bradford Muslims that they had no choice but to depart the Church of England?

  • Anton

    More info re the role of the CoE would be helpful. More info re the Police is not needed in this case. They are a disgrace.

    • IrishNeanderthal

      The Police: in cases like this, here is the song:

  • Inspector General

    Brave people indeed! But such a radical change in a family’s position needs long and careful thought before it can be achieved. To wit, an escape plan. Of which the prime necessity is to move well away from the evil they were bound to encounter. The Church of England may be many things, but it is not designed to receive raw refugees under actual persecution. One cannot fault the clergy involved in what has happened, and to say that despite not knowing the full particulars is testament enough to exonerate those concerned.

  • Murti Bing

    Somebody is doing something. See here: http://www.safe-haven.org.uk

    But more needs to be done and I agree – the C of E needs to step up! I would have thought the first thing to do would be to put clear distance between the Bible and the Koran, between God and allah, Between Jesus and Mohammed. Lumping all these things together muddies the waters and muddles the minds.

    • Anton

      It’s the other way round – muddled minds lump these things together.

      • Murti Bing

        Quite so.

    • Jon Sorensen

      You forgot:
      http://recoveringfromreligion.org/
      They also do good work

    • Merchantman

      Just look at the Bishop of Rochester’s leaving the C of E. The problem is the leadership of the C of E doesn’t seem to have caught up with the challenges present and future. The Lord Jesus Christ, if they love him, would have them go where others fear to tread.

  • Fasdunkle

    You have to take into account the situation in Bradford. If the Church and the schools are seem as providing succour to those who leave islam it could be extremely dangerous for them. All they can do is to have an inter-faith meeting where people from all faiths and none can gather to agree how wonderful islam is (which seems to be the purpose of inter-faith)

    • northernobserver

      Jesus was not this cowardly. Respect does not mean lack of self respect. Let the people come to Christ and woe to those who would harm them.

  • Albert

    The key thing is the purpose of this abusive behaviour: it is to prevent freedom of religion. Muslims are to be made so frightened of converting to something else that they don’t. This is a fundamental violation of everything this country stands for. Thus the real questions to be asked are not directed at the CofE (which is not exactly set up in this country to respond to this kind of intolerance), but at the police, who have a fundamental duty to protect people of whatever faith and to ensure the freedom of religion.

    May God bless this family.

    • Inspector General

      The police have to weigh up their responsibilities towards multiculturalism and their duty to protect individuals. Now which do you think will win out…

      • Murti Bing

        The police have been emasculated by by the PC lobby and, considering their recent history, fear of getting things wrong – so they go for the easy targets like dead MPs and ancient DJs.

        Much easier on the paperwork, don’t you know.

        • Anton

          That particular investigation is well worth doing. The easy targets that the police waste their time on are street preachers.

    • CliveM

      IF the report is to be believed, the police are reluctant to treat this this as a hate crime. I’m curious because unless I misunderstand if I was to, oh I don’t know, let’s suppose as an outlandish example, I stand on some steps say and quote Churchill on Islam, I would probably be arrested.

      But as a Muslim I can trash someone’s car and abuse and threaten them for their faith and get away with it.

      Am I missing something?

      • Inspector General

        Clive. If muslims are prevented from doing what muslims do, there will be riots. Didn’t you realise that, dear chap?

        • CliveM

          Yes I know. Despite much mouthing of platitudes to the contrary by politicians and police, the threat of violence is a very effective lever in British political discourse.

          • Inspector General

            “I say Watson, this town we’re in in England. It must have a muslim majority population”

            “Do you know, you’re right Holmes. How on earth did you twig that?”

            “Elementary. There are dead people everywhere”

          • CliveM

            Probably headless.

      • Anton

        Yes, the joys of multiculturalism.

      • Albert

        It’s worth remembering also that Christian street preachers get arrested for homophobic hate-crimes in this country, even when they haven’t mentioned homosexuality:

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3099487/Christian-preacher-arrested-held-cell-11-HOURS-lesbian-falsely-accuses-homophobia.html

        Someone who looked at this evidence and concluded that the police are institutionally Christianophobic could clearly make a case.

        • CliveM

          I came to the conclusion that it’s institutional cowardice. Arresting a street preacher is low risk.

          Going into a Muslim community may be a risk to far.

          • Albert

            This is true, but it could still, in the broadest sense be called Christianiophobia – for reasons of contempt, rather than fear, British police have targeted a street preacher for saying something he did not (which shouldn’t be a crime, even if he did), while, for reasons of fear and contempt, leaving a Christian family to suffer terrible abuse in Bradford.

            What happens to police officers that let us down in this way?

          • CliveM

            Promotion probably

          • CliveM

            You make a good point. I wonder how many Muslim preachers publicly condem homosexuality and are charged? Can’t find any on google.

          • Coniston

            It’s not fair to single out the police. The Establishment in this country is, in general, anti-Christian. It is not anti-Muslim because a) It would be ‘Islamophobic’ b) They are far too scared of Muslims.

          • Albert

            I am singling out the police because they are the agency which acts and does not act in this case. They arrest a Christian preacher who has not commented on homosexuality, for homophobia, and they don’t protect a Christian family which experiences violence at the hands of their Muslims neighbours.

            Of course, the Establishment shares the blame for creating such an irrational and anti-egalitarian culture, but in the end, the law does not require the police to arrest Christian preachers who aren’t talking about homosexuality, and it does require the police to protect Christians who are on the receiving end of violence.

      • Dreadnaught

        Yes. Hate crimes can only be hate crimes if they are directed at muslims or Islam. Did you not know that?

        • CliveM

          I do now!

  • Inspector General

    We can’t even give the family sanctuary in Lambeth palace. Welby’s token ‘refugees’ would attack them too, might even kill them..

    • Merchantman

      Are the Lambeth ones of ‘the religion of peace’?

      • Old Nick

        If they come from the refugee camps they are likely to be Muslims, because Syrian Christians are not always made welcome in the camps by the Muslims in them.

        • Merchantman

          The Lambeth outcome will be worth recording.

  • Sarka

    When reading the story in the Mail I too did feel a lack of information about the Church of England’s position, although I’m afraid that the reluctance of the police to act was all too believable. I think the local bishop should certainly investigate the whole case.
    BTW there exists a Pakistani Christian Association – as I know because last year it helped organised a vigil in Downing Street to protest against ISIL. Presumably these people should be consulted about the kind of problem indicated in the Mail piece.

  • Jon Sorensen

    Like usually, the answer is less religion and things get better. This story is about Muslim harassing Christians. Equally you could write about Christians harassing non-Christians. Religions are so divisive.

    • northernobserver

      That my friend is a failure to assess the problem. Your happy atheism rests on Christian cultural and theological values. As they are destroyed so will you be destroyed. So help yourself and help England’s Christians.

      • Jon Sorensen

        A happy atheism does not rests on Christian cultural and theological values, atheism was there before and Christianity is Johnny come late.

        • Little Black Censored

          So you are above it all, a spiritual Lib Dem.

          • Jon Sorensen

            I just wanted to point out unjustified Christian land grab to promote their cause on someone’s expense.

          • magnolia

            You treat history without respect as an academic discipline. Context, decent research, and proportionality are key. You cannot just pluck out examples to jam into a pre-existent prejudice, though atheistic circles do tend to play fast and loose with historical evidence. What happens is one person comes up with some loopy arguments, and then they get repeated, often verbatim by people with no respect for the subject. It is embarrassingly gruesome, and as if they have no idea about primary, secondary or tertiary sources.

          • Jon Sorensen

            You of all people claim that “though atheistic circles do tend to play fast and loose with historical evidence.” You are the one who always runs away when asked for evidence.

        • Old Nick

          You cannot seriously believe that ‘atheism was there before’. Atheism in the sense that you mean it is a product of the so-called Enlightment.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Atheism was discussed in Greece 2500 years ago and even mentioned in the OT. Way before Christianity..

          • Old Nick

            Greek atheism (I take it you are thinking of the Epicurean “quod super nos nihil ad nos” line ?) is a different animal from the “Enlightenment” variety – though no less irrational.

          • Jon Sorensen

            So not believing in god in ancient Greece is different from not believing in god today. Strange view you have.

          • magnolia

            Of course it is. I am stunned that you wish to take people out of their historical contexts to that extent.

          • Jon Sorensen

            So can you explain what “not believing in god” meant in ancient Greece and today. What is the difference?

          • Old Nick

            The core of ancient religion was not belief – you could think pretty much what you liked – but practice, which is precisely why the early Christians were called atheoi. As for what people did think when they thought pretty much what they liked, I am hard put to think of anyone who thought that the divine did not exist, though Epicureans of course thought that the Gods existed and simply did not care about anything except themselves, which is as irresponsible as it is irrational. The fact is that the vast bulk of mankind in known history has considered that there are gods or God (capital letter because nomen proprium) and has tried to do something about it (i.e. practice a religion).

          • Jon Sorensen

            “The core of ancient religion was not belief”
            What a nonsense. So Demeter cult followers’, Heracles and Zeus temple builders’, Dionysos cult followers’ core was “not belief”. Yet another Christian myth…

          • Old Nick

            Perhaps you would like to tell us what text corresponds to a pagan creed. The only clear statement of Greco-Roman pagan convictions put together as a set of propositions which I can think of is Sallustius Neoplatonicus De Diis ac Mundo (you will find an exemplary edition by Arthur Darby Nock) – and that was precisely a neo-pagan formulation composed under the Emperor Julian in opposition to the credal formulations of the Christian church in the fourth century. You will search through Beard North and Price’s Religions of Rome (the book which in the 1990s revolutionised scholarly understanding of Roman religion) for a statement of pagan beliefs. Myths existed, of course – but the whole point of myths (as anyone who has read Apollodorus will confirm) is that the story comes in more than one form. Of course pagans trusted their Gods, but the practice of philosophy was separate from their practice of cult and did not affect it. You do not need to be a Christian to know this, you simply have to have read the first few pages of Book III of Cicero De natura deorum – or tried to teach a college course on Roman religion.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “Perhaps you would like to tell us what text corresponds to a pagan creed.”
            Perhaps you would like to tell why creed is important. You can read from an ancient Egyptian funerary text The Book of the Dead what people believed they must believe and do to get to heaven. You can see how people needed to answer correctly to 12 or 14 questions and how their “heart” is weighed before getting to meet Osiris their God. And it’s hard to argue that Attis followers didn’t believe in their God while getting castrated. Or have you ever hear what words must you say in a ritual to get in to Mithraism?

            First you say “The core of ancient religion was not belief” and then “Of course pagans trusted their Gods”. Sorry I don’t get you.

            “the practice of philosophy was separate from their practice of cult [not religion??] and did not affect it”
            Seriously? Logos was discussed and adopted long before Christianity and smuggled in to Christianity. So what were the famous last words of socrates? Or Plato’s philosophical approach to existense of God? Or the whole Eastern traditions, like Buddhism? Clearly you are wrong here.

            “but the whole point of myths is that the story comes in more than one form.”
            Yes. Just like we have different Gospels.

          • Merchantman

            Greek atheist democracy was a tiny weeny dot in space and time. Never caught on in Gaul or Britain for quite some years. Not irrelevant for sure; but soon snuffed out.
            The eventual fight for Christian democracy was long and hard and could easily be have been lost in 1940.

          • Jon Sorensen

            This was not about democracy. It was about atheism predating Christianity. However Greek philosophy was famous and Christian borrowed ideas from it.

    • Murti Bing

      In Oregon, nine people have just been shot for being Christian. The assassin was an atheist. In the light of this, your comment is rather sickeningly stupid.

      • CliveM

        Ah but don’t you understand, by being Christian they provoked the attack in the first place.

        It can never be the fault of the atheist.

      • Jon Sorensen

        As much as you want to blame atheist on this one it looks like the shooter was a spiritual person according to news reports. But of course Christians don’t want to miss an opportunity to false claim this and manufacture outrage with “your comment is rather sickeningly stupid”. Well done.

        • Murti Bing

          It appears he described himself as ‘Spiritual but not religious’ which to me says ‘self-indulgent and atheist’. I may be wrong – perhaps you could enlighten me. Neither am I trying to ‘manufacture outrage’, I simply find the repeated assertion that atheism equals world peace rather naive to say the least, so I think your congratulations are a little misplaced.

          • Jon Sorensen

            ‘Spiritual but not religious’ which to me says ‘self-indulgent and atheist’.
            Yes because you don’t want to accept the facts and want to see what is not in the text. Just call it what it is nothing else.

            Atheism does not equals world peace rather. I never said that. And if something is “naive” it is your strawman.

          • Murti Bing

            Pot. Kettle. Black.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Maybe you want to expand where I redefined his view or strawmanned.

        • Merchantman

          Like this type lined his classmates up; asked if they were Christian and executed them. InIsis land he might have also asked if they were atheist. This Muslim thing doesn’t end well whoever you are, because seemingly, unless you follow the Koran explicitly all bets are off.

      • Jon Sorensen

        Actually can we do a fact check on “nine people have just been shot for being Christian”? Let’s check eyewitness report:
        http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/gunman_in_oregon_college_shoot.html

        “McGowan told family members that the gunman didn’t specifically target Christians but asked them about faith.”

        “It wasn’t about that he was just trying to pinpoint Christians, no.”

      • DanJ0

        Not that I care whether he was an atheist or not but the news reports I saw described him as having a thing against organised religion, which is not quite the same thing.

      • sarky

        I think religion is irrelevant, the guy was obviously mentally deranged. Lets stop trying to score points out of tragedy.

      • Jon Sorensen

        Can we do a fact check on “nine people have just been shot for being Christian”? Let’s check eyewitness report:

        http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/gunman_in_oregon_college_shoot.html

        “McGowan told family members that the gunman didn’t specifically target Christians but asked them about faith.”

        “It wasn’t about that he was just trying to pinpoint Christians, no.”

        Victim profiles:
        http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/10/04/did-the-oregon-shooter-actually-target-christians-that-doesnt-appear-to-be-the-case/

        Not all of them are Christians.

    • John Thomas

      “Christians harassing non-Christians” – do you have evidence for that, I mean, real evidence?

    • Merchantman

      Like of course. Like in the times when I remember the crime rates being a lot lower when we were a more Christian country. Like when neighbours talked to each other. Like I could go on………

      • Jon Sorensen

        Crime rates and human-to-human violence is all time low in Western world. Steven Pinker’s book is great to read about it. Less religion seems to be good for society.

        • Royinsouthwest

          There are many towns in the valleys of South Wales where within living memory people would leave their front doors unlooked. Nobody does so today when it is a much less Christian place. I doubt if anyone over the age of 60, apart from a few committed lefties, while believe your assertions about crime because they can remember a more peaceful age.

          See the article below:

          Crime in 20th Century Britain
          History Today Volume 38 Issue 5 May 1988
          http://www.historytoday.com/victor-bailey/crime-20th-century-britain

          “The history of crime in the twentieth century is inevitably dominated by the explosion of criminality in the last thirty years. In the first half of the century the level of crime recorded by the police grew at a much more moderate rate, extending a pattern of slow growth since the 1870s. From 1900 to 1914, the crime level remained constant. Recorded crime in- creased by 5 per cent a year between 1915 and 1930; by 7 per cent between 1930 and 1948 (compared with a post-war annual growth rate of 10 per cent and more). The main increases in these early decades occurred in theft and breaking-in offences, reflecting the growing opportunity for larceny in a more affluent society. Drunkenness offences, in contrast, declined steeply, owing to tighter licensing laws and changing leisure habits, while at the other extreme, the number of murders was lower in the inter-war years than in Victorian times. It all suggests that the major economic and political crises of the period – the First and Second World Wars, the General Strike, the mass unemployment of the Depression years – had little impact on criminal activity.”

          • Jon Sorensen

            Thanks for the link, but I can’t see the full article. It’s hard to see much changes in levels of Christianity between 1870 – 1948.

            http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0109/US-crime-rate-at-lowest-point-in-decades.-Why-America-is-safer-now

            In the US crime rates peaked around 1990 when secularity started to gain some traction.
            http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

          • magnolia

            Actually crime rates have fallen where less lead has been ingested. This has been proven to be a major cause of falling rates. Hence it can be correlated to the time when lead free paint and lead free petrol came into being. Take these factors out and you are left with experiments that show that without anyone to see whether you pay a bus fare or not, it is mostly Christians who bother to pay. Makes sense, as, you see, we do not feel we are unseen or unaccountable! Even Voltaire insisted all his servants were Christians on the grounds that they were less likely to cheat him!!

            Scuppered by one of your own there!

          • Jon Sorensen

            So it was lead. Can you point to a study on this or did you made this up?

            “experiments that show that without anyone to see whether you pay a bus fare or not, it is mostly Christians who bother to pay.”
            Can you provide this study. It contradict the Austrian study that showed that Church goers are more likely to steal. It would be interesting to compare.

            I understand that some people need think that Jesus is watching them all the time so they do not commit crimes. I hope those kind of people keep their belief in God.

        • magnolia

          I don’t know where you get your figures but they are nonsense, Eastern Germany and Albania were amongst some of the most miserable places on Earth under communism. North Koreans are hardly sparkling with content, now, are they? What’s the betting no one could get in there to do a survey.! Ummmm….. Oh for some commonsense!! Was this by any chance research done by one of your beloved atheistic centres? These little atheistic coterie bubbles come out with some real rubbish arguments that survive the real world like a frozen slug cast into a furnace..

          Probably if you are looking for places with low crime rates Austria and Malta and till recently Greece would come out near the top. Not good for your argument at all.

          • Jon Sorensen

            You don’t know where data comes from (see above the hint “Steven Pinker”) but you dismiss it as it does not support your own bias. You also dismiss it based on where it was done (hint not in “atheistic centres”) which is a fallacy. When you are asked to back up your claims you run away. Do you even care about the truth.

            I didn’t find East Germany “amongst some of the most miserable places on Earth”. Did you ever go there?

    • James Bolivar DiGriz

      “the answer is less religion and things get better”
      Yes, after the revolution in Russia things were so much better. Noone imprisoned, tortured & killed for their beliefs, no systematic destruction of teh system so that millions starved to death, and so on.

      • Jon Sorensen

        You need to look at data not a single data point. Funny how you did not select Scandinavian countries as your single data point. Is it because of your bias?

        • James Bolivar DiGriz

          Let’s get this clear. You made a blanket statement that less religion leads to things getting better. No ifs, no buts, no ‘in general’, so the only possible meaning is that this applies in all cases.

          An idea that is said to apply in all cases cannot be proved but can be disproved by a single counter argument.

          I provided a counter argument which you clearly accept to be true. Hence you initial argument is shown to be false.

          Rather than being an adult and admitting that you were wrong or that you expressed it wrongly, you now want to try and change it without even admitting that.

          You clearly don’t do responsibility or logical thinking.

          As for the Scandinavian countries, I think that (to pick just one example) all of the many women raped by the Muslims parasites refugees would disagree with you.

          • Jon Sorensen

            The least religious countries are wealthiest, healthiest, safest and people are most happy in those. Data correlation is there. If you claim the opposite, you are arguing against the correlation.

            I find it hard to believe that people actually became atheist in Russia by the order of the leaders, also considering that they suddenly are now Orthodox. But even if this is a case you seem to think that single data point invalidate the data from all countries. Of course you can find a odd data point in large data set.

            What puzzles me is that you still insist that single data point is “a counter argument”.
            What also puzzles me that you think asking a rape victim of general social violence trends is reliable source. This of course fits your biased agenda as you don’t want to ask people who were not raped and are happily living with immigrants.

          • David Gillespie

            “The least religious countries are wealthiest, healthiest, safest and people are most happy in those. Data correlation is there. If you claim the opposite, you are arguing against the correlation.”

            Congratulations! You’ve managed to conflate correlation with causation. They aren’t necessarily the same. The wealthiest and healthiest countries are likely to be the happiest – that’s an easy correlation and causation – less poverty, more happiness. Is their religion or lack thereof anything to do with it?

            You point to Scandinavia, alright. It’s wealthy, and happy. But:

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/04/14/map-these-are-the-worlds-least-religious-countries/

            Have a look. Your causation doesn’t add up. Are the people of Azerbaijan happy? China? 90% atheist – if irreligion was directly CAUSING happiness, surely you’d get the happiest people in China?

            It’s complicated, in short. You seem to be picking and choosing just as much as the others.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Data supports my claim and I claimed “correlation” as you can see from my comment. However if you claim the opposite you are arguing *against* the correlation. Good luck with that one.

            “The wealthiest and healthiest countries are likely to be the happiest – that’s an easy correlation and causation”
            There are actually causality studies [single variable] of all of these. For example begin richer makes you happier, but only up to middle class level. Once you earn a good salary any additional money does not seem to make you happier.

            You claimed
            “You seem to be picking and choosing just as much as the others.”
            I asked you to look at the whole data set = all countries
            You asked me to look at two data points = Azerbaijan and China
            You want to look only the data points you picked that best support you view. This is called “picking and choosing”. Only you are picking and choosing.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            ‘Data correlation is there’
            As is very well known and as David Gillespie has explained to you, correlation and causation are completely different things.

            ‘What puzzles me is that you still insist that single data point is “a counter argument”‘
            Well that only shows your lack of understanding. If you make an absolute statement (e.g. “All swans are white” or “the answer is less religion and things get better”) then to totally disprove your position all someone needs to do is to provide a single contrary example (e.g. a black swan or Soviet Russia).

          • Jon Sorensen

            Correlation points to a causality or at least a link. Good luck arguing arguing against correlation in this case.

            Apologists always try to smuggle “absolute” in the discussion as if that had anything to do what I said. You clearly don’t understand the issue if you claim that single data point in a large data set would invalidate the conclusion.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            Last comment as logic, or even basic comprehension, seems totally beyond you.

            “Correlation points to a causality or at least a link”
            No it doesn’t. You clearly know nothing about statistics. All that a correlation reliably points to is a correlation. Data sets, even quite large ones, can be correlated purely by chance.

            And as we are talking about an absolutely tiny data set here (c. 200 countries in the world) then the likelihood of any correlation being meaningful is quite low.

            More fundamentally, as David Gillespie has explained to you, the correlation you are talking about does not exist.

            “Apologists always try to smuggle “absolute” in the discussion as if that had anything to do what I said”
            Well I only think that ‘absolute’ has anything to do with what you said, because that is what you said.

            You said “the answer is less religion and things get better”, which is an absolute statement. As I said earlier, no ifs, no buts, no ‘in general’,just a blanket statement which you did not attempt to qualify initially or since then.

          • CliveM
          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            Thanks for that. I had heard of of that site but forgotten about it.

            I don’t know if he is a troll or if he really is that ignorant. No matter how much counter evidence is put to him he just does not accept not only that he is wrong but even that there is any possibility that he has expressed himself poorly.

            He made an absolute statement about the link between less religion and things getting better but will not even admit that this is what he did.

          • CliveM

            If I am being charitable I would say its because he’s using a second language.

            However I also wonder if he is who he says he is. I’m not entirely convinced.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            Some of what he writes uses odd word choices which might support the idea of English not being his first language.

            Whatever his native language, his behaviour marks him out as a chump. Not just his refusal to accept any view other than his own but his total refusal to offer any supporting evidence and his needless rudeness.

            Below he says to magnolia “So it was lead. Can you point to a study on this or did you made this up?” and “Can you provide this study. It contradict the Austrian study that showed…”.

            The point about the reduction of lead in the environment leading to less violence is far from proven but well know. At
            https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?complete=0&num=30&gws_rd=ssl#num=30&complete=0&q=reduction+lead+environment+less+violence
            I get over 100,00 results. But he abuses magnolia about this but thinks that writing “the Austrian study” is sufficient to support his contention.

          • CliveM

            Yes I saw that. He is strangely stubborn at times.

            I have noticed that he gets ruder when presented with a counter argument. All he has to do is google the words correlation and causation in a single sentence to get all the understanding he needs.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            “I have noticed that he gets ruder when presented with a counter argument”
            Perhaps indicative of the person who knows they are wrong but is not sufficiently mature to admit it.

            The brightest & most knowledgeable people that I know are, on the contrary, quite happy to say they don’t know about a particular point or an entire area.

            “All he has to do is google the words correlation and causation”
            Ah, but searching for more information is for other (lesser in his eyes?) people.

            “to get all the understanding he needs”
            Perhaps “None so deaf as those that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see” is apposite.

          • Jon Sorensen

            Of course like CliveM pointed out that the size of left feet correlate to size of right feet. But the discussion was about studies. Studies can be controlled to a single or multiple parameters and we can be fairly certain that correlation implies causality. So your “know nothing about statistics” is a red herring.

            It is interesting to see that you think data set of 200 is so tiny that “likelihood of any correlation being meaningful is quite low”, but you offered a *single* data point as a counter argument. Fail.

            It is interesting to see that you think data set of 200 is tiny (the whole world) *and* the number of data points is used to assess the meaningfulness of correlation. This is wrong on several levels. (of course we can go to state level in the US or county level in the some countries; which has been studied). Fail.

            David Gillespie *did not* explained that “the correlation you are talking about does not exist”. He offered *two* data points (which you reject as too low). David just asserted his claim. To debunk my claim you need to find something else that better explains what we see in the data. You and David have not done this.

            “Well I only think that ‘absolute’ has anything to do with what you said, because that is what you said.”
            No I didn’t use ‘absolute’. Check my posts

            “”the answer is less religion and things get better”, which is an absolute statement.”
            No. It is just a statement. Apologists try to muggle in “absolute” to other people’s statements but never into their own previous statements.

          • CliveM

            “we can be fairly certain that correlation implies causality.”

            No you can’t. Sometimes there is correlation and causality, but frequently there isn’t. There is no evidence of causality in your statement that a less religious society is less violent then a religious one. Indeed you have made no attempt to show one.

            So for example it maybe that as western society has grown more affluent, it has become less violent.

            Or as society as a whole has become better educated, it has become less violent.

            These are equally valid interpretation of the trend.

            Of course your argument completely ignores the significant fall in homicide rates between the 13th to 17th Century (100 in 100000 to 10 in 100000). Was this due to a lack of religion? Indeed your identified fall in the latter half of the 20th Century can be seen to be simply part of a trend that has been going on for Centuries.

            Which suggests other factors at play. Interestingly that period also ties in with increasing levels of affluence and education.

            The whole question of violence in society is very complex and the measurable rates of violence from one period to another may not be comparable. For example measuring rates of rape and sexual assault of women is very difficult and has frequently not been taken with an adequate seriousness.

            To be honest for a second, your approach to this topic has been snide and sneering. You don’t seem interested in evidence and you are certainly not willing to provide any. When you come out with “fail” you impress no one and simply embarrass yourself.

            Particularly as it’s usually following an incorrect statement by yourself. A little growing up won’t do you any harm.

          • Jon Sorensen

            CliveM said: “No you can’t [imply that studies can be controlled to a single or multiple parameters and we can be fairly certain that correlation implies causality]”
            Jon said: LOL, the whole science is then fail. C’mon be serious now.

            “So for example it maybe that as western society has grown more affluent, it has become less violent.”
            Good hypothesis. We could also see if these three are linked.

            “your argument completely ignores the significant fall in homicide rates between the 13th to 17th Century (100 in 100000 to 10 in 100000).”
            Interesting. Can you please point to this study. Did it take war deaths in account?

            “your approach to this topic has been snide and sneering.”
            LOL, you just posted a link to tylervigen dot com and you complain…

            “You don’t seem interested in evidence”
            You [or anyone else] haven’t provided any. Link to study or data set. You have just made assertions.

            “When you come out with “fail” you”
            I note that you don’t want to refute my statements but assert that I “simply embarrass” myself. Do worry about me. Just refute my two “fail” statements above.

            “following an incorrect statement by yourself.”
            Again please show what these “incorrect statement” are rather than asserting those. So just analyse those two paragraphs that end with “fail” and show how I’m wrong.

          • CliveM

            “CliveM said: “No you can’t [imply that studies can be controlled to a single or multiple parameters and we can be fairly certain that correlation implies causality]”

            Let’s not lose sight of context here. You made the claim that the decline in rates of violence can be linked to fall in religious belief. You pointed to a correlation. Despite several attempts you have refused to accept correlation does not necessarily equal causation. Do you now accept that?

            My comments in the whole ie the context make it clear that is the context I am addressing.

            “”your argument completely ignores the significant fall in homicide rates between the 13th to 17th Century (100 in 100000 to 10 in 100000).”
            Interesting. Can you please point to this study. Did it take war deaths in account?”

            http://theconversation.com/is-the-world-really-becoming-less-violent-15379

            Homocide would exclude war dead. This also gives a broad overview with regards the difficulty of measuring violence in its broad sense rather then simply measuring homocide.

            “You don’t seem interested in evidence”
            You [or anyone else] haven’t provided any. Link to study or data set. You have just made assertions.

            I gave figures, I didn’t simply say levels had fallen during that period.

            “It is interesting to see that you think data set of 200 is so tiny that “likelihood of any correlation being meaningful is quite low”, but you offered a *single* data point as a counter argument. Fail. ”

            You haven’t addressed his point. Do you disagree with his point? If so why? If not how has he failed?

            Your comment about a single data point, to what are you referring? And don’t you see that actually by making this point you appear to concede that small data sets are unreliable and thereby undermine your argument?

            Or are you saying his argument with the single data point (whichever that may be) is correct?

            Your incorrect statement? your assertion that if you have correlation you are likely to have causation. See below:

            “Correlation points to a causality or at least a link”

          • Jon Sorensen

            “Despite several attempts you have refused to accept correlation does not necessarily equal causation.”
            This is not true. I never claimed correlation equal causation. Don’t build strawmen. See my left/right feet analogy and see my single variable studies comment.

            I agree that religion is not the only cause of violence (some causes might be even more significant). Thanks for the link. While the drop from 13th to 17th Century (100 in 100000 to 10 in 100000) is impressive. I’m not sure what the cause was (might be related to “less religion” or not). Note that currently secular countries in the west have homicide rates of less than 1 in 100000 *and* declining. Religious societies have during the looong history never come close to these figures.
            http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-decline-of-violence/

            “You haven’t addressed his point”
            He thought 200 data points are not enough and he offered a *single* data point (=on point is the history of Russia) for his defence! What can I offer to that extreme bias?

            “don’t you see that actually by making this point you appear to concede that small data sets are unreliable and thereby undermine your argument?”
            No I don’t, because I do understand statistics. 200 data point is large enough to make a correlation if the data supports it, but you can’t determine that by the number

            200. You can have even 10 points not trending and the data could be clear evidence of correlation. From your question I see that you don’t understand this.
            AND if 1, 2 or 5 points don’t support correlation it does not mean data set is “small” or “unreliable” or “that small data sets are unreliable”. I’m sorry but you just don’t understand this. If Aspirin did not help your headache last Sunday morning it does not mean that Aspirin does not help headaches.

            I did say “Correlation points to a causality or at least a link” regarding single variable studies.
            In double-blind cancer medicine research if one or two people die immediately because of cancer it does not mean that the cancer medicine does not work. If the study shows that people taking continuously cancer medicine live on average 10 years longer than control group, researcher are correct to conclude that this correlation points to causality. Most medicine studies work from correlation to causality.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            Clive, I think that you are wasting your time. He is, to be charitable, so blinkered that he cannot even see his own statements contradicting one another even when this is pointed out to him, as you did.

            He has not shown any correlation (i.e. data with a high
            correlation coefficient) merely made an assertion. Even if there is a correlation, a data set of c. 200 is small and it will be a weak correlation. David Gillespie posted this
            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/04/14/map-these-are-the-worlds-least-religious-countries/
            and China would be such a strong outlier that it would damage if not destroy any correlation.

            As for the ‘single data point’, he is talking about the value of single that lies between four & six!

            He made an unqualified statement, “the answer is less religion and things get better”, which can be refuted by one example, which I did with Soviet Russia (which is specifically the ‘single data point’ that he is referring to). David Gillespie mentioned Albania & China and magnolia listed Eastern Germany, Albania & North Koreans. Interestingly not only has he not provided any data he has only given one example, he ‘chastised’ me for not using the “Scandinavian countries as your single data point”.

            One other example of the futility of any discourse with him, I have summarised part of an exchange between him and Old Nick.
            ON: The core of ancient religion was not belief – you could think pretty much what you liked – but practice.
            JS: “The core of ancient religion was not belief” What a nonsense.
            ON: Perhaps you would like to tell us what text corresponds to a pagan creed.
            JS: “Perhaps you would like to tell us what text corresponds to a pagan creed.” Perhaps you would like to tell why creed is important.

          • CliveM

            Yes I’ve come to that conclusion as well. I have decided either his grasp of English is so poor he doesn’t fully understand the import of what he says (not really his fault and I will applaud a brave attempt. After all I speak no second language) or he is being deliberately disingenuous. Either way progress is ‘difficult’.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            “I have decided either his grasp of English is so poor he doesn’t fully understand the import of what he says”

            However if that were the case then I would expect someone honest (especially when multiple people disagree with basically everything he says) to ask for clarification, rather than dogmatically sticking to their guns.

          • CliveM

            Well I did give two options!

        • dannybhoy

          It’s because you keep putting yourself up as an expert on religion and why it’s all rubbish Jon. Yet you keep on talking about it……?
          You do know that if you talked like this in a Muslim nation or on a devout Muslim blog, you’d be the proud owner of a fatwa by now!
          Nothing wrong with not believing or asking questions.
          …as long as you don’t become a bore…

          • Jon Sorensen

            I never claimed to an expert on religion. Where do you get this? But can only experts talk about it?

            I’m always surprised how Christians compare themselves to Muslims to point out that they are better/no-so-bad. As if Muslims are the yardstick.

            I have noticed that asking questions and talking to Muslims on Muslims forums does not get you a fatwa. I’ve only been banned. Fatwa would be such an honer to get 😉

    • dannybhoy

      You’ve asked so many questions on this blog Jon, and obviously learnt nothing.

      • Jon Sorensen

        Asking questions is so dangerous to your mind. It makes you think.

        • dannybhoy

          Well you must have a very noisy brain , because you never seem to hear any of the answers!
          Several people on this blog have responded to your questions patiently and tried to explain what they believe, but you rubbish it all. So I ask you, why do you persist here? If you don’t believe in anything save being kind and tolerant to others, why waste your time here?

          • Jon Sorensen

            I hear the good answers. People just seem to use a lot of fallacies that have not convinced me.

            You seem to like to talk to people who think exactly like you. You even question people who disagree with you to leave. I’m sure that is comforting for your brain. I rather talk to people with different views that to those who I already agree with.

          • Inspector General

            No! Don’t go. By your presence here we see how far a man will denigrate his own Christian culture to achieve some comfort of righteous indignation that only a professional atheist can lay claim to.

          • Inspector General

            “I hear the good answers”

            Do you know, that is brilliant. A gift to educators the world over…

            “Why is my son’s school report so wretched. Is he really that thick?”

            “Not really. He asks questions and we give him the answers. But he only absorbs good answers as he sees them”

          • dannybhoy

            I’m so misunderstood Dad. My teachers don’t understand they’re dealing with a genius…

          • Inspector General

            “and one more thing dad, I’m gay. The teachers said I can sodomise at will if I like. And anyone who objects is a bigot who should be locked up”

          • dannybhoy

            I comment here because I’m a Christian, and funnily enough, most who comment here are Christians. That’s the whole point of it.
            It’s not that we all agree on everything but we do believe in Father, Son and Holy Spirit,and that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life.
            Also, we see ourselves however imperfectly as part of the solution rather than part of the problem, in the world in our generation.
            You never get to know God by insisting on cast iron scientific evidence, because no one can give you that.
            We believe that God has no need to prove Himself, rather the other way around. We have to acknowledge that if indeed there is a God, we should listen to what He says about us.

          • Jon Sorensen

            I know that you see yourselves as part of the solution rather than part of the problem, but maybe you need to ask non-Christians were you are part of the problem. I never insisted on cast iron scientific evidence for God. Any kind of evidence would be fine.

            “We have to acknowledge that if indeed there is a God, we should listen to what He says about us.”
            The problem is which God(s) to believe, and why do you assume we should listen to God(s)?

          • dannybhoy

            We don’t need to ask, Jon.
            You keep on, and on, and on telling us.
            But you don’t have any real answers either, do you?

            “The problem is which God(s) to believe, and why do you assume we should listen to God(s)?”
            We’ve been through all this before with you, and I for one won’t be going through it again.
            11 And whatever town or village you enter, find out who is worthy in it and stay there until you depart. 12 As you enter the house, greet it. 13 And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgement for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town. Matthew 10

          • Jon Sorensen

            It’s always the automatic reaction to go to the Bible….

          • magnolia

            Come on, you are close to a professional atheist. Your posting history makes that abundantly clear Your motive is not debate but winning. When and where have you modified your position on anything as a response to another person who is a Christian?

          • dannybhoy

            Good point magnolia.

          • Jon Sorensen

            “professional atheist” LOL. BTW begin a “professional atheist” does not seem to pay well. Being a church volunteer has better benefits. Albert can verify I change my position on a issue.

            How about you. Why don’t you provide evidence to your claims. Are you afraid to check your own claim and find out you are wrong. You seem to always running away when your claim is challenged.

    • Royinsouthwest

      Did you ever study the French Revolution in history classes at school? Do you remember hearing about the Reign of Terror and if so did you think what a good thing it was? Have you heard of Pol Pot and Chairman Mao?

      • Jon Sorensen

        Funny how you didn’t pick modern day Scandinavia…

        I did study French Revolution in history, but It’s like saying did you study Rwandan genocide and how Christians caused genocide. You need to look at data and not only pick the data points you like.

        But let me guess. You pick the best Christian example and the worst non-Christian example and then claim how much better Christianity is. We know that game…

        • CliveM

          You certainly do

          • Jon Sorensen

            When you are sniping so far you miss a lot.

          • CliveM

            Ahhh, if you can nae take it, dinnae gie it.

            Bit of self awareness would do you good as well.

          • Jon Sorensen

            I have no idea what your “You certainly do” and your latest comment means. Your messages to me need to be very simple.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            He’s right. He is absolutely no good at logical thinking, or consistency, or reading what is written (even in links he has provided), so any messages to him need to be very simple indeed!

    • Royinsouthwest

      Stalin persecuted the Russian Orthodox Church but changed his policy during the Second World War because he realised that the Church was not divisive.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Russian_Orthodox_Church#World_War_II_rapprochement
      “After Nazi Germany’s attack on the Soviet Union in 1941, Joseph Stalin revived the Russian Orthodox Church to intensify patriotic support for the war effort. On September 4, 1943, Metropolitans Sergius (Stragorodsky), Alexius (Simansky) and Nicholas (Yarushevich) were officially received by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. They received a permission to convene a council on September 8, 1943, that elected Sergius Patriarch of Moscow and all Rus’. A new patriarch was elected, theological schools were opened, and thousands of churches began to function. The Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary, which had been closed since 1918, was re-opened.”

      • Jon Sorensen

        If there is only one official permitted religion, it can be uniting. Look at Vatican and Kuwait. If you don’t permit freedom of religious you can find examples to support your argument. Otherwise no.

    • len

      ‘Christians harassing non-Christians’
      Please explain?

      • Jon Sorensen

        Oh c’mon, kicking your own kids from home because of thought crime…
        http://www.addictinginfo.org/2
        https://www.gofundme.com/justf
        http://www.atheistrev.com/2011
        or just google:atheist billboard vandalized

        • len

          I haven`t kicked any of my kids out and all of them certainly think for themselves indeed I encourage them to do so…Christians have done bad acts so have atheists but what exactly is your point?.

          • Jon Sorensen

            I never claimed that you kicked any of my kids out. And not all Muslims harassed these guys. Both religious can inspire people to harass out-group people. Less religion would get rid of that problem.

          • magnolia

            Really? As atheists never harass anyone? You never try to make people feel they are part of an “out-group”?? You cannot be serious. You really,really cannot be serious. If you are we could start a list of famous atheists and how many they have harassed for you, but it would be very long indeed……

          • Jon Sorensen

            I never claimed “atheists never harass anyone”. How about you address my claim.

  • Johnny Rottenborough

    Taking into account the precarious position of Christianity in Bradford, it isn’t at all odd that the C of E has chosen the lesser of two evils and has let the family down. Over ten years ago, ‘Asian youths’ attacked the vicar of St Philip’s and members of his congregation, and attempted to burn down the church. Today, in a Bradford with fewer Christians and more Muslims, the church must walk an even more perilous tightrope. Defending the family would provoke further attacks. Incidentally, the arson attempt occurred during Bradford’s Islam Awareness Week, which, that year, was clearly a resounding success.

    Since then, white flight and the Muslim birth rate have resulted in some Bradford parishes becoming 95 per cent Muslim, an abysmal statistic which no one except a senior C of E clergyman would describe as ‘a fantastic opportunity’.

    Contrast C of E defeatism with the outbreak of common sense among German Christians. The repatriation [Rückführungen] of ‘refugees’, Germany’s welcome culture to give way to a farewell culture [Abschiedskultur], and, for the ‘refugees’ who remain, an insistence on adhering to Christian-derived, Western standards of behaviour.

  • Anton

    Hungary’s PM won’t let it happen there.

    • dannybhoy

      They still teach history in Hungary, but let’s not forget the complacency and pomposity of the European Union’s movers and shakers that made this necessary.

    • Putin’s Russia wouldn’t tolerate it either.

  • John Thomas

    You might have mentioned, Abp., that of course these “gangs of devout Bradford Muslims” belonged to what we are constantly told is the “religion of peace”, and those Muslims who think and behave otherwise are the “minority” who gravely misunderstand the real Islam.

  • Dreadnaught

    Nobody misunderstands Islam, even ISIS, more than the CoE.

  • DanJ0

    Perhaps we ought to arrange a forum coach and give the perps a good kicking when we get there.

    • Dreadnaught

      Wouldn’t be enough room for all the Zimmer frames

  • dannybhoy

    I’d like to hear from the local Anglican bishop or clergy of all denominations with knowledge of this situation before we rush to judgement. Someone must have on the spot understanding.

    In the meantime the AofC could perhaps offer them temporary sanctuary or refuge in his palace – or even a spare cottage?
    On second thoughts no, he couldn’t .. It would upset too many people.

    Especially Muslims for whom conversion to any other faith means death to all involved…

  • len

    The Church of England had a good solid foundation restored by the Reformation and laid out in the the 39 articles’…..Pity it never stuck with them and bowed to the pressures of this present corrupt world system.

    I doubt whether any of the disciples or Jesus Himself would be politically correct enough to join the C of E?

    The C of E has ceased to be’ salt and light’ and is in the process of being trampled under foot by the secularists….

    Muslim Converts and disenchanted Anglicans will still be able to find Holy Spirit filled Churches dotted about the Country and I pray that God will guide them to the right Church.

    • David

      That good solid foundation you refer to, is still being ever more actively built upon within churches that belong to the “Reform” group. We now have our own Bishop of Maidstone.
      Of course their successes are hardly PC so they are totally ignored by the MS media.

  • Old Blowers

    “If it be true (and it may well be) that the Church of England has “done
    nothing for us”, could we please know a few specifics and particulars,
    so that Bishop Toby and Bishop Nick might learn from the Church’s past
    errors, shortcomings and pastoral deficiencies?”
    Does His Grace really believe that if the facts are the CofE school did nothing in stopping harassment from muslim pupils to new christian converts which had no place in a CofE school, this will result in a change of direction in muslim dominated areas such as Bradford, telling muslim pupils in a CofE school their intimidation of another person’s faith is unacceptable. It ain’t happening, is it!

    Thought those poor muslims came here to be free of harassment in their own cesspit ex countries?

    We deny the fact that for most muslims we have become a beacon of easy street with our spineless government and law bodies that are ripe for take over…the claim of the flag flying over buck palace etc no longer seems a hollow fantasy, does it, with jihadi Hijrah coming over the horizon to take over our civilisation….We have learned absolutely nothing from the detailed history of the Mohammed fella and followers and what happened after his Hijrah in 622 ad to Yathrib [now renamed Medina) that led to dominance and death for the unbelievers there.

    I am reminded whenever people tell me about muslims living peacefully among us as friends and that we have got the wrong end of the stick, a story regarding two little 7 year old boys..one christian and one muslim.

    The boys had been friends at school since nursery and each year the christian child invited the muslim child to his birthday party with swimming pool, bouncy castle, games etc. Each year he never received an invite to the muslim boys party so presumed that muslims never celebrated birthdays as he did.

    The non muslim families were surprised to discover that the little muslim child had held a birthday party each year since nursery but non muslims are not allowed into a muslim home for such things as they are forbidden to be offered hospitality. Only muslim children are allowed to attend.

    It appears that Allah allows muslims to come into non believers property as non believers have been given into their hands but the non believer is unclean to enter a muslim property.

    This little muslim boy is free from these actions as he is only a child but the seeds are already being planted to bear their vile fruit in latter years.

    They can NEVER integrate in Britain or see others as friends etc as real hospitality comes from allowing others into your life and showing generosity and respect for others.

    Strangely enough the same passage that speaks of Hijrah into the lands of those that allow Islam to thrive states that if a nation is unfriendly to Islam then they must not go there…It appears there is a non violent solution to our predicament if Islam refuses to change/reform but it involves spine and discipline in the face of a trojan horse in our midst.

    Blofeld

    ps

    The little christian child was my beloved grandson.

    • Merchantman

      Thanks Blowers. These sad testimonies are the proof of the dangers of’ the religion of peace’ and how it operates in practice. We have to stand up and be counted. Saying what is true is not hate; it is a warning.
      I reckon the weak leadership in our country would have charged WSC with hate crimes if they had been around in his time.

  • preacher

    To get back to the point, one would like to hear from the local imams in the Bradford mosques, what action they are taking or intend to take. We hear constantly about their opposition to radicalisation well here is a chance to prove that they mean what they say, perhaps the ‘radicals’ in the Bradford Muslim community, if they are really so committed to the ‘peaceful’ teachings of the Koran will listen to their leaders! If not, they are simply criminals & should be dealt with by the law enforcement agencies.
    Fear is like Cancer – it needs to be caught early & eradicated, before it gets too much of a hold & kills the host body.

    P.S Please don’t let the trolls hijack the main points of the Blog guys.

    Blessings.

    • Jon Sorensen

      ..to hear from the local imams to say what?
      They can say that violence is not permitted according to Quran and nothing will happen
      They can say death is appropriate to apostates according to Quran and nothing will happen
      If you criticize religion religious people cry foul under Hate Speech laws.

    • sarky

      Who’s that trip trapping on my Bridge?

  • Old Blowers

    pps

    It seems that we, as Christians, are prepared and are now actively ignoring the need to publicly stand up for our own, against people who act as our enemies of the faith…We prefer to kowtow to muslims whilst a brother and his family suffer at their hands whilst we wash ours that they are our flesh in the Lord. A strange family it is that loves strangers but ignores the needs of it’s own flesh.

    I actually cannot wait to hear what our family in the Lord have to tell and what may be the response of Bishop Toby and Bishop Nick to these revelations…bet they will not lay the law down to the perpetrators, rather that we must all turn the other cheek at this abuse!!!

    • Merchantman

      The Bishops should go in and challenge the mosques and bring the Police with them. Nothing else will do.

  • The Explorer

    I imagine many in the C of E (certainly among the hierarchy) would be highly embarrassed by the whole concept of conversion. All religions lead to God (whatever or whoever that may be) so what on earth is the point of switching from one to another? Conversion can cause fuss, and that’s the last thing we want from a religion. Christ himself had regrettable elements of enthusiasm about him. That’s the result of dying so young. A few more years in which to acquire diplomacy, and he’d have toned down his views. In fact, there’d have been no need for his crucifixion.

    • Welcome back, Explorer.

      • dannybhoy

        Ditto. Hope all is well?

    • IanCad

      Up and at ’em again I see, Mr Explorer.
      I do wish you the best in your travails.

    • CliveM

      Hope things have improved, welcome back.

  • Our Bishops are more concerned about getting involved in politics and preaching a politically correct all inclusive narrative than getting out and preaching the gospels.
    What did Christian Aid do to help Christians in the Middle East and Pakistan? Zilch!
    They have all forgotten what their mission should be.
    I suspect this is also why church attendance has fallen. I’ve no wish to listen to a politically correct left wing sermon, currently about helping refugees.
    The Church should help its own adherents first, but I’ve heard absolutely nothing from it about the Christians slaughtered by ISIS and those being killed for “blasphoney” in Pakistan; This case of these converts in Bradford just highlights the issue.

    • dannybhoy

      “They have all forgotten what their mission should be….”

      Have they?
      I don’t think so. Take a look at their vision and purpose…

      http://www.christianaid.org.uk/aboutus/who/aims/our_aims.aspx

      As I have said many times, caring for the poor is only a part of the Gospel, and in fact the Apostolic letters put the emphasis on doing good and caring for the poor, the widows and orphans in the Church first..

      • Precisely
        They’ve done nothing for members of the Christian Church in those countries that I mentioned, unless caring for the poor, the widows and the orphans doesn’t including help to protect themselves in time of danger.

  • David

    This brave Christian family clearly need to relocate away from Bradford, to a town that is not dominated by Islam, and live in a neighbourhood with a more balanced racial composition. There is no future for them amongst the haters.

    • IanCad

      David,
      I’m a little surprised at your comment. Sure, it would seem that moving would be the easy way out, and, the most peaceful.
      However, our liberties were not earned through peaceful means. Neither will they be maintained through apathy and compromise.
      It must be made abundantly clear to our immigrant communities that, although we are polite and tolerant, we can be utterly ruthless when roused.
      They would be wise to remember that fact.

      • dannybhoy

        A society is only as strong as it’s weakest link, and in terms of enforcing (and I mean enforcing) our traditional values and laws, the weakest link is a secular government of any hue. It doesn’t really believe in religion but it is respectful of those who threaten violence in the name of religion.. and will therefore make further concessions because they don’t have any answers.
        Another weak link is a Christian Church which has allowed itself to be guided by warm, humanistic fluffiness and compassion rather than the red blooded Christianity of the Gospel..
        The last weak link I wish to mention is that because we have been a civilised society for so long, we look to our leaders to tell us what to do. Nothing wrong with that. It is after all civilised; but when faced with a threat to the established order you want real leadership that recognise what’s at stake and that sacrifices may have to be made.

        • IanCad

          Spot On! Danny.

        • David

          Totally agree dannyboy !

      • David

        If you are saying that the law enforcement agencies must convey that message or respecting the law, to the persecutors of this besieged family, then yes I totally support you.

        But the law cannot make people like one another. So this family will now, sadly, always be deeply unpopular in its neighbourhood.

        So if you are suggesting that this father and mother bring up their children surrounded by those who have clearly rejected them socially, as well as spiritually, then I think you have misdirected yourself into an adopting a very unrealistic position.

        • IanCad

          I take your points David.
          However, the law must be applied evenly.
          To harass, threaten, persecute, or otherwise disturb the peace must be prosecuted with the utmost vigour if we are to stay the dividing of our land.

          • David

            Yes I agree.
            Sadly however our fair country is already divided as some minorities have no intention of assimilating or becoming British in any cultural sense.

      • Inspector General

        Ian. Politicians will tell you we have no immigrants in the UK, per se. But ‘recently arrived Britons’ with a list of rights the length of your arm. Further, their rights, which apparently includes the right to behave as they did in their country of origin, are underscored by something known as multiculturalism.

        It’s not just that family that needs to get out of Bradford. All non muslims should evacuate the city with suitable haste. Let the remaining, and those who move in to the vacated properties, get on with it.

        One’s studies of US inner city problems, caused by negroes and Latinos has shown that once they are left by themselves, they will in the most part consume each other, rather than the innocent. There is every expectation those living in an English ‘muslim homeland’ will do the very same. The disagreements between themselves will fully occupy their time, thankfully…

        • IanCad

          I know Inspector! It seems as though we are creating several Newarks and Baltimores in this land.
          It may be wise not to grant “Citizenship” to immigrants; instead give them “Residency” rights. Only those born here by legal residents should be allowed to become “Britons.”
          Also, in order to become a citizen of one country it would follow that it would be necessary to forswear allegiance to one’s native land. IMO it would take a sorry wretch to do just that.

        • They’ll demand evermore land and space and turn our green and pleasant country into a dump. No Inspector their numbers need curbing and their enclaves breaking up. They have to either join us in our way of life or get out.

          • Inspector General

            Do you know, Marie, that we don’t really know we have muslims in England. But we soon will do, and probably in our lifetimes too, when the demands start coming. Slow at first but then thick and fast. One of which will be a demand for a homeland where they can be muslims without kaffir interference. Best prepare for that eventuality now, what!

            After all, we don’t want the car bombers to call for as long as we can put them off…

    • Miles Cairo

      It would appear that their grave situation has, I’m afraid, been exacerbated by real institutional racism: They’re Asian, so put them with other Asians. All the same, aren’t they?

  • Inspector General

    How do you go about policing the worst people in the world…

    Ideas, chaps.

    • sarky

      What, americans?

      • sarky

        Let me clarify:-

        From 2004-2013, there have been 313 American deaths from terrorism and 316, 545 America deaths from guns and 264 mass shootings this year alone. And you’re worried about muslims?

        • CliveM

          Sarky

          All very interesting I’m sure. I’m not sure as to the relevance to here and what is being discussed,

          Or are you saying that we have to fear Americans shooting and beheading us on the streets? Give us figures for that.

          Otherwise don’t you think your point might be a bit misdirected?

          • carl jacobs

            We’re coming, Clive. You know what they say. “Overpaid. Over-sexed. Over here.” Be afraid. Be very afraid.

            I suggest you hide the women.

          • The Explorer

            The way the Americans are going, we’d better hide the men as well.

          • Inspector General

            : – >

          • CliveM

            Hide the women? They’re our secret weapon.

            Be afraid, be very afraid!

          • sarky

            Its all about perspective not hysteria.

          • CliveM

            Perspective only works if the example you give is relevant. Yours wasn’t.

            USA shootings pose zero threat to people living in the UK. Can you say the same about the British Mudlim community?

          • sarky

            I dont feel threatened.

          • CliveM

            No but some people clearly do and are.

            But in this country no one is by the threat of drive by shootings in the US!

        • The Explorer

          On average there are four guns per American gun owner. A conservative estimate is 223 million guns in the US. CAIR (and its spokesmen may be inflating the numbers) reckons there are 7 million Muslims in the USA.

          That means at the moment you are more likely to be killed by a gun than by a Muslim. But when the number of Muslims approaches the number of guns, work it out.

          • sarky

            Yes, because all muslims are murderous arnt they??

            Please.

          • The Explorer

            Well, no, fortunately there are peaceful Muslims. On the other hand, Muhammad – being the perfect man – is the model for good Muslim behaviour. And Muhammad co-ordinated the beheading of over 400 captives in one session.

            There is no record that Christ, on being presented with the head of one of his enemies, said, “I would rather have had that head than the choicest camel in all Arabia!” There is not even a record of Christ’s followers presenting him with such a head. There is about Muhammad and his followers. By contrast, the beheading of John the Baptist is presented in the New Testament as something horrible.

          • sarky

            And the Christian god coordinated the murder of every person on the planet. Not to mention all the other atrocities he was behind in the ot.

          • The Explorer

            True; although the symbolism of the rainbow is, “Never again”. The purgings were specific to place and time, and are superseded by the New Covenant. The Islamic abrogations, by contrast, leave violence open ended.

            Result. When beheading people, Christians cannot cite the example of the founder of their religion. When beheading people, Muslims can.

          • Inspector General

            You are so much the court fool. Entertaining, though…

          • dannybhoy

            No one is saying all Muslims are murderous, but the religion they are brought up in teaches war as the way to establish a worldwide Caliphate. Islam has been slumbering, but now it os fully awake and we can see all around what Islam can do in the name of Allah.
            And before you say it, yes there are aspects of our own society that are not so good,,

    • Dreadnaught

      By sorting out our own miscreants first and far more harshly than they would ever expect. 70 years of peace has made us flabby – time for the Brits and their Parliament to wake up to the fact that the threats to our way of life have never been greater since 1940.

  • IanCad

    If even part of this outrage is true then we should be ashamed.
    That this country, proud of its remaining liberties, should tolerate the violence and persecution visited on this family is shameful.
    We welcomed the Muslim community to our shores. No restrictions were placed on their mode of worship or traditions. The full rights and privileges of citizenship were granted without conditions or test.
    It seems blindingly obvious that a large part of this population is out of harmony with our liberal society.
    It is up to them to sort it out mighty quick. Or; as I see it, the public will force its representatives to action.
    One way tickets?

  • carl jacobs

    This event reminds me of the travails of Salman Rushdie. I always had to force myself to be sympathetic to Rushdie because to me he represented that species of intellectual who enjoys publicly urinating on that which others hold sacred. He enjoyed the degradation he could inflict, and even more the impunity with which he could inflict it. One could easily fall into the trap of finding poetic justice in the Fatwa against his life. But of course writing a book isn’t just cause for a death sentence – no matter how disagreeable the author.

    It’s a truism that we all feel a threat more personally when we can identify with the victim. I noticed a long time ago that there are few stories more intensely covered by journalists than threats to other journalists. The execution of Daniel Pearl was a huge story mostly because it was a huge story to journalists. Other victims and hostages might be kidnapped and killed, but journalists felt the death of Daniel Pearl in a more visceral and personal manner than they would the odd aid worker. The difference is found in the “It could have been me” factor. The aid worker after all was (say) religious. “She was religious. They targeted her because she was religious. I’m not religious. It couldn’t have been me.” This is why the Charlie Hebdo shooting had such wide impact. The nature of the victims intersected with the profile of so many people in post-modern secular Europe.

    I mention this because of the “Well. it’s all about religion, isn’t it?” attitude displayed by some on this thread. It’s a failed attempt to create distance between the victim and self. If this family had become atheist instead of Christian, I suspect a few of the reactions on this thread would have be noticeably different. Internecine sectarian violence is one thing. But threatening someone who thinks and believes like me – well, that’s totally different.

    • Inspector General

      The killing of that journalist and others have made editors keen to secure ‘on the ground coverage’ feel like executioners should they ever contemplate sending, or should that be asking, their minion hacks to get themselves over there. Much can be achieved by those who know what they need to do to ISIS in their absence…

    • Dreadnaught

      The point I think you are overlooking in this was not so much the fact that Pearl was a journalist more that he was a Jew. Anti-semitism has undergone a rebirth since Muslims have formed themselves into a credible threat to Western values. The Muslims have long been jealous of the sympathy extended to Jews because of the Holocaust. Muslims in their minds are the only victims ‘worthy’ of the epithet and they protect that position vehemently.
      When journalists are attacked out freedom of speech is under attack and that’s why it is only right to give prominence to their murders.
      The subject of this post is not so much religion, but that Indian sub-continental primitivism has been allowed to take root through multiculturalism in a free society that was never consulted on such a major change in our society. We are not a nation of immigrants.We never have been. We have the longest record of domestic peace in Europe but we are slowly being pushed into denying our own heritage.
      We accept immigrants on the assumption that they want to be here because our way of life is better than the dusty cack buit villiages and pitch-fork politics of Bangladesh Pakistan and Somalia. We have been forced to accept them as equals; even when they make no contribution to our society other than establish themselves in colonies islolated from everything British except for the Benefits Office.
      We do not need immigrants as much as they need us. They need to be reminded of that. Enoch Powell never said truer words in his ‘rivers of blood speech’ that many are too precious to admit that he was right to sound the warning bells

      • dannybhoy

        “We accept immigrants on the assumption that they want to be here because
        our way of life is better than the dusty cack buit villiages and
        pitch-fork politics of Bangladesh Pakistan and Somalia.”
        And I think we got that wrong! When I lived in Israel I often noticed there was a kind of dichotomy of thought in certain issues, Frankly I found it impossible to follow the logic of some arguments. In fact I don’t think there was a logic; only an emotional rather than an intellectual response.
        I have just got through reading an excellent book called “Son of Hamas” by Mosab Hassan Yousef. This man has an incredible story to tell of his journey from Islam to Christianity. I heartily recommend it to anyone -even non Christians!

        • Anton

          Great book. And Daniel Pearl was the son of a distinguished scientist.

  • steroflex

    I know absolutely nothing about this.
    I worked in Bradford in the 1990s though and know that the bit round the hospital is firmly Muslim.
    If it is true, then the Bishops (always bishops nowadays, never Vicars) need to have their noses rubbed in it.

    • Inspector General

      How can you, like many others here, blame a lack of policing on Anglican clergy? It completely defies logic…

      • Mike Stallard

        OK I was an Anglican Priest in Norfolk for ten years before the catastrophe when it turned into the Methodists. So I know what I am talking about here (for a change).
        The parochial clergy have a duty of care – it is called pastoralia. We were expected to visit round our parishes looking for people to serve. If we missed just one, we felt we had let down the system.
        With a firm back-up of prayer and faith, and actually, with a lot of courage and determination, we were often able to do quite a lot really.
        On the whole – and we were very human – we did rather better than our big rivals, the social services.
        What is going on in Bradford then? 1996 is an awful long time ago. Where are the parochial clergy visiting round out there by the hospital and in the state and independent schools?

        • Inspector General

          Yes, but Norfolk is not Bradford. Sounds like they need Templar knights up there to protect the faithful to Christ, and PDQ at that…

          Of course, if the police did their job, there would be no need for the famous sword wielding Christian military religious order …

      • CliveM

        Sometimes Inspector you are an oasis of sweet reason.

        Sometimes!

  • len

    Can a society or a religious group actually be too tolerant and by being so become a doormat for anyone who wants to wipe their feet on it/them ?. Christians are persecuted because their religion is basically seen a passive one and they are seen as’ a soft target ‘by almost everyone.The Bible Old Testament is full of battles, judgements, an eye for an eye etc. But since the arrival of Christ all that changed. Christians are asked by God to forgive others as God has forgive them, to bless those who persecute them.

    Yet Christianity grows and is growing despite all the oppression in Islamic and Communist Countries and the P C agenda in the West .Statistics are difficult to collect but there could be upwards of 100 million Christians in China now (and rapidly increasing)

    Christ won the victory over sin and death not by fighting but by following God`s Will.The meek, the humble, the persecuted, will end up as the victors and inherit this World and eternal Life.

    • dannybhoy

      I agree with a lot of what you say Len, but what if our nation, the nation that has been shaped by Christian values, had turned the other cheek to the tyrants of yester-year?
      See, I still believe that there is a difference between our responsibilities as individuals and our responsibilities as citizens.
      Like 3> “Then some soldiers asked him, “And what should we do?” He replied,
      “Don’t extort money and don’t accuse people falsely–be content with
      your pay.”

      Matthew 8>
      “And when Jesus entered Capernaum, a centurion came to Him, imploring Him, and saying, “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, fearfully tormented.”…

      Surely all the time we are in this world we must be prepared to fight to protect those we love and to preserve our society ?

      • len

        Dannybhoy, I agree with a lot of what you say but Jesus was fairly clear about how to react to persecution. Not saying this is easy though..

        • Miles Cairo

          As a soldier Len, this has been a constant dilemma I struggle with. Am I doing His will by protecting those that can’t protect themselves, or am I just putting bits of metal into other people to stop their bodies working?

  • James60498 .

    Bradford was the place that bullied Ray Honeyford out of his position.

    I don’t, indeed can’t, often name drop but I knew Ray after he left Bradford. A really fantastic guy who was hounded out of his job for daring to speak against what effectively was the earliest stage of the Islamification of Bradford’s schools.

    It certainly hasn’t got any better.

    • dannybhoy

      I remember his case well. A man of integrity and compassion, he was hounded out precisely because the government of the day preferred to sacrifice one man and his career, rather than upset a religious community that by and large chose to live in the UK..
      And this is the great danger still facing the survival of our nation; that a cowardly British government would pretend to be defending the rights of our multicultural society, whilst allowing the values that underpin those rights to be eroded.

    • IanCad

      The name rang a bell. Thanks for reminding me to remember this man who was – to put it mildly – persecuted.

  • The Explorer

    Ray Honeford

  • chiefofsinners

    A word from the totalitarian state.

    British values are: democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance for those of different faiths and beliefs. The state has decreed that it is so.

    You are all going to prison for undermining British values. You have done this in the following ways:

    Democracy: the vast majority of people in Bradford are Muslims. If they want sharia law, they must be allowed it. That’s democracy.

    The rule of law: The police have decided to do nothing at all about this persecution. All those who criticise them have therefore undermined the rule of law.

    Individual liberty: Means that these gangs are free to do exactly as they please . How dare you question their right?

    Mutual respect and tolerance for those of different faiths and beliefs. You have all been most intolerant of those whose beliefs are that they should mete out the wrath of Allah.

    See you all in the exercise yard.

    • dannybhoy

      Will you be wearing your wig?

      • chiefofsinners

        I think it would be unwise to appear feminine from behind.

        • dannybhoy

          Lol!
          I hadn’t thought of that scenario. I was just hoping to get the chance to find out whether or not you are follicly challenged.. ;0)

    • The Explorer

      If you have sharia law, by definition you don’t have mutual respect and tolerance for those of other faiths. Tricky conundrum for the arbiters of British values.

      • chiefofsinners

        Yes, but experience shows that the courts have a consistent approach to reconciling these conundra. Simply crush underfoot and grind into the dust the rights of Christians.

  • len

    Christians are hated without reason (other than they pose a threat to Satan`s domination over this world system which he controls). Christ was and is hated for the very same reason.So we are all in a spiritual battle with no neutral ground we are either for the God of the Bible or against Him.
    When we realise this fact then persecution against Christians is not only possible but inevitable indeed Jesus warned it would be so….
    When we think of Christian martyrs we might think of the inquisition and those burned at the stake etc during the middle ages but Christian martyrdom is happening today.Christians are the most persecuted religious group worldwide. An average
    of at least 180 Christians around the world are killed each month for
    their faith. (Source: Open Doors USA)

  • ceige

    It does not seem anyone actually has any idea of what happened or the fats in this particular case, and if your media is like ours one can not always take it for granted the facts are what is reported.

    From an outsider perspective it does appear odd to me that local police would not intervene in such a situation. Certainly that other christians or humanists, atheists or any people in the community too would not aid in the context of support if they are aware of what is happening.

    • James60498 .

      Hi ceige

      Certainly our press aren’t any more reliable than anyone else’s. Having seen your reference to AB land on the next thread, it might be appropriate to point out that they pretend that all England’s sports teams are going to win international tournaments when we all know that’s not going to happen.

      And so yes, we perhaps don’t know the full circumstances. But we do know that much of British Society is afraid of/ subservient to Islam.

      I don’t know what, if anything, you know about the child abuse that has taken place in Rotherham just 40 miles away from Bradford. So many people from so many government agencies over so many years sweeping it under the carpet because it was carried out by Muslims. Even when it was at last publicised, most news agencies referred to it being carried out by Asians, rather than Muslims.

      Or then the recent story on this Blog about a court in Leeds (5 miles from Bradford) that decided that rape of Asian girls was worse than rape of white girls.

      Government producing laws to prevent extremism in schools. Muslims doing bad things get a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again whilst a Christian school was closed down because it won’t teach positively about gays.

      When the law and government agencies will not act, then few people are going to be brave enough either. Below I mention Ray Honeyford. Look what happened to him, and that was at a time when things weren’t anywhere near as bad as they are now.

      No. Our press doesn’t always tell the precise truth. In fact some of it (at least that which comments on rugby) even reports that Richie McCaw gets away with cheating, and of course we all know that this isn’t true.

      But there is plenty of precedent to suggest that this story is, at the very least, based on real events.

      • ceige

        Hi James

        I am sure this happened to the family in question, it is unfortunately, as no doubt you know, a familar experience faced by muslims who become followers of Isa (the Christ). I should have been more clear, my reservations about all the facts pertaining to the article have more to do with the comment regarding the lack of support from their local church, and whether or not the church or others were aware of what was happening. A question the article seemed to raise but which commentators seemed to be unable to confirm or deny.

        There is little doubt when it comes to religious tolerance for some reason Christianity comes last on the stakes of popularity. Regardless of the views of other faiths Hindu’s, Buddhists, Islam on ethical issues such as homosexuality Christians are the only ones that seem to get the rap from culture and media for being ‘intolerant’. Our current minister hails from Canada and in the schools there it is illegal to mention Jesus, however, provision is made for those practising Islam to have their own prayer room – go figure. Why secular culture desires to be accepting of all – except Jesus followers – is beyond me, and then perhaps it is not;

        I don’t know the specifics in Bradford but I can comprehend the child abuse cases. I recently read the book from the US called Hiding in the Light, about Rifqa and the abuse she suffered before knowing Jesus and escaping home at 16. However, there are also many Muslims who are not Islam extremists and have loving family situations. And I think this is important to keep in mind so as to distinguish Muslim as an ethnicity from Islam as a religion to prevent ourselves from opting out of not loving our neighbours or our enemies. “We do not war against flesh and blood but against the powers and the principalities of this dark world”… etc

        As for the fear situation it must be difficult. It still perplexes me that the police refuse to intervene regardless of who has been targeted. I can to a degree understand social workers perhaps caving out of fear of personal safety, but the police of ones nation? This must surely be challenged.

        As for the AB’s ha, ha… well we have suffered our fair share of disappointments. I watched the England game against Aussies and thought their handling skills were pretty good but we did want you to win! As for Richie, well, we do pride ourselves a little in good sportsmanship; those rumours are just being spread by ‘Australians’ …. they are always having a go at us for being too polite…. : ) …

        • James60498 .

          Thanks ceige. I note your clarification and fully agree with you. To be fair, I think that one or two people below had already suggested that we really needed to know more about what the church had/ had not done before criticising it and as I had given one of them an uptick I had got it into my head that this was covered.

          As for the government departments failing to act, I have no doubt that some individual social workers failed to act for fear of personal safety. But I really don’t believe that this is the overwhelming reason. They don’t act either due to Political Correctness or due to governmental fear. And whether those orders come from the Home Office or senior police officers, I certainly don’t know. But too many branches of the government are affected for it to be possible that this is just the view of the local senior police officer.
          Slightly changing the subject, but not entirely The Left wing Guardian newspaper where all state jobs are advertised ran an article yesterday as to why racism by white people was worse than any other kind of racism and another as to why pro-lifers should be ignored because our views are based on religion. The Guardian is the house newspaper of most government departments throughout the country. This is where most of their views come from so that challenging the police over these failures means taking on the whole of the government bureaucracy.

          As for being accused of bad sportsmanship by the Aussies. That’s a bit like being called a fascist by most western governments. Having read what you had said about Canadian schools, I was extra pleased to see Romania beat Canada this evening.

          I can’t decide who I want to win RWC though I can’t see past the SFs being between the 4 Southern teams unless Argentina have an off day against France/Ireland. (I think SA have had their bad day), though of course NZ v France at the Millenium Stadium has to be worth watching.
          As my son was born in Wales I will have to go with them for the moment. I do have friends in NZ and the family of a very old friend is there too, but you won it last time!

          • ceige

            Hi James

            Thanks for the reply. I used to think of the Guardian as a more unbiased media medium but lately all the articles I have read from it appear very strongly opinionated. It is a concern if this has become a nations plumb-line.

            It seems to be a strong western phenomenon at the moment that in the name of ‘tolerance’ we are actually failing in the area of equal treatment of all. I have no issue with Muslims’s wearing Burka’s or people who are not Christian living together before marriage etc. To me this is tolerance.

            It is not tolerance when anyone is attacked or bullied for their belief and it is ignored because people see the actions as being normal within a specific ethnic community, it is not tolerance when a person can not say they disagree with abortion (not the people who have them) without being vilified. Being clear we are not associating here with the few in the US who bomb abortion clinics!

            In kiwiland a few years ago we de-criminalised prostitution, the press being in favour of the legal protection it would afford to prostitutes. Unfortunately it has led to brothels appearing in residential areas, more prominent brothels in city centres an increase in child trafficking, teachers moonlighting as prostitutes – all of which people didn’t foresee. Unfortunately those who did challenge the bill (who were not doing so out of a lack of love for those unwillingly or willingly involved in prostitution) were viewed at the time as having a judgemental agenda. Personally, I was for criminalising the men who use prostitutes!!

            Sigh.

            On a more positive note, was great to see the overwhelming vote against Euthanasia in England …

            I think it is a safe bet that SA and Australia will be in the Semi’s, the AB’s too but it will be an interesting game against Argentina. The Welsh seem to be doing particularly well… We will try not to win twice in a row, but no promises! If we do I give you permission to claim us again as a colony, ha, ha.

            Kia Kaha (Stay Strong)

  • Anton

    At the Tory Party conference Teresa May is warning that high levels of immigration make it impossible to build a cohesive society and David Cameron is agreeing with the comment.

    All well and good, except they are the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister ie the executive. They sound like the opposition. I believe these words do not reflect their policies and are to lull “the people”.

  • John Thomas

    “Bradford ex-Muslim Christian converts “have given up on the Church of England”” Can you blame them?

  • Miles Cairo

    WTF!!!???!!! Are my tears of sadness or anger? Both! Welcome, embrace and protect these poor buggers and smash their idiotic and irrelevant persecutors. FFS – are we going to wait for them to be pushed into a kiln???

  • Anton

    Swedish lesbian bishop takes down crosses in favour of Mecca pointers:

    http://www.therebel.media/swedish_church_takes_down_crosses