THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
HARRISBURG, Pa. —30,011 babies were aborted in Pennsylvania in 2017, a new report
from the Pennsylvania Department of Health outlines. The vast majority of women
obtaining the abortions were unwed.
The figure is slightly down from the year prior, during which 30,881 children in the
Commonwealth lost their lives, but is stated to be a record low.
According to the report, over 87 percent of those who aborted their
child last year were unmarried, or 26,310 women. Nearly 39 percent of
those women were age 24 or younger. Most of the abortions—83.6 percent—were performed in five counties in
the Commonwealth: Philadelphia, Allegheny, Dauphin, Delaware and
Northampton.
A chart based on residency shows that the least number of abortions
were performed on women from Bradford, Sullivan, Fulton, Susquehanna,
Tioga, Cameron and Forest counties, which had five or fewer abortions
listed.
143 women experienced complications from their abortion, with the
most common complication being “retained products of conception,”
meaning that parts of (or all of) the dead baby had been left inside of
the woman. 102 of the 143 women were listed under this complication.
48 complications were from pill-based abortions, and 33 were suction
curettage abortions, the latter of which rips the baby from the womb via
vacuum-like pressure.
Suction curettage was the most commonly used abortion method overall,
with 16,879 babies dying by the surgical procedure, and 11,496 babies
being killed by the abortion pill. 1,627 babies died by dilation and
evacuation, also known as dismemberment abortion.
Over 18,000 of the babies were eight weeks gestation or less, and
over 1,000 babies were between 18-23 weeks gestation, or four and a half
to nearly six months gestation.
More than half—52.8 percent—of the mothers had never obtained an
abortion before, while 7,786 women had previously aborted a child and
3,776 obtained their third abortion. 1,082 mothers had aborted four or
more of their children before their 2017 abortion.
“[A]bortion totals in Pennsylvania would be much higher were it not
for the caring pregnancy resource centers administered by Real
Alternatives and other groups,” Maria Gallagher, legislative director
for the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, remarked to the Daily Local
News. “These life-affirming organizations provide everything from
diapers to daycare referrals, along with comprehensive counseling to
pregnant women.” Read the report in full here. As previously reported, Pennsylvania had been an influential state in
American history in the fight against abortion. In 1850, Pennsylvania’s
Supreme Court became the first high court in the nation to declare that
abortion must be prohibited at any stage of gestation for any reason. While other state courts allowed preborn babies to be aborted up to
four months of gestation by reason of a “quickening” theory, which
stated that a person was not protected until the mother felt them
kicking in the womb, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would accept no such
argument. In Mills v. Commonwealth, the court declared that the theory
“is not … the law in Pennsylvania, and ought never to have been the law
anywhere.” The ruling became a strong precedent that other state courts
began to review and follow. By the 1900’s, due to the influence of the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court, nearly every state in the nation prohibited abortion for any
reason, with the exception of Arkansas, Mississippi and North Carolina.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Members of the Baptist-Catholic International Dialogue Joint Commission
with Pope Francis. (Photo: L’Osservatore Romano Photographic Service)
[Ethics Daily] The second meeting of the third phase of international
ecumenical conversations between the Baptist World Alliance (BWA) and
the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity took place Dec.
10-14 in Rome at the Domus Internationalis Paulus VI.
The Baptist delegation was led by co-chair Frank Rees, associate
professor and chair of the academic board at the University of Divinity
in Australia; the Catholic delegation was led by co-chair Bishop Arthur
Serratelli, bishop of Paterson, New Jersey. The meeting took up the theme of the “Context of Common Witness.”
This discussion reflected on the global cultural context in which common
Christian witness is being conducted today in six continents of the
world.
This sub-theme helps to illuminate the overall theme of the third
phase of dialogue, “The Dynamic of the Gospel and the Witness of the
Church.” The Baptist-Catholic group will meet annually through 2021 for
this third phase of conversations.
Included in the week of ecumenical conversations was a meeting with
Pope Francis during the general papal audience on Dec. 12. The following
day, the participants visited a local Baptist church in Trastevere.
The Baptist-Catholic group will convene for its third round of the
current phase of conversations on Dec. 9-13, 2019, in Warsaw, Poland,
hosted by the Baptist Union of Poland at the Baptist Theological
Seminary in Warsaw.
To continue reading, click here. [Editor’s Note: This article was written by Steven
Harmon and Avelino Gonzalez-Ferrer and first posted at Ethics Daily.
This HT is not an endorsement of Ethics Daily]
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Recently, the Times of India reported that the
Ahmedabad-based cult, Swaminarayan Gadi Sansthan has bought a
30-year-old church in Portsmouth, Virginia with plans to convert it into
a Swaminarayan temple of pagan worship. The Portsmouth church is not
the first to be converted into a Hindu center of pagan idolatry. This
seems to be the start of a troublesome trend among failing churches in
the United States.
This latest conversion of the Portsmouth church is only one of five
other recent conversions from a Christian church to a pagan temple here
in the United States by the Hindu cult Swaminarayan Sansthan. Other
converted churches are in California, Louisville, Pennsylvania, Los
Angeles, and Ohio. This troubling trend is not limited to only here in
the United States; it is happening abroad as well. Swaminarayan Gadi
Sansthan has converted other churches internationally, one in London and
another near Bolton in Manchester UK. Additionally the group is
working on an acquisition of a church in Toronto, Canada.
There is an ever-growing number of pagan Hindu worshipers in the
United States. For example, Virginia has a population of more than
10,000 Gujaratis. While we as Christians should be alarmed at the
conversion of churches to pagan Hindu worship centers, we need to
remember that this can present an opportunity to reach the lost. This
prospect of hope comes in Christ and readily provides a mission field to
preach the Gospel to those lost in the pagan cult of Hinduism.
While the field is ripe for the harvest the question has to be asked,
why are these supposed “Christian” churches selling their buildings to
pagan entities? Where are these churches Christian ethics and morals?
While yes, a church may be failing, does that make it right for a church
to sell to just anyone who offers the right amount of money? No,
churches should not be selling to anyone who is willing to buy. Just
because your churched failed and you need to sell does not mean you
forsake your moral and spiritual commitment to the body of Christ at
large or your duty to honor God.
These churches
that are selling to this pagan Hindu cult are inviting the devil into there
backyard to play and shake hands with their community. Even in selling, these
churches owe it to the community, the body of believers, and above all to
Christ to do the right thing and not sell to groups or businesses that openly are
against Christianity.
______________________________________________________________ SEE: https://satyavijayi.com/virginia-church-all-set-to-be-transformed-into-a-hindu-temple/ EXCERPTS: It is the sixth church in the US and the ninth across the world to be
turned into a Swaminarayan temple by Swaminarayan Gadi Sansthan based in
Maninagar, Ahmedabad.
Apart from Virginia, churches in California, Luiseville, Pennsylvania,
Los Angeles and Ohio in the US have been transformed into temples by the
sect. Similarly in the UK, two churches have been coverted into temples
in London and Bolton near Manchester. The sect has also acquired a
125-year-old property in Toronto, Canada.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
As a Christian researcher and minister, I approached the reading of Andy Stanley’s book Irresistible with an account of Andy Stanley’s message to the Southern Baptist Convention that helped me to understand Stanley’s core belief concerning the Scripture. He had told the gathering at the SBC, “I would ask preachers and pastors and student pastors in their communications to get the spotlight off the Bible and back on the resurrection.” Along with similar statements, it was clear to me that Stanley was not strong on the necessity of the Scriptures in our call to preach the Gospel and build up the church.
Stanley’s book Irresistible did nothing to take away that perception. In fact, it appears that Stanley has doubled down on his assertion that Scriptures are not all that necessary in our commission.
Stanley begins the book with the idea that the church used to be irresistible but now people are walking away from God in droves, and he believes it is largely because of the Bible being preached the way it is. He asserts that we change our language and our assertions about the Bible, and that will make us more irresistible somehow.
Stanley spends a great deal of time explaining away his controversial assertions. On the one hand, he will declare that the Old Testament is obsolete, and on the other, he tries to explain that it is still good to have for history, stories, etc.
The first part of the book is Stanley’s effort to prove that the Old Testament, the law, etc., is obsolete and has been replaced by the New Covenant. In effect, there are some of Stanley’s assertions that are correct. But it is not all that he says, and therein lies the problem. Like so many new emergent ministers, the tendency is to try to weaken, eliminate or downplay those parts of Scripture that are troublesome or appear to be in opposition to current cultural mores and lifestyles.
Although there are many true things in Stanley’s book, the number of bones one must throw out to find the chicken is rather overwhelming. His ideas in the second part of the book that we must follow Jesus’ command to love others and that will be our motivator and decider on how to handle people is right, and we would all benefit by understanding that love is the fulfillment of the law, and it is the reason why we do what we do.
But many of Stanley’s conclusions as well as his assertions are problematic on many levels. Here are just a few:
He reduces the Hebrew Scriptures to stories and history and does not feel we should put any authoritative stock in it for ourselves as New Covenant believers.
He uses the phrase “replaced” and “replacement” of Israel and the law several times, raising a concern that he may subscribe to the evangelical movement of “replacement theology” that believes God is through with Israel as a nation and simply replaced them with the church.
Stanley spends a great deal of time planting seeds of doubt as to the accuracy, scientific and archeological and even moral authority of the Scriptures.
Stanley asserts that the reason we are not irresistible to unbelievers is that we keep using the term “the bible says” and that the reason most “nones” walked away from church is that they lost faith in our Bible stories that simply got torn apart in college. And while it is true that many church kids lose their faith in college under the brutal attacks from secular and atheistic professors who are able to argue circles around them, the answer is not to further weaken young people’s faith in the Scriptures but rather to fortify and arm them with the truth of the accuracy, historicity, and spiritual power to transform hearts and lives through the Scriptures. I would further suggest that the reason many, many church kids fall away in college when their faith in Scriptures is undermined may be because they did not have a personal saving encounter with Jesus Christ to begin with.
He asserts that we would become irresistible if we simply stopped using language like “the Bible” and stopped using the Old Testament and the law and ten commandments as our authority or proof of our faith.
Stanley continues to subtly suggest that the Old Testament was contradictory, flawed, and at odds with science and archeology. I suggest the lack of apologetic facts here is very dangerous to young audiences. It leads them to believe that even though there are flaws and mistakes and errors in Scripture, it does not matter, because our faith isn’t based on Scripture. While partially true that our salvation is based on Jesus and His resurrection, it is a grave mistake to suggest that Scripture does not play an extremely significant and crucial part in our faith – not our salvation, but our faith and spiritual growth as we seek to be conformed into the image of Christ. And, we must realize that Scripture is the frame work of our faith.
While Stanley seems to suggest neither Jesus nor the apostles based much on the Scriptures, the fact is that they were all committed to “the Word of God.” The Hebrew term was “Torah observant.” When Jesus said, ‘They have kept your word” (John 17:6), that is what it meant.
Much of Andy’s theology is based on the idea that the Old Testament is obsolete and only good for stories and history. On the other hand, Jesus Himself said, “Sanctify them through the truth. Thy Word is truth”(John 17:17). What Word? The Hebrew Scriptures. When Satan contended with Jesus in the wilderness, Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God”(Matthew 4:4). What Word? The Hebrew Scriptures.
The real crux of the matter is that Stanley spends far too much time weakening people’s confidence in biblical accuracy as well as telling them they have almost nothing to gain from reading the “Old Testament.” But while there may be old and new covenants, there is really just one book. Jesus affirmed both the accuracy and God-breathedness of the Hebrew Scriptures, as did Paul and Peter. Basic theology taught us that the Old Testament is the New Testament concealed, and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed. But more than that, the truths contained in the Hebrew Scriptures are God’s truth.
Perhaps Stanley’s problem is that he does not believe there is any more to the Scriptures than stories and history. But those who have taught and preached and carried the Scriptures throughout history and were used to produce some of the greatest revivals in history did so carrying the whole weight of scriptural authority with them, not deeming half of them obsolete. In fact, in the book of Acts, almost every major public preaching message, whether by Peter, or Paul, or Stephen, was literally a retelling of the Hebrew Scriptures, from prophets to history to wisdom and Psalms.
Perhaps Stanley’s other issue is that he does not believe in the AUTHORITY of the Word of God. Those of us who have lived by it and preached by it for our whole lives can attest that it is not “just a book,” but the Word of God is powerful on multiple levels.
He sent forth His Word and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions. (Psalm 107:20)
Thy Word have Ihid in my heart that I might not sin against thee. (Psalm 119:11)
And perhapsmost central,
Thou hast magnified Thy Word above all Thy Name. (Psalm 138:2)
If God so glorifies His Word, we should be very careful not to lessen its place or importance.
It is also not accurate to say that if we dosome of the things Stanley suggests, we will suddenly become irresistible to the world. Jesus, in fact, made it plain that the world would largely hate believers, not find us or our message irresistible (Matthew 10:22).
While some of Stanley’s suggestions are valid, the repeated undermining of respect and acknowledgement of the power and authority of the Word of God, both Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, as well as pointing out several times how indefensible many of the Old Testament things are, can only serve to get new believers to disregard the Old Testament altogether – especially since Stanley deems them “obsolete.” This makes the book a dangerous book heading in a dangerous direction. As with the former evangelical Rob Bell’s book Velvet Elvis, which Irresistible closely resembles, it has the effect of being a systematic tearing down of faith in the Scriptures, and whatever good things are said will not be sustained without a solid scriptural foundation to enable the reader to walk in truth. ______________________________________________________________ SEE ALSO:https://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=28876
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Once again non-Muslim women will signal their virtue by donning a
hijab. But where is their concern for the women who have been brutalized
and even killed for not wearing the hijab? Do the women who will
happily participate in World Hijab Day care about Aqsa Parvez, whose
Muslim father choked her to death with her hijab after she refused to wear it. Or Amina Muse Ali, a Christian woman in Somalia whom Muslims murdered because she wasn’t wearing a hijab? Have they shown any concern for the 40 women who were murdered in Iraq in 2007 for not wearing the hijab; or for Alya Al-Safar, whose Muslim cousin threatened to kill her and harm her family because she stopped wearing the hijab in Britain; or for Amira Osman Hamid, who faced whipping in Sudan for refusing to wear the hijab; or for the Egyptian girl, also named Amira, who committed suicide
after being brutalized by her family for refusing to wear the hijab; or
for the Muslim and non-Muslim teachers at the Islamic College of South
Australia who were told they had to wear the hijab or be fired; or for the women in Chechnya whom police shot with paintballs because they weren’t wearing hijab; or for the women in Chechnya who were threatened by men with automatic rifles for not wearing hijab; or for the elementary school teachers in Tunisia who were threatened with death for not wearing hijab; or for the Syrian schoolgirls who were forbidden to go to school unless they wore hijab; or for the women in Gaza whom Hamas has forced to wear hijab; or for the women in Iran who protested against the regime, even before the recent uprising, by daring to take off their hijabs; or for the women in London whom Muslim thugs threatened to murder if they didn’t wear hijab; or for the anonymous young Muslim woman who doffed her hijab outside her home and started living a double life in fear of her parents; or for the fifteen girls in Saudi Arabia who were killed
when the religious police wouldn’t let them leave their burning school
building because they had taken off their hijabs in their all-female
environment; or for the girl in Italy whose mother shaved her head
for not wearing hijab; or for all the other women and girls who have
been killed or threatened, or who live in fear for daring not to wear
the hijab?
Courageous women in the Islamic
Republic of Iran are taking off their hijabs as a sign of resistance to
the oppressive Sharia regime under which they live, and at least 29 women have been arrested for doing so. Who is standing in solidarity with them? Not the participants in World Hijab Day.
“World Hijab Day Encourages All Women to Wear Veil in Solidarity with Muslims,” by Edwin Mora, Breitbart, December 26, 2018 (thanks to the Geller Report):
The World Hijab Day (WHD) non-profit organization
launched its 2019 campaign Wednesday, encouraging women and girls of all
faiths, backgrounds, and ethnicities to “voice their choice” of wearing
the headscarf for 24 hours on February 1, in solidarity with Muslim
women across the world.
“#FreeInHijab is the much-needed hashtag for our current global
situation where women in hijab are labeled by media as oppressed and
symbolically imprisoned,” Nazma Khan told Turkey’s state-run Anadolu Agency (AA).
“Through this hashtag, women are encouraged to voice their choice of
wearing the hijab; thus dispelling common misconceptions,” Khan added.
Each year since its inception in 2013, WHD has invited women to wear a
hijab — a headscarf worn by Muslim women — for one day on February 1.
“Perhaps, this one-day experience will make them see the hijab in a different light,” Khan told AA.
“More than 70 global ambassadors from over 45 countries have been
involved, and women from around 190 countries participate in the annual
event,” Al Jazeera noted last year.
Khan explained that WHD’s 2019 motto is “Breaking Stereotypes,
Shattering Boundaries,” noting that the campaign also includes
“promoting World Hijab Day both online and offline globally.”
Each year, the non-profit organization prepares for World Hijab Day weeks in advance.
In 2017, WHD became a nonprofit organization focused on fighting
discrimination against Muslim women through awareness and education,
according to the organization’s official webpage.
Khan has told several news outlets that the hardships she faced
growing up in New York City due to her hijab motivated her to establish
World Hijab Day.
“I was constantly bullied in middle school and high school.
Discrimination took on a different height after 9/11,” she said,
referring to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in the United States.
She added, “Every day, I would face different challenges just walking
on the street; I was chased, spat on, surrounded by goons, called a
terrorist, Osama bin Laden, etc.”
Khan described her experience as “devastating,” adding that she did not want anyone else to go through the same thing.
“Therefore, I thought to myself, if I could invite sisters from all
faiths and backgrounds to walk in my shoes just for a day, perhaps
things would change,” she said.
In 2017, New York state and the House of Commons of the U.K. recognized February 1 as World Hijab Day. The Scottish Parliament and the Philippines have reportedly followed suit.
Khan dismissed accusations that the organization is spreading a political Islam ideology….
Saudi Ex-Muslim: 'World Hijab Day insults millions of women' “#WorldHijabDay is an insult to millions of women and girls who do not have the choice to take off their hijab.”
Saudi #ExMuslim
Each time a new ex-Muslim voice rises, a thousand more realize another life is possible.
Support the ExMuslim TV platform: https://ex-muslim.tv/support
Watch http://ex-muslim.tv and share:
http://twitter.com/exmuslimtvhttp://youtube.com/exmuslimtvhttp://facebook.com/exmuslimtv
ExMuslim TV is a video platform at the service of the ex-Muslim movement. #ReligiousFreedom is the first freedom and now is the time to normalize #LeavingIslam
without consequences.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1:
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are
endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another
in a spirit of brotherhood.
"Wear Hijab Day"? Asra Nomani exposes the global PROPAGANDA campaign behind the Hijab
Asra Nomani discusses the oppressive politics of the hijab and exposes
the global propaganda campaign behind "Wear Hijab Day".
Excerpted from the debate "Politics & Clothing: The Hijab" at the
Chicago Humanities Festival, April 30, 2016. Watch the full debate here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twqAw... Asra Nomani is a journalist, former Wall Street Journal correspondent,
and author of the book "Standing Alone: An American Woman’s Struggle for
the Soul of Islam".
She co-wrote the Washington Post opinion piece: "As Muslim women, we
actually ask you not to wear the hijab in the name of interfaith
solidarity":
Yasmine Mohammed (Author and Activist) joins Dave Rubin to discuss Saudi
Arabia, the soft bigotry of low expectations, fetishizing the hijab and
much more.
Gad Saad on Fetishizing the Hijab, Jew Hatred, and the Personal Cost of Being Public
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
No Western country should bend its laws and abandon its principles in
order to appease anyone or to suit any religious sensibilities at the
expense of its women and girls. And yet this is not happening in Germany
alone; many Western countries are increasingly
adopting a two-tier legal system,
allowing for a harmful accommodation of Sharia norms.
“German Supreme Court Rejects Anti-Child Marriage Law as Unconstitutional,” by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart,December 26, 2018:
The German Federal Supreme Court has made a new ruling on
a child marriage case which could have implications on the way child
marriages conducted legally overseas are treated in the country.
The ruling comes from a case involving a Syrian man who was separated
from his underage “wife” when the pair arrived in Germany as asylum
seekers in August 2015, Die Welt reports.
The pair, cousins, were married in February 2015 while the man was
aged 21 and the girl aged only 14 in a marriage procedure that was done
under sharia legally in Syria but was considered invalid by German
authorities where the marriage age was 16 at the time.
After his “wife” had been taken into separate care due to her status
as a minor, the Syrian man complained to German courts which initially
granted him weekend access to her with a district court claiming the
marriage had not been forced.
The case was then sent up to the Federal Supreme Court which has now
ruled that the marriage between the pair should be examined on the basis
of its legal status in Syria. Such cases in the future should be looked
at on an individual basis, the court said, instead of a blanket refusal
to recognise them — as was the procedure previously.
In Germany, protection of marriage and family are enshrined in the
Basic Law, as well as the principle of equal treatment, and both could
be violated under the ban on child marriages…..
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The following report from the German website Einwanderungskritik
(Immigration Criticism) is all but unbelievable: a district court has
cited sharia law to validate a Syrian immigrant’s marriage to a
14-year-old girl. An act that would land a native German man in prison
for child molestation is being sanctioned by the court as a valid
“marriage”, simply because it as recognized as such by Islamic law.
Many thanks to Nash Montana for the translation:
Scandalous judgment: Islamic pedophile-marriages are valid in Germany “A marriage that has been performed according to Syrian law
in Syria with a 14 year old bride and a man of legal age, has to be
recognized as valid if the husband belongs to the Sunni religion and the
marriage has already been executed.” by Robin Classen
With mass immigration, not only terrorism in Paris and Brussels and
the sex crimes on New Year’s eve came to Europe, but also very different
social and moral values. For instance, Islam allows men to marry
multiple women.
Extremely problematic: Mohammed married his “favorite woman” Aisha
when she was just six years old. That is not an unusual Islamic opinion;
this is widely uncontested knowledge in Sunni as well as in Shiite
Islam. In Germany however, as part of sanctioned lying to advance the
cause of Islam (taqiyya), those who ask critical questions are often
told: Aisha was after all already 14 years old when she married the
50-year-old Mohammed. Even more common is the lie that around the year
700 children were a lot more sexually mature. That one cannot compare
the nine-year-old Aisha therefore with a nine-year-old of today, that
she was a complete woman. That all the focus on cleanliness and coddling
in the modern world is what delays a girl’s menstruation more and more.
The opposite has been scientifically proven: In Germany in 1860 girls
got their first period at the age of 16.6 years old. In 1920 they began
to menstruate at 14.6 years old, in 1980 at 12.5 years old, and today
even sooner yet. And all this of course completely independent of the
fact that a first menstruation is only one step on the way to become an
adult woman and it does not signify the ultimate end of childhood. Forced marriage of children is completely okay in Islam
Since Mohammed was deemed to be an exemplary ideal and virtuous man,
this moral assessment applies as well to his marriage with multiple
women and the child Aisha, which is why forced marriages of children in
Shiite as well as in Sunni Islam are entirely normal. Often children die
on their wedding night due to fatal internal bleeding caused by their
Muslim husbands. This behavior is now entering Germany.
Here’s the case of a 22-year-old Syrian man and his 14-year-old wife —
probably a more benign example — a couple who came to Bavaria at the
end of 2015. They are also cousins — since marriages among relatives,
too, is a custom that is accepted in Islam, which has for centuries
harmed the gene pool of the Islamic peoples. According to one BBC study
55 % of the Pakistanis living in Great Britain are married to relatives.
And worldwide, half of all Muslims are living in incestuous marriages.
The consequences are an average IQ that is 10 points lower, and a
significantly higher risk for psychological and physical illnesses. Youth welfare service unsuccessfully tried to protect the child from German justice
The two youths were separated immediately after their arrival in
Germany: The Youth welfare office took the child into custody. The man
then submitted a lawsuit — in all likelihood at taxpayer’s expense — and
verified through a Syrian marriage certificate that he was effectively
married to the child he according to Syrian law. The district court then
reinterpreted the lawsuit which demanded that the child be handed over
to the husband, and granted visitation rights to the “couple” so they
could meet alone on the weekends. But the youth welfare office lodged an
appeal, arguing that the “wife” is a child and acts like a child. That
she is not in a position to lead an autonomous, self-determined life as a
“wife”, and that there is the danger that the two have sexual
intercourse on the weekends, which according to German law constitutes
sexual abuse of a minor.
The subsequent decision of the OLG Bamberg (regional appeals court
Bamberg) is simply mind-blowing: The OLG decided that international
privacy rights have to be applied to the Syrian couple. During the trial
the court had received a “crash course in Syrian marriage law” and had
decided that the couple were effectively married. That even the German
“Ordre Public”, the public policy doctrine, cannot stand in the way of
this. If anyone would like to know what is possible concerning the
Islamization of German law, they should read the resolution from May 5,
2015, file reference 2 UF 58/16 of the Regional Appeals Court of
Bamberg. OLG is exclusively applying Sharia law
One paragraph after another the judge cites openly and absent of all
critique sharia law, which they then apply one-to-one. For the Bavarian
judges, according to their own statements, it is therefore only
important “whether the marriage of a Muslima with a non-Muslim is void”,
since Islamic law prohibits such. In other words, if there were two
refugees with a Syrian marriage certificate, and then it emerged that
one of the two was a Christian, a German court would void the marriage,
since a Muslim Herrenmensch (overlord) cannot be married to a Christian
Untermensch (subhuman).
According to Syrian-Islamic marriage right there is a minimum
marriage age of 13 years, but it is invalid if the wedding has already
been performed. So therefore, there really is no law for a minimum age,
but this seems to pose no problem for Bavarian judges. It seems more
important to the court in Bamberg that the dowry was paid by the
parents:
Apart from that, Article 51, section 2 of the PSG (strengthening of
the care-giving act) on defective marriage contracts after cohabitation,
decides, among other things, the obligation of paying the dowry, the
obstacle of in-law relationship to marrying, and the obligation of
observing the legal waiting period in cases of dissolution of marriage
either by divorce or death. Therefore, Articles 47 to 52 PSG cannot be
interpreted as a regulation to the effect that a defective marriage
contract after cohabitation leads to a void marriage.
The child has to endure abuse so that “integration” is successful
After all this, the court came out with the real tear-jerker: The
“husband and wife” had endured so much together already during their
“flight”! Additionally, a recognition of their marriage for the purpose
of integration is vital. The two had already rejected participation in
integration courses long before their marriage was validated, the German
judges seriously lamented.
The youth welfare office and parents do not play a role anymore for
the court: The child is legally married and, according to Syrian law,
parental responsibility has thereby lapsed. Punishability according to §
182 III StGB is swept under the rug by the OLG Bamberg: That counts as
“a matter of interpretation”. The bottom line is that the higher
regional court, as the second most highest civil rights entity, has
applied sharia law, which thus with one swipe suspends German family
law, and especially criminal law, and has therefore deprived a
14-year-old girl of all protection given to her by the youth welfare
services, and instead has exposed her to her “husband” defenselessly.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
German Chancellor Angela Merkel told an audience in Berlin
that “nation states should be willing to give up their sovereignty” and
that governments shouldn’t listen to their own citizens on matters of
immigration.
During an event aimed at combating populism
entitled Parliamentarism in the Tension of Globalization and National
Sovereignty, Merkel brazenly said that “nation-states should be willing
to give up their sovereignty today” and this should be done via an
“orderly process”.
Responding to critcism of the UN Migration
Pact, which greases the skids for mass migration to be treated as a
human right, Merkel said that international agreements took precedence
over the will of the people within individual countries.
“There
were [politicians] who believed that they could decide when these
agreements are no longer valid because they are representing The
People,” she said.
“[But] the people are individuals who are
living in a country, they are not a group who define themselves as the
[German] people,” she stressed.
Merkel’s forthright denunciation
of sovereignty and her continued support for mass immigration comes
despite both issues leading to a massive collapse in her own approval
numbers.
Earlier this year, a YouGov survey also found that almost
half of Germans want to leave their own country “for a more stable
political situation”.
_____________________________________________________________ SEE ALSO: https://www.infowars.com/hungary-official-mass-migration-dangerous-integration-failed/
Far-left Slate reporter April Glaser boasted Friday that she
forced YouTube to censor pro-life videos on their platform and replace
them with pro-abortion videos instead. YOUTUBE REMOVES PRO-LIFE TITLES FROM
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
YouTube appears to have cleaned out pro-life videos from the top
choices under the search word “abortion.” What’s more, a writer for the
left-leaning Slate.com suggested that she was responsible for the
change. April Glaser, identified as a Slate technology reporter, wrote that
“before I raised the issue with YouTube ... the top search results for
‘abortion’ on the site were almost all anti-abortion” — meaning they
were pro-life in perspective. One of the previously top-ranking titles apparently unranked through Glaser’s efforts is called “LIVE Abortion Video on Display,”
which is nothing less than a horrifyingly true video representation of
what happens when a pre-born baby’s life is ended through abortion.
While the graphic nature of the two-minute video prevented Glaser from
challenging the veracity of its deeply disturbing content, she claimed
that many other top-ranking pro-life videos she viewed were “frequently
misleading” — a charge she made without qualification. “Only two of the top 15 results struck me as not particularly
political,” she wrote, “and none of the top results focused on providing
dispassionate, up-to-date medical information.” Glaser related that after e-mailing YouTube to ask why pro-life
videos dominated its search results for “abortion,” over the next two or
three days the website’s managers changed the search results to reflect
a bias more favorable to a pro-abortion perspective. In a subsequent Twitter post,
Glaser claimed that a “search for ‘abortion’ on YouTube last week and
the top results were a horrifying mix of gore and dangerous
misinformation.” She went on to insist that “YouTube changed the results
after I asked.”
In her Slate article, Glaser wrote that after YouTube followed her
directions, “anti-abortion content meant to enrage or provoke viewers
was no longer purely dominating the results” — which, translated, means
that any video content designed to confront the viewer with the stark
and murderous reality of abortion was sanitized from YouTube’s top
“abortion” search results, replaced by content that gave all discussion
on the killing of babies through abortion a safe and friendly texture. Why eliminating pro-life content from YouTube’s top “abortion” search
results matters so much to Glaser “is that more than 1.8 billion people
look for information on YouTube every month,” she wrote, “and that
could easily include someone who is considering getting an abortion.”
The apparent implication here is that offering such individuals a truly
balanced representation of abortion may just convince them that the
procedure is wrong for them and their babies. Among the previously top-ranked content that was de-ranked by YouTube
following Glaser’s complaints were videos by pro-life group Live Action.
The videos, which appeared to be among those Glaser labeled as
“misleading,” were produced by Live Action “to educate viewers on how
the different abortion procedures are actually committed, since the
abortion industry fails to inform women of the truth,” explained the
pro-life group after Glaser’s article appeared. The group added that the videos in question “are from the ‘Abortion
Procedures’ series, which show medical animations of the most common
abortion procedures. The animations depict how a pre-born child appears
during each stage, and are narrated by former abortionist Dr. Anthony
Levatino, who committed thousands of abortions before becoming
pro-life.” Live Action defended the accuracy of the videos, saying that “Dr.
Levatino has the experience to understand and explain how each type of
abortion works.” The Live Action videos, including some that were de-ranked by YouTube as a result of Glaser’s complaints, can be viewed here. ________________________________________________________ SEE: https://slate.com/technology/2018/12/youtube-search-abortion-results-pro-life.html?via=gdpr-consent AND: https://pjmedia.com/trending/liberal-slate-writer-brags-about-getting-pro-life-videos-hidden-from-youtube-abortion-search/ SEE ALSO:
Leftist Slate Reporter: YouTube 'Changed Search Results' For Abortion 'After I Asked'
https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=59597 EXCERPTS: Though
Google CEO Sundar Pichai claimed last week in sworn testimony before
congress that "we don't manually intervene on any particular search
result," Glaser said that "YouTube changed the results after I asked."
When
I searched "abortion" on Saturday morning I had to scroll down 39 pages
to find the video titled "LIVE Abortion Video on Display" -- which
means you have to go past around 190 videos to get what was the number
one result last week before Glaser complained.
