All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/
Commentary

Obama’s latest radical leftist nominee would curtail religious liberty

2 Comments

Check out this post from Laura at Pursuing Holiness. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Ms. Feldblum explains that she does feel empathy when the rights of religious people are subordinated to that of LGBT people*, but it must, and will, happen. She intends to make it happen.

[…]In example after example she advocates for the right of LGBT people to make religious people conduct business in a way that they feel violates their core principles. It’s a touchy issue. I was happy to build websites for gay clients when it was for restaurants, real estate, and other businesses that had nothing to do with sex – but when asked to submit a quote to build a gay dating site, I referred the caller to another developer who was glad to bid for the project. Shall the law side with Ms. Feldblum’s dignity or with my religious freedom?

[…]So to sum up, the cure for her deep, intangible hurt is not to go freely associate with other people, but to force others to do what she wants… this is how she will rule when appointed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

She’s done a lot of digging, and cites extensively from Chai Feldblum’s work, so I recommend clicking through and having a look. This is important, especially for those of us who live and breathe apologetics. If nominees like Jones, Jennings and Feldblum are appointed, it is very likely the ability to carry out an authentic Christian life in the public square will be be curtailed. Including apologetics.

This happens all the time in Canada, where people like Chai Feldblum are running the show:

My previous post on Obama’s nominee for safe-school czar is here, and another post about the FRC’s opposition to him. And the Obama administration is backing limitations on free speech at the United Nations. These are serious issues and if they are ignored, we will be facing the same situations you can see in Canada today.

Share

News

New Zealand considers bill to allow freedom of association on campuses

3 Comments

Well, at least it’s passed it’s first reading. Basically, there are eight government-run universities in New Zealand, and students attending them must join at least one of the leftist campus clubs and pay dues to the leftist club. There is virtually no way to get your money back, and there are virtually no right wing clubs on campus to join – they all get banned, much like pro-life clubs are banned in Canadian universities.

Here’s the summary. (H/T E-mail tip from Matt and Madeleine Flanagan)

Excerpt:

““ACT on Campus is thrilled that ACT MP Sir Roger Douglas’ Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill has been drawn from the private member’s bill ballot in Parliament today.

“ACT on Campus calls on all MPs to support student’s right to Freedom of Association, as guaranteed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” said ACT on Campus Vice President Peter McCaffrey.

“Sir Roger’s bill, originally drafted by fellow ACT MP Heather Roy, now Associate Minister of Education, has students up and down New Zealand excited and we hope this bill makes it all the way to law.

“Student Associations are the only organisations left in New Zealand that can force membership onto someone and students have long been fighting to be given the same rights as all New Zealanders.

“The local tennis or rugby club can’t compel membership and instead relies on providing a good quality service that people want in order to attract members – student associations should be no different.

“It is time to end the unfair funding, by all students, of the political activities of radical left wing groups, and put an end to corruption and fraud at these unaccountable and unrepresentative student associations,” said ACT on Campus Vice President Peter McCaffrey.

Here’s the bill itself.

Matt Flanagan reports that the bill has passed its first reading! I think this is a very helpful story to understand the level of psychological confidence that causes leftists to disregard fundamental human rights and force their views on those who disagree with them. Fascism is solely and completely a phenomenon of the left, and the road to fascism goes through socialism.

Share

News

Obama administration backs restrictions on free speech at the United Nations

1 Comment

Story from the Weekly Standard. (H/T Confederate Yankee via ECM)

Excerpt:

The Obama administration has marked its first foray into the UN human rights establishment by backing calls for limits on freedom of expression. The newly-minted American policy was rolled out at the latest session of the UN Human Rights Council, which ended in Geneva on Friday.

[…]In introducing the resolution on Thursday, October 1–adopted by consensus the following day–the ranking U.S. diplomat, Chargé d’Affaires Douglas Griffiths, crowed:

“The United States is very pleased to present this joint project with Egypt. This initiative is a manifestation of the Obama administration’s commitment to multilateral engagement throughout the United Nations and of our genuine desire to seek and build cooperation based upon mutual interest and mutual respect in pursuit of our shared common principles of tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

His Egyptian counterpart, Ambassador Hisham Badr, was equally pleased–for all the wrong reasons. He praised the development by telling the Council that “freedom of expression . . . has been sometimes misused,” insisting on limits consistent with the “true nature of this right” and demanding that the “the media must . . . conduct . . . itself in a professional and ethical manner.”

[…]Pakistan’s Ambassador Zamir Akram, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, made it clear that they understand the resolution and its protection against religious stereotyping as allowing free speech to be trumped by anything that defames or negatively stereotypes religion. The idea of protecting the human rights “of religions” instead of individuals is a favorite of those countries that do not protect free speech and which use religion–as defined by government–to curtail it.

Speaking as a Christian who values religious liberty, I would not use the power of the state to silence the free speech of people who “offend” me by disagreeing with me. That’s fine with me. In any case, these “human rights” laws are almost never used to defend the free speech of Christians. The fact that Egypt and Pakistan approve of Obama’s plan doesn’t fill me with confidence about who is likely to benefit.

Now might be a good time to review how restrictions on free speech worked out in Canada, where offended Muslims sue news publications and news magazines for citing the actual words of radical Imams or publishing the Mohammed cartoons.

Share