Is This a "Twisted Twist" Landmark Gay Hatred Case?

The Jerusalem Post, of all media, has an interesting article today on a recent court ruling in the UK. Here's the quick review:

1. During a protest against a forthcoming Gay Pride parade, Muslims hand out pamphlets titled: "Death Penalty?" which state that gays would go to hell.

2. The men are found guilty of "stirring up hatred" by "calling for the death of homosexuals".

3. Britain has a new law (2010) which makes it an offense to stir up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.

4. Crown prosecutor said "people are entitled to hold extreme opinions which others may find unpleasant and obnoxious", but they are "not entitled to distribute those opinions in a threatening manner intending to stir up hatred . . . ."

5. The intent of the case is not to curtail "people's religious views or preventing them from educating others about those views" as long as they do it in a "lawful manner and not incite others to hatred."

Several things can be said of the ruling . . .

I. It's a good thing the accused weren't 'saved from being found guilty' through the application of Sharia Law. (Maybe that will come in an appeal stage, if there is one.)

II. It appears, one can express one's beliefs, but not hint that anyone should be killed for what they believe or how they live. So, it appears that it's okay to say "I believe practicing homosexuality is a sin and sinners go to hell" but it's not okay to say or imply that "homosexuals should be killed". And that's exactly right -- that should not be allowed. That's not our call, especially for Christians. We'll leave such actions and beliefs that adherents of a faith have the right to murder others because they don't accept the tenets of their faith, to some other religion, not Christianity or Judaism or Hinduism or Buddhism. Did I miss any? Perhaps intentionally and rightly so.

III. What is scary is that these men were found guilty primarily because at least one witness said he "felt" he was "being targeted" and he "feared he would be burned".

On that last point, there's good news and bad news: On the one hand we could argue that if these men were indeed implying that gays should be killed, then by all means -- whether someone 'felt' he was being targeted or that he 'feared' he would be killed, is immaterial. The men are guilty in either case, with or without that evidence.  The would follow from my understanding of the new UK law.

On the other hand, what if the men were simply stating that "practicing homosexuality is a sin and sinners go to hell" (which I admit was not what they constrained themselves to) and one or more homosexuals then also "felt" they were being targeted or "feared" they would be killed? Could that also be considered sufficient to find the men, under these revised circumstances, guilty?  I believe there's a good chance of that.

That is the problem with laws without absolutes -- or at least with laws without godly absolutes. Sooner or later you get tripped up by the rules.  And sooner or later, enough people don't stand up for the truth.

Anyway, here are the details.

UK Muslims convicted in landmark gay hat... JPost - International

 [Are you looking for a speaker at your church, your club, school, or organization? Ken is available to preach, teach, challenge, and/or motivate. Please contact us.]

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

Rise in the number of Black Prisoners in Canada

According to the linked article, blacks represent about 10% of the federal prison inmates while they only represent about 2.5% of the general population. And the ombudsman says he's concerned about that and the quick rise over the last decade.

I would be too, but I'm not sure that it may be for the same reason. There are several reasons a concern with this kind of statistic may be in order. Here are some.

1. The courts may be biased. Certainly North Carolina's governor seems to think so and that's why she kept in place a law that tries to address it.  (see my blog at "Oh, What a Mess, What a Mess in America's Judicial System. Explaining and dissecting the N.C. death-row racial bias bill.")

2. More blacks may be involved in crime than non-blacks proportionally.  That's possible, as politically incorrect as it may be.

3. There may be good reasons why blacks may be more into crime than non-blacks.  Has anyone tried to do a correlation between this statistic and unemployment or average wages or education levels or years in the country, etc., as it relates to blacks and non-blacks?   Therein one may find some very interesting data as well as some potential cause and effect relationships.

4.  The reason for fear may also be due to the potential this kind of situation has for strong reaction in the black community (think of what happens periodically in Canada with militant First Nations youth when they feel frustrated and unfairly treated), not to mention, the negative image more whites may assume about all blacks.  None of this is good or desirable.

5.  The fear may be an economic one.  For example, people may say if the number of blacks in prison were equal to their representative share of the population, there would be 1,050 fewer blacks in federal prisons and that would reduce costs considerably.

So, there are many reasons for the ombudsman to be a little worried.  Many of us are.  But the problem may not be with blacks at all.  It may be with our economic and social and covert racist systems that we all operate in.  To me, Christmastime, now that we've turned it over to big business and commercial endeavors, seems to bring out the social injustices in our society best.  Unless some of us work hard to overcome that.

Here's the original article, for your perusal and thoughtful consideration.

Canada News: Black prison population climbing, says ombudsman - thestar.com

[Are you looking for a speaker at your church, your club, school, or organization? Ken is available to preach, teach, challenge, and/or motivate. Please contact us.]

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.  

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

Kenyan doctors reject offer; many are dying in hospitals

More on the story we are following. Doctors, a third world country, the right to strike, courts, deaths, hospitals, money, poverty, progress. There's lots here to consider.

They mention a good number dying in Nakuru -- a place we've been to and taught at. Clearly there the need is great as it elsewhere in Kenya.

Kenyan doctors reject Sh7bn pay offer �- News�|nation.co.ke

[Are you looking for a speaker at your church, your club, school, or organization? Ken is available to preach, teach, challenge, and/or motivate. Please contact us.]

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

For Our Legal Beagles: How Shariah Law & Islam Creeps Into U.S. Court System.

Just some information that you may want to know and be aware of. The problem is real and we all see it. We're just not doing anything about it. That will come back to haunt us. Mark my words.

Islam makes inroads through U.S. courts

[Are you looking for a speaker at your church, your club, school, or organization? Ken is available to preach, teach, challenge, and/or motivate. Please contact us.]

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.  

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

Why the Court's Decision For WalMart is Correct

During my career in Human Resources, I had the privilege of being the first Director of Policy and Research for the Pay Equity Commission of Ontario. We did all we could to eliminate discrimination against women when it came to work of equal value (never mind identical work). So you would think I would be against today's decision on the WalMart case. Yet, based on the principles of pay equity and how the necessary remedies are to be identified and implemented, I must tell you the court's decision is correct.

Clearly the decision is not saying the women were not discriminated against. It simply says when you group 1.5 million women together -- from different stores, under different managers, in different states, and most importantly in different jobs -- there is no possible way to determine whether zero, one, a hundred, a thousand, a million, or all of them were discriminated against in accordance with any required legislation, and especially to what extent. That being said, each one is free to file their own lawsuit. (Although, due to costs -- that ain't likely to happen.)

But here's the point. This type of lawsuit would have to result in individual remedies on each and every person involved in the suit given the laws that were reportedly violated. It would literally take decades if not a century to accomplish that in the current legal system. This case is very different than the one that says Bank X systemically broke the law with respect to their customers and thus all those in the law suit are entitled to an award equivalent to Y% of their savings of record on such and such a date. That's doable and fair. That cannot be done in a Pay Equity type of case. All women may have been discriminated against but not in the same way, or to the same extent. Therefore, you cannot apply a single ruling on all. For all of the above, I agree with today's decision.

Here's another account of it . . . and p.s. Walmart did not win a sex-bias case. They won a court-related procedural case.   Also most North Ameican reports speak of 1.5 million women, not 1.0 million.

Walmart wins US sex-bias case - Americas - Al Jazeera English

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

You Think Religion & State Should Be Separate. Fine. What About Religion and Major League Sports?

Okay, I didn't see this coming, but obviously it is. Take a look at this recent USA Today night. The Oakland A's baseball franchise wants to get more fans out and the Jewish community approached them with an idea to do so. As a result, they're having a Jewish Heritage night. Take a look.

But the Muslims say that's not kosher. They must either cancel it or give them a night as well. Okay, so the Muslims ask for a night and one of two things happens. Either they get one -- and we'll see who shows up. Or they don't get one -- and the Muslims sue. Let me save you the trouble and the wait -- if that happens and providing all else is equal, the Muslims will win. And then no one will have a special religious theme night. Ball game over.

Take a look.

Finding their religion: Oakland A's plan first Jewish Heritage night - Game On!: Covering the Latest Sports News

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

European Crucifix Decision Has Impact Internationally

One of the bigger legal issues going on right now in the United States is whether or not court decisions should only use earlier American cases as their rationale, or whether the judges can look to international   decisions for their rationale.  Of course, this is a two-edged battle -- both conservatives and liberals would want to use international decisions when it suits them, and forbid their use when it doesn't suit them.  Well, you can't have it both way.

In the meantime, enjoy your crosses in the classroom and do accept what those in other religions may want to bring in -- e.g. a head scarf for girls, etc.

'Offended' parent can't remove classroom cross, court decides

-- Thanks for dropping by.  Sign up to receive free updates.  We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources.  Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar.  And please share this blog with your friends.   Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

Remember the New York Mosque Plan? -- Well, It's Still in the Courts, courtesy Pat Robertson et al.

A Reuters article explains clearly how the battle about building the Ground Zero Mosque is still in the courts and what the current issue is all about. The decision should come down in about four weeks. It's all about whether the building should be considered a monument of September 11th or not.

Personally, although I'm making no predictions on this one -- I don't think the way things have been going that Pat Robertson's side is going to win this one. But God may have other plans.

New York mosque project site faces legal challenge | Reuters

-- Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

Should Christians Give Up?

This article is disturbing -- not so much in what it says or reports, but more in what the implications are.  When victims and their lawyers feel that there is no point in appealing a decision "because the nation's legal system (in the U.K.) is skewed against Christianity."

The recent case under discussion here seems to indicate that Christians only have "qualified" rights as Christians in the U.K.  (And I would venture to say that it is true in most places in the West.)  As a result, true Christians who would accept but not promote homosexuality are now forbidden from being foster children or adopting children.

The case deals with the issue as to whether or not being a Christian is protected by "common law".  The decision seems to indicate that "secular law" trumps Christianity when a judge thinks that a foster or adopted parent's thinking or feeling about a subject may end up being unfair to the child.  In this case, the topic is indeed 'homosexuality'.   But let us stop for a moment and consider another subject:  What if the children were 'prone' to be a compulsive gambler?  Does that mean that a parent who is against gambling and teaches against it should not be allowed to adopt or to be a foster parent to such a child or to any child in particular?  I don't think so.   The U.K. justice system just seems to have it out for Christian beliefs.

So, should these victims have appealed?  What do you think?  Read the article pointed to by the link below and then share your opinion.

Personally, I believe they should have -- if they had the financial support.  But what do you think?

Finally, the article suggests a possible outcome for the future -- that natural parents may one day have to promote homosexuality's acceptance and appropriateness to their own children in order to be allowed to keep them.   That sounds far-fetched.  But it is a rather logical conclusion.  Can you handle it?

Read more: Courts have 'special animosity' for Christians http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=273301#ixzz1GVWNxman

Courts have 'special animosity' for Christians

-- Thank for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.