Tuesday, January 8, 2008


I'm not going to be updating this blog any more. This is due to many things, primarily the dearth of new press releases on the Christian Voice website and also because the blog's failed to rack up more than a very small number of hits.

If this particularly dismays you or you want to use this URL for your own blog then drop a comment, I get notified by e-mail so I will respond.

Chances are that any particularly absurd press releases will get picked up by my main blog: link.

Sunday, December 16, 2007

More sin

More from the 'Britain in Sin' booklet. This time we'll be looking at what Christian Voice/Steven Green has to say about the Ninth Commandment and its relation to British law. The commandment, in case you don't know them by heart, is "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour".

Green isn't keen on the standard of proof of "beyond reasonable doubt". Apparently, the use of this standard of proof means "that one witness was more plausible than another. It is not a just system at all, and has resulted in unjust convictions". Upon reading this I instantly thought Green was on dubious ground. "Beyond reasonable doubt" is a very high standard. His further comments did little to convince me.
In 1995, a lorry driver convicted of killing his disabled baby step-daughter on flawed forensic evidence from a Home Office pathologist alone was able to prove his innocence, three years after his conviction and imprisonment. (Times 30/03/95) [emphasis added]
I've read the article this comment is based on. In no part of the article is the original forensic evidence described as 'flawed'. Additionally, the article reads: "He was convicted mainly on the evidence of... a Home Office pathologist [emphasis added]". I'd suggest that that's a distinct discrepancy between the article and Mr. Green's description of it. Of course it's poor that an innocent man was imprisoned for three years but it's impossible to have a system with no miscarriages of justice and he was freed in the end. Onto the next case he describes:
In another case, a father accused of sexually assaulting his daughter after she claimed to recall incidents from her childhood was freed by a court when the prosecution admitted that the memories were fictitious and had emerged during psychiatric counselling. The prosecution had no other evidence at all. The daughter was mentally disturbed and prone to sexual fantasies. The man had to wait 17 months before the case came to court and he was exonerated. With Biblical standards of evidence understood all round he would never have been arrested. (Times 29/03/95)
But the man was exonerated. What's the problem? If you had to prove that someone committed an offence before even arresting them, then what's the point of having a trial? "Beyond reasonable doubt" doesn't even apply to arrest. What is the relevance of this story?
Let it be clear that there could be no re-introduction of the death penalty without sound conviction according to the Law of God. God hates the conviction of the innocent just as much as the acquittal of the guilty. There is a stark contrast here with present liberal judicial practice. By following the principles set out by Almighty God, fewer people would be convicted of capital crimes, but those who were would face the ultimate penalty.
Absolute shite. You simply cannot have a system where it is required that someone's guilt be proved with 100% certainty. Every solitary defendant would be acquitted. If you don't require mathematical certainty and you have capital punishment then sooner or later an innocent person will end up being killed.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976, Criminal Justice Act 1988 S158

The 1976 Act gave both the accuser and the defendant in rape cases anonymity. Section 158 of the 1988 Act abolished the anonymity of defendants. In a number of recent cases, lying women have hidden behind the cloak of anonymity to make false accusations, whilst those they accuse have endured full publicity. Nor have the false accusers been subsequently charged with perjury. Feminist presumption is that all men are born sinful, but all women virtuous. The law should show no such partiality.
Possible fair point, bar the rubbish about feminism.
Section 40 of the [Road Traffic Act 1991] allowed road traffic authorities to set up cameras to trap motorists committing traffic offences. It can be argued that these are an infringement of civil liberty, to which the reply would be that their presence saves lives. What is undeniable is that the vast majority of notices erected along the highway which depict a camera, or warn of "police enforcement cameras," bear false witness. The highly expensive camera in many cases is not there at all. It may be that no camera box is there, or just an empty box, or just the flashing light. The whole of the law is diminished when, by law, the state does evil hoping that good may come.
Oh please.

I should point out in the interest of fairness that I've cherry-picked bits from the section of the booklet, but it's reasonably long, and I simply don't have time to go around researching a load of random bits of law in order to be able to comment properly. Mr. Green does have a shockingly poor knowledge of what he's writing about a good deal of the time though, the "beyond reasonable doubt" examples above displaying a particularly high level of ignorance.

Saturday, November 24, 2007

It's OK To Rape Your Wife

I was flicking through 'Britain in Sin', a book[let] thing you can get on the Christian Voice website here, when I found this gem about the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994:
It introduced an offence of "marital rape", drafted by the Law Commission, unknown in the Law of God, and in conflict with the marriage service of the Book of Common Prayer, where the promises given by a man and woman to each other establish a binding consent to sexual intercourse.

This makes the following quotes from people supporting the booklet pretty scary:

"Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, has made a meaningful attempt to analyse the cause of Britain 's current moral decline. The list of unrighteous laws passed during the last 50 years is particularly helpful; indeed, it would be a miracle if we were not in decline, having passed so much legislation which is directly contrary to Scripture."
Lord Ashbourne
EDIT: From the comments - "I need to update this entry, as it appears Lord Ashbourne is Christian Voice's patron which kind of reduces the meaningfulness of his quote. I thought he was just some random person of standing".

"This makes interesting and disturbing reading. We desperately need to understand, as a nation, that our Creator knows what is best for us, and to return to His way as the best way to live."
Rt Rev Wallace Benn, Bishop of Lewes

Well done for supporting marital rape, you utter cunts.


I have not updated my blogs for far too long. Sorry about that, I've been somewhat busy.

Anyway, the abortion conference mentioned in previous posts took place, and Christian Voice commented on the day itself. Apparently Christian Voice carried out a 'successful lobbying' - although I somehow doubt that everyone there decided to denounce abortion as evil).


Leaflets were handed out to attendees. Apparently it was 'sad to see so many African and Asian faces and hear Eastern European accents', although I'm not quite sure why.

Steven Green's apparently cynical about reformation on the law of abortion, stating that we should 'expect all the effort being put into reducing the [number of] weeks [abortion is allowed] to result in nothing, or maybe just a two-week reduction, with massive further liberalisation including just one doctor's signature instead of two, and the legalisation of DIY back-street abortion kits.'

Yeah... back-street abortion kits. That's... really going to happen. I mean... surely having Steven Green as PM would encourage the proliferation of these back-street abortion kits, what with abortion being totally illegal under his crazy far-right control.

After a bizarre passage comparing the abolition of slavery with the potential abolition of abortion, we find that Jon Snow didn't attend the conference after all, pulling out 'after being inundated by critical emails, saying he would be "out of the country"'. Since when did Christian Voice have access to Jon Snow's inbox? Because being inundated by e-mails from one person (Steven Green), isn't really a point of interest at all.

And that's that.

Oh, and if you want to see some very selective quoting from the Koran and the Bible, look here: link.

Tuesday, November 6, 2007

Christian Voice On Islam

"A mosque is regarded as an abomination in the sight of Almighty God... Because Islam is a rival religion, one which rejects the God-incarnate, crucified, risen, ascended Messiah and Son of God the Lord Jesus Christ, a mosque is an abomination wherever in the world it is placed."
"When a person worships a god who is not the true God, they are worshipping and empowering unseen principalities and powers that have already been defeated by Christ on the cross. This is exactly what happens in a mosque. When Muslims go into a mosque and bow down before their false god, ‘Allah’ (‘the god’ in Arabic) they are engaging in idol worship without realizing it. It is only necessary to look at the symbol of Islam, the crescent moon, to realize the identity of the real spirit behind Islam. It follows that a mosque is a place where demonic principalities and powers are glorified. The God of the Bible is the only Creator and Almighty God, not ‘Allah’, the god of Islam."
And I thought Christian Voice were such nice people! Fucking hell, doing this blog can be depressing at times...

Sunday, November 4, 2007


Wasn't intending on doing another post, but I was clicking around the Christian Voice website and discovered this:
The rainbow and the ‘rainbow sash’ have become the international symbol of ‘diversity’. Sexuality is a spectrum, according to the thinking, and can encompass ‘straight’, ‘gay’, ‘bisexual’, or ‘transsexual’. When a rainbow in a bold semi-circular design appears in a school classroom alarm bells should ring in parents’ minds. The rainbow sign means that the school is pushing homosexual rights under the guise of making that classroom a ‘safe’ place for ‘gay children’.
Or it could just mean that the kids have been, y'know, learning about rainbows and the teacher thought it'd be a good opportunity to get the coloured paint out and decorate the classroom a bit.

Shriti Vadera And The Abortion Conference

Christian Voice are upset because Shriti Vadera, aka. Baroness Vadera, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International Development, has attended a conference on safe abortion.


There's some guff about the Government taking sides (which they may or may not have a point about, I don't really care) but then Steven Green comes out with this:
'It is especially disturbing to have a Government spokeswoman of Indian origin supporting abortion on demand given the abuses of abortion in India. Selective foeticide has resulted in a gender imbalance of 80 girls being born for every 100 boys. Clearly the Hindu dowry system is partly to blame, but abortion on demand in India is the evil which allows such an injustice to be done. For Shriti Vadera to go and support abortion on demand knowing about the misogyny it encourages in India is simply callous.'
Raised in India? Well then, the Indian abortion issue's entirely on your shoulders then! Ugh...