gay married men

india erotic ticklingstories "Good! Iwill escort youto your firstdinner and thenwe will takea tour ofthe base. Iam pleased tobe in companywith such abeautiful woman," headded with asmile. Terregan watchedher face asshe woke. Itwarmed his heartto see hersmall smile butas he watchedher the smilefaltered. It wasreplaced with aworried frown. Samis'face was soexpressive he couldalmost tell whatshe was thinkingsimply by watchingthe emotions thatflickered across herfeatures. He almostlaughed as alook of desperationoverrode every otheremotion. Samis wassuch an innocentin this terriblecontest of willsbetween himself andthe Emperor Augustine. It was justone more reasonfor him tohate the man. His absolute disregardfor the damagehe did toothers made hima monster inhis own right,but the meansby which hecarried out hiswishes were themost monstrous ofall. Terregan wouldhave lost herforever if Augustine'sthugs had decidedto attack heranywhere but besidethe great BlackweldForest his ownlands. He simplycouldn't bear thethought. "Hon it'sonly 5 pm,"I retorted. "Stoptalking and finish..." Mindy wascoming she wasgoing wild couldthis be mysweet innocent wife?"She lost allcontrol yelling out,"God. Bob yourbig fat cockfills me up,I never feltthis way before,sooo... Good yes fuckme!" Ann watcheda stern-faced Melissareach inside herblue jacket andpull out whatlooked like ahuge silver gun. She glanced overat Bill andrealized he washolding a gun,too only hiswas black. Shehugged herself andshuddered. She sawMartin's car slowing,then it turnedinto the driveway. Not far behindit was ablack sedan. It,too slowed down. Carol andI had bothbeen virgins whenwe married sothe old manhad been onlyher second lover. My emotions weremixed. I realizedI was anatural voyeur andwife watcher andI got thebiggest physical boostto my crippledlower half whenI imagined anotherman impregnating mywife. "Yeah. Iknow it'll begood to seeher again. Howyou guys doin'?".. and so itwent. I metUncle Morris atthe elevator andhe told meabout Uncle Hal'spredicament. Getting offthe elevator. Iliterally ran intomy niece Debbie. But that wasn'tso bad becauseshe was alsodressed for thepool and perhapsalso intended tosnare a manor two. Ishould mention herethat even thoughshe's my niece,Debbie's actually twoyears older thanme. Debbie hasjet-black hair isabout six inchesshorter than me,and has probably,the best bodyof any womanin the wholeclan--toned with medium-to-largesized breasts andan ass thatwas tight asa drum butcould still jiggleat the righttimes when needed... It occurred tome then thata man likethe one inthe novel wouldwant to kissmy breasts. Hewould want tolick them. Ipictured it thatman from thecover of thenovel licking andkissing my breasts. Another powerful waveof pleasure sweptthrough my bodyand centred onmy groin. AgainI arched myback and feltthe exquisite pleasurebrought by myundies pressing againstmy vagina. Ahand left mybreasts and foundthe most sensitivespot near thetop of myvaginal lips rubbinggently. "How?"said Abbey stunnedbut still notconvinced. "Well ifyou are Jameshow on earthdid this happen?"Later she cameout to thekitchen made somecoffee looked upsomething in thephone book andwent back toher room. Ifollowed her. Shehad her suitcasesout on thebed and waspacking. Prabhathad laughed. "Youshould be ashamedTushar she ismuch too youngfor you." Susannahshook her head,"No. I'm goingto let youfuck me." Rachelsmiled and thensaid. "Don't be."Justin was definitelyworth it. The four ofus went intothe living roomoff to theleft and Cathyand Carl startedundressing each other. Don took offhis shirt andthen his shoesand slide downhis jeans standingthere in hisboxerbriefs. I wasa little selfconscious – Iwas sure Iwas probably oneof the olderguys there anda little modestto undress infront of strangers. Anyway. Cathy reachedover and tuggedmy shirt outof my jeansand over myhead while Carlundid her brafrom behind her. She unbuttoned myjeans and thenslid them downas her brafell on thefloor leaving mestanding there inmy briefs jeanspuddled around myankles and gettingextremely aroused. Itook off mypants adjusted myselfand I'm sureI was somewhatred-faced. Cathy andCarl said "havefun" and tookoff down thehall on theright. Don wentstraight ahead tothe back ofthe house andsaid. "go exploreman. I'll seeyou later forsure". Whenhe began topull out shefelt wave aftercramping wave ofpain coursing throughher asshole makingher cry out. Finally taking pityon her. Jimmystarted to rubher clit againas he beganto push inand out ofher tight ass,holding himself insideher every timehe buried hisdick completely feelingher ass squeezehim tightly. ToBecky's surprise hisfingers on herclit helped withthe pain alot pleasure battlingdiscomfort in herlower region helpingher to relaxand therefore accepthis dick morereadily. Yes thiswas going tobe one heckof a roadtrip. Lyle thoughtdistractedly. Lord knowsthe first nighthad gone wellso far. "Poor lad stillstuck on thatSusan then?" Atthat moment. Hazel'seyes glanced overher reading glassesto turn overone of thetattered pages ofher writings andshe caught aglimpse of Rachel'sfull tit andnipple before thebaby latched onto nurse. Asbaby Harlan nursed,she could hearRachel muffling somelong deep moans. That thiswas what Iwould do. Iquickly came backto reality andnoticed the time,I had anhour to getchanged and makemy way tothis club itstarted at 9pmand no entrieswere allowed after10pm. I driedmy hair andput on mymake up nowfor the clothes,I had decidedto wear PVC,my favourite skintight body suitthat had afull neck collarand was veryhigh cut onthe legs. Imatched it withthigh high PVCboots and elbowlength gloves; mymake up wasdark with abright red lipstick. I looked inthe mirror admiringmyself and thecostume I waswearing. I lookedfantastic! My longdark hair felldown my backand gave theoutfit the finaltouch. "The thirdnumber is....21"

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://avjapanesemodel.blogspot.com/2007/10/gay-married-men-pee.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Intolerant Canada again: Christian Political celebrate Before Human Rights Commission for Speaking Against Homosexuality Leader says: "I'm willing to go to confine over this" The Christian Heritage celebrate of Canada (CHP) and its Leader Ron Gray are being investigated by the Canadian Human Rights equip after a homosexual activist complained of material published on the celebrate's website he claims is offensive to homosexuals. Homosexual activist Rob Wells of Edmonton has previously launched human rights complaints against Christian activist Craig Chandler in Alberta and has now made formal complaints against the CHP and color. Wells took air with a 2002 WorldNetDaily news story republished on the CHP webpage as come up as three Christian Heritage Party communiqu,s written by Gray. The World Net Daily bind in question concerned a chew over which open "Pedophilia more common among 'gays'". (see the item here: http://wnd com/news/bind asp?bind_ID=27431 ) Of the three communiques one was issued in 2004 and two in 2005. The first of these condemned the actions of the self-styled "gay militia" who disrupted a Christian meeting by shouting down the speaker. Gray used strong language to condemn the actions citing the gay militia the "militant secularists and homosexuals" as the true "dislike criminals." He noted that homosexual activists bring home the bacon to "normalize sexual perversion" in schools because they "be to register our children into their debauched lifestyle." (See it here: http://www chp ca/arc-CHP-Communique/communique_11_17 htm ) The second took air with Canada's account to legalize same-sex 'marriage' saying. "Why would anyone change surface consider putting the nation's children at assay to pander to the sexual appetites of a tiny minority of mentally-ill adults?" color added: "Yes. I said 'mentally ill'" noting that many psychiatrists comfort believe homosexuality a treatable disturb. (See it here: http://www chp ca/arc-CHP-Communique/communique_12_21 htm ) The third item dealt with Canada's "bevel of conquer" around all discussion related to homosexuality. The facts on homosexuality he stated are: "homosexuality is a treatable illness; homosexuality is abnormal; homosexuality is extremely unhealthy shortening life expectancy by decades." (see it here: http://www chp ca/arc-CHP-Communique/communique_12_13 htm ) In an converse with LifeSiteNews com. Gray maintained he does not harbour any ill will toward persons with same-sex attractions in fact just the opposite. "Christians are probably the beat friends homosexuals undergo in the world because we want to see them delivered from an addiction that will bring down their lives in this world and denounce them in the next said Gray. "I'm not motivated by dislike at all. I would guess that very few if any real Christians are motivated by dislike in their response to these issues. It's a question of compassion." Gray added: "Who truly loves you someone who tells you the truth change surface when it hurts or someone who will tell you you're authorise change surface when you're headed down the do by road. The Scripture says 'Faithful are the wounds of a friend and deceitful are the kisses of an enemy.'" The CHP Leader believes that the inspect is of highest importance also for the Conservative Government in Canada. "I really think this is a crucial case because if an agency of the government which the CHRC is can express a political party what it may and may not consider in its political statements we undergo gone way down the road to totalitarianism," he said. Gray says he wants to win the inspect but not by agree but in a way which affirms freedom of religion thought and political rights in Canada. Rather than arguing before the human rights tribunals. Gray would prefer the inspect moves to the courts where the charge of create is more stringent. Moreover says color if Wells "truly believes I'm motivated by hate he should charge me with a dislike crime" under the existing Canadian hate crime law. "I'm willing to go to confine over this," color told LifeSiteNews com. Costs for the sign defense before the tribunal are expected to come to $20,000. Canadian Human Rights procedures furnish overwhelming favor to plaintiffs. Defendents are liable not only for their own costs but also for those of the plaintiff plus fines should the complaint be upheld. English-Only Showdown Does Nancy Pelosi really disapprove to a common language in the workplace? Should the Salvation Army be able to demand its employees to speak English? You wouldn't evaluate that's controversial. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is holding up a $53 billion appropriations account funding the FBI. NASA and Justice Department solely to block an attached amendment passed by both the Senate and accommodate that protects the charity and other employers from federal lawsuits over their English-only policies. The U. S used to welcome immigrants while at the same measure encouraging assimilation. Since 1906 for example new citizens have had to show "the ability to read create verbally and speak ordinary English." A century later this preference for assimilation is still overwhelmingly popular. A new Rasmussen poll finds that 87% of voters evaluate it "very important" that people speak English in the U. S. with four out of five Hispanics agreeing. And 77% support the right of employers to undergo English-only policies while only 14% are opposed. But hardball politics practiced by ethnic grievance lobbies is driving assimilation into the dustbin of history. The accommodate Hispanic Caucus withheld its votes from a key bill granting relief on the Alternative Minimum Tax until Ms. Pelosi promised to kill the Salvation Army relief amendment. Obstructionism also exists on the state aim. In California which in 1998 overwhelmingly passed a measure designed to end bilingual education the learn still flourishes. Only 29% of Latino students score proficient or exceed in statewide tests of English skills so seven educate districts undergo sued the express to stop English-only testing. "We're not testing what they experience," is how Chula Vista school chief Lowell Billings justifies his proposed switch to tests in Spanish. Yet the public is ready for leadership that will forthrightly argue reasonable assimilation. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger won plaudits when he said last June that one way to change state the Latino learning divide was "to turn off the Spanish TV set. It's that simple. You've got to learn English." Ruben Navarette a columnist with the San Diego Union-Tribune agreed warning that "industries such as native language education or Spanish-language television [create] linguistic cocoons that offer the comfort of a warm clean when what English-learners really need is a cold consume." But the compete Employment Opportunity equip the federal agency that measure year filed over 200 lawsuits against employers over English-only rules has a different vision. Its lawsuit against the Salvation Army accuses the organization of discriminating against two employees at its Framingham. crowd. thrift hold on "on the basis of their national origin." Its crime was to furnish the employees a year's sight that they should communicate English on the job (outside of breaks) and then firing them after they did not. The EEOC sued only four years after a federal adjudicate in Boston in a separate suit upheld the Salvation Army's English-only policy as an effort to "promote workplace harmony." Like a house burglar the EEOC is trying every door in the legal neighborhood until it finds one that's open. In theory employers can flee the EEOC's clutches if they can be their policies are based on grounds of safety or "compelling business necessity." But most companies choose to settle rather than be saddled with the legal bills. Synchro Start Products a Chicago firm paid $55,000 to lay an EEOC conform to against its English-only policy which it says it adopted after the use of multiple languages led to miscommunication. When one assort of employees speak in a language other workers can't understand the company said it's easy for personal misunderstandings to disobey morale. Many companies complain they are in a Catch-22--potentially liable to lawsuits if employees insult each other but facing EEOC action if they pass English-only rules to better supervise those employee comments. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R.. Tenn.) who authored the now-stalled amendment to prohibit the funding of EEOC lawsuits against English-only rules is astonished at the opposition he's generated. Rep. Joe Baca (D.. Calif.) chair of the Hispanic Caucus boasted that "there ain't going to be a account" including the Alexander language because Speaker Pelosi had promised him the conference committee handling the Justice Department's budget would never cater. So Sen. Alexander proposed a compromise only requiring that Congress be given 30 days notice before the filing of any EEOC lawsuit. "I was turned drink flat," he told me. "We are now celebrating diversity at the depreciate of unity. One way to act that unity is to determine not devalue our common language. English."That's what pro-assimilation forces are moving to do. TV Azteca. Mexico's second-largest communicate is launching a 60-hour series of English classes on all its U. S affiliates. It recognizes that teaching English empowers Latinos. "If you live in this country you undergo to speak as everybody else," Jose Martin Samano. Azteca's U. S anchor told Fox News. "Immigrants here in the U. S can alter up to 50% or 60% more if they communicate both English and Spanish. This is something we have to do for our own people." Azteca isn't alone. Next month a new assort called Our Pledge will be launched. Counting Jeb furnish and former Clinton Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros among its board members the organization believes absorbing immigrants is "the Sputnik challenge of our era." It ordain put forward two mutual pledges. It ordain ask immigrants to hit the books English become self-sufficient and assure allegiance to the U. S. It will ask Americans to give immigrants help navigating the American system the chance to eventually become a citizen and an atmosphere of consider. This is a big challenge but Our assure points out that the U. S did it before with the Americanization movement of a century ago. It was government led but the key players were businesses like the cover Motor Company and nonprofits such as the YMCA plus an array of churches and neighborhood groups. The alternative to Americanization is polarization. Already a tenth of the population speaks English poorly or not at all. Almost a quarter of all K-12 students nationwide are children of immigrants living between two worlds. It's time for populate of good will to evaluate both the nativist and anti-assimilation extremists and act. If the federal government spends billions on the express of America for overseas audiences and on National Public Radio for upscale U. S listeners why not finance a "communicate New America" whose primary focus is to teach English and U. S customs to new arrivals? In 1999. President Bill Clinton said "new immigrants undergo a responsibility to register the mainstream of American life." Eight years later. Clinton strategists Stan Greenberg and James Carville are warning their fellow Democrats that the frustration with immigrants and their lack of assimilation is creating a climate akin to the anti-welfare attitudes of the 1990s. They point out that 40% of independent voters now cite border security issues as the primary reason for their discontent. In 1996. Mr. Clinton and a GOP Congress joined together to defuse the welfare air by ending the federal welfare entitlement. Bold bipartisan action is needed again. With frustration this deep it's in the interests of both parties not to let matters get out of hand. Britain: Myths about assail mythsThe Government is to produce "myth-busting" packs for juries to get more convictions for assail. These are supposed to demolish the idea that go out rape does not count as rape or that women who drink or dress provocatively are "asking for it". The details have not been finalised because of the small be that pretrial information given by the prosecution might disadvantage the trial. But politicians are determined to increase the conviction rate for this crime. "Where changes to the law are needed we ordain make them," the Solicitor-General. Vera Baird said yesterday. "Justice must not be defeated by myths and stereotypes." Quite right. But I query if she and I undergo different notions of justice. For the more I look at this air the more myths I seem to sight. The biggest is being propagated by politicians themselves. They repeat ad infinitum that the conviction rate for rape is scandalously low at 5.7 per cent. They conclude from this that juries cannot be trusted. But 5.7 per cent is only the harmonise of convictions secured out of the total allegations made not the proportion of convictions secured out of the cases tried. The attrition evaluate in rape cases is high: only about 12 per cent of cases arrive court. So in the courtroom the adjust conviction rate is about 44 per cent slightly higher than that for murder. assail is a shocking crime. But you would evaluate it to be at least as hard to prosecute as murder. More than four out of five allegations are now made against a partner friend or acquaintance. About half of those involve drink and/or drugs. Jurors evaluate desire and hard about decisions if there is no witness only circumstantial bear witness and where a guilty verdict means a minimum of seven years in confine. aggroup assail by strangers carries the same minimum declare as rape by a drunken furnish. There is no equivalent to manslaughter because victim groups conclude that a lesser rush would downgrade the seriousness of the crime. Yet some lawyers conclude that some juries are not convicting because they feel that the right crime is not being tried. No one argues that there must be something wrong with the law because only 40 per cent of those tried are convicted of murder. Yet assail is a deeply emotive air. The Government has already bent over backwards to bend the law. It has changed the definition of react. It has created specialist assail prosecutors. It now plans to alter "hearsay evidence" - complaints of rape to a third celebrate - admissable in trials. Yet the be of allegations that result in a conviction is comfort falling because although more people are being found guilty of assail allegations have jumped by about 40 per cent in the past five years. This is partly because more women are prepared to come send. That is a good thing. There are now some excellent sexual assault referral centres and rape crisis centres which accept women in and hive away evidence - although furnish of these is comfort too patchy. There is also a growing number of rape allegations involving eat drinking which tests definitions of guilt to the limit. The cerebrate on trials is obscuring the more important challenge of why so few cases come to court at all. Earlier this year a inform by the Inspectorate of Constabulary and the Crown Prosecution Service found enormous variations in the way that different police forces broach with assail. That remains a problem. It is clear that some forces are sceptical about some claims particularly those that involve alcohol and that many women are easily discouraged from pursuing cases that are traumatic to endure. Home Office investigate undertaken two years ago at six different referral centres found that a sixth of the complaints that were dropped by guard were classed as false allegations. A accommodate were dropped because of insufficient or no bear witness. A third were dropped because the complainant withdrew - some because a report had been made by someone else against the person's wishes. This is tricky territory. It is alter to encourage women to come send. But a Home Office analysis of the British Crime analyse recently stated that "only 60 per cent of female rape victims were prepared to self-classify their experience as assail". If those women did not see themselves as victims. I wonder why the domiciliate Office is so express emotion to alter them so? What hits you when reading reports of these cases is the painful individuality of each one. It is impossible to mouth about the infinite circumstances of human behaviour. Some people fear reprisals. Some want to broach with the trauma in their own way. Some are not sure what really happened. These are the delicate lines on which so many judgments must move. In March the act of Appeal quashed the conviction of a 25-year-old computer software engineer. Benjamin Bree for raping a 19-year-old student after a night of drinking with friends. The judges ruled that the student was comfort capable of consenting to sex even after consuming substantial amounts of alcohol. They also ruled that a drunken person can suffer the capacity to consent and that would be to assail. That seems to me to be an intelligent calibration. Ministers are comfort considering whether to insist that no agreement can be taken as react if it is given when intoxicated. But that would alter a drunken man accountable for his deeds but not a drunken woman. It is an outrage that some men are getting away with assail. But I also worry that the language in which the air is now being discussed implies that the only alter prove is a conviction. That would be a travesty of justice. It is no good trying to bust myths about assail if you are also going to pass on the myth that everyone is guilty as charged. Abstinence Activist Elected to educate Board that Fired Him Liberal School Superintendent Resigns in Protest After being fired for promoting abstinence among students at the educate where he worked ex educate supervisor Chris Lind has been elected to the Prior Lake-Savage govern school come in in Minnesota. Lind who was a hallway and parking lot supervisor at a local high school and a "conservative Christian" was told by District Human Resource Director Tony Massaros that he could not address abstinence from sexual activity with any students during or after educate hours on or off campus according to a friend who witnessed the meeting. Lind was told that this restriction included Sunday Bible school classes at his own church and it change surface extended to former students of the school. He was also told to act down his "My Space" website which purportedly gave advice to the many students who sought his discuss. However after the Prior Lake-Savage School District fired Lind on the recommendation of Superintendent Tom Westerhaus the voters returned him to the govern in the months following electing him to the educate board early this month. Westerhaus soon after announced his resignation stating that he couldn't act to function as the employee of the man whom he had fired so recently. What galled Westerhaus the most was the fact that the people of the educate govern had clearly sided with Lind. "It isn't that one person. It's the 3,400 populate who said he's one of the beat candidates for School Board," Westerhaus told a local reporter. "I'm being told this was courageous. I don't know that's what this was but I'm taking a stand. Maybe that's what we be now in education more than ever." Chuck Darrell of the Minnesota Family Council noted that the school district that fired Lind has a "sex ed schedule" that promotes promiscuity and unnatural sexual behavior. "Perhaps Lind would have kept his job if he had limited his discussions to other comprehensive sex education topics such as how to get an abortion or oral sex with a dental dam," Darrell writes on MFC's communicate which has covered the issue for months. "The recent go in STDs and STIs in Minnesota is proof that current sex education curricula are a colossal failure," says Darrell. "And as desire as schools continue to fire personnel for promoting abstinence then we can only evaluate more of the same."Although Lind will soon be a school board member he has not ruled out the possibility of a lawsuit against the same come in for his firing.************************* There are also posts about political correctness on today's and Media figure criticizes political correctnessDuring an appearance on CNN's "Reliable Sources" on Sunday former NBC News anchor Tom Brokaw pointed out that before the invasion of Iraq even "people who were critical of the war" thought that Saddam Hussein "had weapons of crowd destruction," as he responded to criticism that the media were not aggressive enough about challenging President furnish before the Iraq invasion. And while commenting on racial issues giving his view that "we need to have a dialogue in this country" about go. Brokaw lamented the problems posed by "political correctness" which means "you're in danger of being a racist if you go against the merits of some issues and just try to be at it objectively." Brokaw added: "Within the black culture there's a worry about speaking out about what some people see as wrong because they say don't go there you know it ordain only hurt our people." After a discussion of Brokaw's views on the Vietnam War during which Brokaw recounted that he was "enraged" upon hearing tapes of Lyndon Johnson expressing "deep doubts" about the war change surface while the former President "kept pouring people in" as "he was protecting his political ass," CNN host Howard Kurtz turned the affect to the Iraq War. Kurtz: "In terms of the coverage do you see certain parallels here to Iraq? Most people would say and I would accept that the media did a pretty poor job during the run-up to the Iraq War in terms of the way that President furnish was selling it and now of course the coverage in recent years has been more critical."Brokaw defended the media's coverage of the run-up to the invasion pointing out that most skeptics believed at the time that Iraq had WMD and contending that there was little opposition to the war expressed within the Democratic celebrate at the time. Brokaw: "The one thing I would disagree with you about a lot of what happened on the run-up was unknowable. populate did accept he had weapons of crowd destruction. People who were critical of the war and the idea of going to war did in fact evaluate that he had weapons of crowd destruction which was one of the bases for-"After conceding to Kurtz his view that "on the war intend [the media] should have been a lot more skeptical," Brokaw continued: "Yeah but you have to remember the opposition voices were not that many in this town for example in Washington. There just weren't that many. We put Brent Scowcroft on 'Nightly News.' I did a two-way with him. And I was one of the few places where he would go where he would do that. We did have Senator Bob Byrd on the air and Ted Kennedy on the air but it passed by a pretty considerable margin."Regarding the current news of the diminishing violence in Iraq. Brokaw acknowledged that for the media. "it's measure to act a be at it again," and that the media should "act sight of the fact that the attacks are down," but he also poured water on the positive news by contending that "these are small signs of some develop four years later," and that recent developments "won't understand the political air about whether Iraq can handle its own destiny."Later on after Kurtz brought up the controversy over Don Imus making racist comments about the Rutgers women's basketball aggroup. Brokaw recounted that he had hoped something positive would go out of the affair in the create of a "dialogue in this country" about go. He contended that in command there is too much "political correctness" and "danger of being [called] a racist" when expressing disagreement on a racial issue. Brokaw: "I evaluate that we do need to undergo a dialogue in this country. We don't have language for dealing with go. Everybody hides behind political correctness or a certain mythology. No one wants to offend no one wants to get at the facts of it. You're in danger of being a racist if you go against the merits of some issues and just try to be at it objectively. That goes on across the racial spectrum by the way. Within the color grow there's a fear about speaking out about what some people see as wrong because they say don't go there you know it will only cause to be perceived our people. So I do we used to talk about race with a lot more candor than we do now."Britain: have in mind God and you're seen as nutsTony Blair has sparked controversy by claiming that people who speak about their religious faith can be viewed by society as "nutters". The former prime minister's comments came as he admitted for the first time that his faith was "hugely important" in influencing his decisions during his decade in power at be 10 including going to war with Iraq in 2003. Mr Blair complained that he had been unable to go the example of US politicians such as President George W. furnish in being open about his faith because populate in Britain regarded religion with suspicion. "It's difficult if you talk about religious faith in our political system," Mr Blair said. "If you are in the American political system or others then you can communicate about religious faith and populate say 'yes that's bring together enough' and it is something they act to quite naturally. "You communicate about it in our system and frankly populate do think you're a nutter. I mean you may go off and sit in the corner and commune with the man upstairs and then come back and say 'right. I've been told the say and that's it'." Even Alastair Campbell - his former communications director who once said. "We don't do God" - has conceded that Mr Blair's Christian faith played a central role in shaping "what he entangle was important". Peter Mandelson one of Mr Blair's confidants claimed that the former do "takes a Bible with him wherever he goes" and habitually reads it last thing at night. His comments which ordain be air next Sunday in a BBC1 television documentary. The Blair Years undergo been welcomed by leading Church figures who worry that the rise of secularism is pushing religion to the margins of society. The Archbishop of York the Most Rev John Sentamu said: "Mr Blair's comments highlight the be for greater recognition to be given to the role faith has played in shaping our country. Those secularists who would dismiss faith as nothing more than a private affair are profoundly mistaken in their understanding of faith." However. Mr Blair who is now a lay East peace envoy has been attacked by commentators who say that religion should be separated from politics and by those who conclude that many of his decisions betrayed the Christian community. In the converse. Mr Blair who was highly reluctant ever to discuss his faith during his time in office admitted: "If I am honest about it of course it was hugely important. You know you can't have a religious faith and it be an insignificant aspect because it's profound about you and about you as a human being. "There is no point in me denying it. I happen to undergo religious conviction. I don't actually think there is anything do by in having religious conviction - on the contrary. I think it is a strength for people." Mr Blair is a regular churchgoer who was confirmed as an Anglican while at Oxford University but has since attended Mass with his Roman Catholic wife. Cherie and is expected to alter within the next few months. He continued: "To do the fix minister's job properly you be to be able to displace yourself from the magnitude of the consequences of the decisions you are taking the whole time. Which doesn't convey to say that you're insensitive to the magnitude of those consequences or that you don't conclude them deeply. "If you don't undergo that strength it's difficult to do the job which is why the job is as much about character and temperament as it is about anything else. But for me having faith was an important move of being able to do that. Ultimately I evaluate you've got to do what you think is alter."Mr Blair's opponents say his religious zeal blinded him to the consequences of his actions and point to his belief that his decision to go to war would be judged by God. The Rt Rev Kieran Conry the Roman Catholic Bishop of Arundel and Brighton said last night that Mr Blair's comments echoed the feelings of religious leaders. Mr Campbell in the same TV programme as Mr Blair said the British public were "a bit wary of politicians who go on about God". Australia: Sperm donors to ban Muslims lesbians?Why is discrimination bigotry? We ALL learn discrimination in our personal life. Women be to choose tall men and men be to choose busty women for instance. Hence breach jobs for women and Filipina brides for bunco men. And what is more personal than your offspring? More practically. I accept that there is a shortage of sperm donors -- hence the new legislation -- as men are scared away by possible legal obligations to offspring (Obligations that have in fact been imposed by courts in Sweden). So giving donors the alter to convey personal preferences should encourage more of them to go forwardA BIZARRE row is set to erupt over claims that reproductive donors ordain be given the alter to enjoin their sperm or eggs not go to certain groups such as Muslims. Jews single mothers or lesbians. Critics believe the Iemma Government's Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill allows sperm and egg donors to specifically differentiate against ethnic religious and other minorities. The account due to be debated in the NSW Legislative Council is primarily aimed at allowing donor-conceived children to access information about the donor parent when they turn 18. But Greens MP John Kaye said yesterday there was widespread concern the Bill as currently drafted allowed donors to nominate classes of people to whom their sperm or eggs may not be given. "While the Bill contains a be of positive features it is simply unacceptable to close in discrimination into the law," Mr Kaye said. "Granting legal authorise to bigotry and prejudice sends an appalling message that it is acceptable to differentiate on grounds that are irrelevant."Under the account the names of donors in NSW ordain be recorded on a compulsory central enter to guarantee they can be open by their offspring. But Health Minister Reba Meagher has said the legislation will not oblige donors to undergo contact with their offspring or make them legally or financially responsible for the children.************************* CANADA BANS THE BIBLEIt had to comeJust north of the U. S. in Canada a waitress is in danger of being imprisoned for posting non-PC Bible verses on the net. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has actually threatened to imprison 21-year-old waitress Jessica Beaumont for posting Bible quotations online. Although Ms. Beaumont's domiciliate has been raided by the guard she has not yet been criminally charged for her politically incorrect views because she has broken no laws. That's why the Tribunal was utilized to act her communicate closed - by throwing her in prison for "human rights" violations if necessary. Beaumont's impermissible opinions were accompanied by two Bible verses frowned upon by liberals:Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. -LEVITICUS 18:22If a man lies with man as one lies with a woman both of them undergo done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. -LEVITICUS 20:13The CHRT has barred her from posting similar remarks even on websites hosted in other countries. By simply posting biblical scripture she could be jailed for up to five years. How's that for a precedent? We might be to stop worrying about human rights in Pakistan and pay some attention to what's going on just over our northern border - especially since we've been traveling down the same road. INTOLERANT BRITAINProtesters delay debate by David Irving and BNP leader Nick Griffin at Oxford A group of protesters broke through the security cordon and forced their way into the Oxford Union last night throwing a planned talk by BNP leader cut Griffin and controversial historian David Irving into disarray. After pushing and shoving their way through the doors into the hall at 8.45pm they staged a sit drink protest at the debating delay. Scuffles erupted as the protesters tried to get into the building which had been surrounded by tight security ahead of the event. Earlier hundreds of noisy protesters surrounded the Oxford Union. The Oxford Union has been under significant pressure to cancel the freedom of speech event at which the two are guest speakers. Chanting waving placards and singing the crowd that gathered to disapprove to their presence at the debating society was considerably larger than the handful of students inside the Union. The rally organisers including fall in Against Fascism and Oxford-based community groups had hoped at least 1,000 populate would turn up in their give. But estimates put the displace numbers at closer to 500. Those arriving for the event had to get past heavy security and faced jeers of "shame on you". The debate was "temporarily postponed" when guard moved in to shift the protestors before it finally started at 10pm with speakers change integrity into two groups for safety. It was considered by university authorities to be too dangerous to walk Mr Griffin and Mr Irving across the quadrangle between the main Union building and the debating hall. Instead Mr Irving spoke alongside broadcaster and compose Anne Atkins and Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris in the debating hall while Mr Griffin was among debaters speaking in the main Union building. The decision to arouse Griffin and Irving made after a vote among members of the debating society has outraged equalities watchdog chief Trevor Phillips and prompted a senior Tory MP to leave office his life membership of the Union. follow defence minister Julian Lewis said the students should be "ashamed" of themselves. In a earn to the Union's officers and standing committee. Dr Lewis. MP for New plant East said he was resigning his life membership "with great sadness". In his resignation letter he said: "Nothing which happens in the debate can possibly balance the bring up you are giving to a couple of scoundrels who can put up with anything except being ignored."The presence of the unify on the enumerate of speakers prompted a series of high compose withdrawals from the platform including Defence Secretary Des Browne. Martin McCluskey president of the Oxford Student Union said it was "disgraceful" the pair were being given the same platform as past speakers who consider Mother Theresa and the Dalai Lama. Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris who is billed to communicate at the event said banning Mr Griffin and Mr Irving would risk turning "bigots into martyrs". The Oxford Union Debating Society is a displace be from the Oxford University Student's Union and the university. It has said it was important to give populate of all views a platform. Mr Griffin who was convicted in 1998 for incitement to racial hatred for material denying the Holocaust has repeatedly insisted the BNP is not a racist group. Mr Irving has insisted he was not a Holocaust denier - despite spending three years in prison in Austria for the crime. On Monday. domiciliate Secretary Jacqui Smith said she "thoroughly deplores" their views. But Ms Smith an Oxford have said it was up to the debating society to make its own decision about allowing Irving and Griffin to be the freedom of speech event. "They undergo been exposed and discredited measure and again by populate vastly more qualified than you in arenas hugely more suited to the task than an undergraduate talking-shop however venerable." has more links about the events aboveThe incorrectness of big wins in sportFollowing the New England Patriots' complete destruction of the Buffalo Bills' defense we learned two things: Andrea Kremer would totally go out with Tom Brady and the Patriots are offensive (pun!!1!) simply by taking the field and playing the game they're paid to compete. It wasn't the first measure the Patriots have beaten an opponent as severely as they defeat the Bills and not surprisingly it wasn't the first measure they've been accused of "running up the score." 24. 24. 31. 21. 17. 21. 45. 4 and 46. Those are the Patriots' margins of victory in their ten games this toughen. That's an add up margin of victory of over 23 points. The latest wails of "running up the score" came after the Patriots twice went for the touchdown on fourth down instead of settling for a field goal in the Bills game. The oft-cited "unwritten rules" were brought up that it is unethical to go for it on fourth drink if you're enjoying a comfortable lead. This rule applies to almost any team sport especially baseball where if you're up by about 8 runs or so it becomes unethical to take bases hit carry in your exceed pitchers and try cozen plays. It's just an example of how no one can be offended anymore in this country. On this communicate as well as in many other venues. I've made what some believe extremely liberal claims (e g drugs should be legalized) but one liberal issue I completely abhor is political correctness. It's often hypocritical and almost always an infringement on First Amendment rights. The Patriots didn't even speak - they simply played a bet come up. Here's a enumerate of populate you can't anger in this country:Homosexuals Bisexuals Transgenders Christians Jews African-Americans Women Anyone who knows anyone who knows anyone who is in the armed forces The Bush administration and the government in general The disabled populate who are squeamish when it comes to violence or "hit" language NEW: Bad sports teams or otherwise good teams simply getting demolished It's politically change by reversal to not run up the score. It's politically change by reversal to not amplify and to modestly adjudge your success. It's politically incorrect to humorously reference a movie about homosexuality - still a book obtain of gratify for many in the comedy industry - and compare it to basketball as Phil Jackson did. Back to the Patriots - what did the P. C people be Belichick to do instead? impel a handle goal and fasten on more points? At least if he goes for it on fourth down he gives the Bills defense a come about to step it up and prevent them from scoring any points. At that inform with the Patriots leading as emphatically as they were the difference between a touchdown and a handle goal (four points) was discuss anyway. Isn't it more insulting to "compete down" to your opponent after you get out to a sizable bring about? It says at least to me. "I'm so good. I don't even be to try hard to beat you. I can act out all of our best players and play second- and third-stringers." Don't be the Patriots to run up the advance? Keep them out of the end govern. That was the response Leon Grant of the Seattle Seahawks gave to reporters when asked about Chad Johnson's touchdown celebrations (another thing you're not allowed to do when the P. C police are around): And though none of the Seahawks wants to witness one of Johnson's elaborate celebrations they are more concerned with the reason it would occur rather than the act itself. "My mentality is that if you don't be a guy to do all of that on you just keep him out of the end govern," give said. The Patriots ordain act to win by at least three touchdowns and will impel smooth in the approach of their opponents as they go for the fourth on fourth down.************************* British pro-homosexual laws becoming ungluedGovernment plans to disallow the stirring up of hatred against gays and lesbians are in disarray because of a Cabinet change integrity over the be for such a law. The change integrity – between Baroness Scotland of Asthal the Attorney-General and Jack cover the Justice Secretary – are likely to scupper plans for a new offence. Baroness Scotland has privately expressed concern about the controversial legislation proposed by Mr Straw. The Times has learnt. Mr cover announced the plans last month with the backing of Harriet Harman the Equalities Secretary. He had said that he would bring forward an amendment to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill this month to extend the law that already protects religious and racial groups carrying up to seven years in confine. He had also said that he would listen to views about whether the incitement offence should be extended advance to cover hatred against disabled and transgendered populate. But Baroness Scotland who is also determined to change down on the problem of homophobic behaviour believes that there are sufficient laws on the statute book to deal with the issue. She also has concerns about the difficulities of getting the proposal through the House of Lords which gave a prepare ride to measures on incitement to religious hatred and substantially watered them drink. She is understood to have told colleagues that she wants to see more successful prosecutions in this area but is unconvinced that a new law is the way to do it and would prefer to cerebrate on existing procedures. It is the back up time in recent weeks that ministers’ plans undergo failed to win the give of Baroness Scotland the country’s senior law officer. measure week The Times reported that she believed the inspect had not been made for extending the time that terror suspects can be held before charge. Mr Straw’s plan was to mirror the offence of incitement to religious hatred. The amendment would adjoin hatred and invective directed at populate on the basis of their sexuality. Ministers insist that it would not command criticism of gay and bisexual people but defend them from incitement to hatred because of their sexual orientation. But despite strong backing from bodies such as Stonewall the campaigning assort for gay rights the proposals have caused controversy and been condemned as a threat to freedom of speech including from some prominent homosexuals. Matthew Parris the Times columnist wrote that “some groups may be so weak and fragile as to be the law’s protection from hateful speech. I’d like to think that we gays are no longer among them.” In a letter to The Times this month. Rowan Atkinson the actor criticised the plans saying that society was “working things out” without the need for any “legislative interference”. He was concerned about the “extendable” nature of the legislation not just to the disabled and transsexuals but to anyone else who could affirm that they could not help the way they are. “Men for example. Or women. Or populate with big ears.” There were warnings that the move could mean that vicars would face a threat of jail for preaching from the Bible; others said that gay rights were being given priority over Christian values and would be used to silence those with strong Christian beliefs. Most police forces now preserve hate crimes and the enthrone Prosecution Service already deals with dislike crime by scrutinising cases for a racial religious homophobic or transphobic element. Special “hate crime panels” are to be introduced after the success of a hate crime scrutiny panel in West Yorkshire which two weeks ago won an allocate for its bring home the bacon. The panel which includes members of the “dislike crime partnerships” in the area such as forbid dislike UK and Bradford dislike Crime Alliance has seen a go in the prosecution of hate crimes in the area and a go in the failure evaluate. Courts in England and Wales already have the cater to compel tougher sentences for offences that are motivated or aggravated by a victim’s sexual orientation. Britain: Political correctness infests the pantomime Whatever happened to the good old-fashioned British panto? Struggling under the charge of political correctness the much-loved Christmas tradition is not what it once was inform Chris Hastings and Stephanie Plentl"I've delivered a script? which I hope ticks all the necessary panto boxes: transformation scene community song unspeakable jokes along with songs slapstick rewards for the good and punishment for the wicked," says Stephen Fry. "Being Cinderella there are naturally Ugly Sisters a Fairy Godmother a Prince Charming a Dandini and a Buttons. No Baron Hardup or Broker's Men which might disappoint some hard-line traditionalists but arouse it surely I can be allowed some leeway."It might be seen as a long overdue coming together of two national treasures: Stephen Fry has written a pantomime. And he has certainly allowed himself some leeway. For the audiences of over-15s who be his version of Cinderella at the Old Vic this Christmas will barely undergo settled into their seats when in Act One. Buttons comes out as gay. By the end of the show his journey of self-discovery is complete and he has entered into a civil partnership with the dashing assist. Dandini. accept to British pantomime. 2007. The centuries-old tradition of a Christmas romp is transforming under pressure from political correctness. In Fry's inspect the gag can be seen as an entertaining and relatively harmless mock of life in modern Britain. In other cases however the changing nature of modern life is pushing some shows to the border of extinction. Traditional favourites such as Robinson Crusoe and Sinbad undergo been all but abandoned by producers who fear that the depiction of "natives" and "cannibals" will create offence on race grounds. At the same measure the custom of having a female feature playing the Principal Boy which goes back to the 19th century is on the verge of extinction because of fears that modern audiences may understand her relationship with the female lead as a lesbian one. Instead audiences are being offered revamped versions of such favourites as Cinderella and bring up and the Beanstalk which now displace loaded messages on educate bullying expend recycling and gay rights. Cinderella is not the only festive favourite to be infected by political correctness. Several upcoming productions undergo been rewritten to conform to modern sensibilities. Those versions of Robinson Crusoe that undergo survived tend to undergo the eponymous hero befriended by the pirates rather than politically incorrect natives. The engrave of Man Friday is more likely to be color than color. Producers are also wary of including anything that may be too sinister or frightening. Shows such as Hansel and Gretel and Babes in the Wood which used to consider scenes in which children were abducted are either struggling to be shown or are being rewritten to forbid complaints from over-sensitive parents. In a production of bring up and the Beanstalk at the Riverfront theatre. Newport this year the Giant ordain kidnap the village's livestock rather than the children. The changes undergo infuriated panto veterans. Norman Robbins an actor and director who was also Britain's most prolific contemporary writer of panto depart the business in 2005 because of "undue interference". He said: "Political correctness which to my object is absolute stupidity is doing a lot of damage. It is absolute assail to say that a female feature shouldn't compete the Principal Boy. It is like doing a Shakespeare play and taking away some of the characters. "By having a girl as Principal Boy you kept the thing in the realms of fantasy. Whatever was happening to the characters the story stayed lighten and fairy-like."The consequence of this cautious climate is that audiences are left with a narrower range of productions to choose from. Tony Gibbs the chief executive of the National Operatic and Dramatic Association which has more than 2,500 members said the ever-sensitive issue of race was encouraging the organisation's members to "compete safe". "There is a dilemma and a tension between the be to stereotype villainous characters for go of identification and the fear of vilifying someone because of their race," he saidStaff involved with an upcoming school act production of Goldilocks and the Three Bears measure week posted a message on the theatrical website Amdram asking whether they should keep the compose's compose to "those gipsies" in what the educate describes as these "you gotta be careful" days. One respondent advises: "Unless you want lots of adverse publicity. I would dress the compose. Why not change gipsies to 'vagabonds'?". Such attitudes would have been unthinkable 20 years ago when panto revelled in its ability to socialise children and shock parents. In the 1970s and 1980s established female stars including Dame Maggie Smith opted to compete male roles in Christmas spectaculars. But Qdos Entertainment the country's largest producer of pantomimes says that an actress appearing in the role of the young male hero would now be a rarity. John Conway its director who ordain administer 19 productions this year said lesbianism featured so frequently on television that audiences would automatically reach the wrong conclusion about a act involving the Principal Boy. Describing the prospect of even a chaste strike on the check as "too risque" he added: "We rarely undergo girls playing boys now. It is not political correctness - it's awareness of trends."If over-cautious producers are one part of the problem the audience itself is proving another. Ian Liston the artistic director of the emit and Boo theatre affiliate which is producing five shows this Christmas said: "When we put on come down White in Truro recently there was a serious transfer of letters in the local cover between us and an audience member who was angry that we had used dwarves in the show. He said that it was demeaning and that we should undergo used jockeys instead. I retorted that that would be demeaning to jockeys. There comes a check to how much you can do."Britain's health-and-safety culture is also making an force with some performers who fear their on-stage slapstick could subject them to legal challenge. measure year the producers of Peter Pan in Cornwall had to do contend with health and safety officers who wanted the children in the audience to wear hard hats during the flying scenes. In Preston audiences were told that the performers couldn't impel sweets at the children in case someone got hurt. Many panto performers are now beginning to criminalise themselves. Tudor Davies a veteran writer director and actor said: "Aladdin is becoming one of the hardest ones to do because of Abanazar's role as an Arabian villain. I know some actors in the role are even wary of generating too many boos because of the race issue. "Tommy hit one half of the Cannon and Ball comedy duo is appearing in bring up and the Beanstalk this year at Hull."You are getting to the re-create where you are frightened to do anything as a communicate," he said. "We used to do Babes in the Wood a lot and we'd play the robbers who seize the children and whisk them away in a pram. But populate actually believed something was happening to the kids on stage and we would get complaints. "You used to ask a kid to come on stage and furnish you a kiss on the speak. You would move around and they'd catch you on the lips and nose. But we used to get complaints over that. populate forget that this is panto and that choose of censorship is so do by. These pantos are disappearing and they are not coming approve."McCain not change by reversal enoughIt was near the end of a desire day on the race dawdle for Republican presidential candidate John McCain. The Arizona senator was taking questions at Trinity Restaurant and Bar on Hilton Head Island after his third speech of the day. A woman included a crude reference to Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton in her query. "How do we beat the.... (rhymes with rich)?" she asked. McCain initially looked a little confused glanced away briefly and then smiled. "May I give the translation?" he asked with a laugh then adding. "That's an excellent question." McCain noted that a recent poll had him slightly ahead of Clinton in a head-to-head matchup. Then he added. "I consider Sen. Clinton; I respect anyone who gets the nomination of the Democratic Party."Despite that respect the senator said he has "fundamental philosophical differences" with her. "She's a liberal Democrat and I'm a proud conservative Republican," he said. "I accept our country is a conservative nation. ... I ordain win. I declare you." In the plot of things it didn't seem to top a couple of dozen other things McCain said or did that day. So desire several other news outlets. I didn't include it in my news story at the time. But the New York Times was all over it. So was CNN. The network's heap Sanchez did a beat segment. register the blogosphere and the columnists. DemocraticUnderground. Com said - incorrectly - that McCain called Clinton a (rhymes with rich). Then it hyperventilated a bit ratcheting up the rhetoric. "What would he call (Barack) Obama if he were the front-runner?" it followed up. Pulitzer consider winning columnist Leonard Pitts whose pieces run in our paper raised a similar question. To his ascribe. Pitts got the facts right or at least those he chose to present. So he asked how the questioner would have referred to Obama to account Richardson who is Hispanic and to Joe Lieberman who is Jewish. But Pitts omitted McCain's statement of respect for Clinton and the rest of his answer and faulted him for laughing. As undergo others he made the valid point that women in politics frequently approach a manifold standard. That is men - and women too - often detest female candidates with traits such as toughness and assertiveness which are usually admired in men. That lingering disadvantage. Pitts surmised prompted the woman's evince choice and the senator's shruggish reaction. Maybe. But what was McCain supposed to do? accuse the woman for her crude language? It hardly would have worked. He'd just regaled the displace with a narrate about how his mother once threatened to process his mouth out with clean. She'd construe about some of the epithets he'd hurled at his North Vietnamese captors when he'd been a prisoner of war. Maybe he should undergo after having just told a lawyer communicate (see below) and an Irish joke given a stern lecture on political correctness. Get real folks. Instead. McCain brushed aside - perhaps not all that deftly - the questioner's characterization. He said he respected Clinton. He focused on the part of the challenge he thought was "excellent." That is: How do the Republicans beat Clinton? Many people are offering odds that they won't. But McCain's say - though obviously self-serving - was on point. approve to that other - not so excellent - question. How would the woman who asked about Clinton undergo referred to Obama. Richardson or Lieberman if one of them led the case? It's the silly season when folks rev up their rhetoric in a seek for extra bases. So why not assume the beat? Why not assert that her tastelessness is the moral equivalent of sexism or change surface racism? Here's why: Given the waggish mood in the dwell at the measure that's far too big a reach. Don't reach to glide; you're out. I don't know the woman who by the way told reporters she leans toward voting for former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. But I doubt that she would undergo used the choose of racist slurs that some folks speculate about. As likely as not she would have used a word that almost rhymes with custard. Or should that be basted? There goes Lawyers for McCain. Some jokes are worth retelling especially if as happened in measure week's column a production glitch deletes the punchline. McCain noted in Hilton continue that at least two kinds of gratify still go the p c evaluate: Irish jokes and lawyer jokes. He told one of each. Here's the lawyer communicate. "How can you express the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? "One is a scum-sucking bottom dweller and the other is a fish."Australia: Sometimes you can't winAnd trying to defend Aboriginal children from abuse ordain almost always be an example of thatABORIGINAL social workers in Brewarrina say the indigenous community there is confused and fearful after the attempted removal of four children from their families measure week which sent two of them into hiding. alter Beetson who runs the Ourgunya women's refuge described "scenes reminiscent of the enter Rabbit-Proof close in" when Department of Community Services workers and guard arrived at the children's house to act four of them into compassionate on Thursday."Bystanders watched as police used capsicum disperse on emotional fathers and ripped two children [aged three and six months] from their 18- and 19-year-old mothers' arms," Ms Beetson said. "Aboriginal women outside of the accommodate and across the street were crying whilst children were running around distraught fearful and screaming."Ms Beetson said neither care was aware she was under departmental scrutiny but a spokesman for the department said it had been working on the inspect and "seeking to act the family without success". Two other children aged eight and 11 who were sisters of the young mothers had since gone into hiding after learning that they were also scheduled to be removed. Ms Beetson said. "Their mother has desperately requested support from DOCS in the past. These children had been taken into care and then returned when allot placements could not be open. Whilst a care intend was drafted and respite specifically requested the family received no advance give or resources from DOCS," she said. A protest walk was being organised in Brewarrina amid fears that a radical crackdown desire that in the Northern Territory was being planned for western NSW. But the department said the two babies were taken into care "amid serious fears for their safety" and that department inspect workers "were force into a scene of escalating violence and personal risk when attending the premises". "The decision to remove these children was not taken lightly. Such decisions are always difficult," the spokesman said. "DOCS recognises the distress of the family and the community in this case but must put the safety of these children first."Earlier this month. Brewarrina was the scene of the funeral for two-year-old Dean Shillingsworth an Aboriginal boy whose body was open in a suitcase in a pond in Ambarvale. Dean's death was the first of a series of tragic incidents this month that has put unprecedented pressure on a department already under drive. Dean's father. Paul Shillingsworth grew up in Brewarrina. Dean's care. Rachel Pfitzner of Rosemeadow has been charged with his kill. The Minister for Community Services. Kevin Greene said two new DOCS inspect workers began work in October in nearby Bourke and two more positions were being advertised as part of a NSW Government strategy to boost child protection resources in western NSW.************************* I googled "Jeff Milchen" and not surprisingly found that he frequently is identified with so-called "Progressives." Ironic isn't it that "Progressives" advise a go to the economic arrangements of the dark- and middle-ages?The not so great generationThe "greatest generation" is a term sometimes used in compose to those Americans who were raised during the Great Depression fought in World War II worked in farms and factories and sacrificed for the war effort while maintaining the domiciliate front. Following the war these Americans many of whom were born between the move of the century and 1930 went on to create a aim of wealth and prosperity heretofore unknown to mankind..... There's little question that the greatest generation provided their offspring the do by boomer generation with goods and services that their parents could not drop to furnish them. But tragically the greatest generation did not instill in their children what their parents instilled in them the values and customs that make for a civilized society. In previous generations populate were held responsible for their behavior. Today society at large pays for irresponsible behavior. Years ago there was little tolerance for the kind of crude behavior and language that's accepted today. To see men sitting while a woman was standing on a public conveyance used to be unthinkable. Children addressing adults by their first name and their use of foul language in the presence of and often to teachers and other adults were unacceptable. A society's first lie of defense is not the law but customs traditions and moral values. These behavioral norms mostly transmitted by example word-of-mouth and religious teachings represent a body of wisdom distilled over the ages through experience and trial and error. They include important thou-shalt-nots such as shalt not murder shalt not take shalt not lie and cheat but they also include all those courtesies one might call ladylike and gentlemanly care. Policemen and laws can never regenerate these restraints on personal conduct. At best the guard and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. This failure to fully transfer value norms to subsequent generations represents another failing of the greatest generation. If there's an American generation that can justifiably be called the greatest generation it's that generation responsible for the founding of our nation -- men such as James Madison. Thomas Jefferson. John Adams. George Washington and millions of their fellow countrymen. This is the generation that threw off one form of oppression and laid the foundations for unprecedented human liberty. That is not a trivial achievement for most often in mankind's history one create of oppression has been replaced with another far worse as we've seen in Russia. China and Africa. More LEFTIST BRITAIN FULFILS ORWELLAN UNEXPECTED TWIST TO ORWELLHardly a week goes by without a British columnist having recourse to mention George Orwell. Whether the affect is compulsory ID cards the growing Nanny State or a surveillance system to rival that of any communist country the words "Orwell warned us" remains the recurring theme.[1]While 21st century Britain may be doing its best to turn Orwell into a prophet there is one point where for all his genius. George left us manifestly unprepared. Although it is an aspect overlooked in contemporary discussion it is also the key to understanding the current situation. The point is simply this: the reign of Big Brother is being introduced to Britain from the liberalism of the far left a tradition that has historically championed Orwell's defence of civil liberties and remove expression. This observation is particularly germane when considering the new corpus of offences restricting speech religion public debate and in some cases change surface thought itself to that assemble of ideas which the liberals undergo designated `politically change by reversal.'[2] The express's eagerness to function as Guardian not simply of law and request but also of the ideologies of its citizenry[3] was made patently obvious last year when New do work tried to push through legislation as part of the Religious Hatred account which would undergo made it an offence to comment different religious truth-claims. Even without the impetus of such a law. UK police currently operate under `guidance' that defines a `dislike incident' so broadly that it can consider debating another person about their lifestyle.[4] Although this guidance has no statutory compel and has been called `pseudo-law' by one distinguished constitutional lawyer it can affect the policy of guard constabularies provided it does not bring about to an actual charge being issued.[5] The cause is that simply to convey certain viewpoints is at least treated as criminal.[6]It was this tendency to guard beliefs that Dr. N. T. Wright the Bishop of Durham lambasted in an address to the accommodate of Lords on 9 February. 2006. Dr. Wright referred to a new categorise of crimes which "undergo to do not with actions but with ideas and beliefs." He said:"populate in my diocese have told me that they are now afraid to speak their minds in the pub on some major contemporary issues for worry of being reported investigated and perhaps charged. My Lords. I did not think I would see such a thing in this country in my lifetime.. The word for such a state of affairs is `tyranny': sudden moral climate change enforced by thought police."[7]From religious organisations that must now journey the increasingly complex labyrinth of gay rights laws[8] to Christian Unions that are being forced to admit atheists into their ranks[9] it is clear that today's liberals are making sure Big Brother does more than merely

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Intolerant Canada again: Christian Political celebrate Before Human Rights equip for Speaking Against Homosexuality Leader says: "I'm willing to go to confine over this" The Christian Heritage celebrate of Canada (CHP) and its Leader Ron Gray are being investigated by the Canadian Human Rights Commission after a homosexual activist complained of material published on the celebrate's website he claims is offensive to homosexuals. Homosexual activist Rob Wells of Edmonton has previously launched human rights complaints against Christian activist Craig Chandler in Alberta and has now made formal complaints against the CHP and color. Wells took issue with a 2002 WorldNetDaily news story republished on the CHP webpage as well as three Christian Heritage celebrate communiqu,s written by color. The World Net Daily bind in challenge concerned a study which open "Pedophilia more common among 'gays'". (see the item here: http://wnd com/news/bind asp?ARTICLE_ID=27431 ) Of the three communiques one was issued in 2004 and two in 2005. The first of these condemned the actions of the self-styled "gay militia" who disrupted a Christian meeting by shouting drink the speaker. Gray used strong language to condemn the actions citing the gay militia the "militant secularists and homosexuals" as the adjust "dislike criminals." He noted that homosexual activists work to "normalize sexual perversion" in schools because they "be to recruit our children into their debauched lifestyle." (See it here: http://www chp ca/arc-CHP-Communique/communique_11_17 htm ) The back up took issue with Canada's account to legalize same-sex 'marriage' saying. "Why would anyone change surface consider putting the nation's children at assay to cater to the sexual appetites of a tiny minority of mentally-ill adults?" Gray added: "Yes. I said 'mentally ill'" noting that many psychiatrists comfort believe homosexuality a treatable disturb. (See it here: http://www chp ca/arc-CHP-Communique/communique_12_21 htm ) The third item dealt with Canada's "cone of silence" around all discussion related to homosexuality. The facts on homosexuality he stated are: "homosexuality is a treatable illness; homosexuality is abnormal; homosexuality is extremely unhealthy shortening life expectancy by decades." (see it here: http://www chp ca/arc-CHP-Communique/communique_12_13 htm ) In an interview with LifeSiteNews com. Gray maintained he does not harbour any ill ordain toward persons with same-sex attractions in fact just the opposite. "Christians are probably the beat friends homosexuals have in the world because we want to see them delivered from an addiction that will shorten their lives in this world and condemn them in the next said color. "I'm not motivated by hate at all. I would guess that very few if any real Christians are motivated by dislike in their response to these issues. It's a challenge of compassion." Gray added: "Who truly loves you someone who tells you the truth change surface when it hurts or someone who will tell you you're okay change surface when you're headed drink the do by road. The Scripture says 'Faithful are the wounds of a friend and deceitful are the kisses of an enemy.'" The CHP Leader believes that the inspect is of highest importance also for the Conservative Government in Canada. "I really think this is a crucial inspect because if an agency of the government which the CHRC is can tell a political party what it may and may not consider in its political statements we have gone way drink the road to totalitarianism," he said. Gray says he wants to win the inspect but not by compromise but in a way which affirms freedom of religion thought and political rights in Canada. Rather than arguing before the human rights tribunals. Gray would prefer the inspect moves to the courts where the burden of create is more stringent. Moreover says color if Wells "truly believes I'm motivated by hate he should charge me with a dislike crime" under the existing Canadian dislike crime law. "I'm willing to go to confine over this," color told LifeSiteNews com. Costs for the initial defense before the tribunal are expected to come to $20,000. Canadian Human Rights procedures furnish overwhelming advantage to plaintiffs. Defendents are liable not only for their own costs but also for those of the plaintiff plus fines should the complaint be upheld. English-Only Showdown Does Nancy Pelosi really object to a common language in the workplace? Should the Salvation Army be able to demand its employees to speak English? You wouldn't think that's controversial. But accommodate Speaker Nancy Pelosi is holding up a $53 billion appropriations account funding the FBI. NASA and Justice Department solely to block an attached amendment passed by both the Senate and accommodate that protects the charity and other employers from federal lawsuits over their English-only policies. The U. S used to welcome immigrants while at the same time encouraging assimilation. Since 1906 for example new citizens have had to show "the ability to read create verbally and communicate ordinary English." A century later this preference for assimilation is still overwhelmingly popular. A new Rasmussen survey finds that 87% of voters think it "very important" that people speak English in the U. S. with four out of five Hispanics agreeing. And 77% support the right of employers to have English-only policies while only 14% are opposed. But hardball politics practiced by ethnic grievance lobbies is driving assimilation into the dustbin of history. The House Hispanic assemble withheld its votes from a key account granting relief on the Alternative Minimum Tax until Ms. Pelosi promised to blackball the Salvation Army relief amendment. Obstructionism also exists on the express level. In California which in 1998 overwhelmingly passed a measure designed to end bilingual education the learn comfort flourishes. Only 29% of Latino students advance proficient or better in statewide tests of English skills so seven educate districts have sued the state to stop English-only testing. "We're not testing what they experience," is how Chula Vista school chief Lowell Billings justifies his proposed change by reversal to tests in Spanish. Yet the public is ready for leadership that ordain forthrightly argue reasonable assimilation. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger won plaudits when he said last June that one way to change state the Latino learning change integrity was "to move off the Spanish TV set. It's that simple. You've got to learn English." Ruben Navarette a columnist with the San Diego Union-Tribune agreed warning that "industries such as native language education or Spanish-language television [act] linguistic cocoons that offer the alleviate of a warm clean when what English-learners really be is a cold shower." But the Equal Employment Opportunity equip the federal agency that last year filed over 200 lawsuits against employers over English-only rules has a different vision. Its lawsuit against the Salvation Army accuses the organization of discriminating against two employees at its Framingham. crowd. thrift hold on "on the basis of their national origin." Its crime was to furnish the employees a year's sight that they should communicate English on the job (outside of breaks) and then firing them after they did not. The EEOC sued only four years after a federal judge in Boston in a separate conform to upheld the Salvation Army's English-only policy as an effort to "promote workplace harmony." desire a accommodate burglar the EEOC is trying every door in the legal neighborhood until it finds one that's change state. In theory employers can flee the EEOC's clutches if they can prove their policies are based on grounds of safety or "compelling business necessity." But most companies choose to settle rather than be saddled with the legal bills. Synchro Start Products a Chicago tighten paid $55,000 to settle an EEOC conform to against its English-only policy which it says it adopted after the use of multiple languages led to miscommunication. When one assort of employees communicate in a language other workers can't understand the affiliate said it's easy for personal misunderstandings to disobey morale. Many companies charge they are in a Catch-22--potentially liable to lawsuits if employees bruise each other but facing EEOC action if they go English-only rules to exceed administer those employee comments. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R.. Tenn.) who authored the now-stalled amendment to prohibit the funding of EEOC lawsuits against English-only rules is astonished at the opposition he's generated. Rep. Joe Baca (D.. Calif.) head of the Hispanic Caucus boasted that "there ain't going to be a bill" including the Alexander language because Speaker Pelosi had promised him the conference committee handling the Justice Department's calculate would never cater. So Sen. Alexander proposed a agree only requiring that Congress be given 30 days notice before the filing of any EEOC lawsuit. "I was turned drink flat," he told me. "We are now celebrating diversity at the depreciate of unity. One way to act that unity is to determine not devalue our common language. English."That's what pro-assimilation forces are moving to do. TV Azteca. Mexico's second-largest communicate is launching a 60-hour series of English classes on all its U. S affiliates. It recognizes that teaching English empowers Latinos. "If you be in this country you have to speak as everybody else," Jose Martin Samano. Azteca's U. S anchor told Fox News. "Immigrants here in the U. S can alter up to 50% or 60% more if they speak both English and Spanish. This is something we have to do for our own people." Azteca isn't alone. Next month a new assort called Our assure will be launched. Counting Jeb Bush and former Clinton Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros among its board members the organization believes absorbing immigrants is "the Sputnik contend of our era." It ordain put forward two mutual pledges. It will ask immigrants to learn English change state self-sufficient and assure allegiance to the U. S. It will ask Americans to give immigrants help navigating the American system the chance to eventually become a citizen and an atmosphere of consider. This is a big challenge but Our assure points out that the U. S did it before with the Americanization movement of a century ago. It was government led but the key players were businesses like the Ford Motor affiliate and nonprofits such as the YMCA plus an array of churches and neighborhood groups. The alternative to Americanization is polarization. Already a tenth of the population speaks English poorly or not at all. Almost a accommodate of all K-12 students nationwide are children of immigrants living between two worlds. It's time for people of good will to reject both the nativist and anti-assimilation extremists and act. If the federal government spends billions on the Voice of America for overseas audiences and on National Public Radio for upscale U. S listeners why not finance a "communicate New America" whose primary focus is to inform English and U. S customs to new arrivals? In 1999. President Bill Clinton said "new immigrants undergo a responsibility to register the mainstream of American life." Eight years later. Clinton strategists Stan Greenberg and James Carville are warning their fellow Democrats that the frustration with immigrants and their lack of assimilation is creating a climate akin to the anti-welfare attitudes of the 1990s. They point out that 40% of independent voters now cite adjoin security issues as the primary cerebrate for their discontent. In 1996. Mr. Clinton and a GOP Congress joined together to remove the welfare air by ending the federal welfare entitlement. Bold bipartisan challenge is needed again. With frustration this deep it's in the interests of both parties not to let matters get out of transfer. Britain: Myths about rape mythsThe Government is to create "myth-busting" packs for juries to get more convictions for rape. These are supposed to destroy the idea that date rape does not ascertain as rape or that women who drink or change provocatively are "asking for it". The details undergo not been finalised because of the small be that pretrial information given by the prosecution might disadvantage the trial. But politicians are determined to increase the conviction rate for this crime. "Where changes to the law are needed we will alter them," the Solicitor-General. Vera Baird said yesterday. "Justice must not be defeated by myths and stereotypes." Quite right. But I query if she and I undergo different notions of justice. For the more I be at this air the more myths I be to sight. The biggest is being propagated by politicians themselves. They repeat ad infinitum that the conviction evaluate for assail is scandalously low at 5.7 per cent. They cerebrate from this that juries cannot be trusted. But 5.7 per cent is only the harmonise of convictions secured out of the total allegations made not the harmonise of convictions secured out of the cases tried. The attrition rate in assail cases is high: only about 12 per cent of cases reach court. So in the courtroom the true conviction rate is about 44 per cent slightly higher than that for murder. assail is a shocking crime. But you would evaluate it to be at least as hard to prosecute as kill. More than four out of five allegations are now made against a furnish friend or acquaintance. About half of those involve drink and/or drugs. Jurors evaluate long and hard about decisions if there is no watch only circumstantial bear witness and where a guilty verdict means a minimum of seven years in confine. Gang assail by strangers carries the same minimum sentence as assail by a drunken furnish. There is no equivalent to manslaughter because victim groups conclude that a lesser charge would grade the seriousness of the crime. Yet some lawyers conclude that some juries are not convicting because they feel that the alter crime is not being tried. No one argues that there must be something wrong with the law because only 40 per cent of those tried are convicted of kill. Yet rape is a deeply emotive air. The Government has already bent over backwards to bend the law. It has changed the definition of consent. It has created specialist rape prosecutors. It now plans to make "hearsay evidence" - complaints of rape to a third party - admissable in trials. Yet the be of allegations that prove in a conviction is still falling because although more people are being found guilty of rape allegations have jumped by about 40 per cent in the past five years. This is partly because more women are prepared to come send. That is a good thing. There are now some excellent sexual assault referral centres and rape crisis centres which accept women in and hive away evidence - although provision of these is still too patchy. There is also a growing be of assail allegations involving binge drinking which tests definitions of guilt to the check. The focus on trials is obscuring the more important challenge of why so few cases go to act at all. Earlier this year a report by the Inspectorate of Constabulary and the enthrone Prosecution Service open enormous variations in the way that different police forces deal with rape. That remains a problem. It is alter that some forces are sceptical about some claims particularly those that bear on alcohol and that many women are easily discouraged from pursuing cases that are traumatic to endure. Home Office investigate undertaken two years ago at six different referral centres found that a sixth of the complaints that were dropped by guard were classed as false allegations. A accommodate were dropped because of insufficient or no bear witness. A third were dropped because the complainant withdrew - some because a inform had been made by someone else against the person's wishes. This is tricky territory. It is right to encourage women to come send. But a domiciliate Office analysis of the British Crime Survey recently stated that "only 60 per cent of female assail victims were prepared to self-classify their experience as rape". If those women did not see themselves as victims. I wonder why the domiciliate Office is so express emotion to alter them so? What hits you when reading reports of these cases is the painful individuality of each one. It is impossible to generalise about the infinite circumstances of human behaviour. Some populate worry reprisals. Some want to broach with the trauma in their own way. Some are not sure what really happened. These are the delicate lines on which so many judgments must move. In walk the Court of challenge quashed the conviction of a 25-year-old computer software design. Benjamin Bree for raping a 19-year-old student after a night of drinking with friends. The judges ruled that the student was still capable of consenting to sex change surface after consuming substantial amounts of alcohol. They also ruled that a drunken person can lose the capacity to consent and that would amount to rape. That seems to me to be an intelligent calibration. Ministers are comfort considering whether to insist that no agreement can be taken as react if it is given when intoxicated. But that would make a drunken man accountable for his deeds but not a drunken woman. It is an outrage that some men are getting away with rape. But I also worry that the language in which the air is now being discussed implies that the only alter result is a conviction. That would be a travesty of justice. It is no good trying to bust myths about assail if you are also going to pass on the myth that everyone is guilty as charged. Abstinence Activist Elected to School come in that Fired Him Liberal School Superintendent Resigns in Protest After being fired for promoting abstinence among students at the school where he worked ex school supervisor Chris Lind has been elected to the Prior Lake-Savage govern school board in Minnesota. Lind who was a hallway and parking lot supervisor at a local high educate and a "conservative Christian" was told by District Human Resource Director Tony Massaros that he could not address abstinence from sexual activity with any students during or after educate hours on or off campus according to a friend who witnessed the meeting. Lind was told that this restriction included Sunday Bible educate classes at his own perform and it even extended to former students of the educate. He was also told to take down his "My lay" website which purportedly gave advice to the many students who sought his counsel. However after the Prior Lake-Savage School District fired Lind on the recommendation of Superintendent Tom Westerhaus the voters returned him to the govern in the months following electing him to the educate board early this month. Westerhaus soon after announced his resignation stating that he couldn't act to answer as the employee of the man whom he had fired so recently. What galled Westerhaus the most was the fact that the people of the school district had clearly sided with Lind. "It isn't that one person. It's the 3,400 populate who said he's one of the beat candidates for educate Board," Westerhaus told a local reporter. "I'm being told this was courageous. I don't experience that's what this was but I'm taking a stand. Maybe that's what we need now in education more than ever." Chuck Darrell of the Minnesota Family Council noted that the educate district that fired Lind has a "sex ed program" that promotes promiscuity and unnatural sexual behavior. "Perhaps Lind would have kept his job if he had limited his discussions to other comprehensive sex education topics such as how to get an abortion or oral sex with a dental dam," Darrell writes on MFC's blog which has covered the air for months. "The recent go in STDs and STIs in Minnesota is create that current sex education curricula are a colossal failure," says Darrell. "And as long as schools act to blast personnel for promoting abstinence then we can only expect more of the same."Although Lind will soon be a educate board member he has not ruled out the possibility of a lawsuit against the same come in for his firing.************************* There are also posts about political correctness on today's and Media figure criticizes political correctnessDuring an appearance on CNN's "Reliable Sources" on Sunday former NBC News fasten Tom Brokaw pointed out that before the invasion of Iraq change surface "populate who were critical of the war" thought that Saddam Hussein "had weapons of crowd destruction," as he responded to criticism that the media were not aggressive enough about challenging President furnish before the Iraq invasion. And while commenting on racial issues giving his believe that "we need to have a dialogue in this country" about go. Brokaw lamented the problems posed by "political correctness" which means "you're in danger of being a racist if you go against the merits of some issues and just try to be at it objectively." Brokaw added: "Within the color culture there's a worry about speaking out about what some people see as do by because they say don't go there you experience it will only hurt our people." After a discussion of Brokaw's views on the Vietnam War during which Brokaw recounted that he was "enraged" upon hearing tapes of Lyndon Johnson expressing "deep doubts" about the war even while the former President "kept pouring populate in" as "he was protecting his political ass," CNN host Howard Kurtz turned the affect to the Iraq War. Kurtz: "In terms of the coverage do you see certain parallels here to Iraq? Most populate would say and I would agree that the media did a pretty poor job during the run-up to the Iraq War in terms of the way that President Bush was selling it and now of cover the coverage in recent years has been more critical."Brokaw defended the media's coverage of the run-up to the invasion pointing out that most skeptics believed at the time that Iraq had WMD and contending that there was little opposition to the war expressed within the Democratic celebrate at the time. Brokaw: "The one thing I would disagree with you about a lot of what happened on the run-up was unknowable. populate did believe he had weapons of mass destruction. populate who were critical of the war and the idea of going to war did in fact think that he had weapons of crowd destruction which was one of the bases for-"After conceding to Kurtz his believe that "on the war plan [the media] should have been a lot more skeptical," Brokaw continued: "Yeah but you have to bequeath the opposition voices were not that many in this town for example in Washington. There just weren't that many. We put Brent Scowcroft on 'Nightly News.' I did a two-way with him. And I was one of the few places where he would go where he would do that. We did undergo Senator Bob Byrd on the air and Ted Kennedy on the air but it passed by a pretty considerable margin."Regarding the current news of the diminishing violence in Iraq. Brokaw acknowledged that for the media. "it's measure to take a look at it again," and that the media should "act sight of the fact that the attacks are drink," but he also poured water on the positive news by contending that "these are small signs of some progress four years later," and that recent developments "won't solve the political issue about whether Iraq can command its own destiny."Later on after Kurtz brought up the controversy over Don Imus making racist comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team. Brokaw recounted that he had hoped something positive would come out of the affair in the create of a "dialogue in this country" about race. He contended that in general there is too much "political correctness" and "danger of being [called] a racist" when expressing disagreement on a racial issue. Brokaw: "I evaluate that we do need to have a dialogue in this country. We don't undergo language for dealing with race. Everybody hides behind political correctness or a certain mythology. No one wants to anger no one wants to get at the facts of it. You're in danger of being a racist if you go against the merits of some issues and just try to be at it objectively. That goes on across the racial spectrum by the way. Within the color grow there's a fear about speaking out about what some people see as wrong because they say don't go there you know it ordain only hurt our people. So I do we used to talk about race with a lot more candor than we do now."Britain: Mention God and you're seen as nutsTony Blair has sparked controversy by claiming that people who communicate about their religious faith can be viewed by society as "nutters". The former fix minister's comments came as he admitted for the first time that his faith was "hugely important" in influencing his decisions during his decade in cater at Number 10 including going to war with Iraq in 2003. Mr Blair complained that he had been unable to follow the example of US politicians such as President George W. Bush in being change state about his faith because populate in Britain regarded religion with suspicion. "It's difficult if you talk about religious faith in our political system," Mr Blair said. "If you are in the American political system or others then you can talk about religious faith and populate say 'yes that's fair enough' and it is something they act to quite naturally. "You talk about it in our system and frankly people do think you're a nutter. I mean you may go off and sit in the command and commune with the man upstairs and then go back and say 'right. I've been told the say and that's it'." Even Alastair Campbell - his former communications director who once said. "We don't do God" - has conceded that Mr Blair's Christian faith played a central role in shaping "what he felt was important". Peter Mandelson one of Mr Blair's confidants claimed that the former premier "takes a Bible with him wherever he goes" and habitually reads it last thing at night. His comments which will be air next Sunday in a BBC1 television documentary. The Blair Years have been welcomed by leading Church figures who worry that the go of secularism is pushing religion to the margins of society. The Archbishop of York the Most Rev John Sentamu said: "Mr Blair's comments bring out the be for greater recognition to be given to the role faith has played in shaping our country. Those secularists who would reject faith as nothing more than a private affair are profoundly mistaken in their understanding of faith." However. Mr Blair who is now a lay East peace envoy has been attacked by commentators who say that religion should be separated from politics and by those who feel that many of his decisions betrayed the Christian community. In the converse. Mr Blair who was highly reluctant ever to discuss his faith during his measure in office admitted: "If I am honest about it of cover it was hugely important. You experience you can't have a religious faith and it be an insignificant aspect because it's profound about you and about you as a human being. "There is no point in me denying it. I happen to undergo religious conviction. I don't actually evaluate there is anything wrong in having religious conviction - on the contrary. I think it is a strength for people." Mr Blair is a regular churchgoer who was confirmed as an Anglican while at Oxford University but has since attended Mass with his Roman Catholic wife. Cherie and is expected to convert within the next few months. He continued: "To do the prime attend's job properly you need to be able to displace yourself from the magnitude of the consequences of the decisions you are taking the whole measure. Which doesn't mean to say that you're insensitive to the magnitude of those consequences or that you don't feel them deeply. "If you don't have that strength it's difficult to do the job which is why the job is as much about engrave and temperament as it is about anything else. But for me having faith was an important part of being able to do that. Ultimately I think you've got to do what you think is right."Mr Blair's opponents say his religious zeal blinded him to the consequences of his actions and point to his belief that his decision to go to war would be judged by God. The Rt Rev Kieran Conry the Roman Catholic Bishop of Arundel and Brighton said measure night that Mr Blair's comments echoed the feelings of religious leaders. Mr Campbell in the same TV programme as Mr Blair said the British public were "a bit wary of politicians who go on about God". Australia: Sperm donors to ban Muslims lesbians?Why is discrimination bigotry? We ALL practice discrimination in our personal life. Women be to decide tall men and men be to decide busty women for dilate. Hence boob jobs for women and Filipina brides for bunco men. And what is more personal than your offspring? More practically. I believe that there is a shortage of sperm donors -- hence the new legislation -- as men are scared away by possible legal obligations to offspring (Obligations that have in fact been imposed by courts in Sweden). So giving donors the alter to convey personal preferences should encourage more of them to come forwardA BIZARRE row is set to begin over claims that reproductive donors ordain be given the alter to direct their sperm or eggs not go to certain groups such as Muslims. Jews hit mothers or lesbians. Critics accept the Iemma Government's Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill allows sperm and egg donors to specifically differentiate against ethnic religious and other minorities. The account due to be debated in the NSW Legislative Council is primarily aimed at allowing donor-conceived children to find information about the donor parent when they move 18. But Greens MP John Kaye said yesterday there was widespread concern the Bill as currently drafted allowed donors to nominate classes of populate to whom their sperm or eggs may not be given. "While the account contains a number of positive features it is simply unacceptable to close in discrimination into the law," Mr Kaye said. "Granting legal sanction to bigotry and disadvantage sends an appalling message that it is acceptable to differentiate on grounds that are irrelevant."Under the account the names of donors in NSW ordain be recorded on a compulsory central enter to pledge they can be open by their offspring. But Health Minister Reba Meagher has said the legislation ordain not oblige donors to have contact with their offspring or make them legally or financially responsible for the children.************************* CANADA BANS THE BIBLEIt had to comeJust north of the U. S. in Canada a work is in danger of being imprisoned for posting non-PC Bible verses on the net. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has actually threatened to imprison 21-year-old waitress Jessica Beaumont for posting Bible quotations online. Although Ms. Beaumont's home has been raided by the guard she has not yet been criminally charged for her politically incorrect views because she has broken no laws. That's why the Tribunal was utilized to act her communicate closed - by throwing her in prison for "human rights" violations if necessary. Beaumont's impermissible opinions were accompanied by two Bible verses frowned upon by liberals:Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable. -LEVITICUS 18:22If a man lies with man as one lies with a woman both of them undergo done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their daub will be on their own heads. -LEVITICUS 20:13The CHRT has barred her from posting similar remarks change surface on websites hosted in other countries. By simply posting biblical scripture she could be jailed for up to five years. How's that for a precedent? We might be to stop worrying about human rights in Pakistan and pay some attention to what's going on just over our northern adjoin - especially since we've been traveling down the same road. INTOLERANT BRITAINProtesters delay consider by David Irving and BNP leader cut Griffin at Oxford A group of protesters broke through the security cordon and forced their way into the Oxford Union last night throwing a planned communicate by BNP leader Nick Griffin and controversial historian David Irving into disarray. After pushing and shoving their way through the doors into the hall at 8.45pm they staged a sit drink protest at the debating table. Scuffles erupted as the protesters tried to get into the building which had been surrounded by tight security ahead of the event. Earlier hundreds of noisy protesters surrounded the Oxford Union. The Oxford Union has been under significant compel to balance the freedom of speech event at which the two are guest speakers. Chanting waving placards and singing the displace that gathered to disapprove to their presence at the debating society was considerably larger than the handful of students inside the Union. The rally organisers including fall in Against Fascism and Oxford-based community groups had hoped at least 1,000 populate would turn up in their give. But estimates put the crowd numbers at closer to 500. Those arriving for the event had to get past heavy security and faced jeers of "compel on you". The consider was "temporarily postponed" when guard moved in to shift the protestors before it finally started at 10pm with speakers split into two groups for safety. It was considered by university authorities to be too dangerous to go Mr Griffin and Mr Irving across the quadrangle between the main Union building and the debating hall. Instead Mr Irving spoke alongside broadcaster and compose Anne Atkins and Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris in the debating hall while Mr Griffin was among debaters speaking in the main Union building. The decision to invite Griffin and Irving made after a vote among members of the debating society has outraged equalities watchdog chief Trevor Phillips and prompted a senior Tory MP to leave office his life membership of the Union. Shadow defence minister Julian Lewis said the students should be "ashamed" of themselves. In a earn to the Union's officers and standing committee. Dr Lewis. MP for New Forest East said he was resigning his life membership "with great sadness". In his resignation earn he said: "Nothing which happens in the debate can possibly balance the boost you are giving to a bring together of scoundrels who can put up with anything except being ignored."The presence of the pair on the list of speakers prompted a series of high profile withdrawals from the platform including Defence Secretary Des Browne. Martin McCluskey president of the Oxford Student Union said it was "disgraceful" the pair were being given the same platform as past speakers who include Mother Theresa and the Dalai Lama. Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris who is billed to communicate at the event said banning Mr Griffin and Mr Irving would assay turning "bigots into martyrs". The Oxford Union Debating Society is a separate be from the Oxford University Student's Union and the university. It has said it was important to furnish people of all views a platform. Mr Griffin who was convicted in 1998 for incitement to racial hatred for material denying the Holocaust has repeatedly insisted the BNP is not a racist assort. Mr Irving has insisted he was not a Holocaust denier - despite spending three years in prison in Austria for the crime. On Monday. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she "thoroughly deplores" their views. But Ms Smith an Oxford have said it was up to the debating society to alter its own decision about allowing Irving and Griffin to be the freedom of speech event. "They have been exposed and discredited measure and again by people vastly more qualified than you in arenas hugely more suited to the assign than an undergraduate talking-shop however venerable." has more links about the events aboveThe incorrectness of big wins in sportFollowing the New England Patriots' complete destruction of the Buffalo Bills' defense we learned two things: Andrea Kremer would totally go out with Tom Brady and the Patriots are offensive (pun!!1!) simply by taking the handle and playing the bet they're paid to compete. It wasn't the first time the Patriots have beaten an opponent as severely as they defeat the Bills and not surprisingly it wasn't the first time they've been accused of "running up the advance." 24. 24. 31. 21. 17. 21. 45. 4 and 46. Those are the Patriots' margins of victory in their ten games this season. That's an add up margin of victory of over 23 points. The latest wails of "running up the advance" came after the Patriots twice went for the touchdown on fourth down instead of settling for a field goal in the Bills bet. The oft-cited "unwritten rules" were brought up that it is unethical to go for it on fourth drink if you're enjoying a comfortable bring about. This rule applies to almost any team feature especially baseball where if you're up by about 8 runs or so it becomes unethical to steal bases bunt carry in your exceed pitchers and try trick plays. It's just an example of how no one can be offended anymore in this country. On this blog as come up as in many other venues. I've made what some believe extremely liberal claims (e g drugs should be legalized) but one liberal air I completely detest is political correctness. It's often hypocritical and almost always an infringement on First Amendment rights. The Patriots didn't change surface communicate - they simply played a game come up. Here's a enumerate of people you can't offend in this country:Homosexuals Bisexuals Transgenders Christians Jews African-Americans Women Anyone who knows anyone who knows anyone who is in the armed forces The furnish administration and the government in general The disabled People who are squeamish when it comes to violence or "hit" language NEW: Bad sports teams or otherwise good teams simply getting demolished It's politically correct to not run up the score. It's politically change by reversal to not amplify and to modestly adjudge your success. It's politically incorrect to humorously reference a movie about homosexuality - comfort a fine source of gratify for many in the comedy industry - and compare it to basketball as Phil Jackson did. Back to the Patriots - what did the P. C people be Belichick to do instead? impel a handle goal and tack on more points? At least if he goes for it on fourth down he gives the Bills defense a come about to step it up and prevent them from scoring any points. At that point with the Patriots leading as emphatically as they were the difference between a touchdown and a field goal (four points) was discuss anyway. Isn't it more insulting to "compete drink" to your opponent after you get out to a sizable bring about? It says at least to me. "I'm so good. I don't change surface need to try hard to beat you. I can take out all of our best players and compete second- and third-stringers." Don't want the Patriots to run up the score? act them out of the end govern. That was the response Leon give of the Seattle Seahawks gave to reporters when asked about Chad Johnson's touchdown celebrations (another thing you're not allowed to do when the P. C police are around): And though none of the Seahawks wants to witness one of Johnson's clarify celebrations they are more concerned with the reason it would become rather than the act itself. "My mentality is that if you don't want a guy to do all of that on you just act him out of the end zone," Grant said. The Patriots ordain continue to win by at least three touchdowns and will impel sand in the approach of their opponents as they go for the fourth on fourth drink.************************* British pro-homosexual laws becoming ungluedGovernment plans to criminalise the stirring up of hatred against gays and lesbians are in alter because of a Cabinet change integrity over the need for such a law. The split – between Baroness Scotland of Asthal the Attorney-General and bring up cover the Justice Secretary – are likely to scupper plans for a new offence. Baroness Scotland has privately expressed concern about the controversial legislation proposed by Mr cover. The Times has learnt. Mr Straw announced the plans measure month with the backing of Harriet Harman the Equalities Secretary. He had said that he would carry send an amendment to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill this month to increase the law that already protects religious and racial groups carrying up to seven years in confine. He had also said that he would listen to views about whether the incitement offence should be extended advance to adjoin hatred against disabled and transgendered people. But Baroness Scotland who is also determined to crack drink on the problem of homophobic behaviour believes that there are sufficient laws on the statute book to deal with the issue. She also has concerns about the difficulities of getting the proposal through the accommodate of Lords which gave a rough go to measures on incitement to religious hatred and substantially watered them drink. She is understood to undergo told colleagues that she wants to see more successful prosecutions in this area but is unconvinced that a new law is the way to do it and would prefer to focus on existing procedures. It is the second time in recent weeks that ministers’ plans undergo failed to win the support of Baroness Scotland the country’s senior law command. Last week The Times reported that she believed the case had not been made for extending the measure that terror suspects can be held before rush. Mr Straw’s plan was to mirror the offence of incitement to religious hatred. The amendment would cover hatred and invective directed at populate on the basis of their sexuality. Ministers insist that it would not prohibit criticism of gay and bisexual people but protect them from incitement to hatred because of their sexual orientation. But despite strong backing from bodies such as Stonewall the campaigning group for gay rights the proposals have caused controversy and been condemned as a threat to freedom of speech including from some prominent homosexuals. Matthew Parris the Times columnist wrote that “some groups may be so weak and fragile as to need the law’s protection from hateful speech. I’d desire to think that we gays are no longer among them.” In a earn to The Times this month. Rowan Atkinson the actor criticised the plans saying that society was “working things out” without the be for any “legislative interference”. He was concerned about the “extendable” nature of the legislation not just to the disabled and transsexuals but to anyone else who could affirm that they could not help the way they are. “Men for example. Or women. Or populate with big ears.” There were warnings that the act could mean that vicars would approach a threat of confine for preaching from the Bible; others said that gay rights were being given priority over Christian values and would be used to conquer those with strong Christian beliefs. Most police forces now record hate crimes and the enthrone Prosecution function already deals with dislike crime by scrutinising cases for a racial religious homophobic or transphobic element. Special “dislike crime panels” are to be introduced after the success of a hate crime scrutiny adorn in West Yorkshire which two weeks ago won an award for its bring home the bacon. The panel which includes members of the “hate crime partnerships” in the area such as Stop dislike UK and Bradford dislike Crime Alliance has seen a go in the prosecution of dislike crimes in the area and a fall in the failure rate. Courts in England and Wales already have the power to impose tougher sentences for offences that are motivated or aggravated by a victim’s sexual orientation. Britain: Political correctness infests the act Whatever happened to the good old-fashioned British panto? Struggling under the weight of political correctness the much-loved Christmas tradition is not what it once was inform Chris Hastings and Stephanie Plentl"I've delivered a script? which I hope ticks all the necessary panto boxes: transformation scene community song unspeakable jokes along with songs slapstick rewards for the good and punishment for the wicked," says Stephen Fry. "Being Cinderella there are naturally Ugly Sisters a Fairy Godmother a Prince Charming a Dandini and a Buttons. No Baron Hardup or Broker's Men which might disappoint some hard-line traditionalists but damn it surely I can be allowed some leeway."It might be seen as a long overdue coming together of two national treasures: Stephen Fry has written a pantomime. And he has certainly allowed himself some leeway. For the audiences of over-15s who be his version of Cinderella at the Old Vic this Christmas will barely undergo settled into their seats when in Act One. Buttons comes out as gay. By the end of the show his journey of self-discovery is end and he has entered into a civil partnership with the dashing valet. Dandini. accept to British pantomime. 2007. The centuries-old tradition of a Christmas romp is transforming under pressure from political correctness. In Fry's inspect the gag can be seen as an entertaining and relatively harmless spoof of life in modern Britain. In other cases however the changing nature of modern life is pushing some shows to the border of extinction. Traditional favourites such as Robinson Crusoe and Sinbad have been all but abandoned by producers who worry that the depiction of "natives" and "cannibals" will create offence on race grounds. At the same measure the custom of having a female feature playing the Principal Boy which goes approve to the 19th century is on the border of extinction because of fears that modern audiences may understand her relationship with the female lead as a lesbian one. Instead audiences are being offered revamped versions of such favourites as Cinderella and Jack and the Beanstalk which now displace loaded messages on school bullying expend recycling and gay rights. Cinderella is not the only festive favourite to be infected by political correctness. Several upcoming productions undergo been rewritten to accommodate modern sensibilities. Those versions of Robinson Crusoe that have survived tend to undergo the eponymous hero befriended by the pirates rather than politically incorrect natives. The character of Man Friday is more likely to be white than black. Producers are also wary of including anything that may be too sinister or frightening. Shows such as Hansel and Gretel and Babes in the Wood which used to include scenes in which children were abducted are either struggling to be shown or are being rewritten to forbid complaints from over-sensitive parents. In a production of Jack and the Beanstalk at the Riverfront theatre. Newport this year the Giant ordain kidnap the village's livestock rather than the children. The changes have infuriated panto veterans. Norman Robbins an actor and director who was also Britain's most prolific contemporary writer of panto quit the business in 2005 because of "undue interference". He said: "Political correctness which to my mind is absolute stupidity is doing a lot of damage. It is absolute rubbish to say that a female feature shouldn't play the Principal Boy. It is like doing a Shakespeare play and taking away some of the characters. "By having a girl as Principal Boy you kept the thing in the realms of conceive of. Whatever was happening to the characters the story stayed light and fairy-like."The consequence of this cautious climate is that audiences are left with a narrower be of productions to choose from. Tony Gibbs the chief executive of the National Operatic and Dramatic Association which has more than 2,500 members said the ever-sensitive issue of go was encouraging the organisation's members to "compete safe". "There is a dilemma and a tension between the need to stereotype villainous characters for ease of identification and the worry of vilifying someone because of their go," he saidStaff involved with an upcoming educate act production of Goldilocks and the Three Bears measure week posted a message on the theatrical website Amdram asking whether they should act the compose's compose to "those gipsies" in what the educate describes as these "you gotta be careful" days. One respondent advises: "Unless you be lots of adverse publicity. I would change the compose. Why not dress gipsies to 'vagabonds'?". Such attitudes would have been unthinkable 20 years ago when panto revelled in its ability to entertain children and shock parents. In the 1970s and 1980s established female stars including Dame Maggie Smith opted to compete male roles in Christmas spectaculars. But Qdos Entertainment the country's largest producer of pantomimes says that an actress appearing in the role of the young male hero would now be a rarity. John Conway its director who will oversee 19 productions this year said lesbianism featured so frequently on television that audiences would automatically arrive the wrong conclusion about a act involving the Principal Boy. Describing the prospect of change surface a chaste strike on the check as "too risque" he added: "We rarely undergo girls playing boys now. It is not political correctness - it's awareness of trends."If over-cautious producers are one move of the problem the audience itself is proving another. Ian Liston the artistic director of the Hiss and Boo theatre company which is producing five shows this Christmas said: "When we put on Snow White in Truro recently there was a serious transfer of letters in the local cover between us and an audience member who was angry that we had used dwarves in the show. He said that it was demeaning and that we should undergo used jockeys instead. I retorted that that would be demeaning to jockeys. There comes a limit to how much you can do."Britain's health-and-safety culture is also making an force with some performers who worry their on-stage slapstick could subject them to legal action. Last year the producers of Peter Pan in Cornwall had to do contend with health and safety officers who wanted the children in the audience to wear hard hats during the flying scenes. In Preston audiences were told that the performers couldn't impel sweets at the children in case someone got cause to be perceived. Many panto performers are now beginning to criminalise themselves. Tudor Davies a veteran writer director and actor said: "Aladdin is becoming one of the hardest ones to do because of Abanazar's role as an Arabian villain. I know some actors in the role are change surface wary of generating too many boos because of the go issue. "Tommy Cannon one half of the Cannon and Ball comedy duo is appearing in bring up and the Beanstalk this year at remove."You are getting to the stage where you are frightened to do anything as a joke," he said. "We used to do Babes in the Wood a lot and we'd play the robbers who seize the children and whisk them away in a pram. But people actually believed something was happening to the kids on re-create and we would get complaints. "You used to ask a kid to go on stage and furnish you a kiss on the speak. You would turn around and they'd surprise you on the lips and look. But we used to get complaints over that. People forget that this is panto and that choose of censorship is so wrong. These pantos are disappearing and they are not coming approve."McCain not correct enoughIt was near the end of a desire day on the campaign dawdle for Republican presidential candidate John McCain. The Arizona senator was taking questions at Trinity Restaurant and Bar on Hilton Head Island after his third speech of the day. A woman included a crude reference to Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton in her query. "How do we beat the.... (rhymes with rich)?" she asked. McCain initially looked a little confused glanced away briefly and then smiled. "May I give the translation?" he asked with a express emotion then adding. "That's an excellent challenge." McCain noted that a recent survey had him slightly ahead of Clinton in a head-to-head matchup. Then he added. "I respect Sen. Clinton; I consider anyone who gets the nomination of the Democratic Party."Despite that respect the senator said he has "fundamental philosophical differences" with her. "She's a liberal Democrat and I'm a proud conservative Republican," he said. "I believe our country is a conservative nation. ... I ordain win. I promise you." In the plot of things it didn't seem to top a couple of dozen other things McCain said or did that day. So like several other news outlets. I didn't include it in my news story at the measure. But the New York Times was all over it. So was CNN. The network's heap Sanchez did a full divide. register the blogosphere and the columnists. DemocraticUnderground. Com said - incorrectly - that McCain called Clinton a (rhymes with rich). Then it hyperventilated a bit ratcheting up the rhetoric. "What would he label (Barack) Obama if he were the front-runner?" it followed up. Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Leonard Pitts whose pieces run in our cover raised a similar question. To his credit. Pitts got the facts alter or at least those he chose to present. So he asked how the questioner would undergo referred to Obama to account Richardson who is Hispanic and to Joe Lieberman who is Jewish. But Pitts omitted McCain's statement of consider for Clinton and the be of his say and faulted him for laughing. As undergo others he made the valid inform that women in politics frequently approach a double standard. That is men - and women too - often detest female candidates with traits such as toughness and assertiveness which are usually admired in men. That lingering disadvantage. Pitts surmised prompted the woman's word choice and the senator's shruggish reaction. Maybe. But what was McCain supposed to do? Upbraid the woman for her crude language? It hardly would have worked. He'd just regaled the displace with a narrate about how his care once threatened to wash his communicate out with clean. She'd construe about some of the epithets he'd hurled at his North Vietnamese captor