eChurch Blog

Previous posts on the The Presbyterian Church’s anti-Israel stance; here and here.

CAMERA

The Presbyterian Church (USA) will debate numerous proposals regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict at its upcoming General Assembly scheduled to take place in Minneapolis in early July 2010. One overture submitted to the General Assembly by the San Francisco Presbytery declares Israel guilty of the crime of apartheid. Other resolutions call on the denomination to rebuke Caterpillar for continuing to sell its products to Israel.

Setting the stage for the debate is a lengthy report issued by a Middle East Study Committee created by the PC(USA)’s General Assembly in 2008. The report of this committee includes a number of letters to various stakeholders, a theological treatise on how the denomination should address the conflict, a list of recommendations from the committee itself and a distorted history of the Arab-Israeli conflict written by two members of the committee.

In the committee’s letter to its “American Jewish Friends,” the committee includes states the following:

We want to be sure to say to you in no uncertain terms: we support the existence of Israel as a sovereign nation within secure and recognized borders. No “but,” no “let’s get this out of the way so we can say what we really want to say. We support Israel’s existence as granted by the U.N. General Assembly. We support Israel’s existence as a home for the Jewish people. We have said this before, and we say this again. We say this because we believe it; we say it because we want it to be true.

This is troublesome, but what is more troublesome is the historical analysis submitted by the committee. This document, written by committee members Nahida H. Gordon and Frederic W. Bush, is explicitly anti-Zionist.

The document’s authors reveal their anti-Zionist agenda when they compare the influx of Armenians into pre-1948 Palestinians with the influx of Jews into the region during the first half of the 20^th century. The overall assessment is that the Armenians were well behaved guests while the Jews were violent marauders.

Here is how the document describes Armenian immigration into pre-1948 Palestine:

The Armenians came to Palestine to seek refuge with a wish to live, raise their families, and contribute to the culture of their new home. They embraced the culture, learned the language, shared its cuisine, and most importantly contributed to the rich diversity of Palestinian society. Deep friendships and lasting family connections were common among the newly arrived Armenians and the indigenous Palestinians. Tragically, the Armenian-Palestinians were uprooted once more in 1948–1949 during the Nakba, the expulsion of Palestinian Christians and Muslims by the newly arrived Jewish settlers from Europe.

The authors report that when the Armenians came into Palestine, they joined a pre-existing community of Jews who “spoke Arabic, lived peacefully on the land with Christian and Muslim Palestinians, shared its cuisine, and enjoyed Palestine as did their Christian and Muslim neighbors. They were part of a multicultural Palestine, without whom Palestine would have lost some of its rich diversity and heritage. Friendships between these Jewish Palestinians and their Christian and Muslim neighbors were common.” The narrative continues as follows:

So why did things change? They changed with the mass immigration of Jewish refugees from Europe to Palestine during the first half of the 20th century. These refugees came to Palestine to escape centuries of segregation, expulsion, murder, and the horrors of their holocaust during World War II. They were a traumatized people who, rather than integrating into the existing Palestinian society as the Armenians had done earlier, eventually came to displace the Palestinians. They took the land of Palestine from a majority of its inhabitants at gunpoint. The land dispossession by the state created by these European immigrants continues to the present time to further add to the widely dispersed 1948 Palestinian refugee population. Tragically, the government of these immigrants continues to nurture the belief that security comes only from military might. Not surprisingly, Palestinians responded with violence to their displacement. Violent elements in both the Israeli and Palestinian communities have repeatedly frustrated efforts at reconciliation. (Emphasis added.)

The message of this document is that Israel’s creation was a fundamentally illegitimate act that colors everything it has done in the years since 1948. In other words, everything Israel does is tainted by the original sin of its creation. Readers who examine this historical analysis closely will find that it applies a utopian standard to Israel’s creation, and makes the adherence to this standard a condition for its continued existence.

The anti-Zionist message inherent in this document should not come as a surprise. In an article published before the study committee report was made public, the Presbyterian News Service reported that there was some controversy in the study committee over the language acknowledging Israel’s right to exist. The report states:

Israel was built on the ruins of Palestinian land and culture,” said Nahida Gordon, a committee member and Palestinian American who teaches at Case Western Reserve in Cleveland. “I take this personally — my personhood as a Palestinian has been obliterated. Palestinians are being erased as human beings. To say this [‘the right of Israel to exist'] is to give Israel a pass on the way Israel was created and denies the legitimacy of the Palestinian people.”

At the suggestion of the Rev. Susan Andrews of Hudson River Presbytery, the committee added the following footnote: “The phrase ‘the right of Israel to exist’ is a source of pain for some members of our study committee who are in solidarity with Palestinians, who feel that the creation of the state of Israel has denied them their inalienable human rights.”

Bastards.

From Harry’s Place:-

They took the staff into a separate room and executed them one by one, according to a news report on ABC.

The charity said they thought the office was targeted because it was running programmes to help women.

World Vision has decided to suspend its programmes and pull out of the country following the “brutal and senseless” attacks on its staff.

From World Vision:-

World Vision is a Christian relief, development and advocacy organisation dedicated to working with children, families and communities to overcome poverty and injustice.

Motivated by our faith in Jesus Christ, World Vision serves alongside the poor and oppressed as a demonstration of God’s unconditional love for all people.

World Vision serves all people regardless of religion, race, ethnicity or gender.

Financial support is received from; the UK Government, the European Union, charitable trusts, corporate supporters and also more than 100,000 individuals, who sponsor children in poor communities overseas. Lives are also transformed through the Alternative Gift Catalogue and events such as the 24 Hour famine

World Vision works to change the root causes of poverty through campaigning, church partnerships, education and influencing policy makers.

In whatever we do, we place a special emphasis on ensuring the needs and rights of children are met, because they are often the hardest hit by conflict, disaster and chronic poverty.

Continue Reading

LA Times – Pakistan militants attack U.S. Christian aid group, killing six
All of the dead were Pakistanis employed by World Vision, which has been helping victims of a devastating 2005 earthquake in the country’s north.

The Long War Journal – Earlier today, armed fighters attacked an office operated by World Vision International, a Christian charity that has been aiding victims of the devastating earthquake in 2005. The aid group has sought to provide schooling, jobs, food, and other basic needs for Pakistanis impacted by the earthquake and other natural disasters.

UPDATE: From World Vision:-

World Vision: Pakistan attack “brutal and senseless”

World Vision is today mourning the brutal and senseless deaths of six members of staff in the Mansehra District of Pakistan, killed in an unprovoked attack by gunmen.

The international humanitarian organisation is seeking to confirm reports that gunmen first set off bombs or grenades, then opened fire on the office, located 65 kilometres north of the capital, Islamabad, at 9.20am local time today.

In addition to the four men and two women killed, seven employees have been hospitalised with injuries.

No threatening letters were received prior to the attack.

World Vision’s relief and development work in Pakistan is conducted by local citizens.

All of World Vision’s operations in the country have been suspended indefinitely.

World Vision remembers those staff who have died as dedicated people seeking to improve the lives of people affected by poverty and disasters.

Since 1992, World Vision has primarily focused on relief interventions in Pakistan. The work expanded in 2001, when the agency began collaborating with other aid groups in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Punjab Province with emergency relief assistance and community development initiatives.

After the devastating October 2005 earthquake, World Vision expanded its operations in Pakistan.

The British Humanist Association has put together their election manifesto, which can be found on the following PDF Links:-

BHA – Local Manifesto

BHA – General Manifesto

Personally I can’t be bothered to read them as I am politically depressed and apathetic currently, however, here are a couple of links from folks that could be bothered:-

The Church Mouse – The British Humanist Association have published their ‘manifesto’ for the coming local and general elections.  They have put together a series of issues which are of particular interest to humanists, along with a list of questions to ask candidates, should they come knocking on your door.

CCFON – The British Humanist Association has issued its Manifesto for the 2010 General Election attacking faith schools and what they call ‘religious privilege’, and slamming any accommodation of faith groups’ initiatives.

Archbishop Cranmer has today written of his hopes and dreams for the forth coming election:-

The Tory Trinity: the ineffable theo-political Three in One – Cameron, Osborne and Johnson. Or, for those who feel more immanence, Dave, George and Boris.

This headline caught my eye:-

Telegraph – Gary Neville’s plans for ‘Teletubby’ home opposed by neighbours

A few years ago, I spent 6 months recuperating from meningitis and as my son was very young, I happened to watch a lot of CBeebies, and of course the Teletubbies.

Ever since this time, I have secretly yearned to live in the land of Teletubby.

Check out this picture of the proposed building:

How cool is that?

And it’s not hard to see the similarities with this:

I will say this though, if I don’t make it to the land of Teletubby, I’ll be happy to settle with the Hobbits in the Shire and live in one of those cosy little hill houses with the round front door.

I’m popping this one on the blog, because it covers one my pet subjects, namely, the Internet and Christianity and also because this report relates to the demise of the Anglican Diocese of British Columbia, which my favourite Anglican blog – Anglican Samizdat – who happens to be Canada based, has blogged about recently; here and here.

The Globe and Mail

Faced with declining enrolment and revenue that will force it to shutter churches on Vancouver Island, the Anglican Church is turning to the social medium where millions of followers already flock: Twitter.

The Anglican Diocese of British Columbia last weekend voted to close seven churches outright and move those congregations to “hub churches.” The meeting, during which several members tweeted updates to followers, came on the heels of an ominous recent report that predicted that the once powerful church was headed for extinction unless dramatic changes occur.

In addition to recommending that churches close, the report described Canada as a post-Christian society and urged a change in attitude to attract new members, including embracing modern forms of evangelism.

Among other things, the report suggested members and lay people go “outside the walls of our parish buildings,” to talk to people about the church and even invite them to a service. Some clergy have already begun this modern missionary work, using social media, such as Twitter and Facebook, to reach new followers.

Rev. Christopher Parsons said the notion of evangelism has traditionally struck a raw nerve among churchgoers, but he argued that the status quo hasn’t worked for years. “Over the years, the church has been able to rest on its laurels,” he said. “You could open the church and its door and people would pour in.” That’s not happening any more.

Canon Parsons, who has his own Twitter account, said finding new faithful through social media isn’t a gimmick. “On the one hand it’s modern. On the other hand it’s incredibly ancient,” Canon Parsons said.

“The idea of doing church differently . . . there are examples of this happening all through the history of the church,” Canon Parson added.

If anything, Canon Parsons drew comparisons to the church and Twitter groups. He attended a recent tweetup, (a social gathering organized by Twitter users), which he described as similar to church.

“The times I’ve gone, they know who I am. They know what I do, so we talk about church. And I say: ‘What is church for you? What is important about this [tweetup]?’ And they say: ‘I find meaning. I find belonging. I find like-minded people.’ I think: ‘This is exactly like church.’ ”

The call for fresh approaches was contained in a 48-page document prepared by The Anglican Synod of the Diocese of British Columbia. Released in January, it repeated earlier predictions that the Anglican church in Canada is losing 13,000 members per year and risks extinction by the 2061.

As a result, the church synod last weekend voted to close seven churches outright, and their congregations will be urged to moved to so-called “hub” churches. There are 54 Anglican churches on Vancouver Island and the adjacent Gulf Islands. More closings could occur in the future.

The changes have sparked concern, sadness and wariness about the future. “Will this work?” asked Christopher Page, the rector of St. Philip’s in Victoria and archdeacon of Juan de Fuca. “It could go either way. This is not a slam dunk.

“It’s not an easy task to be a Christian church in the present cultural climate. There are far too many other attractive options for Sunday morning.”

But Archdeacon Page hopes people will return to religious institutions – and not simply because the Anglican church restructured and consolidated. He said people crave a spiritual life and will tire of the individualism that pervades our culture.

“The hope lies in the reality, I believe, that people do have an abiding hunger in their hearts for something beyond themselves, some kind of transcendent reality. And I think the hope lies in the fact that in our culture, even as we speak, people are becoming dissatisfied and discontented simply with materialism and the focus on getting ahead in the world. And they’re realizing that that is not a fully satisfying life.”

There is a furore over the Israeli governments announcement of plans to build hundreds of homes in east Jerusalem. To make matters worse the timing of the announcement coincided with the official state visit of US vice president Joe Biden, to begin indirect negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian authorities.

Telegraph:-

Israel’s controversial announcement that it had approved construction of 1,600 new apartments coincided with Mr Biden’s arrival in the country for a round of meetings with Israeli officials.

In a strongly-worded statement, Mr Biden criticised the decision to announce the plan during his visit.

“The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now,” he said.

“We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them,” he added, warning that “unilateral action taken by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations.”

Although ministry officials said the announcement was procedural and unconnected to the visit, a top aide to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed he had been blindsided by the news. Mr Netanyahu tried to contain the damage at a late-night dinner with Mr Biden, but it was too late and Mr Biden issued his statement after the dinner.

Relations between Israel and the Obama administration have been chilly precisely because of the settlement issue, and one of Mr Biden’s main goals had been to try to repair ties. Mr Biden is the highest-level member of the Obama administration to visit Israel.

Did you notice this comment:-

Mr Netanyahu tried to contain the damage at a late-night dinner with Mr Biden, but it was too late and Mr Biden issued his statement after the dinner.

If you are wondering why they met during a “late-night dinner” and not earlier in the day, then the answer lies in my post from yesterday:-

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday addressed a Christians United for Israel (CUFI) summit in Jerusalem and encouraged Christian Zionists around the world to stay the course in their defense of the Jewish state.

It would appear that Benjamin Netanyahu decided to meet with the CUFI earlier in the evening, rather than meet with Biden.

On top of this, the Middle Eastern press has been unimpressed and rather subdued about Biden’s visit:-

BBC

Press commentators in Israel and the Palestinian territories have given a subdued response to the visit of US Vice-President Joe Biden to Israel shortly after a new round of indirect negotiations between the two sides was announced.

Israeli papers recognised that the visit was aimed at reaffirming relations with the US, but some acknowledged that the spirit of the trip was undermined by the news that Israel had approved the construction of 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem.

The Palestinian press, already cool on the prospect of indirect negotiations, were also unenthused by Biden’s visit, with two papers saying he was more interested in Iranian issues than Palestinian ones.

It certainly looks as if the Obama administration is a spent force in the Middle East currently, and these incidents were designed to snub.

Following is Netanyahu’s Address to the Christians United For Israel Jerusalem Summit, and notice the opening comment relating to Jerusalem, which I happen to completely agree with:-

Welcome to Jerusalem, the undivided, eternal capital of the Jewish state and the Jewish people.

Your presence here today represents a profound transformation in the relationship between Christians and Jews. This transformation has its roots in the 19th century when the early Christian Zionists came to the Land Israel and when they began exploring the land of the Bible, when they began to yearn for the Jewish restoration in this land, the restoration of our numbers, the restoration of our sovereignty.

In fact, Christian Zionism preceded modern Jewish Zionism, and I think enabled it. But it received a tremendous impetus several decades ago when leading American clergymen, among them most notably, Pastor John Hagee, a dynamic pastor and leader from Texas, began to say to their congregations and to anyone who listened, it’s time to take a stand with Israel. It was time to take a stand with the sole democracy in the Middle East. It was time to take a stand against the lies and the slander and the vilifications. It was time to defend the Jewish state’s right to defend itself.

Today, Christians by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, by the hundreds of thousands, by the millions, by the tens of millions – today they have heard this call, and they stand with Israel. I salute you, the people of Israel salute you, the Jewish people salute you.

Time after time, through thick and thin, you have stood shoulder to shoulder with our state, and I have come here tonight to thank you for your unwavering friendship. And today that friendship is more important than ever because Israel faces unprecedented challenges to its security and its legitimacy.

No security challenge is more important to our common future than preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. I have said before and I’ll say again, that the greatest threat facing mankind is the specter of a militant Islamic regime acquiring nuclear weapons, or the specter of nuclear weapons acquiring a militant Islamic regime. The first is dangerously close to happening in Iran, and the second may or may not happen in Pakistan. I believe that with the right policies both can be averted.

If Iran develops atomic weapons, the world would never be the same. We would witness a cascade of terrorism across the globe as terrorists would operate under an Iranian nuclear umbrella. Look at how much havoc, how much terror they sow now, when there is no such umbrella, and understand what can happen if Iran, their patron, sponsor, supplier and supporter, if that Iran had nuclear weapons. Equally, the region’s vital oil supplies could be severely threatened and efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East would collapse as one regime after another would rush to acquire nuclear weapons of their own. Worst of all, if nuclear weapons would be given to terrorists, or to terrorist states, a 65 year-old era of nuclear peace would be endangered for the first time.

Remember that for the tyrants in Tehran, Israel is only the little Satan. In their eyes, America is the Great Satan. America is their ultimate target. Yet for Israel, the threat from Iran could not be clearer. Iran’s leaders openly call for Israel’s destruction. They brazenly deny the Holocaust and they hope, and they say so just about every other day, they hope to wipe Israel off the map of the Middle East.

We must not allow such a regime to threaten the peace of the world, the peace and security of all humanity. All responsible members of the international community must do everything in their power to stop Iran from developing atomic weapons.

As we speak the United States is leading an international effort to impose sanctions on Iran. We believe those sanctions must have teeth. And to have teeth, they must bite deep into Iran’s energy sector. Simply put, they should prevent Iran from importing gasoline and from exporting oil. I believe that such measures might convince the regime to choose between continuing the weapons program and between assuring the regime’s future. But there must be tough, biting sanctions.

I said that we face great challenges to our security, but we also face unprecedented challenges to our legitimacy. Now this assault on our legitimacy comes in many forms – it comes from the so-called human rights bodies in the UN which would deny Israel its legitimate right of self-defense, it comes by falsely charging Israel’s political and military leaders with imaginary war crimes, and it comes by the outrageous waging campaigns to boycott, divest and sanction Israel. You are all familiar with that.

But I think that there is an even greater assault on our legitimacy. I think it is the attempt to perpetrate one of the greatest lies of history — to deny the connection between the people of Israel and the land of Israel; to cast the Jewish people as foreigners in the land of our forefathers. Make no mistake about it. The attempt to deny our history in this land is an attempt to deny our future in this land. That is why to defend our past is to defend our future.

I ask you all to join us in this battle to defend the truth. Remind them of Abraham and Isaac, remind them of Joshua and Samuel, remind them of David and Solomon. Remind the world that the land of the Bible is not in the heavens but right here on earth. And that the people of the Bible, are on the land of the Bible.

Let me tell you how I remind foreign officials of this connection of the Jewish people to our history and to this land. You see, they visit my office. And I say, Would you come and look at this little signet ring that I was given on loan from the Department of Antiquities? It was found next to the Wall of the Second Temple, but it dates back to the First Temple. It goes back some 2800 years ago, to the period of the Kings. It is a signet seal of a Jewish official, and it has a name written in ancient Hebrew, which I can read. The name is: Netanyahu. Netanyahu Ben-Yoash. I say, that’s my last name. My first name, Benjamin, dates back 1000 years earlier, to Benjamin the son of Jacob, who also walked these hills. That is our connection. And nobody can deny the connection of the Jewish people to the Jewish land.

Israel faces great challenges. We must prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. We must repel the assault on our legitimacy. We must find a way to achieve peace with our neighbors. We must all pray for the peace of Jerusalem.

After centuries in exile, I have come here to assure you, the people of Israel have come home and no force on earth will ever make us leave our home again.

Of course the Obama administration could always attempt to impose a solution on Israel, however, given the above, I doubt that the US has the power or the influence to do so.

Original Source EZGToons

Previous post here.

Cross-post by Polycarp:-

The King of Spain, Juan Carlos I, has signed a bill into law legalizing abortion on demand for the first fourteen weeks of pregnancy.

The law, which was recently passed by the Spanish Congress and Senate, also declares abortion as a “right,” allows minors as young as 16 to obtain abortions without their parents’ consent, and requires abortionist and homosexualist education in the nation’s schools.

The king, a professed Catholic, ignored pleas from a number of theologians and pro-life activists to withhold his signature from the bill, which would have prevented it from being promulgated and applied

via the totally unbiased LifeSiteNews.com: ‘Catholic’ King of Spain Signs Abortion Bill into Law.

Internet link from the Catholic News Agency:-

Nearly one million Spaniards marched in cities across the country on March 7 defending the right to life of the unborn and demanding that the government revoke Spain’s new law on abortion recently passed by the Senate and signed by King Juan Carlos.

Previous posts here, here and here.

CMS

Following the murder of more than 500 people in the latest shocking violence in the Jos area, we reproduce here in its entirety an open letter from the Rt Rev Benjamin Kwashi, Archbishop of Jos. He describes local peace moves and rails against lack of government action.

January 17th was a Sunday morning and as usual Christians left their homes to congregate in churches to worship. That day has since become a remarkable day in history with sad memories for Christian and Muslim communities in Jos and its environs. A few days after that, leaders began to gather to see how to resolve what the perceived problems, or real problems, or even imaginary problems were. I myself became a part of a group with industrialists, businessmen and women, academics and religious leaders, both Christian and Muslim, to discuss these matters. We even spent a day at a forum listening to elders and religious leaders in Jos and spent another day listening to the youth. In all the conversations the Christians and Muslims spoke up frankly and aired their understanding of the grievances they have. We are in the process of putting together ideas as to how to move forward.

News then broke on Sunday 7th March that two other villages plus Dogo na Hauwa had been attacked by Muslim Fulani from about 3am to 5am. Some of these communities may never again be recognised in history because generations have been wiped out. Hundreds of corpses of men, women, children and grandchildren littered the burnt houses, roads, bush paths, farm areas and hiding places. Tears and endless wailings until voices croaked and words are no more.

Is there no other way by which matters can be resolved except through this sadistic and cruel way of making peoples’ lives miserable? For me, as a Christian, human life is so sacred that no-one, absolutely no-one, should tamper with it, no matter what religious faith you belong to.

Human life is so sacred and we have to teach and train people to value it: it is a gift from God.

What bothers my heart are a few questions:

* It was curfew time when these attackers came in and carried out their heinous activities. Who are responsible for these areas? What happened to those who should enforce the curfew? The purpose of the curfew is to stop events like this.

* Failure of government to provide full security for its citizenry leaves a people with very little option but to provide for their own kind of security. History has shown that these kinds of security are bred in vengeance, retaliation, bitterness, hatred and malice. This gives birth to an almost endless cycle of senseless violence as can be seen in many nations of the world today. Where is our government in all the levels of governance? Where were they on this night? Where were they on 17th January? Shall we continue to have the ugly sight of mass burials? Are there no leaders who fear God, who will swallow their pride and choose to be humble before God for the sake of those faces of slaughtered children?

* The new dimension these attacks are assuming is revealing a system of well-trained terror groups who rights now have attacked these villages, and only God knows which community will be next. Their merciless precision and fearlessness should give any government serious concern. The earlier that these kinds of groups are rounded up, the better for everybody. I know as of fact of many Christian religious, political and community leaders who are willing and prepared peacefully to arrive at workable conditions for people to live with. I also know as of fact that there are Muslim religious, political and community leaders who are willing to find solutions.

I am convinced that the prayers of the church world-wide are ascending like a sweet smelling sacrifice to the throne of mercy. It is my firm determination to encourage all who trust in the Lord to keep praying and never give up. One day God will enthrone good over evil, truth over lies, righteousness over wickedness and justice over injustice. It may be soon; it may be later, but “My faith looks up to Thee, Thou Lamb of Calvary”. I urge believers to clean and clear their minds of any form of bitterness, resentment or even any thought of vengeance against one another from within the fellowship, and then we can see clearly how to respond in times of difficulty such as this one.

The promises of the Lord are true and the way of the Lord is just. The good news is: we do not have anywhere else to turn to. In the words of the apostle Peter, in John6:68: “To whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.” These times call for a full turning of our hearts and lives to the Lord.

The Lord be with you,

+The Most Rev Dr BA Kwashi
Archbishop of Jos, Nigeria

If you haven’t come across the Rev Fred Phelps of the US Westboro Baptist Church, then your life is all the better. To give you a hint, his website is called “GodHatesFags”.

Anyway, for those who do know about these despicable folk, you may be interested to know that the US Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether the father of a fallen Marine can collect damages ($5m), from the Westboro Baptist Church, who picketed his son’s funeral with vulgar placards celebrating the death of American soldiers.

The predicament of course, is around the issue of freedom of speech. What implications on this freedom would a judgement in favour of the father have?

The issue of freedom of speech is such a double edged sword as always, and Heresy Corner articulates this issue more lucidly than I’m able:-

Heresy Corner:-

Interesting legal news from the US, where the Supreme Court has decided to hear the case of Snyder v Phelps. The Phelps in question is the Rev Fred Phelps, of the notorious Westboro Baptist Church whose USP is picketing military funerals with signs reading “God damn America”, “God Hates Fags”, and the like. Last year, you may remember, Jacqui Smith gave them some much-needed publicity by banning Phelps and other members of his family/congregation (the two are more or less the same) from Britain – after the Westies had expressed a desire to call down God’s wrath on the sinful people of Basingstoke.

Back in 2007, the Westies were sued by the father of a Marine killed in Iraq who had been offended by the sight of the placards at his son’s funeral. He told the court that he “became angry and tearful when he thought about the protest and that the memory of it had caused him to vomit.” The jury awarded him $10 million in damages for “intentionally inflicting emotional distress” – which makes you wonder about the low level of libel awards in Britain, doesn’t it? – a sum reduced by the judge to a mere five million. The Westies appealed – and won, on the grounds that they have a constitutional right to proclaim their hatred of gays, celebrities and US soldiers as loudly as they want.

Continue Reading