News

British barrister helps feed US loons’ paranoia over ‘Christian bashing’

OH my! Hate preacher Dr Gary Cass sure landed a big ‘un for his mammoth “Let’s Bash a Homo” fest in Washington on Monday: British barrister Paul Diamond of the Christian Legal Centre, who fancies himself champion of oppressed Christians the length and breadth of the UK.

Paul Diamond

Paul Diamond

Diamond’s presence at the rally must have given Cass a spectacular hard-on, judging from the way the loopy fundamentalist has been throbbing on his website about the “success” of the event.

The Lord was honored, truth was proclaimed, and we are grateful for the many people who came and supported our effort. We look forward to challenging this law in the future.

The law in question is, of course, the new Matthew Shepard hate crimes bill that extends protection to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered Americans.

According to CBN News, which features a video, Cass and his supporters gathered in front of the Justice Department to say that Christians’ right to speak the Gospel is now threatened “like never before”, and that the law meant to protect homosexuals could someday be used “to silence sermons and even the reading of scriptures that condemn homosexuality”.

Roughly a dozen pastors and heads of religious rights organizations led the protest.

Geez, as many as that?

Diamond used the opportunity to warn US Christians that hate crimes laws in the UK are already being used against the faithful. He said British Christians had been arrested when they were the ones who had been violently attacked.

We have Christians attacked for evangelism and they are arrested for inciting their own attacks. Sometimes the attacks are brought by sick members of the public, sometimes by individual homosexuals.

Diamond also warned that some in Britain now see preachers as more dangerous than those who commit violent acts against a minority.

Many people are arguing now in the universities that speech is worse than violence; that it encourages stereotypical views, that it incites discrimination.

Backers of the law say it is only supposed to affect those who commit acts of violence against a member of a protected group like homosexuals.

But Cass says the law can actually be used to prosecute those who in any way incite that violence.

Somebody could listen to a minister on any given Sunday, and the minister would have to know what’s in that person’s mind and what that person might do in the future. And if that person went out and committed a hate crime, the minister would be as guilty as the person who actually perpetrates the crime. And that’s unprecedented in American history.

The protesting pastors say they don’t hate homosexuals (yeah, yeah) and they would never commit an act of violence against them. But they say if it becomes a crime to preach the Gospel, that is a crime they are always going to be willing to commit.

By the way, Christian Channel CBN lost no time in pouncing on the story of Pauline Howe, the mad Norwich cow who almost got her collar felt by the local rozzers after she set out to “witness” at a gay pride rally. They have an interview with the poisonous old pensioner, who, unsurprisingly, comes over all sweetness and light.

26 responses to “British barrister helps feed US loons’ paranoia over ‘Christian bashing’”

  1. barriejohn says:

    “Truth was proclaimed”. That would be a first then! For instance, just how many faithful British Christians have been violently attacked for “witnessing” against these “sick” homosexuals that Dr Crass loves so much?

    PS Wasn’t he Gary Cass the other day Barry?

  2. Bubblecar says:

    It’s amusing how these creeps proudly boast of the “culture war” they’re waging against liberal, mainstream America, but immediately start whining about attacks on their “civil rights” when the rest of the nation fights back.

    “….the poisonous old pensioner, who, unsurprisingly, comes over all sweetness and light.”

    Here she is in her true colours: http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i199/bubcar9/howe3.jpg

  3. Barry Duke says:

    It is “Gary” Barriejohn. Thanks for pointing out the error, now corrected (I DID post this at 2am!) As to “attacks”, well Pauline Howe alleges that someone whispered something unpleasant in her ear when she was witnessing at Norwich Pride, and that, in the fundies’ books, constitutes an”assault”. What delicate, wee flowers they are.

  4. barriejohn says:

    Yep – good old “Gray Sacs”! And I do believe, now that I come to think of it, that when that stupid old bat attended the Norwich Gay Pride event she did complain about being “pushed”!!

  5. barriejohn says:

    That’s very funny, Bubblecar!

  6. David Lawson says:

    In a way I actually hope they do keep preaching these homophobic passages. The more accepted this law becomes, the more peoples attitudes will change, the sillier these people become and the more embarresing they become to US citizens.

    Also the more the break the law, the more they will go to prison where they can’t poison the minds of children with their filth.

  7. barriejohn says:

    We had this discussion a few days ago, @David Lawson! Most of us are in agreement that sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, as long as hatred is not being deliberately inflamed. There are also blogs (here in Britain) where younger guys are telling me that I’m just a reactionary old bigot myself, and that times have changed now – the church has moved on and has more modern, conciliatory ideas! So let’s give the likes of Put-upon Pauline Howe as much rope as possible with which to hang themselves, and demonstrate to all and sundry that the churches really ARE still full of raging, bug-eyed homophobes, who have the same moral values as the National Front!!

  8. Stuart H. says:

    Makes mental note – if I ever flog my house, check the solicitor doing the conveyancing isn’t associated with the Christian Legal Centre. If he knew as little about property law as Diamond does about ‘hate crimes’ I’d be minus a house!

  9. JarrodB says:

    Please, please write something on Chuck Fazio from DC Podiums, who saved the day during that protest, turning all the money the ministers paid him over to gay activists and letting them speak on the microphones. It had a happy ending, after all.

  10. barriejohn says:

    Noting that Ol’ Gray Sacs has a doctorate, I thought I would while away the hours looking him up on the web. (Just google Dr Gary Cass and you’ll be amazed at what comes up.) He evidently used to be “Executive Director of the Center for Reclaiming America for Christ“, I kid you not! That HAS to go down as the most pretentious name for an organization in history – unless someone knows better!!

    His doctorate, surprise, surprise, comes from the Presbyterian, virtually Calvinist (think Ian R K Paisley again!), Westminster Theological Seminary. Look THEM up and you will find that the very first statement about them is that they are “committed to presuppositional apologetics”. This means that, in their view, there is no middle ground upon which they can meet unbelievers (it goes with the idea of Calvin that fallen man is “dead” in sin: has no redeeming features whatsoever: is totally incapable of doing good, responding to or knowing God; and needs God to make Himself known to him rather than “seeking for God” himself, as other Christians teach) so they start off on the assumption that THEY are right and everyone else is wrong! The sole agenda of these people is to convert everyone else to their own narrow view of the world, without compromise, and Pauline Howe and her eloquent spouse, judging from the sermons of his that we have heard on the net, and the church which is publishing them, would most likely have identical views.

    BTW Calvin’s doctrine is entitled Total Depravity! That does give you some idea of the way that these lovely people view the rest of us poor sinners, doesn’t it?

  11. barriejohn says:

    My above remarks do rather beg the question: why do these loonies insist that we hell-bound, totally depraved, dead-in-sins-and-iniquities sinners need to obey the rules which THEIR god has laid down? It’s totally illogical when you look at it (oops – answered my own question there again!).

    I know I have said this before, for which I apologize, but I did know members of the Plymouth Brethren who seriously contended that the worse that things became in the world the better it was really, because it just meant that the “Coming of the Lord” was even more imminent than it would otherwise have been! That does take the biscuit, in my view, as the most idiotic piece of Christian reasoning that I have ever come across – and there are quite a few other claimants to the coveted title, I can tell you!!

  12. CybrgnX says:

    Lets see…
    They want the hate crime bill removed so they can bash the schit out of homos.
    But they also want blasphemy laws put in place so no one can bash the hell out of them for bashing the homos.

    They may be crazy but not stupid!

    barriejohn….It is not illogical just crazy as in insane.
    THEY are filled with and believe in their self loathing and self hatred, and as seen in many insane types, this is reflected out onto others so they can in-act the punishment THEY deserve. Just look at the way serial killers reflect their internal problems externally for temporary relief of the stresses and you can see why THEY insist we must obey their fairy’s rules. This is for the extreme end as most of the moderates handle their self-hate by praying and trying to live a good life, they are just as bad but not as forceful.

  13. Colin Daniels says:

    “…rally must of given”

    Surely you meant to write “…rally must have given” or maybe “… rally must’ve given”

    [/pedantry]

    😉

  14. barriejohn says:

    I’ve just spotted that the acronym for the “Centre for Reclaiming America for Christ” is CRAC – hahahahaha!!!!!!!

  15. William Harwood says:

    One minor addition. Gary Cass’s theological seminary (analogous to a school of tealeaf reading) awarded him the degree of Doctor of Ministry, a degree that (as far as I am aware) is not awarded by any other institution. It does not require a dissertation, and instead requires only that the recipient has completed three years of preaching and nothing else whatsoever. By that standard, Mary Whitehouse could have obtained the same degree.

  16. Barry Duke says:

    @ Colin Daniels: Correction made.
    @ JarrodB. Thanks so much for the alert. I have just posted the details.

  17. barriejohn says:

    Thanks for that, Dr Harwood. I did wonder whether his doctorate was that peculiar “Doctor of Ministry”, but I didn’t actually come across anything that specific! I did notice, however, that the “primary focus” of the college is “pastoral training”, which tells you everything you need to know really, and that “urban mission” and “biblical counselling” feature prominently in its syllabus. This does not really suggest academic rigour to me – we have “Bible Colleges” in Britain which offer courses like this, and I have had experience of the type of Christians who have “graduated” from them!!

  18. barriejohn says:

    How we miss Richard Whitely! “What should he of done Carol?”

  19. Stonyground says:

    It is an interesting question as to why the godly should be concerned about the behaviour of people who are already damned by definition. Maybe they want you to repent and get saved or something.

    I believe that there is a Bible passage that damns all illegitimate children “even unto the tenth generation”. Is there anyone alive today who could trace their family back ten generations without finding a single case of illigitimancy? I certainly can’t.

  20. JarrodB says:

    Stoney, I fail that test exactly one generation back.

  21. Ivan says:

    Has Paul Diamond broken any Law Society or Bar Council rules with this rant? Equality, bringing the profession into disrepute etc. If so, it would be terrible if anyone reported him……

  22. barriejohn says:

    In common with the vast majority, you completely fail to grasp Calvinism, Stonyground! Their idea is that the ungodly are completely dead in sin, and incapable of making themselves acceptable to God in any way whatsoever. Look it up on the net – it’s an amazing attitude. They even have a saying that the worse the sinner is the more God is able to demonstrate His divine grace in “saving” them – so why on earth do they want us to become more “godly” in our behaviour? None of it ties up! (Even the latter statement has no internal logic – how can one sinner be “more dead in sin” than another?) As Dr Harwood has said, the “study of Theology” is akin to the ancients sitting down to deliberate how many angels would be able dance on the head of a pin!!

  23. barriejohn says:

    Amongst the Five Points of Calvinism is Unconditional Election. This means that God chose, before the world was even created, those who would be saved and those who would perish (some of them do try to wriggle out of this last part, but THEY make themselves look even MORE stupid by trying that!). As the lost are incapable of finding, or even desiring, God, they are totally dependent on Him revealing Himself to them, granting them repentance from sin, and thus bringing about their salvation. Close on its heels comes the doctrine of the Limited Atonement. This means that, as God knew beforehand precisely who would be saved and who would be lost, Jesus died ONLY for the sins of the “saved”. So, if you are predestined to be “lost” it’s no good saying “Please sir, can I be saved as well?”, because there just ain’t enough salvation to go round! The more you look into it, the more barmy it all becomes!!

  24. William Harwood says:

    Let me correct the misleading reference to “illegitimate children” and “tenth generation”. Deuteronomy 23:2 (The Fully Translated Bible) reads: “A mamzer is not to be admitted into Yahweh’s community. Not even his tenth-generation descendant is to be admitted into Yahweh’s community.” The interlinear note following reads: “A mamzer was the half-caste offspring of a Jewish father and a non-Jewish mother. The word eventually became equated with ‘bastard’, which originally meant a person of mixed or uncertain paternity.”
    The modern concept of “illegitimate” has nothing to do with any belief that existed in biblical times. The Deuteronomist did not equate illegitimacy with lack of a marriage certificate. He was a racist whose condemnation of tenth-generation mamzers was what has recently been called “ethnic cleansing”.

  25. rog says:

    I know exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin – NONE, because they don’t bloody well exist!

  26. rog says:

    p.s. to clarify, I believe that pins exist.