Christian News
15 July 2004
________________________________________________
Southern
Africa:
* Museveni is right!
True Love Waits - South Africa heartily congratulates Uganda and its president Yoweri
Museveni, for the bold stand promoting the vital role premarital abstinence must take in
the fight against HIV/AIDS, at the UN Conference on AIDS in Bangkok.
It is hugely exciting for us to see a fellow African willing to brave ridicule and
disbelief, to tell the world that he has faith in young people. Premarital abstinence is
not, as US Congresswoman Barbara Lee put it today, "inhumane". It may be hard,
but it’s very possible – as over 330 000 young South Africans have proved by
signing a pledge to remain sexually abstinent until marriage. And the rewards of this
lifestyle are certainly worth the struggle.
It is strange that the approach of a country that is actually winning the war against
HIV/AIDS, is labeled "impossible" and "too much to expect". It is even
stranger that ‘scientific’ methods, so enthusiastically promoted, reduce us
young people to hormonally-charged-led-by-their-feelings animals unable to practice
self-control. It’s insulting! Rather than feed the fires, it would help if all the
experts at the Bangkok conference would focus on what will truly make a difference:
Behavior Change.
TLW-SA teaches girls that it’s OK to say ‘no’ to premarital sex; that sex
is not the proof of love. We teach the guys that sex maketh not the man, rather ‘the
man’ is proved by his self-control.
Perhaps it would benefit scientists out there to come to the `grass roots’ level
and see the life-changing success TLW-SA has in the lives of both HIV positive and HIV
negative people.
TLW-SA will join True Love Waiters from over 100 countries (including Uganda), to form
a large and powerful display with signed abstinence pledges on 22 August at this
year’s Olympic Games in Athens. If you hadn’t noticed: Abstinence is the new
trend. Don’t be left behind.
For further information call Jerusha on 083 799 9981 or email
jerusha@truelovewaits.org.za or visit www.truelovewaits.org.za
For further information on the Olympic Event: www.truelovewaits.com
(www.truelovewaits.org.za,
12 July 2004) (to index)
* Clergy speak up against Mugabe
Zimbabwe's church leaders said that there was no chance that Zimbabwe would hold free
and fair elections next year and accused South Africa of complicity in the human rights
abuses committed by President Robert Mugabe's government.
Archbishop Pius Ncube, of the Roman Catholic Church, spoke for Zimbabwe's church leaders
in Johannesburg yesterday.
Ncube said Mugabe would use food to buy votes.
"He wants to be in charge of all food distribution and to coerce people into voting
for him in exchange for food," said Ncube.
He was adamant that the violence and repression in Zimbabwe would intensify as the country
moved closer to the March general elections. Ncube said that by backing Mugabe, President
Mbeki had only made Mugabe's repression worse.
He said South Africa should publicly recognise the injustices in Zimbabwe and "insist
on lawful conduct by the Zimbabwean government".
The clergymen also launched a report by the Solidarity Peace Trust on human rights abuses
in Zimbabwe. Entitled Disturbing the Peace, the report documented, among other abuses,
tortures and rapes.
Ncube said it would be impossible for Zimbabwe to hold free and fair elections, because
the opposition could not campaign properly under draconian security laws which required it
to seek police permission before holding rallies.
Ncube was also scathing of the AU for doing nothing to rein in Mugabe.
"All they are good at is covering for each other and using their summits as coffee
and tea drinking sessions," Ncube said.
Zimbabwe's opposition MDC party said yesterday that the ruling Zanu-PF had "no
answer" to the "facts" published in a recent African Union human rights
report.
The report has been slammed by Zimbabwe's Information Minister, Jonathan Moyo.
The AU report described Zimbabwe as a deeply divided society with wide-scale human rights
abuses, a compromised judicial system and a stifled media.
MDC spokesman Paul Themba Nyathi said: "The report provides further confirmation that
there is very little support for the Zanu-PF regime within the international community.
(The Mercury, 8 July 2004) (to index)
International
* Slap in the face for parents
Parents will face prosecution for all but the gentlest smacks under proposals passed
overwhelmingly by Britain’s House of Lords on Monday. They could be jailed and banned
from working with youngsters for delivering a slap which causes the skin to redden.
The dramatic clampdown on the rights of parents to discipline their children, backed by
Downing Street, is seen by critics as a "snooper’s charter". It is the
first step towards parents being reported and prosecuted if they cause "actual bodily
harm" by smacking their child.
The drastic restriction raises the spectre of parents being criminalised simply for
disciplining their children if this inadvertently causes injury. They face investigation
by police and social workers if anyone – even a complete stranger – chooses to
complain about their behaviour. However, peers rejected a total smacking ban – which
would have outlawed even the gentlest slap on the wrist.
Any law against smacking will present huge problems for police and the courts who must
decide when to treat a parent as a criminal.
Scotland has already rejected a law that would have banned parents from smacking
children under three. After three years of argument, Scottish PMs decided longstanding law
gives sufficient safeguards. And they had no appetite for seeing ordinary and otherwise
law-abiding parents turned into criminals and carted off to jail.
An anti-smacking law in England would, according to opinion polls, be far less popular
than its supporters claim.
The compromise measure, backed by peers on Monday, weakens the longstanding defence of
a parent accused of hitting a child, that the act is "reasonable chastisement".
That idea has stayed the test of time since it first became law in 1860. It permits a
parent to use physical punishment while forbidding unreasonable abuse. The reasonable
chastisement law has even survived the attentions of the European Court of Human Rights.
(Daily News, 7 July 2004) (to index)
* Poll Says `Passion'
Is Popular but Changes Few Lives
(RNS) A new poll says 11 million people changed their religious beliefs after seeing
Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," but only a tiny fraction of
movie-goers became Christians after seeing the film.
The survey, by the Ventura, Calif.-based Barna Group, said the film about the death of
Jesus was remarkably effective at drawing attention to the Christian savior, even if it
persuaded few to make a profession of faith. "More than any other movie in recent
years, `The Passion' focused people on the person and purpose of Jesus Christ,"
George Barna, the director of research, said. "In a society that revolves on
relativism, spiritual diversity, tolerance and independence, galvanizing such intense
consideration of Jesus Christ is a major achievement in itself."
The controversial film, which was denounced by Jewish groups for its portrayal of Jews,
is the year's top-grossing film, at $609 million worldwide. Barna said about 67 million
adults have seen the movie, about one-third of all adults in the United States.
(beliefnet.com) (to index)
* Defenders of marriage just
beginning to fight
Backers of constitutional amendment say yesterday's Senate defeat of a proposed
constitutional amendment limiting marriage to one man and one woman is only the beginning
of a long battle.
Focus on the Family founder and chairman James Dobson said, "Although we are
disappointed by today's outcome, we are not distressed or defeated."
Dobson said the cloture vote, to prevent Democrats from filibustering, was "only
the opening salvo in a long battle to preserve the definition of marriage as the union of
one man and one woman – a battle we are determined to win."
The Senate yesterday rejected a move by Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennesee to end
debate and vote on the amendment. Republicans garnered 48 votes in favor of cloture, far
short of the 60 needed.
As WorldNetDaily reported, Dobson told his supporters before yesterday's vote a
"distressing number of U.S. senators and congressmen are being cowed by the
homosexual lobby and are afraid to support the amendment. Indeed, many of them who ran as
conservatives are running instead for the tall grass."
After the vote, Dobson compared the battle over marriage to the Civil War, saying
"and like that great cultural clash, we are certain morality will prevail."
(WorldNetDaily, 15 July 2004) (to index)
* The United Nations: Friend or Foe to Iraqi Women?
The United Nations has a poor record in Iraq. After the U.S. troops freed Iraq from the
dictatorship of Saddam, they bolted from the country at the first instance of terror
against their headquarters. Further, the U.N. is caught in the scandal of the Oil for Food
Program, where they mismanaged the largest relief program in U.N. history. Thus, they
allowed Saddam to fund his opulent lifestyle and other terrorist organizations, as well as
to terrorize his own people.
Now, recent action in the Security Council may actually undermine a workable, truly
representative democracy in Iraq.
Nesreen Berwari, Iraq’s minister for Municipalities and Public Works, describes
herself as an Iraqi, a Kurd and a democracy activist. She writes in the Wall Street
Journal that she is deeply disappointed in the recent U.N. Security Council resolution
that recognizes Iraq’s sovereignty. Why? The Security Council refused to endorse
Iraq’s Transitional Administrative Law (TAL). For women as well as ethnic minorities,
this omission could undermine newly won rights and protections.
In Ms. Berwari’s opinion, the TAL which served as Iraq’s interim Constitution
contains a strong bill of rights, and guarantees equality and a voice to minorities and
women. In addition, it laid down the foundation for a real democracy – not one in
which powerful Shiite clerics and other religious leaders can impose their will. But this
is exactly what has happened.
By not endorsing the TAL, which was a collaborative effort of all Iraq’s religions
and ethnic groups, the Security Council has stripped it of the force of law in the eyes of
the international community. She says that this "is a terrible slap in the face for
all those Iraqis who have been fighting so hard for freedom and democracy." In
addition, it plays into the power-posturing of Shiite clerics.
Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse, senior fellow for Concerned Women for America and a U.S.
delegate to United Nations conferences, notes, "This is particularly important to the
women of Iraq. They have worked on the Interim Governing Council to restore the human
rights of women that were a model in the region—until Saddam’s regime eroded
them. Under Islamic law, women tend to have an unequal, second-class role. Because women
are acutely aware of this, laws guaranteeing human rights are needed as the Iraqis create
a permanent constitution that will guarantee religious freedom and prevent the tyranny of
powerful Islamic clerics."
The United Nations does well to recognize Iraq’s sovereignty. But in not solidly
backing the transitional law, it fails to rally the international community solidly behind
the commitment to a free Iraq. By refusing to endorse the TAL, the U.N. undercuts the very
element that ensures a democracy that will represent and protect all citizens equally.
Dr. Crouse summarized, "Once again, the U.N. stops short and proves that it lacks
the will to act decisively on behalf of all Iraqis."
(Concerned Women for America, 7 July 2004) (to index)
* ACLJ Asks Supreme Court to Take Ohio Ten
Commandments Case
Washington, D.C., July 12, 2004—The American Center for Law and Justice,
specializing in constitutional law, today asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take a case out
of Ohio involving the public display of the Ten Commandments and overturn a decision by a
federal appeals court declaring the display unconstitutional.
"It is an undisputable fact that the Ten Commandments played a significant role in
the development of our legal system in this country," said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel
of the ACLJ, which is representing the Ohio school district. "We believe the federal
appeals court got it wrong and that the Supreme Court now needs to step in to clarify an
increasingly confusing area of the law. Nothing in our constitution or the Supreme
Court’s interpretation of it require that high school students be shielded from
exposure to things religious. And in the Adams County case – the displays merely
recognize the fact that religion has played an enormous role in the development of
civilization and our legal system. We are hopeful the Supreme Court takes this case and
overturns the federal appeals court decision."
(American Center for Law and Justice, 12 July 2004) (to
index)
