Public debate of ideas best defence against intolerance, says US in Sedition Act caution

Wednesday April 15, 2015
11:08 AM GMT+8

KUALA LUMPUR, April 15 — The US today cautioned Putrajaya over its amendments to the Sedition Act 1948, saying that new provisions in the colonial-era law could end up criminalising public debate.

The US Department of State said it was “particularly worrying” that the new provisions would increase penalties, especially for first-time offenders, and could also make it illegal to share allegedly seditious material on social media.

“The public debate of ideas can be among the best protections against intolerance and can play a positive role in strengthening democracy and combating hatred,” it said in a brief statement.

“We welcome the decision to remove provisions outlawing criticism of the government and the judiciary, and we hope the government of Malaysia will therefore reconsider recent sedition charges brought under those now-defunct sections of the law,” the statement added.

Last week, Parliament passed amendments to the Act that effectively provide the authorities wider jurisdiction to act on speech or activities that are seen as seditious in nature.

Putrajaya’s amendments will allow for criticism of the government in a bid to “create transparent and accountable administration” amid widespread opprobrium over the use of the Act on political dissenters if passed by Parliament.

However, they also made it an offence to excite “ill will, hostility or hatred” on grounds of religion and race as well as to demand the secession of a state from Malaysia, while maintaining prohibitions towards exciting disaffection against the rulers or questioning issues such as Bumiputera privileges.

The Bill also added a new section that imposes a penalty of between five and 20 years jail for sedition crimes that cause bodily harm or property damage, while it increases the jail term for general sedition crimes to between three and seven years.

Prior to the amendments, the colonial era law imposed a maximum three-year jail term or maximum RM5,000 fine on first time offenders, and a maximum five-year jail term for repeat offenders.

Another new section states that a judge shall order the prevention of access to an online publication deemed to be seditious.

Up to 150 opposition leaders and activists have been hauled up under the Sedition Act recently.

Putrajaya previously pledged to repeal the Sedition Act that critics say is used to stifle political opposition and dissent, but later announced in November last year that it will be retained and expanded instead.

Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/public-debate-of-ideas-best-defence-against-intolerance-says-US-in-Seditio

In campaign to defend democracy, U.S. should start with Malaysia

By Editorial Board October 31 at 7:20 PM

 

AT THE United Nations in September, President Obama, citing “relentless crackdowns” around the world against dissent and civil society, promised “an even stronger campaign to defend democracy.” Even when it was “uncomfortable” or “causes friction,” he pledged, his administration would step up to defend persecuted activists and “oppose efforts by foreign governments to restrict freedoms of peaceful assembly and association and expression.” So far we haven’t seen much follow-up on that promise, but the opportunities to do so are abundant.

One of the most urgent lies in Malaysia, a U.S. ally that has launched an extraordinary crackdown on opposition leaders, academics and journalists. In the past two months, the government of Prime Minister Najib Razak has charged nearly two dozen activists under a colonial-era sedition law, that mandates three years in prison for acts that “excite dissatisfaction” with the government. Mr. Najib promised as recently as 2012 to repeal the law; instead, the government is prosecuting critics merely for speaking out, publishing articles or uploading videos.

At the same time, the government has revived an odious criminal case against Anwar Ibrahim, the leader of the opposition and one of the Muslim world’s foremost liberal democrats. Mr. Anwar was charged in 2008 with homosexual sodomy, which Malaysia shamefully still treats as a crime. Though he denied the charge and was acquitted in a 2012 trial, an appeals court this year reversed the verdict and handed him a five-year prison sentence. This week his final appeal is being heard by Malaysia’s highest court. If he loses, the 67-year-old Mr. Anwar will be imprisoned and banned from politics. Even if he wins, he, too, faces prosecution under the sedition law.

It’s not hard to guess why Mr. Najib might have broken his pledge to repeal the statute and reversed what was previously a cautious march toward greater freedom in his majority Muslim country. Last year, his ruling party for the first time lost the popular vote in a general election, to a coalition led by Mr. Anwar.

Gerrymandering preserved the government’s parliamentary majority, but the ruling establishment Mr. Najib leads appears to have set out to crush the opposition before the next election, due in 2017. The campaign is particularly destructive because Malaysia, unlike many other majority Muslim countries, does not currently face an internal terrorist challenge, though some Malaysians are known to have traveled to Syria to join the Islamic State. By eliminating peaceful means of opposition, Mr. Najib risks making extremist options more attractive.

Mr. Obama has made a point of cultivating Mr. Najib and his government as part of his policy of “rebalancing” toward Asia, and so far the administration has had little to say about the political crackdown. In March, it cautiously expressed concern about Mr. Anwar’s prosecution. But as Mr. Anwar has argued his appeal this week there’s been no sign of the “stronger campaign” Mr. Obama promised. The verdict is expected next week; if Mr. Obama is genuinely willing to incur “friction” with allies in defense of human rights, now is the time to do it in Malaysia.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/in-campaign-to-defend-democracy-us-should-start-with-malaysia/2014/10/31/ff50e0ae-6048-11e4-9f3a-7e28799e0549_story.html

Once Gay, Always Gay?

9:42AM EDT 10/10/2012 J. LEE GRADY

 

198

 

30

 

1

 

20

 

(istockphoto.com/Lisa Blue )

A new law in California tells gay teens it’s impossible to change their sexual orientation. But what if they want to change?

I have a confession to make: I have prayed for many people who struggle with homosexual feelings, and I have asked the Holy Spirit to help them overcome those urges. According to the state of California, that makes me a criminal if the person I prayed for was under 18.

California has banned so-called “reparative therapy,” which is used to cure minors of their homosexual feelings. Upon signing the law in late September, Gov. Jerry Brown said such psychological counseling has led to depression and suicide among gay youth, and he added that any therapy aimed at changing a person’s sexual orientation falls into the category of “quackery.”

The law states that no mental health provider can provide minors with therapies to “change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”

Brown, the majority of California’s legislators and leaders of the gay community say it’s hateful to offer a gay person alternatives if they struggle with same-sex attraction. They believe if young people have gay feelings, they might as well embrace their homosexual identity and get busy acting it out. (Meanwhile, a formerly gay student and two therapists have filed suit against the law, claiming that it is a violation of free speech and freedom of religion.)

We all know homosexuality is a complicated issue, and it requires loads of compassion and sensitivity. I will readily admit the Christian community hasn’t always shown love to homosexuals. But as we develop genuine compassion there are three truths we must never compromise:

1. Homosexuality is not necessarily inborn. The prevailing view in the mainstream psychological community is that if a person feels gay attraction, those feelings permanently define him/her. Change isn’t possible, supposedly, because all homosexuals are “born that way.”

Yet any honest psychologist knows certain factors can trigger gay feelings. I have prayed for many guys, for example, who were haunted by unwanted gay desires because they were sexually abused as children or teens. I have also prayed for women who developed sexual feelings for women after being abused by men; for them, lesbianism provided protection from the men who hurt them.

Some boys develop same-sex feelings because they lack a father figure. A boy’s craving for his absent or distant dad’s affection can lead to sexualization of other men in his life. To ignore such environmental or developmental factors is a gross denial of the obvious. To tell a teenage boy that he must automatically embrace gay feelings—especially when his sexuality is still being developed—is a worse form of quackery than Brown has condemned.

2. The Holy Spirit can heal our broken sexuality. I have known many people who struggled with various levels of homosexual desire before they met Christ—and many who continue to resist those temptations as Christians. Some were in long-term gay relationships; some simply experimented with homosexuality; others got hooked on gay porn. But in every case they found freedom from those urges through honest confession, repentance and healing prayer.

If a young man came to me and admitted he was tempted to seduce women, I would not tell him: “You just have a strong sex drive. Go ahead and have sex with as many girls as you want! That’s just who you are!” That would be crazy. If this teen really wanted to change his behavior I would lead him in a prayer of repentance, deal with the root issues of his problem and encourage him to trust Jesus for the grace to exercise self-control. Why wouldn’t I do the same for a teenager who is attracted to the same sex?

3. Many homosexual strugglers want freedom. Supporters of the California law would probably say I’m being “hateful” if I prayed for a young person who wanted to overcome same-sex urges. But I could turn the argument around and accuse the psychological community of hate because they are not giving gay people any options. Wouldn’t it be more loving to ask a person what they want instead of imposing a lifestyle on them?

One of the most basic truths of Christianity is that Jesus gives us a new nature when we experience conversion.  This is the miracle the apostle Paul described in 2 Corinthians 5:17: “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come” (NASB). Why would we offer that freedom to those who struggle with other forms of sin or brokenness, but not to those who want to be free from homosexuality?

Let’s stop being naive. California’s tyrannical law is not based on science or solid psychological theory. It is mean-spirited intolerance, and it will become federal policy if defenders of religious freedom don’t challenge it.

J. Lee Grady is the former editor of Charisma and the director of The Mordecai Project. You can follow him on Twitter at leegrady. His recent books include 10 Lies Men Believe and Fearless Daughters of the Bible.

Source: http://www.charismamag.com/blogs/fire-in-my-bones/15645-once-gay-always-gay

This Is NOT a Counterfeit Bill

22 Sep 2012
By Chris Nichols | The Exchange

In this age of debate about the value, or non-value, of the dollar, we've encountered a little something from the past that you probably don't see every day unless you're a currency collector -- a 1935 series U.S. dollar silver certificate.

Peter Gorenstein, executive producer for The Daily Ticker and Breakout, found one in his change. If you've not come across one of these in person before, you might at first think it's counterfeit, but it is real, and you can certainly buy things with it. Compare the 1935 certificate to a modern, 2009 series, Federal Reserve note below:

Among several different features that stand out between the two is a very prominent one: The promise on the old bill below George Washington's portrait that the certificate is equivalent to "One Dollar In Silver Payable To The Bearer On Demand." We know that some of our readers love the idea of investing in hard assets and of hard assets backing the U.S. currency. But despite what this dollar says, you can't get silver for it from the government. Your ability to redeem the certificates for silverwith the U.S. Treasury came to an end in 1968.

Now have a look at the back. Notice anything missing from the old one on top?

The phrase "In God We Trust" is absent. The 1935 series certificate was the last paper currency in the nation whose run began without the language -- it had been used and dropped previously on certain American coins. However, it was added later in the series, which was printed for several years. The bill we're showing here is the 1935F, without the wording, but it can be found on some subsequent G notes, first appearing in 1961, and on all of those in the H run, the last of the 1935s. (Other, newer bill series first carried the phrase in 1957.)

If you take this to a regular merchant right now, you can plan on it getting you $1 worth of goods, the same as your current Federal Reserve note. You might have a little more luck if you sell it privately than you would taking it to the neighborhood grocery store. Still, despite the note being somewhat unusual in 2012, it doesn't qualify as rare, so don't expect a dealer to make you rich for parting ways with it.

A quick check on eBay lists 197 individual lots containing the 1935F.  The cheapest single certificate the online auction site has at the moment is listed for an opening bid of 99 cents. That's followed by offers of $1.04, $1.25 and on up. The most expensive item is a pack of 50 of the 1935Fs, with a price of $4,977.77. So it's a little nugget if you're interested in collectibles, and it's fun to compare. Or it's a stark reminder of what used to be.

Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/1-silver-certificate-still-looking-pretty-sharp-175434007.html

Pastors Take Stand Against Defense of Marriage Act Repeal

11:52AM EDT 5/24/2012 JENNIFER LECLAIRE

195

Share

165

 

10

 

16

Email

 

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley (C) speaks to reporters outside the U.S. District Court after attending a hearing before a federal appeals court panel on the Defense of Marriage Act in Boston, Massachusetts April 4, 2012. A federal appeals court in Boston heard arguments on Wednesday about the constitutionality of a law that denies federal benefits to married same-sex couples - a case with implications for gay marriage across the United States. (Reuters/Jessica Rinaldi)

Bishop Harry Jackson has invited pastors from across the country—and across denominational lines—for a news conference at the Senate swamp. The motive: to show support for the Defense of Marriage Act and marriage as the union of one man and one women.

Spiritual leaders will discuss Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s possible plan to hold a vote on a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. The press conference, which is scheduled for 3 p.m. on Thursday, will also address President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage.

"Marriage is a biblical institution that mirrors the relationship between Jesus and his bride, the church," says Bishop Anne Gimenez, founder and overseer of Rock Ministerial Fellowship and senior pastor of Rock Church International. "It is a loving relationship that is core to our beliefs and something we will fight for."

Gimenez will join Jackson, Sen. Jim DeMint, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, and other Christian leaders on Thursday afternoon. Altogether, more than 50 religious and political leaders—both Democrat and Republican—will stand united.

During the event, leaders will present a "Stand for Marriage" letter, which has been signed by religious leaders from all over the nation.

"Our country is divided, and our nation's soul is sick. The issue of traditional marriage is one of the many issues we are facing," says Gimenez. "Our country needs God and it is time for us to get serious about praying for his presence in every area of our lives."

Gimenez is also organizing America for Jesus 2012, a gathering of Christians representing all races, parties and denominations, to gather in a solemn assembly on Independence Mall in Philadelphia, Sept. 28-29, to pray for the healing of our nation and its people 40 days before America casts its vote for president.

America for Jesus 2012 is being organized by One Nation Under God, a coalition of ministries that sponsored the watershed Washington for Jesus events in the '80s and '90s, which focused on prayer, repentance and revival, based on God's promises found in 2 Chronicles 7:14.

Source: http://www.charismanews.com/us/33473-pastors-take-stand-against-defense-of-marriage-act-repeal

Obama Uses Scripture to Justify Same-Sex Marriage Stance

Obama got the revelation from his daughter and from God. A foolish President will bring ruin to the country. Unless Obama repents and the whole lots of homosexuals and lesbians turn away from their lusts, the nation will have to prepare for judgment to come.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6:00AM EDT 5/11/2012 JENNIFER LECLAIRE

2703

Share

2529

104

28

Email

The dust has hardly settled on President Obama’s move to support same-sex marriage. Indeed, it’s an issue that’s likely to linger on through the 2012 presidential elections and beyond.

The Assemblies of God is voicing its dissent and objection. George O. Wood, AG general superintendent, says the denomination is in complete disagreement with the president’s new position and takes exception to Obama taking Scripture out of context to defend his position.

“[Michelle and I] we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others. But, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated.

“And I think that’s what we try to impart to our kids and that’s what motivates me as president and I figure the most consistent I can be in being true to those precepts, the better I’ll be as a dad and a husband and, hopefully, the better I’ll be as president,” Obama told ABC News.

Wood explains his position: “The Bible clearly teaches that marriage should be a lifelong commitment between one man and one woman,” he says. “There is no affirmation of homosexual behavior found anywhere in Scripture. However, the Bible is replete with evidence that homosexual behavior is immoral and comes under the judgment of God. Although it has become popular to quote Scripture grossly out of context to serve a personal or political agenda, it still doesn’t change what God’s Word clearly states.”

Wood adds that in light of what Scripture says, Christians should not be surprised by individuals and groups twisting Scripture, citing 2 Timothy 4:3, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (NIV).

In the Assemblies of God’s official position paper on homosexuality, it states: “We believe, in the light of biblical revelation, that the growing cultural acceptance of homosexual identity and behavior, male and female, is symptomatic of a broader spiritual disorder that threatens the family, the government and the church.”

The paper also states: “Not only do the Scriptures condemn more flagrant examples of homosexual violence and promiscuity, they also provide no support for the popular modern idea that loving and committed homosexual relationships between two long-term partners are morally acceptable. Homosexual activities of every kind are contrary to the moral commandments God has given us.”

Wood adds that it’s important for Christians to not underestimate the implications of a pro-homosexual, pro-abortion president, and what it means for the church.

“In no time in our nation have we ever needed to pray more for our political leaders and this country than we need to today,” he explains.

Source: http://charismanews.com/us/33390-obama-uses-scripture-to-jusify-same-sex-marriage-stance

The Ominous Handwriting on America’s Wall

Wednesday, 31 August 2011 09:18 AM
EDT J. Lee Grady Newsletters - Fire In My Bones

An earthquake rattles Washington, D.C., and a fierce storm ravages the East Coast. Is God speaking to us?

I’m not a doomsday prophet, and I don’t believe every hurricane, earthquake or drought is God’s judgment. But I did pause to ponder the significance of the freakish 5.8-magnitude quake that jolted the East Coast last week. The White House was evacuated, the Washington Monument was closed indefinitely because of cracks, and the National Cathedral’s central tower was seriously damaged.

Does anybody else find that slightly spooky?

“I hope President Obama and the leaders of both political parties in Washington are heeding the ominous signs of the times. And I pray they don’t forget the words of another one of our founders, Patrick Henry, who said: 'It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains.'”

Atheists and secularists will say it was just a big seismic coincidence. They probably also ignored the fact that a few days after the quake, a massive storm weirdly drifted toward Washington, D.C., and New York City. Hurricane Irene has now been blamed for at least 42 deaths in 12 states, and more than 2.5 million people from North Carolina to Maine were still without electricity Tuesday.

Judgment from God? That’s not how I view disasters. But I do think last week’s double whammy was about as obvious a sign from heaven as when God scribbled a warning on the wall while King Belshazzar was partying in his palace.

Hello? Is anybody reading the handwriting on America’s wall?

In the case of Belshazzar (see Daniel 5:1-31), that clueless king couldn’t decipher God’s cryptic graffiti—so he called a true prophet to decode it. I’m not sure if many American leaders would ask a modern Daniel for counsel. Many of them have divorced themselves and our government from faith in God and His moral standards.

New York’s ultra-secularist mayor, Michael Bloomberg, was certainly in a Belshazzar mood when he announced last week that he was excluding any and all members of the clergy from the city’s commemoration of the 10th anniversary of 9/11. Pastors as well as politicians have blasted Bloomberg for his insensitivity, but he insists that the ceremony will be better without a spiritual tone.

I guess he thinks America doesn’t need God to help us through our worst national crisis in a generation. We can just read some humanistic poems and grieve by ourselves.

According to the joke posted on thousands of Facebook pages last week, the Virginia earthquake was triggered when America’s founding fathers rolled over in their graves. A funny thought, yes, but I don’t think George Washington or Benjamin Franklin would find anything amusing about the state of our country today. And I don’t think they’d be laughing at Mayor Bloomberg’s blatantly tyrannical stance against religion.

The idea of a 9/11 commemoration without prayer is downright sad, especially when you recall that our nation’s founders—as imperfect as they were—built this country on Christian precepts. In today’s secularist climate, people who speak about our founders’ faith are labeled right-wing whackos. Pardon my political incorrectness, but questioning whether many of the founders were Bible-believing Christians is as insulting as denying the Holocaust.

The founders did not hide their faith or apologize for it—and they certainly never legislated against it. Consider these facts (which, thankfully, have not been removed from history books):

• The first prayer in the U.S. Congress was offered in Philadelphia in 1774. George Washington was among those kneeling as other leaders gathered to pray after hearing that British forces had attacked Boston. One observer wrote that the scene “was enough to melt a heart of stone” as he watched tears gush from the eyes of the old patriots.

• During the Continental Congress of 1787, Benjamin Franklin asked that clergy be called in every morning to lead prayers “imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessing on our deliberations.”

• George Washington asked citizens in 1789 to “unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions.”

• In 1799 President John Adams urged Americans to fast, pray and “call to mind our numerous offences against the most high God, confess them before Him with sincerest penitence” and “implore His pardoning mercy … for our past transgressions.”

Fast forward to the America of 2011, where faith is criticized, believers are mocked and leaders don’t see any need for prayer. It’s a pitiful way to end our legacy.

It will probably take more than a few cracked monuments or damaged cathedral towers to grab the attention of leaders like Mayor Bloomberg. Meanwhile, I hope President Obama and the leaders of both political parties in Washington are heeding the signs of the times. And I pray they don’t forget the words of another one of our founders, Patrick Henry, who said: “It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains.”

Source: http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/fire-in-my-bones/31890-the-ominous-handwriting-on-americas-wall#readmore