• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Christian pastor defends the burkini

Sep 2, 2016 9:16 am By Christine Douglass-Williams

Pastor Ed Stetzer arrogantly takes it upon himself to declare that “this is not really about burkinis,” ignoring the fact that France has collectively faced the trauma of deadly, unprecedented jihad attacks that shook its citizens, so that when the burkini was sported on beaches, they were rightly taken as an assertion of Islamic supremacism, and the ban followed.

Stetzer further states: “So, why do I, an evangelical Christian, who wants to see women (and men) liberated from the oppression that the burkini represents and set free in Christ, write the RNS article and now this post?” He answers his own loaded question that the burkini is about religious freedom. He particularly runs to the defense of Muslim women whom he does not want to see “forced to strip off some of their clothes on the beaches of France under the watchful eye of the police.” He continues to preach:

When Christians demand religious freedom for ourselves and do not speak up for others, we miss the teaching of Jesus, who said, “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 7:12).

Stetzer’s unsettling dismissal of the millions murdered, raped, beheaded, dismembered, and terrorized in the jihadist global war against infidels and apostates is worsened by his misuse of “Christian love” to mask the truth. Stetzer zeroes in on a contrived proposition of human rights which is in stark contrast with what female coverings under Islam really represent, an issue of clear interest to Iranian columnist Rita Panahi:

I wonder how women who fled countries that require them to cover up feel about local government encouraging women to wear hijabs?

It was only late last year when women in Iran were disfigured and blinded in acid attacks for daring to contravene the country’s strict hijab code.

Shouldn’t we stand with disempowered women in Islamic countries across the world instead of celebrating an instrument that is used in their suppression?

For many the hijab, along with the dehumanising niqab and burqa, are symbols of oppression not some national costume to be worn for kicks and giggles.

Somalian born author and activist, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, describes Muslim headscarves as a means in which a deeply patriarchal culture oppresses women.

“The veil deliberately marks women as private and restricted property, non-persons,” she said.

If Stetzer wishes to further the cause of human rights for women under a banner of “Christian love,” he should learn to empathize with real victims. But there is something important to note about the author Ed Stelzer in analyzing his integrity and trustworthiness: Last year, Stelzer attended a “Spread Peace Convocation,” where he focused on “views of Islam in two studies, one of Americans and one of Protestant pastors.” During the event, Stetzer also denigrated Franklin Graham’s so-called negative characterization of Islam as being influential among Christians.

According to a report which described the event:

Ed Stetzer spoke at an interfaith gathering with Islamic extremists, including known aiders and abetters of international terrorism. Stetzer provided Southern Baptist-owned Lifeway data to assist the Muslims in “learning how to relate” to evangelicals and how to “build bridges” with other faiths. Speaking with Stetzer at the ironically-themed “Spreading Peace Convocation” was Obama’s spiritual advisor, Joel Hunter, radical sheik Hamsa Yusef, cop-killer supporting Muslim and friend of Anwar Awlaki, Suhaib Webb. Stetzer was paid to hand over the Southern Baptist intellectual property to the Islamic extremists.

Ed Stelzer

“Why Burkinis Should Matter To Christians Who Care About Religious Freedom”, by Ed Stetzer, Christianity Today, August 31, 2016:

Yesterday I wrote an article for Religion News Service about women and burkinis. But, it was not really about women and burkinis. It was about secularism and its march.

Before you go much further, click here and see this picture at the New York Times. It’s of the French police making a woman take off more clothes to stay on a beach.

So, this is not really about burkinis, but it is about the right of religious people to live out the implications of their beliefs, even in the face of the secular march of the Western world.

I’ve written on that before, talking about religions freedom in an earlier RNS column.

In “3 reasons Christians should back religious freedom for all,” I explained:

  1. The First Amendment does not protect certain faiths, but all faiths, and people of no faith.
  2. Minority faiths, like minority viewpoints, are the ones who need the most protection.
  3. When those of us who identify as Christians allow the government to pick whose freedoms are recognized, we undermine our own religious liberties.

So, why do I, an evangelical Christian, who wants to see women (and men) liberated from the oppression that the burkini represents and set free in Christ, write the RNS article and now this post? As I state in the RNS article, because of religious liberty.

If we don’t speak out, Muslims in France will not be the only ones stripped of their religious liberty. We can’t stand idly by today because it is not “our” religious liberty that is being trampled upon. Next time, as secularism continues its march across the West, it very well might be us.

Religious liberty for some soon means religious liberty for none.

I don’t want Muslim women forced to strip off some of their clothes on the beaches of France under the watchful eye of the police.

Or Catholic adoption agencies stripped of their participation in Massachusetts’ adoption system because of their views of marriage.

Or a baker stripped of her business because she did not want to participate in a wedding with which she disagrees.

Around the world, nations often deny religious freedom. We need to show the world a better way—the one our Founding Fathers laid forth. When Christians demand religious freedom for ourselves and do not speak up for others, we miss the teaching of Jesus, who said, “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 7:12).

These religion liberties continue to surface in the Western world, most recently in California where Christian colleges were threatened (see my article on an earlier version of the bill), but then the lawmaker relented and the bill was changed.

These issues keep surfacing because religious liberty always needs defending, even when it is not our own…

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, Leftist/Islamic Alliance, moral equivalence, Useful idiots Tagged With: burkini, Ed Stetzer, hijab


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. Angemon says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:31 am

    So, this is not really about burkinis, but it is about the right of religious people to live out the implications of their beliefs, even in the face of the secular march of the Western world.

    Listen, you moron, if the law says you can’t wear conspicuous religious symbols then you don’t do so or face the consequences. You don’t see, for example, Christians, or Jews, or Buddhists, being arrested for disrespecting that law, do you? Only muslims. It’s not unreasonable, then, to think that muslims are doing so purposely. Do you suggest law enforcement is to turn a blind eye to adherents of *one* specific religion when they purposely break the law? Give them a special status? Do you suggest that ALL religious people in France purposely go against the law? Or do you suggest that France is to throw away something they fought and bled for – laïcité?

    Again: the problem is with muslims only, much like a countless number of similar cases (in nature) worldwide.

    • Alexius Comnenus says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 12:13 pm

      I am a pastor like him and I say he is insane and a false Christian, naïve and stupid to quote Trump.

      • JAR says

        Sep 2, 2016 at 1:27 pm

        Stetzer’s defense of Islamic dress and religious bridge building are not going to have the effect of saving him from the Islamic scimitar, if the aggressors have anything to say about it.

        • Anne Smith says

          Sep 3, 2016 at 4:55 am

          Stetzer shows his stupidity and ignorance. He will never have to wear a burka, he can pontificate from a position of power as a man. What an idiot.

          Brilliant commentary by Allison Person in the Daily Express. Well worth reading and shows this man u for the fool he is.

      • gravenimage says

        Sep 2, 2016 at 10:55 pm

        Thank you, Alexius.

        • Frank Anderson says

          Sep 3, 2016 at 12:04 am

          Insane means that he is not responsible and should be excused for giving aid and comfort to an enemy that has been at war with us (infidels) for 1400 years. Were Nazi’s insane while they killed 10’s of millions?

      • Jay Boo says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 12:30 am

        Narcissistic Pastor
        Notice that long interfaith approved Chrislam Goatee.

        “Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.”

        • heidi says

          Sep 3, 2016 at 5:13 pm

          lol! i was thinking the same thing about the ” long interfaith approved Chrislam Goatee.” as you called it. he’s hoping his dhimmi comments will save him. his response to the multitude of Christians murdered as infidels makes stick his head in the sand.

        • Champ says

          Sep 3, 2016 at 5:24 pm

          “Chrislam Goatee”

          Good one, Jay Boo! 😀 …and so true!

      • Bob says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 7:09 am

        Alexius – like you, I am a Christian pastor. I agree with you completely. Is he unable to understand that as a Christian pastor he heads the muslim list of ‘enemies’ of islam?

      • heidi says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 5:06 pm

        thank you for taking time to understand this issue.it is alarming to see other religious leaders acting in such ignorance. Daniel Greenfield wrote a great article on this subject as well: “When clothing becomes a license to encourage harassment, then it’s no longer a private choice.
        Muslim women wearing a burka, a hijab or a burkini are pointing a sign at other women. The sign tells Muslim men to harass those other women instead of them. It’s not modesty. It’s the way that Muslim women choose to function as an instrument of Muslim violence against non-Muslim women.
        In the Islamic worldview, sexual violence is the fault of the victim, not the perpetrator. From the dancing boys of Afghanistan to the abused women of Egypt, the fact of the assault proves the guilt of the child or the woman who was assaulted.” (here is his full article: http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/)

    • heidi says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 4:48 pm

      even someone at the huffpo gets it:” But for many secular Muslims and former Muslims, the hijab is not a symbol of freedom. It is a symbol of the fact that women in Islam are second class citizens and that this status is encoded in both sacred text and tradition, enforced by culture and law. The hijab lies at one end of a continuum with the burka, a portable fabric wall that prevents subject women from engaging fully with the world, and vice versa. It is a reminder that for millennia women have been chattel.”
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/valerie-tarico/is-the-hijab-a-symbol-of-_b_4796907.html

    • Mubarak says

      Sep 4, 2016 at 4:50 am

      If there is freedom for groups of people to bike naked through the center of our big cities in order to promote their religious or anti religious dress code together with naked art exhibitions in public squares (e.g. Copenhagen) there should be freedom for people to wear what they want on the beach.
      There is a wonderful irony here; don’t miss it!

      • Angemon says

        Sep 14, 2016 at 1:49 pm

        Mubarak posted:

        “If there is freedom for groups of people to bike naked through the center of our big cities in order to promote their religious or anti religious dress code together with naked art exhibitions in public squares (e.g. Copenhagen) there should be freedom for people to wear what they want on the beach.”

        I’m just going to copy/paste from my previous post, which you clearly didn’t read:

        Listen, you moron, if the law says you can’t wear conspicuous religious symbols then you don’t do so or face the consequences.

        Also, FYI, Copenhagen is not in France.

  2. cs says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:35 am

    Should have added, “HIPSTER PASTOR” is in favour of Burkini… Because it looks cool and it is sex negative…

  3. Praeceptor Maximus says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:44 am

    Hijab is not a choice; neither is burkini. Muslim women are born into an environment that teaches them while very young that a girl must wear a hijab because not to wear means that she is not a good girl. And she in turn will enforce this onto her own daughters. How many young girls have been murdered by their own families because they did not want to wear hijab! So, no, hijab is not a choice, neither is burkini, and as such both are symbol of oppression. A woman wearing hijab, whether she is conscious of it or not, is telling the world that she is not free, that she has to abide by the rules of her religion, her family and her community. But the greatest irony lies in the message that it sends. A woman wearing a hijab regards herself as a free woman, as a chaste woman, thinking that she is not a sex object, but that is precisely what she projects, that is a sex object, that without hijab men would want to violate her. She sends also another message; that all men are potential rapists. This is true in the case of Muslim men, since they have miserably failed to ennoble themselves and prefer to go on behaving like savage barbarians.

    • JMB says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 5:08 pm

      I live near Sydney’s Cronulla Beach, scene of the 2005 riot where real Australians decided to take on the arrogance of the Muslim community who had effectively taken over that beach. The young Muslim men were assaulting any young lady who happened t be in normal beachwear, be it a bikini or one piece. The Muslim women would go into the water in their medieval robes and expected to be rescued by our life savers, an almost impossible task when they are wet. The young Muslim men also decided it was fun to insult and attack our surf life savers, that was the last straw, these people are heroes in this country.

      The aftermath of that riot was that for years there has not been a Muslim in sight at that beach, the Australian community is constantly reminded of the “shame” of that day, a lot of taxpayer money was made available to try and involve the Muslim community into life saving activities and the Burkini was developed. The Burkini seems to have been very successful in France, more so than where it is manufactures here in Oz. But as P Max says it is still a symbol off oppression of women and a religion that is alien to both Australia and the French Riviera in particular.

      In the meantime Muslims are returning to Cronulla Beach. The women still go into our often dangerous surf in full robes. While walking along the esplanade recently my wife asked me, why are those young ladies, 9 – 14 age group wearing full Islamic dress and looking so sad. My guess was that they have all been married off as child brides. In the meantime young Australian women can just enjoy the beach in appropriate clothing, that is a swimsuit and then choose to go out that evening with a young man of their choice and when they are old enough, go and marry a man of their choice.

      Islam neither belongs in Australia nor France.

      • Bob says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 7:12 am

        Nor, JMB, in any western culture!!

    • Kay says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 5:04 pm

      Well put.
      So clothing frames another lie of Mohammedism and the crippling that ensues.

      For in truth, God created men in His image.
      In truth, God created women in His image.

  4. Carol says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:50 am

    I think that the problem is Islamic being supreme in civil society rather than choice for religious wear. In Gaza there are religious police that make sure all women are covered according to Sharia law on the beaches, according to an article in the Jerusalem Post). Christian women are targeted since their dress code isn’t as severe, (though we Christians also dress modestly.) Amish as well as religious Jews or Hindus, have a certain dress code. So, all things being equal, the Burkini is less threatening than say the Burka, (how does one get a drivers license in one?) or Niquab, (what can you hide in there? ditto license, or identification).

    • gravenimage says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 10:58 pm

      The “Burkini” is about imposing Islamic norms, which leads to the Niqab and the Burqa, I’m afraid.

  5. Frank Anderson says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:53 am

    I wonder who else connects these modern collaborators with WWII Nazi collaborators such as Pierre Laval or Vidkun Quisling? How many people have been led into dazed denial of the facts before them by people equally evil with those who perform evil. Deceiving us, Lying to us, Proclaiming to us the equivalence of all “religions” is now a major industry that will destroy us and our future.

    To equate modern Christianity or Judaism with Islam is a lie worthy of the most severe condemnation. There is no equivalence between a 1400 year old “perfect, final, and unchangeable” statement of a god that teaches mass murder, slavery, misery, total domination of every aspect of life, with another God who particularly through the Exodus and the Resurrection, teaches that we are literally and in my opinion scientifically demonstrated, His children, whom He wants to be free of all forms of tyranny and slavery.. A society that craves its children to die as martyrs is not a religion. As the child sacrificers who occupied the Promised Land, the Moabites, offended God, Who the Bible teaches led the conquest and elimination of the evil practice, we face a cult of murder and child sacrifice now. Contrary to what many have written for decades there is and has not been child sacrifice in Christianity or Judaism since Abraham refused to sacrifice at God’s direction his son Isaac. In fact there has not been any sacrificial altar anywhere in the Jewish world since the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed just short of 2,000 years ago.

    That our leaders are corrupt enough to steal our money under threat of violence and jail through taxes, and then give it as a reward to those who kill us, is enough to reveal them as unfit to lead. They will not change: Therefore they should be replaced. And this “preacher” should certainly be among the first.

  6. Buford says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:53 am

    It is all Rubbish that garbage should not be worn in any Western Country if they are going to wear that crap stay in the Middle East.

    • Alexius Comnenus says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 12:14 pm

      They must keep this rubbish in the Middle East.

  7. Linde Barrera says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:53 am

    To Angemon, cs, and Praeceptor Maximus- GREAT COMMENTS, ALL. You 3 should be advising Christian church leaders around the world. Keep up the great thinking.

  8. H says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:55 am

    burkini has only become a thing this year. What were muslimas doing before? Either not going or wearing a regular swimsuit instead. They can either take it off or leave. Nobody wants to see violent muslims when they’re trying to relax at the beach.

    • JMB says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 8:14 pm

      I regret to say it but the burkini is an Australian design and a very successful export! It was designed as a Islam compliant swim suit, it seems to be more popular in Europe than here. It was developed as a way of getting Muslims involved in our beach culture.

  9. abel & solomon says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 10:14 am

    Me thinks the dear Pastor is missing the whole point…
    Part Seven; Is Allah the same as the God of the Jews and Christians? (from The UNdoing:Islam by its own words, the amazing free e-book that’s turning heads in some very high places. Get your copy or read it online here;- http://abelandsolomon.simplesite.com/424568444 , for the bigger picture read our full length book Islamic Apocalypse;- https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01AS09LYW )

    One God, or different deities?
    The word “Allah” today simply means “the deity”, so religions other than Islam also use this word in Arabic to refer to their gods. This does not mean that they are the same spiritual entity, we have to consider their attributes as revealed in the sacred writings to discover whether or not they are the same. The Koran says; (9:2) “ye cannot escape Allah…”, (113:2) “…the evil He created”, (74:56) “He is the fount of fear”, (16:70); “Allah… causeth you to die”, (22:6) “Allah quickeneth the dead”, (32:13) “will fill hell with the jinn and mankind together”, (2:167) “They will never get out of the fire”. From such verses it is very apparent that Islamic Allah is not the same as the God of the Bible who is described very differently; “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (Gospel of John 3:16), “God is love” (1 John 4:8), “Save others by snatching them out of the fire (of going to hell)” (Jude 1:23), “He is not the God of the dead but of the living” (Gospel of Mark 12:27). Islam’s Allah is very clearly not the same as the God of the Christians and Jews.

    There is no god but God, so who is Allah?
    Is Allah the Satan of the Bible? As we have seen Allah admits urging people into hell, he and his fallen angels are in charge there (74:30); “have We not only appointed angels to be wardens of the Fire…”. He assigns a demon to each Muslim (7:27); “We appointed devils as companions…” and thus fits Satan’s description as “Beelzebub, Prince of Demons”.

    The Star and Crescent
    One of the “Seven Wonders of the Ancient World”, was “the temple of great Artemis, of her image (idol) which fell from heaven” (Book of Acts 19:35). Artemis is the Greek name for the crescent moon goddess Diana and her image was much like Mecca’s Black Stone. John of Damascus in the Fount of Knowledge tells that the Black Stone has the likeness of Aphrodite (the Greek name for Venus), “who they (the Arabs) named Akbar in their own language”. Hence that Islamist shout of “Allahu Akbar” really is an invocation of the ancient goddess of war Venus, whose symbol is a five-pointed star. During WW2 author John Van Ess visiting the Ka’aba noted; “in one corner is the Black Stone, probably a meteorite, the kissing of which is now an essential part of the pilgrimage”. If the Hajj Pilgrimage and the direction of prayer of all Muslims are focussed on this egg shaped idol, once addressed as a female pagan deity, then it is evident, as many experts maintain, that Islam is actually paganism packaged as monotheism.

  10. samdav7 says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 10:30 am

    Pastor Ed Stetzer, this is a message from an unknown who lived with & studied extreme Islam for half a century, you are definitely a donkey !

  11. samdav7 says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 10:48 am

    Ok, I agree that the god of Muslims is completely different from the god of Christians, and the god of Christians is completely different from the god of Jews, and the god of Jews is completely different from the god of Muslims, hmmm, the true god is very obvious, you just have to use logic, logic tells precisely who is the real god, all the rest is a rotten garbage, read the books, read all the books, it’s impossible that you can go wrong !

  12. Georg says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 10:53 am

    If this guy isn’t an attention whore, then no one is. He’s other things, but I’ll only suggest this one for now.

  13. chris rone says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 11:02 am

    i have yet to read a comment on basic terrorism 101, what u wear is what u represent to the world., berka, to burkinis, silently proclaiming their murdurpos hating cult., conversion or death to all infidels., mohammed -” Migrate and Dominate”..

  14. Bradthefuzz says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 11:34 am

    Right or wrong…if a muslima chooses to look like a teletubbie, that is her choice. Why sink to the level of the intolerant jihadis and dictate what a. woman can wear? That is hipocricy. We should focus on preventing Sharia law from poisoning our culture first, then all the secondary issues will naturally become non issues. Jesus is Lord.

    • gravenimage says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 11:03 pm

      The imposition of Shari’ah norms does indeed lead to Shari’ah. That, indeed, is its entire purpose.

  15. mortimer says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 11:52 am

    Hey, Stetzer, the requirement of veiling in Koran 33.59 is linked to a threat of rape.

    Do you get that? Read that verse over slowly.

    • gravenimage says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 11:05 pm

      *Very true*, Mortimer.

  16. Baucent says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 11:56 am

    ‘If we don’t speak out, Muslims in France will not be the only ones stripped of their religious liberty.”

    Well, Pastor Ed doesn’t know that. But I’d really like to know whether he is as concerned about the religious liberty of his fellow Christians in muslim countries. Not many muslims in the West get arrested or locked up simply for practicing their religions. Happens all the time in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and elsewhere.

  17. hautedaug says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 1:20 pm

    Ban Burkas
    Ban Mosques
    Ban madrassas
    BAN ISLAM

    but, banning burkinis is stupd

    • JMB says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 5:38 pm

      Why?

  18. Mirren10 says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 2:28 pm

    ”Before you go much further, click here and see this picture at the New York Times. It’s of the French police making a woman take off more clothes to stay on a beach.”

    Apart from anything else, that photograph was a deliberate setup.

    • gravenimage says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 11:06 pm

      True.

  19. traci94 says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    He is just showing that he really doesn’t know anything about Islam at all, and it pisses me off that it is published in Christianity Today because he is naive, missing the point and people are going to be misled.

  20. J-A palmaer says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 4:09 pm

    Well, I haven’t ever read it the Bible that “God is Religious” – but I have read that “God is Love.

    A correct definition of “religion” seems, to me, being crucial in dealing with “religious matters” – if the definition is not in accord with the total “behaviour/theory (etc.)” required for such a word, I don’t find it very wise to “label just anything being religion/religious”.

    I actually think the same about “freedom”, and other, to me, very presciuos words connected to a good QOL.

    When it comes to “Love”, we also have to use this concept correlated to another extremely important concept, namely “Truth” – they are like “twins” – or. If you like, the TWO EYES you have (hopefully). Besides this, “Love” in Greek uses 4 words to enable us to understand what it may be about. One of the most common and popular words, connected with a very special and wonderful relationship between (originally) a woman and a man, is “Eros”. Mark my word, “relationship”, not only “body contact”… Or “docking in space” or so…

    Plucking out Bibleverses from their “context” – the “Body of the Text” – is like the bereavement of “eyesight”… Ask me “to see the meaning” after that…sorry.

    The “mind setting” for these important concepts are different in the different holy books “among religious people”, I guess. Their “languages” are completely different, why this will never work out in a “discussion”. By the way, before “heresy” there is ALWAYS the first text which the heresy tries to knock down, excuse my language. And, in case of “religion” heresy is common – because the Love and Truth in the first statement (text) is touching the core of problem humans may have when it comes to e lack of QOL in their own lives.

    Love and Truth is not “another theory” – they are the hardest, and the most presciuos concepts for building a Society. No wonder the mess we see in the World. The “ideal” (the bubble) cracks up, disappears (since it is not so substantial) – and is excghenged into bullets – the language of revenge. It always have to be “someone else’s sin/fault” for my own emptiness” – right…

    Hiding behind the Golden Rule will not help – the difficulty with the Golden Rule is that he One who pronounced it also lived like that – Loving in truth the people He met on his path. Be like Him – if you can! Without Him the Golden Rule will be a Social Concept, which actually can be the first step to steal the candy from the kids… The Golden Rule in a wrongly defined “religious context” can turn out to be a disaster – Be meek like the Doves – and clever as a “Snake”…

  21. JMB says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 5:37 pm

    Article 1:3 of the UN declaration on religious freedom seems to be the only limitation. It says;

    3. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be
    subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are
    necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the
    fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

    Apart from that the UN says we must allow religious freedom. As such and unfortunately the pastor is right, BUT TOTALLY WRONG.

    If the good pastor was ever to answer the call to be a missionary in a Muslim land he would soon find out that “Freedom of Religion” means anyone is free to be a Muslim.

    As with all UN declarations, freedom of religion overrides national sovereignty and sensitivities, again it is wrong.

    Muslims come to nominal Christian countries to escape war, famine and religious persecution, they should respect the way of life in our nations, THEY DON’T.

    I am no lawyer but section 3 allows for a religion to be limited when it affects public safety health and morals etc. I feel that wearing Islamic dress in public is offensive, intimidating, shows support of terrorism, goes against UN rules on women’s’ equality and possible many other reason that Islam needs to be limited by the laws of a sovereign nation.

    The good pastor may also quote scripture, so does the devil. He may even tell us that “We are all one in Christ, there is no Jew, gentile, Greek…” (Gal 3:28). These invaders are NOT in Christ. (If they ever are they will take off their robes)

    • Frank Anderson says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 6:15 pm

      The delusions of the “pastor” are obvious. His quote from Paul, earlier Saul, reveals clearly his delusional state. Islam did not exist when during about 200 years the New Testament was written and “edited”, to be “canonized” by a committee under Emperor Constantine. Islam is “different” and aspires to nothing less than the elimination of any alternative lifestyle anywhere in the world.

      As GB and many other countries have no constitution, UN Treaties can override their local laws. But, I do not know of any decision in the US where the UN or other treaties have been allowed to override our Constitution, yet. The UN Small Arms Treaty directly destroys the Second Amendment rights of US Citizens. It has been signed by John “Lurch” Kerry and treated as binding by Barack Hussein Obama, notwithstanding that even when Democrats controlled the Senate, the treaty has never been presented for ratification.

      The inclusion of phrases giving the right of “local” governments to enact laws relating to defense of their societies and rights of their citizens is a joke. I suggest this is another case where “law” is used to oppress the law-abiding and enable the lawless to destroy our freedom and liberty. It is also another demonstration where I suggest when a leader demonstrates not only incompetence, but hostility to the interests of those governed, the governed need to walk away and elect new representatives to lead.

      • JMB says

        Sep 2, 2016 at 6:37 pm

        Unfortunately UN resolutions seem only to be used or quoted when it suits the agenda of Muslim sympathisers or the general loopy left.

    • J-A palmaer says

      Sep 2, 2016 at 6:34 pm

      By this we also can understand that Muslim countries neglect UN. How about “communistic” countries? All kinds of segregation I suppose, but “civilised”… The Greatest Command in the Bible is Loving you God, with all your Heart, Soul, Strenght (body!) and Intelligence – and your neighbour as yourself… And still, I suppose, that “Good” must mean more than “Good for ME!”. Poor children of this generation seeing all these embarrassing things…what kind of future generation will come out of this???

      • JMB says

        Sep 2, 2016 at 6:47 pm

        The UN is an unelected body which has drifted away totally from it’s original purpose of preventing armed conflict conflict between nations. The UN is dominated by 3rd World and Islamic countries, it is anti-West, anti-white and anti-Christian.It has set itself up as the worlds moral authority (on it’s terms)

        I saw a possible ray of hope a week or so ago when the Philippines threatened to withdraw from the UN if it kept interfering with that countries internal affairs. Note also, the Philippines has a a dreadful problem of it’s own with Muslim separatists. Basically where ever there is trouble in today’s world there is Islamic involvement, and what does the UN do about it? Very little.

  22. Kepha says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:28 pm

    Sorry, but I see the French Burkini ban as a classic case of straining a gnat and swallowing a camel.

    I also happen to agree with Stetzer on these points:

    “I don’t want Muslim women forced to strip off some of their clothes on the beaches of France under the watchful eye of the police.

    Or Catholic adoption agencies stripped of their participation in Massachusetts’ adoption system because of their views of marriage.

    Or a baker stripped of her business because she did not want to participate in a wedding with which she disagrees.”

    The issue with Islam isn’t women’s clothes, but its glorification of armed violence as a way to spread itself and its demand that the Dhimmi accept either conversion or a humiliating subjugation as fourth-class citizens. That’s the issue!

    Further, the other two cases I quote from Stetzer are examples of how militant sexual perversion is attacking First Amendment liberties and seeking to shut those who disagree with them out of offering useful charitable services or ruining their lives and businesses. While I’m at it, I d-double-dare the next easily offended ssm couple to demand a wedding cake from a Muslim caterer. The so-called progressive movement in the West wants to abolish all real religious freedom (including private devotion, since they’ve loudly declared for half a century that “the personal is the political”).

    And, as for “the law of the land” banning “religious symbols” in public or tempting people to think that a passage of the Torah in a course comparing systems of law violates “separation of church and state” (something I successfully stared down while a lecturer at a public university), then I say seven times to Hell with the “law of the land”–while dusting off Justice Stewart’s dissent in _Abington Township_. This attitude of militant secularism and the establishment of secular “humanism” (how I hate to dignify modern idolatries with that term) has played havoc with any real education in Western history and culture. The fact that it insists on bullying Christians while meekly dropping its trousers and presenting its collective 屁股 to Islamic demands that it submit to cultural rape (which has been the case all across Europe; and which the Left wants to impose on America) shows that it is really worthless when the West comes under a true jihadi assault.

    You want me to fight Islam? I’ll do it by professing to be a Christian, and confessing what I find in the Bible (which necessarily precludes my seeing Muhammad as a prophet or the Qur’an as a legitimate revelation: I reject that silly HuffPo article which asks me to do so). Sure, I’ll fight for liberty. I will use the Gospel and prayer to show Muslims a better faith (I’ve noted that this has been working in some quarters). But I don’t want America to devote its prestige and treasure to making the world safe for sodomy and the subsidizing our being turned into T.S. Elliot’s Hollow Men.

    • gravenimage says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 12:29 am

      Dear Kepha, I’m afraid your idea that Shari’ah will serve as some sort of shield to protect Christianity is quite mistaken.

      • Kepha says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 10:42 pm

        You have not heard me, gravenimage (with all due respect, since I know how you feel about most things here, and we are often on the same page).

        I do not see Shar’iah as some sort of shield to protect Christianity, and in times past, attacked those who thought it might (Peter Kreefft, I believe). It is just that I think going after women in Burkinis is ridiculous. Indeed, I see Shariah as an enemy.

        But I am also very much aware of how the militantly secular Left is also willing to strip me of meaningful citizenship–and very generously leaving me my private place, while at the same time loudly proclaiming that the personal is political (so I trust the secular Left as far as I can throw the bathtub–and I am an old man with health problems).

        Shariah has no place in our free republic–and nor should judges and legislators who drive Roman Catholic and other Christian organizations out of adoption services because those organizations do not wish to place children with same sex couples. While we’re at it, those jurists who would declare simply stating that homosexuality is sin to be prosecutable hate speech really ought to be impeached and removed.

        I am aware that I and people like me are under attack from two sides–both of which are seeking to strip us of meaningful citizenship. We live in evil times.

    • Jay Boo says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 4:57 am

      Kepha
      Sorry but …
      First of all:
      She had the option to leave or remove her berkini elsewhere and come back.
      She was not forced to strip off some clothes.
      From your comment I surmise that —-
      You clearly do not know anything about Muslim woman.

      You fail to understand (every Muslima’s) absolute #1 sexual fantasy is to be forced to strip in front of infidel men on a public beach. It is the old Muslima exhibitionist excuse of “I did not want to do it, but the infidel made me undress” fantasy.
      Her only regret was that the policemen did not insist that she continue stripping or assist her “against her will and Allah’s (Wink, Wink).

    • RAB says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 8:58 pm

      Kepha, do you seriously believe that by simply being a Christian you are fighting Islam? That’s precisely why devout Muslims hate you so much, and that hatred is inherent in Islam, as I’m sure most people here know who have read the Koran, etc. As for the matter of the hijab or burka being a harmless “religious symbol” that we should accept, can you point out to me any so-called “religious” elements in Islam that are not associated with violence and intolerance toward non-believers, Even the Muslim prayer prostrations in public are not a sigh of true worship but rather a defiant declaration that eventually everyone must submit to the will of Allah.

    • Mazo says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 10:30 pm

      John Calvin was a well known proponent of liberty and freedom of religion through use of a stake.

      • Kepha says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 10:45 pm

        Mazo, Truth by its very nature is intolerant.

        Jay: I am not simply being a Christian, but also insisting on my share of the public square (against both Islam and established Leftism).

        • Mazo says

          Sep 4, 2016 at 2:25 am

          Thats not my point. I don’t care about people’s views. What you claim is to be a follower of Calvin and want to implement his laws and claim to abide by the American Bill of Rights. Is there something about burning people at stake there?

      • Cecilia Ellis says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 10:47 pm

        Mazo wrote: “John Calvin was a well known proponent of liberty and freedom of religion through use of a stake.”

        As was Muhammad . . .

        • Mazo says

          Sep 4, 2016 at 2:29 am

          Nobody with proper knowledge said the American Bill of Rights has anything to do with Islam. I’m asking people who claim to want to establish Calvin’s teachings and claim at the same time to be democrats who believe in the American Bill of Rights. They are saying they would abide by it but Calvin’s prescribed actions go against it.

          Bill of Rights does not apply in Muslim countries and nobody said it would.

      • Jay Boo says

        Sep 3, 2016 at 11:27 pm

        Kepha said,
        “I don’t want Muslim women forced to strip off some of their clothes on the beaches of France under the watchful eye of the police.”
        ——————————–

        I totally agree with that.
        But I doubt seriously that is what occurred.
        Surely the lady was free to leave and change.
        Beaches often have rules of expected behavior clearly posted.

        Should there be a rule?
        If Muslims were not continuingly attempting to impose themselves on the West, it would not matter in the least if they wore a berkini or scuba suit to the beach.

      • Kepha says

        Sep 4, 2016 at 6:41 am

        To get to your point, Calvin did not make the laws of Geneva. He was called to the pastorate of St. Pierre’s, and was merely an expert witness at the trial of Michael Servetus, who was outlawed all over Europe.

        The things for which I respect Calvin are his systematization of the various doctrines of Protestant Christianity concerning the work of God, ethics, and revelation; plus the contribution of his movement to our North Atlantic tradition of limited government. As for persecution, even the radical secularists recognize the need of society to protect itself from those who would destroy its moral underpinnings.

        If America’s secular republic originally “worked”, it was largely because it was supported by a population shaped by Protestant Christianity.

        • Mazo says

          Sep 5, 2016 at 2:43 pm

          The laws of Puritan Massachusetts are not compatible with the ideology of the Deists who wrote the American Bill of Rights.

          Puritans allowed parents to murder their children and did not allow freedom of religion in their colony.

  23. Carmel says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 9:54 pm

    This , here , is a pur rationalisation of the embarassed unconsciuous of that man . In fact , that pastor fear women bodies as hell and he is very happy that someone ,here a muslim , try to hide it . This has nothing to do with religion, christianism or something else. Here, we have a man that received an education , from his dear mom , probably , who teach him that girls are very dangerous . Yes . They could take him out of his mother’s hands. What a sin !!!! So this man fear his own attraction to women and he is too happy to see there is someone who hide them . This pastor is a pity . A person with who didn’t went far in his personal development and now , try to bring others in his path . Shame on him. Persons like him block the progress of humanity in march . Turn away from such peoples, everybody. please..

  24. Champ says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 10:04 pm

    Ephesians 5:11 …

    “Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.”

    Pastor Ed Stetzer should be exposing evil islam, not defending it in *any* way, shape, or form.

    • Kepha says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 10:49 pm

      How do you know Stetzer isn’t also teaching people that Muhammad was a false prophet, and that the Qur’an and Bible cannot both be true? We also disagree with Rabbinical Judaism in insisting that Jesus is M’shiach, but we’re not going to scream about someone going down the street in a talit qatan and kippeh–and we’re certainly not for throwing bricks through someone’s window.

      All I see in Stetzer’s statement is tolerance towards certain external practices–and a reminder that the secular Left had better either respect others’ freedom of speech or openly admit itself an enemy thereof.

      • Champ says

        Sep 4, 2016 at 2:46 am

        Kepha, thank you for sharing. And that may be what you see, but that isn’t what I see. We will simply have to agree to disagree.

        Take care.

  25. gravenimage says

    Sep 2, 2016 at 10:47 pm

    Christian pastor defends the burkini
    ………………….

    What a dhimmi tool. You run into these fools on occasion–Christians who believe that the horrors of Islamic supremacy is actually some sort of bulwark against secularism.

    He and his fellow useful idiots should take a good look at Dar-al-Islam to see how Muslim hegemony has worked out for Christians.

  26. Kepha says

    Sep 3, 2016 at 11:24 pm

    To my critics:

    I do not see Mr. Stetzer ignoring the rapes, beheadings, terrorism, and history of jihad. I see him defending the right of a woman to dress as she wants on a beach. He is simply defending someone’s right to engage in a behavior that is harmless in itself.

    I will not be listed with those people who see Shariah as a moral bulwark (which it most certainly is not). But if we allow professors in our universities the right to believe that the historical destiny of everyone who owns property and/or believes in God is to be shot by the inevitable revolution of the Proletariat (yet does not act on it); we must also allow a woman to cover her hair and limbs while on the beach. And I insist on my right to call homosexuality and transsexualism both sinful and unhealthy.
    I have made no secret of my view of Islam as blasphemy. I am a supporter of those engaged in Christian evangelism directed at Muslims. I have even explained to an Iraqi student of mine who broached the subject that there is a deep divide between Christians and Muslims over how God acts to save humans; that he really ought to compare Qur’an and Gospel for himself; and that our civil peace cannot rest on pretending that our religions are the same. I have corrected the ignorant belief of a [supposedly well-educated] relative that Muslims somehow respect the Old Testament and read it with a respect bordering on that with which they read the Qur’an.

    At the same time, I also believe it crime of the politicians in DC. Massachusetts, and Illinois when they drive the Roman Catholic and other Christian organizations out of adoption services for their refusal to place children with homosexual couples.I believe that Mark Tushnet, when he calls for relentless lawfare against people like me to be as big a threat (and closer to home) as the Iranian Ayatollahs. If the Muslim migrant who carries bad attitudes with him from his homeland is someone throwing a brick at my windows, people like the ACLU and Tushnet are termites eating the woodwork of my house.

    Back in the 1930’s, in Vienna, Moritz Schlick, Friedrich Waisman, and Joseph Schaechter, thinking they were going to put all knowledge andd ethics on a logical-positivist basis, despairingly screamed “where is the Socratic man?” to save them from their country’s and continent’s slide towards Nazi tyranny and barbarism–when they themselves ignored Socrates’ reply to Callicles in Gorgias that the tyrant is not the happiest of men because we will face a judgment after death; and ridiculed us old-fashioned folk who learned the same lesson about judgment after death from Isaiah and Jesus. I see the same issue with the Left-secular folks who get a moment of lucidity about Islam when a 9/11 happens and then hastily reassure themselves that we Christians are their bigger enemy.

    Again, I stress that the issue with Islam is the theology’s justification of violence against the rest of us, and declaring us a legitimate target for murder, rape, and plunder–not the amount of cloth it would put on a woman’s body or its abstention from pork. I have a feeling that Mr. Stetzer would agree.

    And it is just too typical of laicete Leftism to strain at gnats of burkini-clad women on beaches while swallowing camels by “understanding” the car-burners of the banlieux or hailing the suicide bombers of 9/11 as “revolutionary fighters”.

    • Jay Boo says

      Sep 3, 2016 at 11:52 pm

      “I see him defending the right of a woman to dress as she wants on a beach. He is simply defending someone’s right to engage in a behavior that is harmless in itself.”

      Then no doubt you must agree that men can also wear burkinis. bikinis and pink leotards with with a color coordinated lavender tutu and women can “free the nipple’ and go topless as men do at the beach.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_the_Nipple_(campaign)
      (PG rated)

  27. Felix Quigley says

    Sep 4, 2016 at 6:57 am

    Kepha

    What a disgusting lie you peddle here: QUOTE…Kepha says …that the historical destiny of everyone who owns property and/or believes in God is to be shot by the inevitable revolution of the Proletariat

    Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky all Marxists were totally opposed to the suppression of religion. You probably do not know what you are talking about and to prove this I challenge you Kepha to quote one sentence or passage which shows that those four Marxists were not for freedom of religion

    • Frank Anderson says

      Sep 4, 2016 at 12:11 pm

      “Religion is the opiate of the people.” Karl Marx, Das Kapital?

      • Mirren10 says

        Sep 4, 2016 at 12:48 pm

        Felix Quigley identifies as a Marxist, but he doesn’t seem to know much about his woeful creed, nor how it played out in Russia, post 1917. He’s rather like some mohammedans in that, ie: he persuades himself that Lenin and Stalin, et al, weren’t *really* practicing *true* Marxism. 🙂

        IS isn’t practicing *true* islam …

  28. Felix Quigley says

    Sep 4, 2016 at 7:10 am

    The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

    NO RELIGION ESTABLISHED… that is the whole point. The American Constitution was based on secularism yet there is in the writings of plenty on Jihadwatch, especially Kepha, an attack on the secularism of the American Constitution.

    It was this secularism that allowed and allows people to practice their religion freely in America.

    The secular Constitution…freedom of religion … the two are inseparable.

    There is also a concurrent attack on Marxism by people like Kepha, but also many others, However it is easily shown that Karl Marx was a big supporter of the American Constitution because it made the American State into a secular state. It was the secularism that created the freedom.

    Now people like Kepha want to take all of that freedom so beloved by the Founding Fathers and DESTROY it.

    We oppose Islam which is inseparable from Sharia Law because it in turn wished to destroy the secularism of the state. In other words it is a movement directed against the American Constitution – its secularism. Those advocating Sharia law and Kepha are on the same page here in this. It is as serious as that.

  29. Felix Quigley says

    Sep 4, 2016 at 7:34 am

    NOT SO FAST THERE KEPHA

    Kepha has a tendency to rant in all directions at once but we are not dealing with all directions here we are simply dealing with the American Constitution and what it says about the connection between state and religion,

    Which is that the state and religión must be kept separate.

    If I apply as a citizen of America for a government job, say as a teacher, then being appointed must have nothing to do with my religión.

    Does Kepha agree with this principle yes or no?

    The advocate of Sharia Law certainly does disagree with this principle which is laid down in the American Constitution and that Jihadist says that the state has no right to lay down such a law in the first place, because Allah is primary in everything.

    Kepha goes on to state QUOTE…”I have made no secret of my view of Islam as blasphemy. I am a supporter of those engaged in Christian evangelism directed at Muslims.”

    You Kepha can hold that view or any other view you want but it has nothing to do with this discussion, nothing whatsoever, which is about the secular basis for the American Constitution and American State.

    We defenders of the American Constitution are sublimely uncaring as to whether you try to convert Muslims, or even try to convery David Icke away from his ideas that all we are is “eternal consciousness” towards Christianity or any other faith you care to name.

    We say do so as long as you want.

    But keep it out of the affairs of the American State.

    So for example if you are a teacher in a government school keep your religión, all religión, to your after school activity and off school property.

    That is secularism and it is fair because it applies to all.

    Kepha seeks to do away with that basis for freedom in America. It is a downright shame that these Kepha rants take place on a libertarian type blog such as Jihadwatch. Such kepha rants will be transformed into chains.

    If I am wrong in saying this about Kepha show me where I am going wrong.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • revereridesagain on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’
  • James Lincoln on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’
  • Carol on Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, France and UAE conduct joint military exercises amid rising Turkish threat
  • James Lincoln on EU Parliament members call for firing of border agency director for preventing illegal migrants from entering Europe
  • Jayme on Canadian Mental Health Association studies Muslim women’s mental health due to ‘discrimination’ and ‘hate crimes’

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.