Add criticism into relgious education.

I propose that equal criticisms of all religions should be taught in schools.

The entire key stage 4 of religious education is about Christianity and what the bible says. There should be sections on using logic to defeat god, evidence against relgion, bible criticisms, the evil in the bible (millions of murders in the name of god or ordered by god) or the morality of relgions that are wrong.

Why is this idea important?

I propose that equal criticisms of all religions should be taught in schools.

The entire key stage 4 of religious education is about Christianity and what the bible says. There should be sections on using logic to defeat god, evidence against relgion, bible criticisms, the evil in the bible (millions of murders in the name of god or ordered by god) or the morality of relgions that are wrong.

Review the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008

Review and revise the HFEA to end research on embryonic stem cells, which has produced NO feasible treatments for any diseases. Re-focus the money on adult and umbilical cord stem cell research, which has already produced promising treatments for leukemia, Crohn's Disease, heart disease, with other treatments in the pipeline.

I'm not suggesting the government has to say that an embryo has a complete set of human rights, but the government must at least acknowledge that there are many people, both religious people, medical ethicists and philosophers, who are deeply uncomfortable with the idea that an embryo is created with the specific purpose of being destroyed in research.

Proposed European legislation to change the rules on medical testing may make embryonic testing even more common, and it is necessary that we legislate now to prevent this further attack on the integrity of human life at its' origin.

Why is this idea important?

Review and revise the HFEA to end research on embryonic stem cells, which has produced NO feasible treatments for any diseases. Re-focus the money on adult and umbilical cord stem cell research, which has already produced promising treatments for leukemia, Crohn's Disease, heart disease, with other treatments in the pipeline.

I'm not suggesting the government has to say that an embryo has a complete set of human rights, but the government must at least acknowledge that there are many people, both religious people, medical ethicists and philosophers, who are deeply uncomfortable with the idea that an embryo is created with the specific purpose of being destroyed in research.

Proposed European legislation to change the rules on medical testing may make embryonic testing even more common, and it is necessary that we legislate now to prevent this further attack on the integrity of human life at its' origin.

Repeal the Act of Supremacy of 1559

Repealing the Act of Supremacy to return the Church of England to its' proper place in full communion with the Pope and the Catholic Church. The Queen would no longer be the supreme head of a state religion, which is anachronistic in our current age, though she would retain the title 'Defender of the Faith', given as it was by an earlier Pope in recognition of the role of the monarch in protecting Catholic truth. The Act of Supremacy represents an assault on the conscience of every individual, requiring (at the time) all of Her Majesty's religious subjects to acknowledge the head of state as having a power over the Church which belongs properly only to God and to His appointed apostolic vicar the Bishop of Rome. Although religious toleration has been extended in the following 500 years, this assault is still inherent in our country's constitution. All of those religious freedoms for non-Catholics would remain if this one Act was repealed.

The Church of England could, as a whole, take advantage of the invitation offered by Pope Benedict XVI in his encyclical Anglicanorum Coetibus, coming home to the largest Christian Church in the world.

St Thomas More and all English Martyrs, pray for us.

Why is this idea important?

Repealing the Act of Supremacy to return the Church of England to its' proper place in full communion with the Pope and the Catholic Church. The Queen would no longer be the supreme head of a state religion, which is anachronistic in our current age, though she would retain the title 'Defender of the Faith', given as it was by an earlier Pope in recognition of the role of the monarch in protecting Catholic truth. The Act of Supremacy represents an assault on the conscience of every individual, requiring (at the time) all of Her Majesty's religious subjects to acknowledge the head of state as having a power over the Church which belongs properly only to God and to His appointed apostolic vicar the Bishop of Rome. Although religious toleration has been extended in the following 500 years, this assault is still inherent in our country's constitution. All of those religious freedoms for non-Catholics would remain if this one Act was repealed.

The Church of England could, as a whole, take advantage of the invitation offered by Pope Benedict XVI in his encyclical Anglicanorum Coetibus, coming home to the largest Christian Church in the world.

St Thomas More and all English Martyrs, pray for us.

Stop racism against the ethnic English

Multiculturalism will never work as it racist against the native ethnic English. The fanciful concept is based on the oppression and ethnocide against the native ethnic population of  England.  Multiculturalism by definition needs to eradicate the native culture and people, the native ethnic people and culture of the English and England (we era not a mongrel nation-learn your history and do not be racist). The English created England and named it after themselves.

Today most people would quite rightly be disgusted if they heard of a native ethnic population and culture being eradicated in its own land  for the benefit of the failed Multicultural project. Yet today in England the ethnic English, the native population of England are subject to state backed racism and bigotry in our own country. Our ethnic English history is not be taught or is being re-written to accommodate PC lies and disinformation. The ethnic English are being banned from applying for jobs in their own country because of who they are and their skin colour. Their ethnic identity of 'ethnicity  white English' is not to be found on monitoring or census forms. Whereas other peoples ethnicity is!  The ethnic English are being forced down the waiting list for council properties due to asylum seekers and loosing jobs because of over population. England is the fourth most densely populated area on earth.

There is no labour shortage or need for immigrants from the EU or elsewhere. In a civilised country it is for the state to make sure the native ethnic English and existing population is always trained, employed and housed at all times. Why are successive governments not doing this? Yet pulling out the stops to accommodate unnecessary immigration. This must be a bribe for votes and symptom of Multicultural fanaticism at all costs.


Multiculturalism causes meltdown and social decay, all that ties a nation together, it's shared history, traditions, ancestors and achievements, it's identity is undermined. So self-imposed multicultural ethnic segregation will always occur because of it. Where loyalty is not to country, its native culture of even a political party, but to a group whose identity, traditions and loyalty lie elsewhere and always will. It is fact that most victims of racist crime are native ethnic English and this number has increased in-line with open door immigration, and will continue along with social and national breakdown unless the doors are locked. 

The ethnic English are the goose that lays the golden egg, Wales,
Scotland, Northern Ireland and the illegal EU all need English tax payers money. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own assemblies and or parliaments paid for by the ethnic English. Yet the English do not have ether own parliament. Westminster is the UK parliament not England's. And governments continue to refuse the ethnic English to once again have their own parliament where only English people can represent and vote on English matters! Yet England is largest and oldest nation in the British isles. Again this is case of bigoted multiculturalism where the native ethnic population is subject to ethnocide. There must be an immediate end to immigration. This also means leaving the illegal EU, contrary to what politicians say the EU has no jurisdiction or sovereignty in England.

All laws that discriminate against the ethnic English from existing, participation in their our culture and being 'Fully Represented' in their own country must be ended. We need to immediate and permanently leave the illegal EU, the pointless Human Rights Act and so end unwarranted and unnecessary immigration. By doing this the fast approaching maelstrom can be prevented. England has the Magna Carta, English Deceleration of Rights The English Bill of Rights, Common Law and Act of Settlement. All these are our constitution and cannot be rmeoved contrary to what politicians say. And I am speaking ethnic Englishman who has friends of various ethnicity.
 

Why is this idea important?

Multiculturalism will never work as it racist against the native ethnic English. The fanciful concept is based on the oppression and ethnocide against the native ethnic population of  England.  Multiculturalism by definition needs to eradicate the native culture and people, the native ethnic people and culture of the English and England (we era not a mongrel nation-learn your history and do not be racist). The English created England and named it after themselves.

Today most people would quite rightly be disgusted if they heard of a native ethnic population and culture being eradicated in its own land  for the benefit of the failed Multicultural project. Yet today in England the ethnic English, the native population of England are subject to state backed racism and bigotry in our own country. Our ethnic English history is not be taught or is being re-written to accommodate PC lies and disinformation. The ethnic English are being banned from applying for jobs in their own country because of who they are and their skin colour. Their ethnic identity of 'ethnicity  white English' is not to be found on monitoring or census forms. Whereas other peoples ethnicity is!  The ethnic English are being forced down the waiting list for council properties due to asylum seekers and loosing jobs because of over population. England is the fourth most densely populated area on earth.

There is no labour shortage or need for immigrants from the EU or elsewhere. In a civilised country it is for the state to make sure the native ethnic English and existing population is always trained, employed and housed at all times. Why are successive governments not doing this? Yet pulling out the stops to accommodate unnecessary immigration. This must be a bribe for votes and symptom of Multicultural fanaticism at all costs.


Multiculturalism causes meltdown and social decay, all that ties a nation together, it's shared history, traditions, ancestors and achievements, it's identity is undermined. So self-imposed multicultural ethnic segregation will always occur because of it. Where loyalty is not to country, its native culture of even a political party, but to a group whose identity, traditions and loyalty lie elsewhere and always will. It is fact that most victims of racist crime are native ethnic English and this number has increased in-line with open door immigration, and will continue along with social and national breakdown unless the doors are locked. 

The ethnic English are the goose that lays the golden egg, Wales,
Scotland, Northern Ireland and the illegal EU all need English tax payers money. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own assemblies and or parliaments paid for by the ethnic English. Yet the English do not have ether own parliament. Westminster is the UK parliament not England's. And governments continue to refuse the ethnic English to once again have their own parliament where only English people can represent and vote on English matters! Yet England is largest and oldest nation in the British isles. Again this is case of bigoted multiculturalism where the native ethnic population is subject to ethnocide. There must be an immediate end to immigration. This also means leaving the illegal EU, contrary to what politicians say the EU has no jurisdiction or sovereignty in England.

All laws that discriminate against the ethnic English from existing, participation in their our culture and being 'Fully Represented' in their own country must be ended. We need to immediate and permanently leave the illegal EU, the pointless Human Rights Act and so end unwarranted and unnecessary immigration. By doing this the fast approaching maelstrom can be prevented. England has the Magna Carta, English Deceleration of Rights The English Bill of Rights, Common Law and Act of Settlement. All these are our constitution and cannot be rmeoved contrary to what politicians say. And I am speaking ethnic Englishman who has friends of various ethnicity.
 

Freedom of Religion and

 

Over past few decades I believe this country has seen the gradual erosion of freedom for Christians to practice and represent their faith, as the recent BBC documentary “Are Christians Being Persecuted?” uncovered. Instances such as when an airline hostess was challenged because she refused to remove a cross around her neck, a nurse suspended because she offered to pray with someone and a registrar asked to choose between her job and carrying out a ceremony for a civil partnership as well reveal that the freedom of some to practice what they believe to be true is being limited.

I support freedom for all and in doing so I uphold that everyone should be granted the same level of freedom. To advocate civil partnerships as a means of expanding peoples’ freedom (as true as that may be) and then to punish those who simply, out of conscience, don’t feel they can be party to the partnership and so request that they may be absolved from their responsibility of carrying it out, as happened in July 2008 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3972735.ece, strikes me as a contradiction. If people are free to practice what they want, surely people should also be free to disagree with those practices and be allowed to respectfully and peacefully opt out of any part of professional or civil duty that contradicts conscience with impunity.

I by no means seek to encourage any form of prejudice, but think that laws designed to advance equality should hold the interests of everyone at heart and grant people the freedom to disagree with an act as well as partake in it!

Why is this idea important?

 

Over past few decades I believe this country has seen the gradual erosion of freedom for Christians to practice and represent their faith, as the recent BBC documentary “Are Christians Being Persecuted?” uncovered. Instances such as when an airline hostess was challenged because she refused to remove a cross around her neck, a nurse suspended because she offered to pray with someone and a registrar asked to choose between her job and carrying out a ceremony for a civil partnership as well reveal that the freedom of some to practice what they believe to be true is being limited.

I support freedom for all and in doing so I uphold that everyone should be granted the same level of freedom. To advocate civil partnerships as a means of expanding peoples’ freedom (as true as that may be) and then to punish those who simply, out of conscience, don’t feel they can be party to the partnership and so request that they may be absolved from their responsibility of carrying it out, as happened in July 2008 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3972735.ece, strikes me as a contradiction. If people are free to practice what they want, surely people should also be free to disagree with those practices and be allowed to respectfully and peacefully opt out of any part of professional or civil duty that contradicts conscience with impunity.

I by no means seek to encourage any form of prejudice, but think that laws designed to advance equality should hold the interests of everyone at heart and grant people the freedom to disagree with an act as well as partake in it!

Removal of constraints on religious freedoms

I would like to see the Equality Acts, discrimination legislation and associated regulations amended to allow greater protection for individuals to mainfest their religious beliefs and conscience. The Human Rights Act 1998 protects absolutely the right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion although our law does not offer much protection for the manifestation of religious beliefs especially if they are exercised in the public sphere. This has lead to a number of examples where Christians have been prevented from wearing crucifixes, being asked to officiate in civil partnership ceremonies against their deeply held convictions or to them being barred from being allowed to offer adoption services exclusively to certain categories of person.

Why is this idea important?

I would like to see the Equality Acts, discrimination legislation and associated regulations amended to allow greater protection for individuals to mainfest their religious beliefs and conscience. The Human Rights Act 1998 protects absolutely the right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion although our law does not offer much protection for the manifestation of religious beliefs especially if they are exercised in the public sphere. This has lead to a number of examples where Christians have been prevented from wearing crucifixes, being asked to officiate in civil partnership ceremonies against their deeply held convictions or to them being barred from being allowed to offer adoption services exclusively to certain categories of person.

Repeal charitable status for “the advancement of religion”

I propose that section 2 2 c of Part one of the Charities Act 2006 be deleted.

This section creted a catagory of charity for  "the advancement of religion;"

I propose that the advancement of religion can not be reconcilled with the "public benfit" requirement and therefore should be removed.

Why is this idea important?

I propose that section 2 2 c of Part one of the Charities Act 2006 be deleted.

This section creted a catagory of charity for  "the advancement of religion;"

I propose that the advancement of religion can not be reconcilled with the "public benfit" requirement and therefore should be removed.

Defend the principle of religious tolerance

Preserve the right of all people to live by any law-abiding creed or religion they choose, without restraint or penalty. Protect faith schools, and the rights of parents to bring up their children without undue interference. Repeal all laws infringing freedom of speech, for both religious and non-religious people. In other words, stop this country's collapse into mutual hatred and intolerance.

Why is this idea important?

Preserve the right of all people to live by any law-abiding creed or religion they choose, without restraint or penalty. Protect faith schools, and the rights of parents to bring up their children without undue interference. Repeal all laws infringing freedom of speech, for both religious and non-religious people. In other words, stop this country's collapse into mutual hatred and intolerance.

Restore the Catholic adoption agencies and allow them to follow their Catholic Christian conscience when finding suitable families for children.

The Labour Cabinet decision not to allow Catholic adoption agencies to follow their conscience when placing children with suitable families was based on a secularised idea of equality. This subsequently forced these agencies to close to protect the integrity of Catholic identity and conscience. Before the new gay rights laws came into force, very aggressively, Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor said: "We believe it would be unreasonable, unnecessary and unjust discrimination against Catholics for the government to insist that if they wish to continue to work with local authorities, Catholic adoption agencies must act against the teaching of the Church and their own consciences." The Catholic Church does not hold homophobic ideas in its teaching, this is erroneous idea in an attempt by a secular based ideology to undermine the ethical teachings of the Catholic Church on the family in order to further its atheist/secular ideology. The issue is about freedom of conscience and a firm ethical underpinning that cannot be swayed by passing ideologies. The Catholic Church has a huge amount to offer British society but it will only do so where a freedom of its teachings and ethics are respected and protected by the Government. The Catholic adoption agencies should be welcomed back into the life of British society as a sign of the acceptence of the Catholic Church in the public life of Britain and a sign of an ideology free equality that we all seek.

Why is this idea important?

The Labour Cabinet decision not to allow Catholic adoption agencies to follow their conscience when placing children with suitable families was based on a secularised idea of equality. This subsequently forced these agencies to close to protect the integrity of Catholic identity and conscience. Before the new gay rights laws came into force, very aggressively, Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor said: "We believe it would be unreasonable, unnecessary and unjust discrimination against Catholics for the government to insist that if they wish to continue to work with local authorities, Catholic adoption agencies must act against the teaching of the Church and their own consciences." The Catholic Church does not hold homophobic ideas in its teaching, this is erroneous idea in an attempt by a secular based ideology to undermine the ethical teachings of the Catholic Church on the family in order to further its atheist/secular ideology. The issue is about freedom of conscience and a firm ethical underpinning that cannot be swayed by passing ideologies. The Catholic Church has a huge amount to offer British society but it will only do so where a freedom of its teachings and ethics are respected and protected by the Government. The Catholic adoption agencies should be welcomed back into the life of British society as a sign of the acceptence of the Catholic Church in the public life of Britain and a sign of an ideology free equality that we all seek.