Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.


Ban the Bible – And Those Who Read It


The Bible has often been banned or strictly censured in the past – and even in many places today. Simply think of most Communist and Muslim countries, past and present. The Word of God is always anathema to the powers that be, especially those of the secular left.

And those found possessing a Bible have often been punished severely. Simply quoting from the Bible can get you into a lot of trouble. But the very worrying thing is this is now happening more and more in the so-called free West. The once free and democratic West is becoming more and more averse to believers even quoting the Bible in public.

In the politically correct and heavily secularised West of today, the Bible is routinely being described as a book of “hate speech,” and those who simply recite some passage from it are getting into big trouble with the law. I have documented various cases of this happening, and there looks to be no let up to this.

bible-19Indeed, the most recent case – coming from France – is a real shocker. It is another example of how it is mostly because of homosexual activism that believers are being targeted and persecuted by the law. The claim that granting special rights to homosexuals will not impact anyone is looking thinner by the day.

We are all impacted when homosexuality becomes a politically protected lifestyle, and everyone is expected to bow the knee to it, or face the consequences. Just ask Christine Boutin – she knows all about this. The French politician and former housing minister was found guilty of “hate speech” a few days ago, all because she dared to quote from the Bible.

Because she used the biblical word “abomination” in an interview in the political magazine Charles two years ago, she is now paying the price – literally. She has been ordered to pay a fine of 5,000 euros, along with being forced to pay 2,000 euros each in damages to three homosexual groups that took offence at what she said.

Here is how one media report covers this worrying story:

This amounts to being fined for quoting the Bible. In two separate occurrences, Leviticus uses the word abomination, which is the same in French as in English, in chapter 18, verse 22: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Clearly, the judgment also means that Christians should not express their agreement with this form of prohibition of homosexual acts if they do not want to be sanctioned for a criminal offense.

The public prosecutor and the three senior judges of the 7th penal chamber of the Paris Court of Appeal agreed that Boutin committed an offense with regard to French “anti-racist” laws, which impose specific and extra heavy penalties on defamation, insults, and inciting to violence or hatred against a number of categories of persons including sex, age, nationality, ethnicity, handicap and, more recently, “sexual orientation.”

The judgment confirmed a prior condemnation in December 2015 by a penal tribunal in Paris and added more damages in favor of the “Inter-LGBT” group, which had not been deemed admissible at the first hearings.

Boutin is well known for having opposed civil unions for homosexuals. She was a figurehead in the mobilization against the legal recognition of same-sex couples in 1998 as well as same-sex “marriage,” which became law in France in 2013. A former member of Parliament and longtime head of the Christian-Democrats, Boutin was also the founder in 1993 of the “Alliance pour les droits de la vie” (Rights of life alliance), now “Alliance Vita”, a mainstream pro-life movement that is mainly active against abortion and euthanasia and aims to help pregnant women. The group avoids involvement in political debate over the abolition of legal abortion.

People can decide for themselves just how ‘hateful’ Boutin was by simply reading about the actual interview in question:

Boutin was every bit as cautious in her interview with Charles, in the way the Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks about homosexuality, taking care to distinguish between persons and their acts, and then some. But that was not enough to avoid scrutiny.

During the talk with a female journalist, Boutin was asked whether the fact that her openly-gay communications adviser was not in “contradiction” with her declaration to another magazine in 1999, saying “homosexuality is an abomination as it is said most clearly in the Old and in the New Testament.”

Boutin answered, “It isn’t contradictory at all. (…) I have never condemned a homosexual. Never. It is not possible. Homosexuality is an abomination. Not the person.”

“You’ll admit that the boundary may seem very fine,” the journalist said.
Boutin replied, “‘Oh, no, it is not the same thing! For me, the difference is the same as between the sin and the sinner. Sin is never acceptable, but the sinner is always forgiven! The two things are completely different! It’s a subtlety that is not always understood. I have homosexual friends! I promise you, they are real friends! But as far as sexual behavior goes, everyone does as one can. I’m not even saying as one wants; I’m saying as one can.

“With my faith, a homosexual person is every bit as loved by God as I am. Thank you for letting me explain this to you: that is where a very important confusion lies. Homosexuality has nothing to do with the judgments that I make about homosexuals who are my brothers, my friends, and whose dignity every bit as large as that of people who have other sexual behaviors. They are sinners like I am. We are all sinners. I am in sin also, I am a sinner (she laughs). But you will never hear me glorifying a sin. Even if I can forgive a sin.”

These are the words for which Boutin was prosecuted and doubly condemned, in the first instance and then in appeal. No matter how carefully she worded her response, she used at least one word too many. The gay press was quick to pick it up and to slam her condemnation of homosexuality. The mainstream press denounced her as homophobic.

Days later, Boutin backpedaled, publicly proclaiming that she had used “awkward terms.” “Abomination,” according to the Dictionary of the Académie française, means “that which provokes horror.” Boutin said in a communiqué: “Following the numerous reactions to the words I used in an interview with Charles magazine, I admit that the word abomination, taken out of its original context and of the complete text I spoke, in which it was included, can have been an awkward term. I made no personal attack and I regret that the meaning of my words can have been misunderstood, or have hurt people. There was no intention at all of hurting anyone.”

At that point, various LGBT movements had already filed a complaint against Boutin.

It does not matter how careful and cautious you are it seems. If you dare to say anything – ANYTHING – critical of homosexuality, eventually someone will hunt you down and drag you to the courts. All because the homosexual militants and other minority activist groups have created out of nothing bogus ideas about “hate speech” and “hate crimes”.

Um, I would have thought most crimes already involve some hate. Why create new classes of crimes? And the idea of hateful speech is quite bizarre. Any time someone does not like anything someone says, it can be labelled as hate speech. I would imagine right now that a lot of Cleveland Indian fans are sure that Chicago Cubs’ fans are full of hate speech.

But this is all about silencing people and taking away their basic freedoms, including the freedom of speech. For decades now we have been warned about how all this will pan out. Let me offer a few warnings that have been made in the past, but obviously went unheeded:

“Liberals supported free speech until they realized, years later, how bad speech is for them and began demanding hate crimes legislation, speech codes, and sexual harassment laws restricting speech.” Ann Coulter

“Hate crime laws establish a preferential justice system and create a double standard in the legal system that fosters distrust, conflict, and intolerance in a society. Such laws suggest that members of a minority group deserve a higher level of justice than those of the majority, which makes members of the minority group more important and morally superior.” Jerry Kane

“In George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, the government Thought Police constantly spies on citizens to make sure they are not thinking rebellious thoughts. Thought crimes are severely punished by Big Brother. 1984 was intended as a warning against totalitarian governments that enslave and control their citizens. Never have we needed this warning more urgently than now, because America’s Thought Police are knocking on your door.” Chuck Colson

“One of the most dangerous trends of our times is making the truth socially unacceptable, or even illegal, with ‘hate speech’ laws. There seems to be something ‘liberating’ about ignorance – especially when you don’t even know enough to realize how little you know.” Thomas Sowell

Their important warnings have sadly fallen on deaf ears, and so we find ever more totalitarian cases of “hate speech” prosecution in the West. One simply has to ask how long before the Bible is banned altogether? I fear it will easily happen in my own day.


Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Trending Now on

Send this to a friend