Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Christian Student Senator at UC Berkeley Harassed for Abstaining From LGBT Vote

    Christian Student Senator at UC Berkeley Harassed for Abstaining From LGBT Vote

    “because of my Christian views and because I represent the Christian community on campus, I cannot fully support this bill”

    https://youtu.be/MuKqwAltMPs

    When a pair of LGBT resolutions came up at UC Berkley, Isabella Chow, a Christian student senator, abstained from voting based on her faith.

    Now some students want Chow to resign.

    She was even denounced in an editorial in the school paper, the Daily Californian:

    UC Berkeley students cannot accept leaders like ASUC Senator Isabella Chow

    Content warning: Anti-LGBTQ+ language

    On Wednesday, ASUC Senator Isabella Chow made transphobic and homophobic statements during an ASUC meeting, publicly dismissing the identities of individuals on campus. In doing so, Chow reminded students of a reality that many often disregard — that UC Berkeley continues to be a toxic space for LGBTQ+ communities.

    Chow made these comments during a discussion concerning an ASUC resolution to oppose the Trump administration’s proposed Title IX changes and to stand in solidarity with transgender, intersex, nonbinary and gender-nonconforming students. She chose to abstain from voting on the resolution — and then went beyond simply removing herself from the conversation. Chow, a former member of the Student Action party, also chose to voice her personal — and highly problematic — interpretation of Christian scripture, stating that any “lifestyle” outside of male and female and heterosexual identities was not “right or safe.”

    This abject dismissal and non-acceptance of gender identities goes far beyond personal opinion. Chow’s language erased and dehumanized individuals who already experience marginalization and violence at a significant rate. She perpetuated the stigma that individuals who identify outside of the gender binary face on a daily basis. Chow must stop framing these remarks as personal opinions or views. These statements are offensive and disturbing invalidations of human beings.

    You have to give Isabella credit. It takes bravery for a student to defend their faith in this way on almost any college campus today, let alone Berkeley.

    She appeared on the Laura Ingraham show to discuss the situation. The FOX News Insider has details:

    Christian Cal-Berkeley Student Senator Told to Resign for Not Backing Pro-LGBTQ Resolutions

    A University of California-Berkeley student senator is facing calls for her to resign after she decided to abstain from a vote on two pro-LGBTQ resolutions because of her Christian faith…

    On “The Ingraham Angle” Wednesday, Chow said she did not agree with the resolution containing clauses that promote the LGBTQ identity and lifestyle.

    “I said because of my Christian views and because I represent the Christian community on campus, I cannot fully support this bill,” Chow said.

    She explained that there is a fine line between “protecting” individuals from discrimination and “promoting” their beliefs, and she believes the Advocacy Agenda and Title IX resolutions crossed that line, so she abstained from voting.

    “I don’t see a conflict between being able to accept, love and validate you as an individual, and yet not fully agreeing with how you choose to identify yourself sexually and how you choose to promote your sexual lifestyle,” Chow said.

    She said while she’s been accused of being “transphobic and homophobic,” and she’s been called vulgar names on campus and on the student senate floor, she has also gotten support from some conservative and Christian students.

    Watch the segment below:

    Featured image via YouTube.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments


    Isabella Trump.

    You go, girl!

    A pearl of a woman, as opposed to the buffoonish Alexandra Cortez and the gluttonous and useless moooochelle obama.

    The problem of course is that our politicians can’t defend freedom of speech. It’s a foreign concept to them even though it is a vital pillar of western civilization. Of course they can’t defend western civilization, period, and in fact don’t believe it should be defended. One might think the meda would pick up the slack but they also don’t think certain people should be allowed to voice certain opinions.

    They also don’t believe in truth. I’m not just talking about American pols. We can see what road we’re going down by looking to Europe. And the Europeans can see their own future by looking to the Islamic world.

    https://www.dw.com/en/calling-prophet-muhammad-a-pedophile-does-not-fall-within-freedom-of-speech-european-court/a-46050749

    This blogger is one brave woman. I gather Shammi Haque is a Muslim herself. But she blogs among other things that interest her about Islam, and she’s critical of it. Muslims have killed six other bloggers in Bangladesh and she had to leavve the country because it was getting too dangerous for her to speak her mind. She actually wants to return to her country but she doesn’t know when or if ever it will be safe for her to return.

    Europe has long had hate speech laws. Or, as they’re usually worded, laws against incitement to religious or racial violence or incitement to prejudicial action against individuals because of their membership in an identifiable protected group. It was Germany that got the ball rolling following WWII because they wanted to outlaw the kind of anti-Semitic garbage that the Nazis used to spout The standard is so nebulous that it’s impossible to even say there is a standard. One thing you need to know about European hate speech laws is that the truth is no defense. All that matters is if an individual in a protected group takes offense. Or someone takes offense on their behalf.

    The story she is blogging about is a recent ruling by the European Court of Human Rights against an Austrian woman named Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. She’s been battling her conviction for hate speech by an Austrian court for years, and now she’s out of options as the ECHR has ruled that the Austrian courts were correct when they convicted her of hate speech as they balanced the defendant’s “right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, and served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria.”

    Her crime? She grew up in the Islamic world as her dad was an Austrian diplomat and she gives private luctures on the basic facts about Islam to interested parties who she carefully vets. They have to be kept private as you will get in a lot of trouble talking honestly about Islam in Europe these days. As this case proves. Somehow a lefty reporter for a hard left rag got into one of her lectures and wrote about. In one of her lectures she called Muhammad a pedophile because he liked to “do it” with children.

    Bizarrely, the courts all agreed that not only was she offending Muslims but she was wrong. It’s bizarre because all the Muslim sources confirmed that his favorite wife Aisha was six when her father agreed to the marriage contract and that she was nine when Muhammad consummated the marriage with her. Those are the basic facts, and it’s important to understand this marriage if you’re going to have any sort of understanding of the current Islamic world. The Quran stresses that Muhammad is the model of conduct to follow if you want to have any hope of getting into heaven (Qur’an 33:21). It’s why the Ayatollah Khomeine as one of his first acts after overthrowing the Shah was to lower the age of marriage from 18 to nine. Because that was the example that Muhammad set for Muslims. He wrote in one of his books that a father should not allow his duaghter to “see her first blood under his roof.” In other words he should make sure to marry her off before she starts puberty. It’s also true that the age of marriage in Iran is only applicable to vaginal sex. Neither the Sunni or Shia outlaw marriage at any day. It’s possible to marry a girl at any age; you can marry a girl the day she’s born. And a man can use even an infant for sexual pleasure. But in Sunni Islam a father has to agree that his daughter is capable of having vaginal sex and even if she’s four or five the husband can consummate the marriage. If the ‘groom” and the “father” don’t come to that agreement the prospective husband has to wait until she turns nine years old per the Islamic lunar calendar. The Shia have a hard and fast rule; no vaginal intercourse before the girl turns nine but in both sects anything else goes at any age.

    Some politicians in some Muslim majority countries have tried to raise the age for marriage to something approaching a more civilized age and they can’t because the clerics raise a stink about raising the age for marriage from nine is insulting their prophet and Islam. Because Allah laid down the law about waiting periods for men to divorce their wives depending on if she’s pregnant or might be pregnant. The waiting period for girls who haven’t had their first period yet is three months. So not only can a Muslim man marry a prepubescent child, he can also divorce her.

    So on the one hand in many Majority countries majority countries it’s blasphemous to want to raise the age for marriage over the age of nine. And in Europe it’s essentially blasphemy now to talk about it.

    Another thing as that you can’t do is quote the Quran. You can’t even quote an Imam who is quoting from the Quran as he spews forth a hate filled Friday sermon about such thoroughly Islamic topics as Jews being descended from apes and pigs. Basically Islam is just one big glob of incitement to racial and religious hatred and incitement to prejudicial treatment against women and anyone who isn’t a Muslim. But that’s OK as the pols throughout the western world can not bring themselves to admit it.

    Which is wy the German government tried to quash any reporting of Muslim men going on a mass spree of sexual assault and rape on New Year eve/day on 2015/2016 in cities throughout the country. Their official line was that it was just the usual quiet holiday and nothing unusual happened. They were forced to take that story back and admit the truth as angry Germans who were victimized or just witnessed the crime spree started sharing their cell phone videos of what actually happened. And police not only had to admit that something unusual did happen but it was literally unprecedented and that were overwhelmed by the violence.

    Germany isn’t as far gone as Sweden. The Swedish police do collect statistics on criminals broken down by type of crime, ethnicity /national origin of the criminal, etc. They share that information with select government officials and reporters. But it is illegal for anyone who has access to that information to make it public. A Swedish member of their parliament was convicted of hate speech for posting crime statistics to his facebook page. He tried to defend himself by pointing out that everything he posted was true. The court would not allow him to make that offense. A Swedish police officer with 47 years on the job and nearing retirement and was entirely fed up with having to lie to people about the actual state of crime in Sweden went on a rant about what his typical week consisted of. Here’s part of what he posted after first observing that the information he was going to post was “prohibitedd for us to peddle as state employees:”

    “Here we go; this is what I’ve handled from Monday-Friday this week: rape, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, rape-assault and rape, extortion, blackmail, assault, violence against police, threats to police, drug crime, drugs, crime, felony, attempted murder, rape again, extortion again and ill-treatment. Suspected perpetrators; Ali Mohammed, Mahmod, Mohammed, Mohammed Ali, again, again, again. Christopher… what, is it true? Yes, a Swedish name snuck in on the edges of a drug crime. Mohammed, Mahmod Ali, again and again. Countries representing all the crimes this week: Iraq, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Somalia, Syria again, Somalia, unknown, unknown country, Sweden. Half of the suspects, we can’t be sure because they don’t have any valid papers. Which in itself usually means that they’re lying about their nationality and identity.”

    Naturally the local special prosecutor investigated him on suspicion of hate speech. This happened last year and I don’t know if they prosecuted him for hate speech but Sweden is apparently full of busybodies, some of whom reported him to his city’s police officials and I believe they fired him.

    Many of those Swedish busybodies have nothing better to than monitor facebook and other social media for “hate speech.” Some senior citizens have been fined or jailed for simply complaining about the violent crime they experienced or witnessed with their own two eyes. For instance, one 65 year old woman was arrested and successfully prosecuted for making a YouTube video about how she was assaulted by “refugee children,” as a result of the assault she was injured and developed a number of health problems, and the police did absolutely nothing about it. But they sure did successfully prosecute her for being upset about it.

    I’m surprised that the Swedish government hasn’t cracked down on rape victims for having the gall to actually report their rapes to the police and describe the perpetrators.

    No society can survive as a society when people are prohibited from simply saying what they think. Because a society that can not tolerate a dissenting opinion, decreeing that it is beyond the pale of allowable discussion, is doomed. You can’t fix problems you can’t discuss. Europeans that are being muzzled by their own governments, and now the ECHR has validated their governments’ laws that stifle them, will simply get fed up and take matters inot their own hands. European governments will discover far too late just how important the right to free speech is and how fiercely it must be defended.

    “Chow must stop framing these remarks as personal opinions or views. These statements are offensive and disturbing invalidations of human beings.”

    There. Are. Four. Lights.

    We will deny reality as a courtesy to your delusions.

    Because we know what will follow.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend