Christian Victory Catalog

Nov 2008
64,018
5,005
Washington state
You are misrepresenting the word by capitalising it, presenting it as something it is not.
This is the group that claims they believe in nothing, and fight to prevent those that believe in something from exercising their freedoms.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 2008
64,018
5,005
Washington state
British Court Upholds Right of Christians to Freely Express Their Faith

A Christian student won his appeal in a UK appeals court on Tuesday after he was expelled from college for expressing his faith on sexual ethics in a debate on social media.

Felix Ngole was dismissed from the University of Sheffield in 2016 where he was studying to become a social worker.

He was expelled for his participation in a 2015 Facebook discussion opposing same-sex-marriage. Being a devout Christian, he quoted biblical verses confirming the traditional Christian views on marriage.

A complaint was filed against Ngole by an anonymous source several months after the Facebook discussion. He was told by the university that he "lacked insight' into the effect of his Facebook posts. The expression of his Christian views was found to be unacceptable by the university, and he was required to stay silent on the subject while attending the school.

Ngole was also told not to express his Christian views in public, including a church. He could never express his viewpoint in a work situation even if directly asked.

In their decision, the Court of Appeals rebuked the university saying that people should not live in fear when expressing their views. The court said, "The mere expression of religious views about sin does not necessarily connote discrimination."
The student took to Facebook and expressed gratitude for his victory, writing:

"You say something that your employer doesn't like and they expel you. And we know that type of thing that you would say that would lead to that. Most of it is just expressing your faith which as a Christian country we should be able to do that."
British Court Upholds Right of Christians to Freely Express Their Faith Hopefully the American courts start ruling like this and stop calling religious beliefs discrimination.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 2008
64,018
5,005
Washington state
Christian group wins religious freedom case against University of Iowa: 'Ruling is a win for basic fairness'

A Christian student group that was kicked off campus for requiring its leaders to embrace Christian religious beliefs won a federal court case against the University of Iowa this week.

The university stripped the Business Leaders in Christ (BLinC) of its status on campus after a member claimed he was denied a leadership position for being openly gay, saying BLinC violated the school's Human Rights Policy. The group, however, argued the member was rejected because “he expressly stated that he rejected BLinC’s religious beliefs and would not follow them.”
Judge Stephanie M. Rose of the U.S. District for the Southern District of Iowa found that the University of Iowa violated the Christian club's First Amendment rights to free speech, expressive association, and free exercise of religion.

“The university wanted a license to discriminate, and Judge Rose said no way,” Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, which represented BLinC, said in a statement.
After BLinC was stripped of its registered student organization status, the group sued the school in December 2017. The judge ordered the school to give BLinC and any other groups affected by the case registered status until the court decided the case. With the outcome this week, the court is effectively allowing the 33 religious student groups who were being audited by the school's administration to permanently remain on campus.
“We are grateful the court protected our rights today—to let us have the same rights as all student groups to express our viewpoints freely on campus and to be who we are,” Jake Estell, president of BLinC, said. “This victory reinforces the commonsense idea that universities can’t target religious student groups for being religious.”
“This ruling is a win for basic fairness, but it is also an eloquent plea for civility in how governments treat Americans in all their diversity," Baxter said. "As a governmental body bound by the First Amendment, the university should have never tried to get into the game of playing favorites in the first place, and it is high time for it to stop now.”Christian group wins religious freedom case against University of Iowa: 'Ruling is a win for basic fairness'

A great win for religious expression. This was a religious group and a Gay member wouldn't accept the religious beliefs of the BLinC so they would not allow him to be a leader. To be a leader in any group you have to accept their beliefs. This University was just trying to manipulate and discriminate towards this religious group to allow a Gay person to be a leader. No religion should have to change their belief system and the court backed them on this and won this case.
 
Nov 2008
64,018
5,005
Washington state
Expelled Christian student wins appeal
IN A strongly worded judgment, three judges of the Court of Appeal unanimously reversed a Deputy High Court judge’s refusal to interfere with a decision of the University of Sheffield. The university had removed a Christian student from a two-year MA course in social work because he had expressed, on a public social-media platform, his disapproval of homosexual acts based on his religious views.

In September 2014, the student, Felix Ngole, enrolled as a mature student on the course which, if completed successfully, would lead to registration and practice as a qualified social worker. He had completed one practice placement, which brought him into direct contact with service users, and was due to undertake his second placement in the second year of the course.

In September 2015, Mr Ngole posted a series of comments on his Facebook account about a prominent news story on a website in the United States regarding the imprisonment of a registrar in the United States, Kim Davis, for contempt of the order of a Federal District Court. The sentence was a result of Ms Davis’s refusal to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples because of her Christian beliefs.
His posts were brought anonymously to the attention of the university by another student. The Department of Sociological Studies initiated an investigation. When interviewed by an investigator, Mr Ngole admitted making the posts, sought to explain their religious and theological meaning, and said that he never discriminated against anybody. His placement reports, he said, demonstrated that he was supportive and non-discriminatory when working with people in same-sex relationships. He said that, if he was asked his views, he would have to tell people his opinion, and the Bible said that homosexuality was a sin.
The university had wrongly confused the expression of religious views with the notion of discrimination, the CA said. The mere expression of views on theological grounds (for example, “homosexuality is a sin”) did not necessarily connote that the person expressing such views would discriminate on such grounds. There was positive evidence to suggest that Mr Ngole had never discriminated on such grounds, and was not likely to do so in future, because, as he explained, the Bible prohibited him from discriminating against anybody.

The Appeals Committee had found that Mr Ngole had failed to offer “any insight” on how his public postings might negatively affect the public’s view of the social-work profession. The CA said, however, that in its view it was the university’s stance which could be described as lacking “insight”.

Instead of exploring and imposing a lesser penalty, such as a warning, the university had imposed the extreme penalty of dismissing Mr Ngole from the course, and that, the CA said, was inappropriate in all the circumstances. The disciplinary proceedings were “flawed and unfair”, and there should be a new hearing before a differently constituted committee.

In this case, the second highest court in the land has recognised that the right to freedom of expression can apply equally in favour of Christians as adherents of other faiths. Religious texts may reflect attitudes to social issues which are no longer held by a majority, but the law does not prevent professional people from relying on those texts to express their own views in appropriate language — even publicly — provided that this does not itself involve discrimination against those with whom they deal in their professional capacity.Expelled Christian student wins appeal A win for a religious student falsely accused of discrimination because his religious views didn't match the views of the Schools. When will people learn, they can't kick people out of school because they don't agree with the latest social experiments. People have had religious views for thousands of years