American Televangelist Benny Hinn refused entry to Britain

An American Christian preacher has been turned away from Britain, leaving thousands of people stranded at an evangelical rally in London this weekend.

Benny Hinn, from Texas, who draws large crowds to his Pentecostal revival rallies, was turned back at Stansted airport under new rules on visiting ministers of religion. Many thousands of Pentecostal Christians travelled from across Britain and Europe and booked long weekend breaks in the capital’s hotels for his mission at the ExCeL exhibition centre in Docklands, East London, which had been due to begin on Thursday night.

They were left disappointed after Border Agency officials turned him back when he landed with his private jet because he had failed to obtain a “letter of sponsorship” from a church. Instead, Mr Hinn flew on to Paris and tried to enter Britain at Luton airport but was again turned back. He was on his way back to France last night. Jill Masefield, who lives in Bristol, said that she and thousands of other followers had been left waiting for Mr Hinn to appear at the
free preaching event, not knowing why he had not appeared. Instead, another pastor preached and requested donations of up to £1,000.

A Border Agency spokesman said: “Under the UK’s tough new points-based system, religious workers must obtain a valid certificate of sponsorship prior to arriving in the UK. These rules are designed to make sure that a legitimate sponsor is linked to each application to enter the UK for work purposes.

“These rules are applied objectively and clearly set out for travellers. People who arrive without the required documentation can be refused entry to the UK.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6859240.ece

Combating Defamation of Religions

A new value is emerging in the realm of the peoples’ rights. Now two years in a row, the United Nations General Assembly has passed a resolution called, Combating Defamation of Religions. Although the Defamation Resolution applies to all religions, it highlights “the negative projection of Islam in the media and the introduction and enforcement of laws that specifically discriminate against and target Muslims.” The Defamation Resolution, first introduced in the 60th Session (2005) of the General Assembly, however, has failed to gain universal approval. The West is particularly opposed to the Defamation Resolution. In the 61st Session held in December 2006, the Defamation Resolution gathered slightly more support than before. Still, the opposition persists.

The General Assembly resolutions may contain soft international law. With the passage of time and compliant state behavior, some resolutions pave the way for the formation of a multilateral treaty or customary international law. In almost all cases, these resolutions reflect the international community’s views, which cannot be dismissed as mere opinions. These views, even when they fall short of opinio juris, influence multilateral relations and compose the sociology of international law. This article briefly examines the Defamation Resolution’s contents and the voting pattern to highlight the differing ideological viewpoints that inform the defamation debate.

Contents of Defamation Resolution: Taking into account the negative stereotyping of religions that exist in various regions of the world, the Defamation Resolution proclaims that defamation of religions causes social disharmony and leads to violations of human rights. The Resolution notes that in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks on the United States, Islam has been frequently and wrongly associated with terrorism, and the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities is becoming more and more acceptable. The Defamation Resolution deplores the use of print and electronic media to incite xenophobia against Islam or any other religion. It also condemns physical attacks on places of worship and religious symbols.

Furthermore, the Defamation Resolution urges states to prevent political institutions and organizations from fomenting discrimination, hostility, and violence against religious groups. It also urges states to complement their legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance. The Resolution calls upon the international community to initiate a global dialogue between civilizations to promote a culture of tolerance and an awareness of religious diversity.

The Resolution does not define defamation. Traditionally, defamation applies to reputational injury to individuals. Group defamation is a problematic concept as it can stifle free speech and furnish undeserved protection to decadent customs and practices. The defamation of religions falls even beyond the concept of group defamation, since it may even prohibit the defamation of religious ideas and doctrines.

In the absence of a legally sustainable definition of defamation of religions, the Defamation Resolution will be taken in the West as an infringement upon free speech, a fundamental civil and political right deeply embedded in numerous human rights treaties and national constitutions. The United States Constitution tolerates very few constraints on the freedom of press, political speech, and academic freedom. The advocates of free speech will therefore have little use for a resolution that urges states to use the coercive power of law to
prevent defamation of religions. In secular legal systems, the protection of religious sensibilities at the cost of sacrificing artistic liberty and political rhetoric is considered a bad bargain.

Furthermore, some critics argue that the Defamation Resolution fails to distinguish between the dignity of religion, which must be protected, and valid criticisms of certain religious practices. The right to adopt a religion without coercion is a fundamental human right recognized in numerous human rights treaties. Muslim countries do not actively proselytize but they welcome non- Muslims to embrace Islam. However, some Muslim countries impose harsh punishments, including death penalty, if a Muslim converts to another religion. Many critics see these practices as a double standard. The International Humanist and Ethical Union, a non-governmental organization, while expressing its views before the UN Commission on Human Rights, was accused of attacking Islam when it “raised the issue of the treatment of those accused of apostasy in some Islamic countries.”

The idea of combating the defamation of religions, though morally sound, is difficult from a legislative viewpoint and will pose serious drafting challenges. The idea, however, poses no greater problems than prohibiting hate speech against racial, ethnic, or religious groups---a law adopted in almost all countries of the world except the United States. 11 One key function of law is to make distinctions and draw balance between competing rights. In the complex realm of human affairs, no right is absolute, not even free speech or the dignity of religion.  Accordingly, the law against defamation of religions may be constructed in a way that does not abridge legitimate speech including artistic freedom and yet protects the dignity of religion.

Conclusion: An overly broad interpretation of defamation would allow states to own a religion and persecute even their own citizens who challenge any aspect of this ownership. Valid criticisms of religious practices must not constitute actionable defamation. However, all nations must devote intellectual and moral resources to teach children and adults respect for the diversity of religions. A legal system in which religions are respected rather than trashed will not be a blemish on human civilization.

Ali Khan is a professor of law at Washburn University School of Law in Topeka, Kansas.

Controversy Over Dutch Support For Hindu Goddess

Citizens in the Dutch town of Amstelveen have condemned plans by local authorities to support a controversial Hindu festival that would involve praying to a Hindu goddess from India, in the heart of the town.

The nearby Dutch capital Amsterdam and Amstelveen-based KPMG, one of the world’s largest professional services providers, also finance the October 10 festival on Amstelveen’s ‘Stadsplein’ (Town Square). Local officials said the ‘India Diwali Festival’, or ‘Festival of Lights’, is part of a policy to accommodate the Indian community in Amstelveen, a European gateway for international companies due to its location near Schiphol Airport and key highways.

Goddess Lakshmi is a key attraction during the festival, which symbolizes the victory over evil, according to organizers. Young visitors can receive Hindu make-up and dresses, and also paint their own small clay lamp, while the event will also feature Hindu tattoos, music, dancing, and hundreds of small lights, reported the influential Amstelveen-based news website amstelveen.blog.nl. Several Amstelveen citizens, including Christians, have expressed shock about the event and demanded that the local Christian party
ChristianUnie (ChristianUnion) protests the planned festival in the local council.
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/23744/festival-of-lights-amstelveen-netherlands

Council of Europe body says blasphemy should not be illegal

Blasphemy is part of a person's freedom of expression and should not be made illegal, a Council of Europe advisory body said in a report published recently. The body's constitutional law experts argued that while inciting religious hatred should be a criminal offence, as is the case with almost all of the Council of Europe's 56 members, blasphemy comes under freedom of expression.

The Venice Commission also noted a distinction between blasphemy and insults prompted by a person's religion. Blasphemy is punishable by death under the laws of Muslim countries. Many European countries also have laws against blasphemy, but rarely use them. The Venice Commission is the Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional matters.
http://www.expatica.com/de/news/german-news/Council-of-Europe-body-says-blasphemy-should-not-be-illegal_53069.html

Dalai Lama Honored in Washington With Human Rights Award

Tibet's exiled spiritual leader the Dalai Lama was honored by U. S. lawmakers with a human rights award on Tuesday. But for the first time since 1991, the Dalai Lama will not meet with the sitting president of the United States.

The Dalai Lama received a warm reception and the first Tom Lantos Human Rights Prize from U.S. lawmakers. The medal, in memory of the late Congressman and longtime human rights activist, honored Tibet's exiled spiritual leader for his achievements.

Accepting the award, the Dalai Lama said he will continue to champion human rights. "Although now I am 74-years-old, the rest of my life I dedicate for the promotion of human values, emotional human affection, human compassion, equality and basic human rights in Tibet or in mainland China or everywhere," he said.

House of Representatives speaker Nancy Polosi praised the Dalai Lama's work in pressing China to improve its human rights record.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-10-06-voa45.cfm

Increasing use of face veil worries Egyptian government

Women dressed in stark black, their faces veiled and their hands sometimes gloved, are becoming a common sight in Cairo, a trend that worries the government as it battles a lurch towards fundamentalism. Most Muslim women in Egypt wear the hijab, which covers the hair, but the niqab, which covers the entire face, is becoming more popular on the streets of Cairo.

The issue has been brought into sharp focus following reports this week that Mohammed Tantawi, head of the Islamic Al-Azhar University, told a girl to remove her niqab when he toured a high school funded by his institution. Tantawi, the country's top religious authority, reportedly also said that he intends to ban the niqab at the university. The ministry of religious endowments has distributed booklets explaining that wearing a niqab is un-Islamic while the health ministry wants to ban doctors and nurses from wearing the austere veil.

A decision has also reportedly been taken to ban students from wearing the niqab in the residences of the state-run Cairo University, although the university authorities deny this is the case. Egypt has over the years witnessed a series of large-scale attacks by fundamentalist militants, starting with the assassination of president Anwar Sadat in 1981.

This year, it arrested two cells of Islamists blamed for a bombing in a Cairo bazaar that killed a French teenager, and a botched jewellery store heist that killed four Christian Copts.
http://news.yahoo.com

Joke: A great scientist in embryo

(A family has just finished their dinner. The mother excused herself to sleep early. But father and son decided to have a chat)
The boy asked his father,
"Dad, you said you are a great scientist, can I ask you some questions?"
"Sure, my boy!"
"You told me Elisha just disappeared into the sky. Do you think there is any scientific explanation for that?"
"Young man, that is rapture and nothing more, not science!"
"Is it not possible for the alien moving around in the UFO to have grabbed him and took him to another planet?"
(The father laughed; shrugged off the reply)
"O.k. Any other question?"
"How did the Jesus' mother Mary, got impregnated by the holy spirit without 'canal' sex?"
"Common, my boy, that is not a science matter but religious besides you are too young to sex talks"
"Dad! Have you forgotten that biology teaches all that? Just answer my question."
"Well, I think it was just divine intervention!"
"As for me, I think the holy spirit just bluetoothed the semen into her while Joseph helped to open the hymen to easy delievery. What do you think Dad?"
"I think you must drop sciences for the humanities!!"

On Blasphemy

It is disheartening to know that  laws still exist today that criminalizes  certain expressions as blasphemous. It is even more worrisome to know that such cases are still taken so seriously as to be punishable by death penalty in places like Pakistan, Saudi-Arabia and Iran. 

What is more annoying is the boundary between qualifies as 'blaspeheme'  and what does not which has become so blurred. In Germany, for  instance, bashing of religious committments, religious societies or organisations are 'criminal' offenses, most especially if viewed as capable of  rocking public peace. But religious fundamentalist groups are already perceiving a lot of issues as blasphemes, issues such as general denial of gods, cursing of religious symbols and religious contents (for example the movie "Dogma"). Although Germany has a good record of free speech, we are still suffering from an ongoing process of christian dependency. Sometimes we are walking two steps forward and three steps backwards again. Tension often exists between political freedom, particularly freedom of speech, and certain examples of art, literature, speech or other acts considered by some to be sacrilegious or blasphemous.

Although many laws prohibiting blasphemy have long been repealed, particularly in the West, they remain in place in many countries and jurisdictions. In some cases such laws are still on the books, but are no longer actively enforced. The issue of freedom of speech versus blasphemy cannot be seen in isolation from the role of religion as a source of political power in some societies. In such a society, to blaspheme is to threaten not only a religion, but also the 'political power that be', (those in government), in such cases popular responses to blasphemy tend to be more severe and violent.

Across a large swathe of the Middle East and beyond, we find countries whose state religion is Islam. In such instances, Shari’a law reigns supreme. Shari’a law, as commonly interpreted, has many incompatibilities with universal human rights. Saudi Arabia even denies the right to practise any religion other than Islam. But Islam is not alone in posing a threat to human rights and secularism. The Catholic Holy See's special status at the United Nations enables it to meddle in international deliberations in a way that is not available to other religions or to organisations representing non-believers such as IHEU. The churches in general have fought hard against equality and human rights for all, and are still fighting to maintain discrimination against homosexuals. Ditto Islam (some Islamic countries even demand death penalty for homosexuality).

In general, states that give a privileged position to religion are doing so at the expense of human rights. Religious leaders often interpret a desire for secularism as an atheistic attack on all that is good. While many supporters of secularism may indeed be atheists (or simply humanists), many others are religious believers. A truly secular state allows free choice in matters of religion or belief. Secularism, rightly understood, far from being against religion, provides the only possible level playing field for all religions and none.

Religious believers have nothing to fear from secularism apart from loss of the ability to impose their belief system on others. The new draft resolution on freedom of expression from the Human Rights Council fails to mention the fastest-growing threat to freedom of expression: intolerance in the name of religion.

IHEYO, as a youth-led organisation, will continue to do its best to educate and speak openly on this vital issue, threatening the norms of secularism,  in publications, seminars and conferences. This we can guarantee, come what may.

See you in Nepal!

Silvana Uhlrich, President IHEYO

Paul Kurtz: Pillar of American Skeptic Movement

Paul Kurtz was born on December 21, 1925 in Newark, New Jersey. He is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo, but is best known for his prominent role in the United States skeptical and humanist community. He is undoubtedly one of the founding fathers of secular humanism. He is founder and chairman of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, formerly the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), the Council for Secular Humanism, the Center for Inquiry and Prometheus Books.

Kurtz is the editor-in-chief of Free Inquiry magazine, a publication of the Council for Secular Humanism. He was co-president of the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU). He is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and Humanist Laureate and president of the International Academy of Humanism. As a member of the American Humanist Association, he contributed to the writing of Humanist Manifesto II.

Kurtz was largely responsible for the secularization of humanism. Before Kurtz embraced the term "secular humanism," which had received wide publicity through fundamentalist Christians in the 1980s, humanism was more widely perceived as a religion (or a pseudoreligion) that did not include the supernatural.

Kurtz used the publicity generated by fundamentalist preachers to grow the membership of the Council for Secular Humanism, as well as strip the religious aspects found in the earlier humanist movement. He founded the Center for Inquiry in 1991. There are now some 40 Centers and Communities worldwide, including in Los Angeles, Washington, New York City, London, Amsterdam, Warsaw, Moscow,Nigeria, Beijing, Hyderabad, Toronto, Dakar, Buenos Aires, Uganda and Kathmandu.

Kurtz is well-known for his eupraxsophy thoery. He coined the term eupraxsophy (originally eupraxophy) to refer to philosophies or lifestances such as secular humanism and Confucianism that do not rely on belief in the transcendent or supernatural. A eupraxsophy is a nonreligious lifestance or worldview emphasizing the importance of living an ethical and exuberant life, and relying on rational methods such as logic, observation and science (rather than faith, mysticism or revelation) toward that end.

In 1999 Kurtz was given the International Humanist Award by the IHEU.The asteroid (6629) Kurtz was also named in his honor. Kurtz believes that the nonreligious members of the community should take a positive view on life. Religious skepticism, according to Paul Kurtz, is only one aspect of the secular humanistic outlook.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Kurtz"

Repeal of Blasphemy Laws Still a Pipe Dream in Pakistan

Every time someone charged with violation of the controversial blasphemy laws is murdered or suffers mistreatment in the hands of an angry mob or individual, calls for their repeal intensify. Yet concerned sectors are still waiting anxiously for concrete action by the state to stem the tide of religious violence against minority groups who bear the brunt of these laws.

The death of a 20-year-old Christian while in the custody of the police has intensified the campaign against the laws. But clerics are not backing down, insisting the laws should stay.

In 2000, then President Pervez Musharraf promised to repeal the laws. "He retracted when the ‘mullahs’ (religious teachers) threatened protests," recalled Zohra Yusuf, vice chairperson of the Sindh chapter of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP). Robert Fanish Masih was arrested around mid-September on blasphemy charges after Muslims went on a rampage in his village, Jaithikey, near Sialkot, close to the Indian border. He was found dead in his cell four days later. Asma Jahangir, the head of the HRCP, called it "death in custody" and held the police authorities responsible for it.

His family and community members were forced to flee the area, where they were also prevented from burying him. Rights activist Tahira Abdullah said mobs using the law to inflict harm on others are acting "like private vigilante groups," she said. No less than governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer has called for a repeal of the blasphemy laws. But his bold call on Sep. 16 for the controversial laws’ repeal was met with a warning from the president of the conservative Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid-e-Azam), Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, who said that his party would resist any attempt to annul the blasphemy laws.
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=48736

Review: Blasphemy by Douglas Preston

Blasphemy is as much a commentary on religion, science and fanaticism as it is a fictional novel. I finished the book at a record pace and was immensely enthralled from beginning to end. I would place this novel in my Top Five favorite works of all time as it still has me reflecting on its message and implications relating to science and religion in our world today.

In a nutshell, a group of elite, well rounded scientists from various backgrounds and expertise build an enormous supercollider named Isabella. Located in Northeast Arizona, Isabella is able to replicate the point of singularity of the "Big Bang Theory" giving further insight to the origins of the universe. The ideas are well researched and based on sound applications including quantum physics, particle theory, astronomy, etc Working against the scientists are various religious based factions claiming the project was seeking to play and replace God.

Clearly, this novel may be upsetting to Christians or anyone else of faith due to the atheistic overtones presented from the scientists as well as the results of the experiment with Isabella. I believe this is exactly what Preston intended to do since science and Christianity are often in conflict. Presented within Blasphemy is the notion Christianity has its origins from long dead primitive man whose core beliefs were predicated on primitive ideas such as propagation (old testament) and survival against a domineering culture oppressive of
religious ideology (new testament).

Blasphemy is a must read for free thinkers, philosophers and any one else independent from the shackles of religion. If you are one such person who has been blinded by the biggest sham ever in the history of humanity which we call organized religion, then this book is not for you. Admittedly, I have been unsuccessful in writing an impartial review, but given the highly controversial subject matter, can anyone?

Reviewed by Eric C. Johnson "The Great Teller of Truth"

http://www.amazon.com/Blasphemy-Douglas-Preston/dp/0765311054/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Sanjivani Nepal

Sanjivani Nepal, a non-governmental, non-political and non-profit making organization was established by a group of dynamic youths in 2003. It was registered in the local authority (Kathmandu) of His Majesty's Government, Nepal under Social Organization Registration Act (SORA) 1976. Bylaws it has received permission to run programmes like health, information/communication, human rights, social justice, women and youth empowerment and child welfare throughout the kingdom.

Sanjivani
Nepal has three branches to run different programmes in accordance with its bylaws. Teams of experts and professionals run all three programmes.

Sanjivani Nepal (Youth Forum for Humanism and Ethics)
Sanjivani Nepal (Center for Public Health Concern)
Sanjivani Nepal (Media Forum for Peace and Development)
Contact person Youth Forum

Ms Prashannata Wasti, President
P.O. Box 11568
Kathmandu, Nepal
E-mail: prasanw_2@hotmail.com

Sanjivani
Nepal, Media Forum for Peace and Development
Contact Person: Mr Yadav Raj Joshi, Programme Coordinator
E-mail: mediaforum@mail.com, yrj2001@yahoo.com

Stem Cells Which 'Fool Immune System' May Provide Vaccination For Cancer

Scientists from the United States and China have revealed the potential for human stem cells to provide a vaccination against colon cancer, reports a study published in Stem Cells.

This discovery, led by experts in immunology, Dr. Bei Liu and Dr. Zihai Li, builds upon a century old theory that immunizing with embryonic materials may generate an anti-tumour response. However, this theory has never before been advanced beyond animal research so the discovery that human stem cells are able to immunize against colon cancer is both new and unexpected.

"This finding potentially opens up a new paradigm for cancer vaccine research," said Dr. Zihai Li. "Cancer and stem cells share many molecular and biological features. By immunizing the host with stem cells, we are able to 'fool' the immune system to believe that cancer cells are present and thus to initiate a tumor-combating immune program."

The research is the first of its kind to implicate the role of human stem cells in vaccinating against colon cancer, and represents collaboration between the prestigious laboratories of Dr. Zihai Li and stem cell expert Dr. Renhe Xu at the University of Connecticut Stem Cell Institute.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091007223724.htm

The 'Day' has come to Stay

I have never been a fan of outright religious provocations hence I have been accussed many times by friends as been too soft on religions; some will even suggest that am too sentimental about them despite all that I know about the religious attrocities. None of the allegations succeeded in swaying me to the side of the gadflies. None! Not even the anti-Miss world rally that cost lives and properties in Nigeria. In fact, I could still remember saying that Daniel Isioma (a Nigerian journalist now a refugee in Norway) should have crafted her words more consciously rather that saying what would suggest that even Muhammed, if alive, would have wanted one of the beauty queens as wife.

But the Danish cartoon saga, which created so much hulabaloo around the world, changed everything. I became worried on the infrigements of these fanatics on freedom of speech. How could these persons attempt to censor the entire socio-political space? How could they seek to control men and women who do not subscribe to their faith yet have contrary views to air? Do they have monopololy of access to the public space? Why must these fanatics seek to strangle the ethics of public discourse on a flimsy excuse of blasphemy? These questions, in a dialectical way, led me to think there is more to the activities of
'blasphemy law' activists.

Sincerely, the conclusion was that the crux of these recent cries lie with the muslim fanatics. Of course, am not unaware that the christians have had their fun with the blasphemers in the past; but I thought many christians are now better enlightened and modernised to tolerate other beliefs and unbeliefs. But the push for and final criminalization of blasphemy in Ireland has changed all that. Indeed, it served as a pointer to the fact that hardly can the religionists be trusted with the rights of others (most especially freedom of speech).

After reading Albert Mohler's article, Why Do the Heathen Rage? — International Blasphemy Day, I became more convinced that there is, indeed, the need for a day to be set aside annually to remind the religionists that they do not have the monopoly of access to the public space and can never hold beliefs which would be insulated, by forces of the states,from critical evaluation.

The declaration of September 30 as the international blasphemy day is therefore a welcome development. Indeed, I cant agree less with Ron Lindsay's justification of the dire need for such a day: "to expose all religious beliefs to the same level of inquiry, discussion and criticism to which other areas of intellectual interest are subjected."

This might lead to many islamic 'fatwas' and christians' 'call for arrests/cautions', yet the religionists must realise that it has become old-fashioned for them to be unwilling to subject their beliefs to the dictates of critical inquiry, in the face of contemporary global religious attrocities in diverse shades. The earlier they accept this reality the better because the International Blasphemy Day has come to stay! To my humanist friends, moderation is the word: we do not need to be execessively insultive on others' beliefs to drive home our point.

Yemi Ademowo Johnson
Editor