Doublethink was coined by George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four and means “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them”.
Doublethink works, and has been an effective weapon in the globalists’ success in changing the way people think and behave.
“WAR IS PEACE”
The war in Afghanistan is to make us safer from terrorists – at the same time as allowing an unknown number of them to live here and turn their taxpayer-funded houses into bomb factories.
“FREEDOM IS SLAVERY”
Let the Government control your life, so you don’t have to bother.
“IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH”
State education and indoctrination by the BBC since birth equips people to be experts on everything – in their own mind.
“Equality” and “Human Rights” thrive on doublethink – and hypocrisy – and, of course, the downright illogical. This is because an agenda has been set and the rules must fit, but made to look impartial.
So, when Trevor Phillips says that his Equality and Human Rights Commission will stand up for believers, anyone who knows anything about the man and his Ministry will instantly shudder. Or just laugh uncontrollably.
Phillips starts by talking sense – these people need to talk some sense to be believable to even the most dimwitted prole. He talks about “fashionable atheism” and that “people of belief” feel that they are “under siege, that they are often disadvantaged, that they are looked at and considered in some way different and their faith makes them less worthy of regard.”
This is true, but of course, it is largely down to organisations like his, which he somehow has the nerve to deny.
He adds that, “There is a view that says religion is a private matter and it’s entirely a choice. I think that’s entirely not right.
I believe that the Christ died for me and that means a) spreading the Good News and b) trying to live as He directed. This means that keeping my faith private is not an option.
And why should it be in a free country?
The equality watchdog chairman said it would support believers who suffer discrimination because of their faith, and conceded there was a perception it had not done so in the past.
“That is slap bang in the middle of our anti-discriminatory work,” he said.
Are those guffaws I can hear? The man’s being serious.
“Being an Anglican, being a Muslim or being a Methodist or being a Jew is just as much part of your identity and you should not be penalised or treated in a discriminatory way because of that. That’s part of the settlement of a liberal democracy.
Did someone tell him that the UK is a liberal democracy? The correct definition is “constitutional monarchy”.
“Our business is defending the believer. The law we’re here to implement recognises that religious identity is an essential part of this society. It’s an essential element of being a fulfilled human being.
“My real worry is that there are people who may well feel they’re being treated unfairly because of their faith and who actually in fact may be being treated unfairly because of their faith but for some reason feel they can’t get our support in getting justice.”
I know you are waiting for the “buts” and here they are.
The quid pro quo for standing up for individual believers is that churches and faith groups have to fall into line with the views of wider society to keep their charitable status, Mr Phillips signalled.
Yes, we must “fall in line” just like other dictatorships insist upon.
“People are being confused about the right of the individual to freedom of conscience and freedom of expression and the freedoms of particular institutions or organisations.
And of course, it’s our old friend, homosexuality, which is at the centre:
Mr Phillips says that the refusal to allow Catholic adoption agencies an exemption from laws stating homosexual couples could not be discriminated against was even more clear cut.
“Catholic care was a clearer and simpler case. You’re offering a public service and you’re a charity and there are rules about how charities behave. You have to play by the rules. We can’t have a set of rules that apply to one group of people simply because they happen to think it’s right.”
No, a corrupt and discredited government agency now decides right and wrong and our freedom only extends as far as the choices they allow us.
Equality laws should not impinge on the way that religious institutions are run, Mr Phillips said – meaning gay bishops and women priests are not a matter for his watchdog.
“It’s perfectly fair that you can’t be a Roman Catholic priest unless you’re a man,” he said.
“It seems right that the reach of anti-discriminatory law should stop at the door of the church or mosque.
And yet it doesn’t. A church can get into trouble for not employing a homosexual as a youth leader.
Then Phillips starts losing the plot completely,
“At the moment the law says it [appointing openly gay bishops] is a matter for the Church of England. It’s probably right.
“I’m not keen on the idea of a church run by the state. I don’t think the law should run to telling churches how they should conduct their own affairs.”
A string of high-profile legal cases involving Christians who feel discriminated against because of objections to homosexuality may be fuelled by evangelical activists who are seeking political influence – not helping their religion – he warned.
“I think the most likely victim of actual religious discrimination in British society is a Muslim but the person who is most likely to feel slighted because of their religion is an evangelical Christian,” he said.
No, Phillips, it is about people who demand the right that others adhere to their standards on their property and the right to express their opinions without being arrested and to be able to adopt children without being forced to indoctrinate them with your PC garbage.
“There are a lot of Christian activist voices who appear bent on stressing the kind of persecution that I don’t think really exists in this country. There are some Christian organisations who basically want to have a fight and therefore they’re constantly defining the ground in such a way that anyone who doesn’t agree wholly agree with them about everything is essentially a messenger from Satan.
“I think for a lot of Christian activists, they want to have a fight and they choose sexual orientation as the ground to fight it on. I think that whole argument isn’t about the rights of Christians. It’s about politics. It’s about a group of people who really want to have weight and influence and they’ve chosen that particular ground.
Personally I don’t know why they don’t choose ground that really is defending Christian values. I wish they’d choose gambling or human trafficking or something.”
And we do, but we also defend other values, and our rights – including what we allow on our own property. That is a most essential part of liberty: for every citizen of this country.
in a highly provocative comment Mr Phillips said he believed Anglican and Catholic churches were seeing growing congregations from African and Carribean (sic) backgrounds with “old time” views which put them at odds with mainstream Britain.
“In the Christian and Muslim faiths migration has given some of the great faith institutions a massive shot in the arm,” he said.
“I come from that kind of community. We like our faith strong and pretty undiluted. If you come from an Afro-Caribbean Christian background the attitudes to homosexuality are unambiguous, they are undiluted, they are nasty and in some cases homicidal.
Now he is equating people who have traditional beliefs with murderers. YOU are the nasty one, Phillips, by a country mile. But I imagine that this is how you have kept your job for so long.
“I think there’s an awful lot of noise about the Church being persecuted but there is a more real issue that the conventional churches face that the people who are really driving their revival and success believe in an old time religion which in my view is incompatible with a modern, multi-ethnic, multicultural society.
And multiculturalism has been dismissed as a failure by most commentators, including himself. And anyway, the point of multiculturalism was that every “community” could get on with living the way it wanted.
“Muslim communities in this country are doing their damnedest to try to come to terms with their neighbours to try to integrate and they’re doing their best to try to develop an idea of Islam that is compatible with living in a modern liberal democracy.
40% of Muslim students want Sharia law in this country. I suggest that Phillips is confused and that they are actually more keen to integrate with Saudi Arabia or Iran. Everyone knows that Muslims are the least likely group to try to integrate. I don’t think it would be unfair at this stage to call Phillips an outrageous liar.
“One of the aspects of that is essentially saying ‘whatever we feel about matter of sexuality we’re going to have to deal with the fact that most of our neighbours, most of our children’s friends, most of our work mates have a broader, more liberal view and we just have to live with that’.
And we’re back to sexuality: where all roads seem to lead eventually and why I have written about it to such an extent. That is because the perceived rights of those who wish to live contrary to good morals and good health have been allowed to impinge upon the rights of everyone else in the name of “equality”.
“Integration is also about compromise and I think the reason you don’t hear a lot about that from Muslims is that they’re trying to find ways of being good Muslims in a way that is consistent with the society they’re living in.”
He is saying that Muslims are good and Christians are bad. Being willing to accept alternative sexualities seems to be his only yardstick to “integration” and he conveniently avoids the fact that Muslims generally are vehemently, sometimes violently, opposed to homosexual behaviour. Not only in traditional Muslim lands, but also in the UK, where whole areas have been declared “gay free zones“.
But they aren’t “old-time” traditional Christians, so he lets them off.
Because the Religion of Peace is beyond reproach. It’s all everyone else’s fault that they cannot get along like every other known group of people in this country.
I call for the sacking of Trevor Phillips. It should have happened years ago.