Resources

The UK is now officially recognised as one of the top five countries for anti-Christian hate crime in Europe (Annual Report 2021 (intoleranceagainstchristians.eu).  To discover whether or not this is true, VfJUK launched a survey to ask people their experiences of intolerance or discrimination.  The results are a wake-up call to all concerned with freedom of speech and freedom of belief.

Some of our findings:

38% of under 35s felt their freedom of speech was restricted.

56% – 61% experienced hostility and ridicule if they discussed their religious beliefs.Over half of under 35s felt there were negative stereotypes of Christians at their place of work.

78% believed religious discrimination was not treated as seriously as other forms of discrimination.

The conclusion is inescapable: Christianity is under attack in the UK.

To find out more, download our Report here.

“We all need to wake up to the attack on Christianity in our society, before it turns into something even more sinister. This report is a vital step in sounding the alarm.” Nick Fletcher MP

Following public outcry over the staggering number of premature and inappropriate deaths caused by the now infamous Liverpool Care Pathway (LPC), in 2014 the protocol was scrapped, presumably consigned to a scrapheap of medical mistakes from which it was hoped it would never again emerge.  That hope proved to be misplaced.  When end of life care in the NHS performs correctly, it is superb, but sadly, as this Report shows, the many-headed hydra that was the Pathway has refused to lie down.  The name may have changed, but the misapplication, misuse – and even abuse – persist.

As this Report shows, misdiagnoses and mis-assessments as to quality of life are all too common.  This, together with a failure to appreciate the respect and care required for those approaching their last days is, in every sense, a fatal combination.   Excessive and inappropriate use of Midazolam and Morphine, rendering a patient comatose, coupled with the withdrawal of food and hydration, have combined to impose a death sentence which, in the current climate, it is extremely hard to challenge.

From over 600 complaints that we know about – the tip of a very large iceberg – this Report details 16 medically analysed and validated accounts of such failure, provided in their own words by families left stunned at the inhumane treatment suffered by their relations.  The individualised ‘care package’, recommended by NICE in the wake of the LCP, has all too often become a pathway to death – imposed for what sometimes started out as seemingly trivial conditions.  One patient, for example, was admitted for treatment for constipation.  Others, otherwise healthy, underwent knee replacement surgery or elective eye surgery.

Commentary on each case is provided by Professor Emeritus Sam H Ahmedzai FRCP, a palliative medicine specialist, who chaired the NICE guideline committee responsible for its clinical guidance on care for the dying adult in 2015.  Legal analysis is provided by James Bogle, a practising barrister specialising in clinical negligence, and especially end of life cases.

Examining the many clinical failures, and what sometimes appears blatant abuse, the Report concludes with a series of proposed actions to address the problems.

We propose the following:

1. A national inventory of local end of life care plans, policies and procedures currently being used in all healthcare settings
2. A national rapid response service to advise and support people who have a loved one currently experiencing poor quality end of life care
3. A fast track advice helpline for recently bereaved families
4. A national register of cases where end of life care has fallen below standards or breaches guidelines
5. The urgent adoption of a uniform national system to capture patients’ preferences for end of life care
6. Further high-quality research into social, medical and nursing aspects of end of life care

Doctors are called to save life, not kill, and it is urgent these problems be addressed by Parliament, and appropriate action taken to end such callous and inhumane treatment of those at the end of life.

A report from The Lords and Commons Family and Child Protection Group

On Tuesday, 11th September, the Lords and Commons Family and Child Protection Group, chaired by Sir Jeffrey Donaldson MP, and jointly Convened by Revd Lynda Rose, CEO of VfJUK, and Robert Harris, launched its Report on Relationships and Sex Education: The Way Forward. The Report is in response to the public consultation on Relationships and Sex Education (RSE), due to close on November 7.

Whatever the public response, the Government has insisted the proposals will be implemented between September 2019 and 2020, making Relationships Education mandatory in all Primary schools, including free and maintained schools, and Academies, and Sex and Relationships Education mandatory for all Secondary schools. However, Relationships and Sex Education: The Way Forward argues that the underlying rationale is fundamentally flawed, and will not help what everyone agrees is a major crisis in child welfare.

The Problem

Despite our best efforts the UK still has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Western Europe – and that’s even with the reported recent 9.6% drop in conceptions for girls aged 15 to 17, hailed as such a success by family planning groups. At the same time we have sky-rocketing rates of teenage STIs, classified by doctors as at epidemic level, while children as young as five are reportedly accessing pornography, and sexting and online bullying is at a record high. And despite justifiable concern over the rise in paedophile and sex grooming, figures for child sexual abuse show that one third of attacks are actually committed by other children.

The traditionally favoured remedy has been to increase sex and relationships teaching – the line the Government is now taking. As said, under the new proposals, relationships education will be mandatory for all primary schools, and relationships and sex education will be mandatory for children aged 11-18. Up until now parents have had the right to withdraw children from sex education classes, but Damian Hinds has now announced that this right is incompatible with English case law and the European Convention on Human Rights, so he is proposing to limit this to the right to request withdrawal from sex education lessons, which the Head may or may not allow. At the same time, under the new provisions, children will be held competent to make their own decisions, which can therefore again override the parental right of withdrawal.

At first glance, the rationale may seem sensible. As everyone acknowledges, the world is a very dangerous place and all of us want to keep children safe. But the problem is that SRE programmes up to now have been a disaster, not just in failing to protect children, but by actually contributing to – even causing – the very problems they’re supposed to stop. In fact, RSE appears to be prematurely sexualising children by giving them too much information, too young.

The report, Relationships and Sex Education: The Way Forward, analyses why and how RSE policy has gone wrong, arguing that current proposals are not just flawed, but highly dangerous. It suggests indeed that much of current policy is not concerned with child welfare, but is rather ideological promotion of adult behaviours. The Report suggests an alternative approach that will realistically confront the problems, while prioritising child welfare and safety.

THE CASE FOR CHRISTIAN FREEDOMS TODAY

“As one essayist puts it, ‘We need to be much more honest about where we have come from and where we are going.’ These essays are frank, lucid and stimulating sources for reflection; and are helpful encouragements to further inquiries and to work for sensible remedies before it is too late.”
John Finnis, Professor of Law and Legal Philosophy Emeritus, University of Oxford

“Magna Carta continues to compel Christian people to fearlessly explore what makes for human flourishing in a liberal democracy. Any wake-up call — such as this book — is rarely comfortable, occasionally inconvenient, always unsettling; but the issues discussed, of conscience, belief and freedom, refuse to be silenced.”
HH Judge David Turner QC

“At a time when secular humanism is so energetically seeking to undermine the Judaeo-Christian values of our culture, this book presents a brilliant and robust statement of the continuing significance of Magna Carta.”
Dennis Wrigley, Founder of The Maranatha Community

“This book emphasises the relationship between the dignity of our democratic traditions and the religious liberty of our citizens. It is a timely reminder of the proper limits of the power of the state and deserves to be studied widely.”
The Rt Rev Dr Peter Forster, Bishop of Chester

“This book provides a comprehensive analysis of the basis and origins of human rights and a penetrating examination of the contemporary battle between secularism, Islam and Christianity. It is essential reading for all concerned at the loss of traditional freedoms and the future implications.”
Rev Dr Clifford Hill, Issachar Ministries

Questions of Eligibility and Consequences

This is a full balanced account of the argument against opening the institution of marriage to same sex couples. I commend it to all who are concerned about this vitally important question. The reader will be able to reach a conclusion on this issue confident that it is based on a thorough analysis and not dependent on any view he or she has previously formed.
The Rt Hon the Lord Mackay of Clashfern KT, former Lord Chancellor of Great Britain

This is in the great tradition of British pamphlets – clear in its exposition, convincing in its arguments, it should be required reading for every politician, especially those well-intentioned leaders whose insufficiently thought out proposals could have the unintended consequence of undermining the very bedrock of our still stable family-based society.
The Lord Cormack DL

R. S. Harris has been nothing if not thorough in his description and analysis of the issue of same-sex marriage. He points to the uniqueness of marriage as a publicly undertaken relationship between a man and woman for life and to the exclusion of all others. He shows how other relationships, whatever their value, should not be confused with marriage nor can it be said that the benefits of marriage would accrue to these relationships if they were. He considers the question of identity and cautions against confusing inclinations and desires with fundamental questions about who we are and what we are here for. His work makes for compelling reading and his opponents have a lot of questions to answer.
The Rt Revd Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, former Bishop of Rochester and former Member of the House of Lords; President of OXTRAD

Those in the “uncertain middle” who do not wish to incur the intimidation of activists for “gay” marriage, find it more comfortable to declare an ambivalent or agnostic position on the matter. R. S. Harris’s comprehensive and evidence-based study argues that “equal marriage” fails the eligibility test for marriage and so is not discriminatory. His discussion on the related issues of children, and the legal position facing the churches will be illuminating for those not afraid to examine the evidence with an open mind.
Canon Dr Chris Sugden, Executive Secretary, Anglican Mainstream; Member of the General Synod of the Church of England

There is a disturbing, and growing, tendency to accuse those who oppose same-sex marriage of bigotry and prejudice, thereby intimidating them into silence, and effectively shutting down debate. In this study, the author reopens the discussion by spelling out, in clear and considered terms, why homosexual relationships are intrinsically different from heterosexual ones, and that the concept of same-sex marriage is in essence a category error.
Prudence Dailey, Lay Member of the General Synod of the Church of England

The support of same-sex marriage by our political leaders has almost inhibited reasoned discourse around this complex and sensitive issue. So this well-researched and measured publication is a timely contribution which offers light rather than heat with well-documented information. I commend it especially to those with open minds who believe in democratic debate and want to hear both sides of the argument.
The Baroness Cox, former Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords

Marriage for me is a sacrament and a union between a man and a woman. This is an important part of my religious belief as a practising Catholic. The attempt to redefine marriage would have serious consequences for family life and indeed society. R. S. Harris has written a well balanced and thoughtful defence of marriage and I recommend this work as part of the wider debate that is taking place.
Jim Dobbin MP, Member for Heywood and Middleton

Healthy Parliamentary Government requires that those proposing legislation know that they will face robustly argued opposition. It is therefore thoroughly unhealthy that in the matter of ‘Equal Civil Marriage’ there is so remarkable a degree of consensus between the political Parties, not only in support of the proposal, but in the apparent conviction that nothing can intelligently and decently be said against it. So I warmly welcome ‘Is there a case for same-sex marriage?’ as a comprehensive and extensively-referenced contribution to the debate; and I hope that responsible Parliamentarians will read it and weigh its arguments.
The Rt Revd Michael Scott-Joynt, former Bishop of Winchester; former Member of the House of Lords

R. S. Harris does an uncommon thing; he brings reason into the ever present debate about the meaning of marriage and family. He debunks the argument often made that anyone opposed to same-sex marriage is bigoted. He explains the distinctive nature of marriage, and in so doing, demonstrates there is no compelling reason to redefine the institution…If we are serious about the future of our society and especially the future of our children, we would do well to carefully consider this well-written and cogent essay.
Prof Dale Kuehne, Richard L. Bready Chair of Ethics, Economics, and the Common Good, Saint Anselm College, New Hampshire;
Founding Director, New Hampshire Institute of Politics

Important decisions about socially significant matters deserve very careful attention, and should come only after full and well-informed public debate. Here is a significant contribution to the debate. This well researched survey sets out in a measured and balanced way a range of considerations that should cause hesitation in UK political circles about the headlong rush to introduce gay marriage. It is not too late to press the pause button!
Prof John Nolland, Trinity College, Bristol

This is a well-researched, balanced, comprehensive and marvellous study. I found it most useful in collecting my arguments together and getting so much great information on the whole background in an infinitely fair and extraordinarily well-reasoned way. It puts paid to those arguments made by same-sex marriage advocates which we thought were so convincing. The six essential components of marriage listed and explained by the author are a powerful argument that makes it absolutely clear that civil partnerships can in no way be deemed to be marriage. This study needs to be read by a wide audience.
The Baroness O’Cathain OBE

For some this study will not make for comfortable reading, but it ought to be read and studied by all. R. S. Harris very carefully appraises and challenges the arguments of those who seek to change the traditional understanding of marriage and its nature. I would encourage the wide circulation of, and proper engagement with, his careful analysis of the wide range of issues involved in a matter which will have implications for our whole society and its future.
The Rt Revd Dr Michael Langrish, Bishop of Exeter

An important contribution that highlights that this issue is far more complex than at first imagined, and cannot, solely, be decided on the idealism of a few. Whatever one’s position, Harris aptly demonstrates that the sensitivity of this issue may have been wholly underestimated by some members of the political-class and that formal equality is by no means an easy concept to grasp.
Dr. Abhijit Pandya, Daily Mail blogger; Executive Director of the Centre for Democratic Studies;
former Teaching Fellow at the London School of Economics

The quality of this research underpins a clear and objective presentation of the case for true marriage. Here is a compelling argument that the campaign to redefine it is pregnant with serious consequences for future generations. Children have an absolute right to the optimum environment for their emotional and social well-being. This study reaffirms the conviction that human dignity is particularly respected in the Christian understanding of marriage and is ‘never in conflict with reverence for the Divine.’ (Joseph Ratzinger) We are indebted to R. S. Harris for his timely publication as a reminder of the prophetic warning that families ‘will be the first victims of the evils that they have done no more than note with indifference.’ (Pope John Paul II Familiaris Consortio n44)”
Edmund P. Adamus, Director for Marriage and Family Life, Archdiocese of Westminster

An excellent, valuable and fearless examination of the issues raised. It should be compulsory reading for all involved!
Revd Lynda Rose, Director, Voice for Justice UK

I commend this study because of its thorough treatment of the issues involved in the current debate. It has been well researched and documented and, on the evidence presented, its conclusions merit measured consideration by all.
Guy Hordern MBE JP