Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...

There is no mention of the fact that Lennon was violent towards his wife, emotionally abused his child, worshipped Eastern Gods, lived in luxury or helped finance and publicize radical groups who extolled the use of violence.

To be protesting for Freedom, Unity and Equality and yet to crush the voices of those protecting the sanctity of life and purity within marriage and family life demonstrate the most egregious hypocrisy, double standards and schizophrenia [2]

The crowd who sang Lennon’s “imagine no possessions” were also Lenin’s “useful idiots”

Why is it we are no longer free to ask why it is that the most productive part of our society, the very building block of any nation, marriage, the family, centred around one man and one women, created by God, without which there is no productivity, is being deliberately and consciously deconstructed?

Instead we only hear discussed the NHS, the economy, immigration, pensions, student fees and housing etc.

Why are we not allowed asking why marriage and family life are broken without being accused of a hate crime?

Instead of marriage being solemnised it had become sodomised with same sex marriage and families that come in all shapes and sizes. .

In 2010 Iain Duncan Smith, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions stated:

“The collapse of marriage has brought soaring crime rates, doubled the chances of living in poverty and cost the country an astonishing £100 billion a year….”

Why are we not allowed asking why children are broken without being accused of a hate crime ?

70,000 children are in the care of social services.

Secret courts tear children away from their parents and put them up for gay fostering and adoption. One in ten children is sexually abused. Sexual predators are becoming more and more confident as paedophile rings are protected by the highest in the land. Children are being groomed on an industrial scale in schools with compulsory sex education that normalises unnatural sexual relations and behaviour.

Why are we not allowed asking why babies are broken without being accused of a hate crime?

Since 1967 Britain has murdered 8 million babies in their mothers’ wombs.

Girls as young as 13 have been fitted with contraceptive implants at schools Southampton, without their parents knowing.

Britain has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies and abortion in Europe.

Thousands of teenagers are already having repeat abortions, with some undergoing at least eight terminations. Latest figures suggest many girls are using the procedure as a form of contraception.

For one in seven teenagers who had an abortion in 2010, it was not their first.

Out of 38,269 teenagers having terminations in England and Wales, 5,300 had already had at least one. Three had their eighth abortion, while another two had their seventh.

The Health Service is spending around £1million a week providing repeat abortions, with each procedure costing up to £1,000, according to data released earlier this month.

Among the cases was Lucy Lanelly from Doncaster, who had her first abortion at age 12 then more at 13, 15 and 16.

Unquestionably contraception and abortion are designed to terminate life; nearly a quarter of the 40,000-or-so teen pregnancies recorded every year end in an abortion sometimes with that of a young mother herself [3].

C.S. Lewis said “The most dangerous thing you can do is to take any one impulse (such as the demand for tolerance, or kindness) of your own nature and set it up as the thing you ought to follow at all costs. There is not one of them which will not make us into devils if we set it up as an absolute guide. You might think love of humanity in general was safe, but it is not. If you leave out justice and truth you will find yourself breaking agreements and faking evidence in trials ‘for the sake of humanity ’, and become in the end a cruel and treacherous man”, Mere Christianity, Chapter II.

Michael D. O’Brien says “How long will it take for our people to understand that when humanist sentiments replace moral absolutes, it is not long before very idealistic people begin to invade human families in the name of the family, and destroy human lives in the name of humanity (and tolerance)? This is the idealist’s greatest temptation, the temptation by which nations and cultures so often fall. The wielder of power is deluded into thinking he can remould reality into a less unkind condition. If he succeeds in convincing his people of the delusion and posits for them an enemy of the collective good, then unspeakable evils can be released in society. Those who share a mass-delusion rarely recognise it as such, and can pursue the most heinous acts in a spirit of self-righteousness.”

The Gay Liberation Manifesto 1971

At the root of this is the Gay Liberation Manifesto, written in 1971 written by those who hate the Christian faith, traditional marriage and family and who are determined to destroy it.

We are killing our nation softly, but to speak or question such things results in our being accused of a hate crime and the police harassing and intimidating us, with public humiliation, fines, loss of job and business and even prison. We are no longer worthy to be called a nation of free men and women. We are under an oppressive system of government ruled by gay tyrants and their idiot friends. Even the homosexual historian David Starkey endorses this fact [4].

Christian Concern has produced excellent material for challenging all parliamentary candidates hoping to be elected as MPs on May 7th 2015. Please ask them why the most fundamental freedom, without which a democracy cannot exist, freedom of speech (and thought and conscience), has been taken away and what will they do protect it [5]?

[1] http://www.bdcwire.com/charlie-hebdo-john-lennon-imagine/

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CZmSyOsLwg&feature=youtu.be

[3] i) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/9065998/Girls-13-given-contraceptive-implants-at-school.html

ii) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2149753/Teenage-girls-EIGHT-abortions-let-appalling-way-38-000-undergo-termination-single-year.html

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOuBRMKtM1g

[5] i) http://www.election2015.org.uk/

ii) http://www.election2015.org.uk/constituency/65933/bournemouth-west

Below is my question to my Conservative MP for Bournemouth West, Conor Burns

OPEN LETTER TO CONOR BURNS MP (BOURNEMOUTH WEST)

QUESTION 1.

Dear Mr Burns

Will you fight to defend our ancient freedoms of speech, thought and religion?

Rejection of God’s Laws

As we approach the General Election on the 7th May 2015, it appears to be dominated by anxieties over the state of the NHS and the economy. Yet people forget that such material benefits are the fruit of a government guided by justice and the fundamental and inalienable right to freedom of thought and speech, without which a nation is not worthy to be called free. This is not the freedom of wild beasts but the freedom of men who love Jesus Christ and His Christian laws, which the Queen promised to uphold in her Coronation Oath of 1953, but which she has catastrophically treated with contempt by signing through legislation after legislation, designed by those hate God's laws and allowed such abominations that allow things such as idolatry, abortion, the dishonouring of marriage, the corruption of children and the celebration of same sex marriage, which are against God’s laws. All these have been followed by oppressive laws, making it a criminal offence to speak against such abominations. God is not mocked.

On the 5 October 1938 in the House of Commons, in the face of a rising faction within government who supported Hitler, and the stifling of debate about Nazism, Winston Churchill said: "I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the Press, for it will be said - indeed, I hear it said sometimes now - that we cannot allow the nazi system of dictatorship to be criticised by ordinary common English politicians. And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless, by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”

How appropriate these words are for today.

Lord Waddington’s freedom of speech amendment to Homophobic Hatred Law

When the Labour party came to power in 1997 they became involved in a frenzy of law- making, whereby it seemed that our every emotion and thought expressing a love of GOd's laws were to be legislated against. In 2008, Gordon Brown tried to introduce legislation which would have made any discussion or criticism of homosexuality, a crime punishable with up to seven years in prison [1]. However, Lord Waddington, battled to win a free speech amendment inserted into the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act, clause 58 that now forms section 29JA in the Public Order Act 1986, which reads as follows:

“In this Part, for the avoidance of doubt, the discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices or the urging of persons to refrain from or modify such conduct or practices shall not be taken of itself to be threatening or intended to stir up hatred.” [2].

But this did not satisfy the gay lobby, because whilst they wanted the liberty to attack what they deem as a sex negative, repressive, and guilt-laden, heterosexual hegemony, which apparently denies the population of a whole smorgasbord of kinky sex and perversion, they had demanded a specific injunction on criticising homosexuality. At the last election, in 2010, the Labour Party made a manifesto commitment that, were they to regain political power, they would repeal Lord Waddington’s freedom of speech amendment, making any discussion, apart from speaking positively about homosexuality, a crime punishable with up to seven years in prison [3].

This is a mirror image of the breath taking arrogance of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), in their attempt to bring in religious speech hatred bill in 2006, making it a crime, also punishable with up to seven years in prison, to say anything negative about a person’s religious belief, especially Islam, and yet at the same time asking for an exemption, allowing them to express their hatred of Christianity with impunity [4].

Threat to our foundational freedoms from Multiculturalists and the Equality and Human Rights Commission

However, whilst both Islamism and homosexualism might appear to be in opposing camps, they are both prepared to horse trade, using pluralism and multiculturalism in order to expunge the Bible and Christians from Great Britain.

One of those responsible for bringing these two camps together was Sir Trevor Phillips, Leninist, who was the first Chief Commissioner of the Equality and Human Right Commission. In the Times, February 26th 2006, it was reported:

‘Sir Trevor said that non-Muslims must also accept the right of imams to denounce homosexuality in a way that many would find offensive.

“One point of Britishness is that people can say what they like about the way we should live, however absurd, however unpopular it is…That’s why freedom of expression — including Muslim leaders’ right to say they think homosexuality is harmful — is absolutely precious.” [5].

Yet in the following year, In the Pink News October 18 2007, Sir Trevor made a transparent attack on Bible believing Christians.

"Let me put it as crudely as I can do it as a public official. If somebody is guilty of discrimination of any kind, and with sexual orientation we usually know what it's about with sneering and contempt and all the rest of it, we want them not to be just be punished by the court but frankly to feel the contempt and hatred that they have visited on other people……

They can argue what they like, but there's a law now and frankly if these people want generally to pose as they often do as the decent and moral people in the community, perhaps they should remember that the first elements of decency in a liberal democracy is the rule of law….

As far as I'm concerned there isn't a conflict here….

There is a law. Your faith does not protect you. I understand what you are asking me but to be perfectly honest I haven't got time for it. If people want to use in my view, the mantle of faith to be bigots, I'm not buying it." [6].

According to Mr Phillips first elements of decency in a liberal democracy is the rule of law which allows all manner of perversions and wickedness but is intolerant of sexual purity, righteousness, justice and truth.

Harry Hammond, first Christian Martyr in Britain in the 21^st century.

Not only do gays ‘enjoy’ more rights than any other section of the population apart from Muslims, they are free to incite hatred [7], using obscene hate speech [8]. They think they have the right to take away freedom of speech from anyone who opposes them with methods that are clearly breaking section 5 of the public order act, which states that persons are guilty of an offence if they use threatening, abusive words or disorderly behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress [9].

For example, in 2001, in your own constituency, Bournemouth West, a 65 year old street preacher, Harry Hammond went into Bournemouth city centre on a Saturday afternoon carrying a placard which read: “Jesus Gives Peace, Jesus is Alive, Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism, Jesus is Lord.”

And as Paul Diamond reported in the Telegraph,

“As he started to speak, a crowd surrounded him, pushed him to the ground, threw water and soil at him, and pulled down his sign.

The police arrived, noted that Mr Hammond had been attacked and arrested him for the incitement of his attackers.

They did not arrest anyone who had assaulted him. In court they said that they had been uncertain whether they should protect or arrest him. He was found guilty, and ordered to pay £695 in fines and costs. Shortly after his conviction he was hospitalised and died...” [10].

Reading of the attack on the defenceless 65 year old Harry Hammond and seeing Stonewall’s offensive poster, ‘SOME PEOPLE ARE GAY, GET OVER IT!’ plastered on the side of Bournemouth buses alarms and distresses me [11]. I doubt that many would have dared to complain to the Town Council, especially since they fly the Rainbow, a kind of pink swastika [12]. To complain to the town hall or even worse to the police could land one in trouble.

A police force we can no longer trust to protect us.

The Christian Institute have a long list of people from all walks of life who have been threatened by police for objecting to the gay agenda:

‘Christian pensioner Pauline Howe, 67, was verbally abused at a gay pride parade but when she complained to her local council, the police investigated her for ‘homophobic hatred’. Mrs Howe wrote to the Chief Executive of Norwich City Council objecting to abuse she suffered while handing out Christian leaflets at the homosexual carnival, held in the city on 25 July 2009. In her letter she pointed out that she and other Christians protesting at the parade were “not attempting to prevent those who engage in this offensive behaviour from doing so in the privacy of their own homes”. Her letter also Marginalising Christians used biblical language to describe homosexual practice, said it had contributed to the downfall of every empire and said that gay sex was a major cause of sexually transmitted infections. In September she received a reply from the Deputy Chief Executive at the Council warning that she could face being charged with a criminal offence for expressing such views. Weeks later two police officers knocked on her door and interviewed her in her home. They said her letter was homophobic and may be treated as a ‘hate incident’. The police force defended the decision to send officers to Mrs Howe’s home.

‘On 2 September 2006, Stephen Green of Christian Voice was arrested in Cardiff at the city's Mardi Gras for distributing a leaflet that quoted the Bible at length to support his belief that, while same-sex love is not a sin, sexual activity between members of the same sex is. On Thursday 28 September 2006, the case against Stephen Green was dropped by Cardiff Magistrates Court.’

‘A Member of the Scottish Parliament asked Strathclyde Police to investigate the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Glasgow after he said in a sermon that the moral teaching of the church was being undermined by the introduction of civil partnerships.’

‘In 2005 elderly Christians Joe and Helen Roberts, of Fleetwood in Lancashire, were subjected to 80 minutes of questioning by police officers. The police were sent to the couple’s home after the couple had telephoned the local council to express their disagreement with its ‘gay rights’ policy. There was never any accusation that the couple had been impolite in their tone. The two officers, from Lancashire Constabulary, told the Roberts they were responding to a reported “homophobic telephone call”. They said the couple were close to committing a ‘hate crime’ which carried a seven-year prison sentence and were “walking on eggshells”. The Roberts lodged formal complaints but the police and the council refused to admit they had acted wrongly. The Roberts therefore began a legal action. In December 2006, in an out-of court settlement, the police and council both admitted they were Marginalising Christians wrong in how they treated the Roberts. They both paid costs and damages and said they would revise their procedures to avoid a repeat of the incident. In a free society, taxpaying citizens must be able to express their disapproval of public policy without fear of a knock at the door from the police.’

‘In February 2008 a police community support officer (PCSO) told two church workers in Birmingham, “You can’t preach here, this is a Muslim area”. The incident happened as Arthur Cunningham and Joseph Abraham handed out Christian tracts on Alum Rock Road. PCSO Naguthney told the Christians they were committing a hate crime by attempting to convert Muslims to Christianity and threatened to take them to the police station. Another officer, PC

Loi advised Mr Cunningham and Mr Abraham not to come back to the Alum Rock Road area. PCSO Naguthney said, “You have been warned. If you come back here and get beat up, well you have been warned.”

The two Christians subsequently made a formal complaint to West Midlands Police about the conduct of the officers, but no formal apology was given. It is understood that PCSO Naguthney has been given verbal advice for his pocket notebook and will receive training in understanding hate crime and communicating with the public. West Midlands Police issued a public statement saying “there are not any no-go areas in the West Midlands Police Area.”’

‘In 2007 church worker Julian Hurst was handing out leaflets to the public in Manchester, inviting people to Easter services. The leaflet Marginalising Christians featured a picture of a daffodil and said, “New Life, Fresh Hope”. A homosexual man complained to the police that he was offended, so officers took copies away for examination. The next day Mr Hurst was visited in his home by a PC from the Race and Hate Crime Unit. The officer confirmed that the leaflet was inoffensive and that Mr Hurst was within his rights to distribute it on public streets. But the case illustrates that police feel duty bound to investigate any complaint made by a homosexual – no matter how spurious. Removing the opportunity for officers to use their common sense wastes police time, creates an incentive for complainants and generates a censorial atmosphere for legitimate Christian activity.’

‘Miguel Hayworth, a Christian street preacher in Manchester, was silenced by police after publicly reading a passage from the Bible discussing homosexuality. Mr Hayworth had been reading from Romans 1:17-32 when a member of the public complained of ‘homophobic remarks’ and the police arrived. Mr Hayworth was then taken into the back of a police van, questioned and detained for over an hour. The officers later released Mr Hayworth and he was permitted to continue preaching.

Birmingham street preacher charged by police. In summer 2008 Tony Rollins, a street preacher in Birmingham, was arrested after expressing the Bible’s teaching on same-sex relationships. An onlooker took offence and two police officers arrived at the scene. Mr Rollins, who suffers from Asperger Syndrome, was arrested under Section 5 of the Public Order Act, handcuffed and kept in a police cell for four hours. He was charged and was set to appear in court. After a number of submissions from members of the public and The Christian Institute, Crown Prosecution Service decided the case was not in the public interest.’

‘In December 2005 Lynette Burrows, an author and family-values campaigner, took part in a BBC Radio 5 Live talk show. The show, hosted by Victoria Derbyshire, was looking at the issue of civil partnerships. During the course of the discussion Mrs Burrows said she did not believe that adoption by a homosexual couple was in the best interests of a child. The following day, Mrs Burrows was shocked to receive a telephone call from the police who said a member of the public had made a complaint about her ‘homophobic’ comments. Mrs Burrows says the police officer proceeded to read her a “lecture about homophobia” and told her that the incident would be noted on police records. Mrs Burrows felt intimidated by the phone call.’

‘In 2008 the police investigated Northern Ireland MP Iris Robinson for expressing her religious beliefs about homosexuality on a BBC radio show. Officers from the ‘serious crime branch’ of the Police Service of Northern Ireland held interviews about the incident. As part of a BBC Radio Ulster debate, Mrs Robinson used the biblical word ‘abomination’ to describe homosexual practice. She also recommended that homosexuals seek counselling if they are struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction. When the incident hit the headlines in June, Mrs Robinson pointed out that her criticism was directed at the practice of homosexuality, rather than homosexuals themselves. “I was very careful in saying that I have nothing against any homosexual,” she said. “I love them – that is what the Lord tells me, to love the sinner and not the sin.”’ (Note these are not the words of Jesus Christ, but Ghandi) [13]

Even with Lord Waddington’s free speech amendment, there has continued to be case after case of the police and courts silencing any who oppose homosexuality or Islam. Perhaps one of the most recent and egregious cases is that of the street preacher, Michael Overd, being told by a Muslim Judge, who sits on Shariah courts, which parts of the Bible he can and cannot read in public [14].

I too have had the police harass me in my own home three times, simply questioning the homosexual agenda.

The Home Office, the Crown Prosecution and numerous police authorities are all signed up to Stonewall’s WorkPlace Equality Index which lists the top 100 employers in the UK for advancing the gay agenda. So if you have ever a member of the public brings a case against a homosexual and it ends up on the desk of the Crown Prosecution do not expect either impartiality or honesty [15].

Nick King prospective Police Commissioner for Dorset

In 2012 you nominated the homosexual owner of the degenerate, transsexual cabaret club in Bournemouth, (Rubyz Cabaret Restaurants) to become the Commissioner for Police in Dorset. It just so happens that Rubyz is situated in an area with one of the highest crime rates of violence and drug dealing in the country [16]. This surely was a blatant attempt to politicise the police and thus advance the right of gays over the rest of the population.

When we view the way a peaceful demonstration, entitled, “Le Manif Pour Tous,” composed of fathers, mothers, grandparents, children, young and old, who had come to Paris in 2013, to protest at the way same sex marriage was denying the human right of every child to have one father and one mother, was treated by riot police in Paris, 2013, we can understand why people are fearful of the police [17].

Sir Peter Fahy, Chief Police Constable of Greater Manchester Police

The Christian Institute reported: ‘The Bishop of Chester was investigated by the Cheshire Constabulary in November 2003 after he told his local newspaper of research showing that some homosexuals reorientated to heterosexuality.

The Rt Revd Dr Peter Forster was quoted as saying: “Some people who are primarily homosexual can reorientate themselves. I would encourage them to consider that as an option but I would not set myself up as a medical specialist on the subject – that’s in the area of psychiatric health.”

A complaint was made to the police who announced they were investigating the matter. Just days later the Chief Constable, Peter Fahy, attacked the Bishop publicly, saying: “All public leaders in Cheshire need to give clear leadership on the issue of diversity”. He also attempted to link the Bishop’s remarks with crimes against homosexuals “generated by hate and prejudice”. The police passed a file to the Crown Prosecution Service which decided not to prosecute. The police eventually admitted no crime had been committed.’

Sir Peter Fahy the Chief Constable for Greater Manchester who was recently under investigation for covering up paedophilia has crossed the line from protecting the public to marching in Manchester’s para – military style gay pride [18].

All this makes me feel we are seeing the resurrection of Ernst Rohm, the brutal homosexual leader of the Brown Shirts who formed a para- military army, headed by homosexuals, to beat up any opposition to Hitler during the 1930s [19].

Sir Ian McKellen CH CBE

But it appears that not only are we threatened and intimidated by the police for speaking the truth, our children are going to be forcibly indoctrinated into gay values, morality and a redefinition of the reality and it appears there is nothing parents can do about this. Certainly they will get no help from you.

I wrote to you in 2010 with regard to Sir Ian McKellen, who was cruising around schools peddling his gay propaganda [20] *, for fear that he might give Bournemouth Schools a visitation.

“Dear Mr Skinner,

Thank you for contacting me regarding Sir Ian McKellen and his role in helping children learn about the importance of tolerance ….many schools may see Sir Ian as a valuable aid in learning key social skills.”

I responded by asking what social skills McKellen was teaching children by promotingh hatred of Chrisitan sexual purity. In 2008 in celebration of the blasphemy laws, McKellen read out in a Restaurant, off the Tottenham Court Road, London, the poem, “The Love that Dares to Speak its Name” by James Kirkup which gives a graphic description of a Roman soldier pouring out his lust on the dead body of Jesus Christ. Apart from being a blasphemous piece of obscenity this reading was clearly inciting hatred towards Christians.

I also asked what social skill he was teaching children by boasting of his tearing pages from the Bible and hanging them next to his toilet, because they condemned homosexual practices [21].

You responded by saying,

“Thank you for writing to me again.

Hatred and intolerance have no place in a civilised society.

This correspondence is now closed.”

* Please note the sickening way the BBC news readers abase themselves before McKellen and yet speak contemptuously of Mike Overd. With useful idiots like the BBC who needs enemies? [20 ii)]

Professor Eric Anderson

I also wrote to you about a homosexual professor, Dr Eric Anderson from Winchester University who gave a lecture at Bournemouth University as well as had given at Oxford University, in 2011, entitled “Why Gay sex is better than straight sex,” he had said, “My intention is to offend you, I’m going to cuss a lot and I’m going to break down all kinds of hegemonic structures. If you’re offended by discussions of (obsecene list of depraved sexual activity)…..Apart from expressing a blatantly islamophobic comment he then slandered and insulted the Archbishop of Canterbury with impunity: “Christianity was “the most disgusting religion in the history of mankind” and he called the Archbishop Rowan Williams an “a***hole”, “a total bigot” and “a f***ing liar.”

Your response was equally dismissive.

Allow me to repeat that in spite of Lord Waddington’s freedom of speech amendment to the homophobic hatred legislation the Labour Party made a manifesto commitment in 2010 that, were they to regain political power, they would abolish Lord Waddington’s amendment and I suspect give the Muslims the religious hatred bill they were denied in 2006.

Lord Waddington’s message to all of us if vital if we are to remain a nation of free men and women under the laws of Jesus Christ. If nothing else please watch and listen to Lord Waddington’s message that fell on deaf ears in 2008 [22].

So to sum up according to you a definition of a civilised society is one that is inclusive, tolerant, liberal, live –and – let - live, non- judgemental, accepting of all shades of opinions, championing equality and diversity of beliefs and opinions, except those whose intent is to destroy us. What hypocrisy.

Assuming that you are elected to represent me in Parliament and in the event of the next government pressing to introduce a crime of homophobic and Islamophobic speech hatred, will you do all in your power to resist it?