High Court denied Lynas’ the injunction to gag NGO

Posted by MSN News on 27 July 2012.

Save Malaysia Stop Lynas (SMSL) releases a press statement on the High Court's decision: http://news.malaysia.msn.com/regional/high-court-denied-lynas%E2%80%99-the-injunction-to-gag-ngo

The press statement reads:

"SMSL was pleased that the Kuala Lumpur high court has rejected Lynas' second attempt to get a court injunction to gag SMSL yesterday. Over a hundred concerned citizens consisting of Kuantan residents, supporters from interstates and civil society organisation's representatives congregated at the high court vicinity peacefully with placards and banner in a show of solidarity to express their outrage with the Lynas' defamation action.

"It is heartening and encouraging seeing justice delivered at this juncture. We are relieved that our freedom of speech to voice our concerns with our own government in the interest of the public and the country is upheld through yesterday's high court decision." Lamented Mr Tan Bun Teet, a SMSL spokesperson, a Kuantan resident and a defendant named in the defamation suit.

"Here we are dealing with a world-scale rare earth plant at least ten times bigger than the one in Bukit Merah with hundreds more times hazardous waste. It has been built without any consultation with the public, with lax environmental safeguards and speedy approval processes. What more it is located in a swampy area so close to the sea and the population? We as informed citizens cannot simply sit back and do nothing" Continued Mr Tan

The high court awarded a court cost of RM5,000 to SMSL against Lynas and the court will resume on 14th August to work out details of future trials and hearings.

The fair judgment delivered by Judge John Louis O'Hara is a much welcome gesture of hope for SMSL and concerned Malaysians who have fought hard to stop the Lynas rare earth project since it became widely known for the first time last March through a New York Times article.

Haji Ismail Abu Bakar, another defendant named in the Lynas suit and a Kuantan resident remarked, "many rakyat (citizens) who will be directly and most immediately put at risk once the Lynas plant starts to operate are at no liberty to speak out or to voice their concerns. We breathe a sign of small relief for now but we have a long way to go yet to keep our country safe and clean from toxic pollution."

Last Thursday on the 19th, the court heard arguments from both Lynas and SMSL counsels. SMSL was represented by senior counsel Datuk Bastian who argued that SMSL acted in the interest of the public in issuing the open letter to the Prime Minister which Lynas alleged is defamatory.

"SMSL will brief its various expert witnesses in Malaysia and overseas in preparation for the trial. SMSL aims to use the trial to reveal information in its possession. We have independent opinions and assessments from various highly qualified professionals. We would like to inform the court and the public of the risks and hazards of the Lynas project to our communities, our livelihoods and the local economy as well as Malaysia as a whole."

Explained Mr Tan.

For further comments, please contact:

SMSL Hotline :+60 (0) 12-982 3302

Bersih 2.0 is LEGAL: Court quashes Hisham's "tainted" ban, time for BN to APOLOGISE

Written by  Maria Begum, published by Malaysia Chronicle on 24 July 2012.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ruled that Bersih 2.0 was not an unlawful society, quashing a Home Ministry order aim to derail the free and fair election's movement decision to hold a mass protest on July 9, 2011.

While the court decision will surely be savored by many Malaysians and civil society alike, it is also a slap in the face for Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein and his cousin, Prime Minister Najib Razak.

The two men are regarded as the prime movers behind the BN government's brutal crackdown on some 50,000-odd peaceful demonstrators.

"This vindicates the Bersih 2.0 steering committee and the rally goers. All they ever wanted to do was to show that they supported clean elections but many were cruelly beaten through no fault of their own. If anyone should be blamed, it should be the BN for its flawed conduct, policies and desperate attempts to cling to power," PKR vice president Chua Jui Meng told Malaysia Chronicle.

Calling Hisham's decision a "tainted" one, Justice Rohana Yusuf said the Bersih 2.0 coalition of civil societies, though not officially registered, could still be considered a society under the Societies Act.

“The minister’s order is quashed because Bersih is a lawful society,” Rohana said.

She added that even if it could be proved Bersih 2.0 was a society that had been used for purposes prejudicial to the security of Malaysia, the order was unreasonable and not valid.

Hisham had declared Bersih 2.0 unlawful, citing section 5 of the Societies Act 1966 as investigations had shown that Bersih 2.0 was not a registered organisation and that it was creating unease among the people.

Bersih 2.0 chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan and 13 of her colleagues had in response filed a judicial review seeking to get the Najib administration to lift its July ban.

"It's the right decision. It affirms what has been said by the brave people who attended the rally all along. The government must be acciuntable and held responsible for all the unlawful arrests made against the innocent people under the pretext of 'illegal Bersih'," PKR legal bureau director Latheefa Koya told Malaysia Chronicle.

"Now that the court has made its ruling, I think it is only fitting that the BN government and the police issue a public apology to Bersih, and of course to the thousands of Malaysians who attended the protest."

Freedom of Religious Belief vs Gay Rights

Published by The Boundary Sentinel. By Mona Mattei on 18 Jul 2012.

http://boundarysentinel.com/news/grand-forks-b-b-owners-held-responsible-human-rights-violation-20040#.UAzdgmEjGSo

A gay couple from Vancouver was awarded over $4500 for discrimination in a  B.C. Human Rights Tribunal decision yesterday after being refused Grand Forks accommodations in 2009.

The decision, by Tribunal member Enid Marion, found that Les and Susan Molnar, operating the Riverbend Bed and Breakfast business at the time, were not complying with B.C. laws when they advised Shaun Eadie and Brian Thomas that they could not accept their reservation for a room.

“Having entered into the commercial sphere, the Molnars, like other business people, were required to comply with the laws of the Province, including the Code, which is quasi-constitutional legislation that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,” stated Marion in the decision.

Eadie’s testimony said he originally contacted the Molnars and made a reservation for one room. Later he received a call from the Molnars asking if they were a gay couple and then saying that the situation was “not going to work out” and cancelling their accommodations.

The Molnars, in response to the human rights claim, did not dispute what had taken place but argued that their religious beliefs would not allow a gay couple to stay at their home and that the case was a matter of competing rights. In testimony at the tribunal, the Molnars clearly identified their Mennonite beliefs and that their strong faith made them uncomfortable with any gay or unmarried couples staying at their B & B.

In testimony both Eadie and Thomas said the discrimination had emotional impacts on them. “He (Eadie) testified that the incident with the Riverbend felt like a “slap in the face”, that it made him feel like a second-class citizen again after he had rebuilt his confidence, and that he felt crushed,” stated the decision.

Marion did not discount the Molnars’ faith, but found that their choice of business and lack of promotion that the business was Christian-based impacted her decision.

“The Riverbend was not operated by a Church or religious organization. While the business was operated by individuals with sincere religious beliefs respecting same-sex couples, and out of a portion of their personal residence, it was still a commercial activity. It was the Molnars’ personal and voluntary choice to start up a business in their personal residence. In this respect, the Molnars were not compelled by the state to act in a manner inconsistent with their personal religious views,” the decision outlined.

Eadie and Thomas were awarded $3000 for damages for injury and $1530 for expenses and lost income.

The Molnars closed the Riverbend in late 2009, not because of the claim but as a result of the public reaction to the situation and the risk of further liability.

Asian Markets Tumbled and Euro Slumped to its Lowest Level

Posted by Channel News Asia on 23 July 2012.

Asian markets tumbled and the euro slumped to its lowest level against the yen in almost 12 years on Monday as Spain's debt crisis deepened, raising concerns over the wider eurozone.

With borrowing costs hitting the danger levels that forced Ireland, Greece and Portugal to seek a bailout, investors are concerned that Spain, one of the eurozone's biggest economies, will also have to call for help.

Hong Kong led the losses, diving 2.63 percent by the break, while Tokyo shed 1.27 percent, Sydney slipped 1.70 percent, Seoul lost 2.09 percent and Shanghai slumped 2.11 percent.

Market players were spooked by reports that one of Spain's indebted regions, Valencia, would ask the central government for financial support, while officials in Madrid warned that the economy would likely contract through 2013.

"Europe is definitely a drag on risk assets again this week as investors are worried that Spain's debt burden could be bigger than expected and that a full bailout may be required," said Peter Esho at CityIndex in Australia.

The worries sent Spanish borrowing costs to a euro-era record level, with the 10-year bond yield climbing to 7.24 percent, while the euro at one point fell to 94.61 against the yen, its lowest level since November 2000.

In afternoon Tokyo trade the euro, which also tumbled Friday amid the Spanish woes, bought 94.70 yen, compared with 95.38 late Friday in New York.

"It's not the kind of situation where fears are just going to fade away, since the required amount of aid that Spain will need is likely to mount given the increasing needs of local governments," Rakuten Securities senior market analyst Masayuki Doshida told Dow Jones Newswires.

Read more here: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific_business/view/1215136/1/.html

The euro tumbled below 95 yen for the first time in almost 12 years on Monday as dealers rushed to the safe-haven Japanese unit owing to growing fears about Spain's debt crisis.

The common currency dipped as low as 94.61 yen in morning Asian trade -- its lowest level since November 2000 -- from 95.38 in New York trade on Friday.

It was changing hands at 94.71 yen by 0430 GMT.

Investors must be ready for the euro's fall below 93.00 yen this week if the euro falls below US$1.18, said Atsushi Hirano, senior trader at Royal Bank of Scotland in Tokyo.

"We don't have much important economic indicators this week, so we'll pay attention to stock prices and headlines related to European debt problems," he said.

The euro was also weak against the dollar, treading around two-year lows at US$1.2115, while the dollar bought 78.16 yen.

The euro fetched US$1.2152 in New York trade Friday while the dollar was at 78.48 yen.

Dealers have been moving out of the euro after the borrowing costs on 10-year Spanish bonds soared to euro-era highs above seven percent, which is seen as unsustainable for the government to service.

With yields so high, unemployment at 24 percent and the economy expected to remain in recession throughout next year, analysts say Madrid will likely need a bailout on top of the one agreed for the country's banks last week.

Read more here: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world_business/view/1215137/1/.html

Marriage for the 99%: Seeing Family as a Social Justice Issue

How research demonstrates that marital status can predict a person's socioeconomic status.

By Glenn T. Stanton. Published by Christianity Today on 13 July 2012.

Bill Galston, a senior fellow at Brookings who served as President Clinton's domestic policy advisor, has explained that an American today must only do three things to avoid living in poverty: graduate from high school, marry before having a child, and have children after age 20. Only 8 percent of people who do these three things are poor, while a stunning 79 percent who fail to meet these expectations live in poverty.

Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute makes important observations of how marital status is related to poverty in his important new book, Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010. In 1960, the poorly and moderately educated were only 10 percent less likely to be married than the 94 percent of college-educated Americans who were married. The comparison between the two groups largely held until 1978. Today, these two groups are separated by a 35 percent margin. According to a recent report from the Brookings Institute, the strong rate of marriage among the highly-educated, top-earning Americans has largely held constant and even seems to be increasing. But the bad news is that marriage is sinking dramatically among low and middle-class Americans, down from 84 percent to a minority of 48 percent today—a dramatic decline over the last 40 years, and no indicators hint at a slowing pace. The stark trend line leads Murray to lament, "Marriage has become the fault line dividing America's classes."

In some ways, the concern about marriage and class mobility is not new at all. In 1965, a young Daniel Patrick Moynihan passionately warned his boss, President Lyndon Johnson, and our nation that the new landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act was not likely to be fully successful because the African American family was dangerously fragile and continuing to weaken. On the first page of his infamous report—which was one of the first shots fired in the modern culture war over the family—Moynihan warned of the consequences stemming from the persistent "crumbling" of the African American family: "So long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself" among African Americans.

The problem has persisted: the percentage of all married women in the U.S. is 50 percent (53 percent for white women), but is a tragically low 29 percent for African American women. The wide disparity led to culturally soul-searching books such as Stanford professor Ralph Richard Banks's Is Marriage for White People?, in which he contends that marriage recovery is essential for the socio-economic well-being of African Americans. A larger question could be, "Is marriage for rich people?"

Marriage is not just a personal, sentimental institution, giving couples something to feel good about at each year's anniversary. The scholars at the National Marriage Project working from the University of Virginia offer dramatic evidence in their recent report (page 78) that marriage is a "wealth-generating institution."

All other things being equal, the never-married are 75 percent less wealthy than their continuously married peers. And two people are not necessarily wealthier than one. Cohabitors generally are 58 percent lower in financial wealth than those who are married. And those who divorce and never remarry have a 72 percent lower amount in wealth. The National Marriage Project suggests that those with better financial prospects are not necessarily more likely to marry, but the "institution of marriage itself provides a wealth-generation bonus."

Nobel-winning economist George Akerlof has explained the pro-social influence of marriage upon men and fathers. "Married men are more attached to the labor force, they have less substance abuse, they commit less crime, are less likely to become the victims of crime, have better health, and are less accident prone," he said in a prestigious lecture. He found cohabitation was incapable of providing these benefits, he said, because, "men settle down when they get married and if they fail to get married, they fail to settle down."

And settled-down men work more, earn more, save more, and spend more money on their families than on themselves. Married men are also dramatically less likely to abuse their wives and children than men of any other relational status. Marriage boosts the well-being of women as well in nearly every important measure of well-being.

The evidence is impossible to ignore or explain away. Marriage drives well-being and upward mobility. The absence of marriage drives it down. Any smart poverty alleviation program cannot ignore this.

And for Christians, the research enriches our reading of two of God's earliest and most profound statements about humanity and marriage. First, "It is not good for the man to be alone." Second, "That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife." As we are created as an icon of the Trinitarian God in the world, we're made deeply and mysteriously for one another. And just as Jesus yearns deeply for his bride, it is very natural and deep in our wiring for us to yearn for a spouse. It is in our God-imaging nature to do so. No wonder marriage boosts our well-being in such important and diverse ways.  

Such a truth is so evident that even some sociologists grasp it. 

Will the church?

Read more here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/julyweb-only/seeing-family-as-a-social-justice-issue.html?paging=off

What does the Bible say about gay marriage/same sex marriage?"

http://blogs.christianpost.com/the-pastors-eye/what-does-the-bible-say-about-gay-marriage-same-sex-marriage-10244/

By Peter Mattice.

While the Bible does address homosexuality, it does not explicitly mention gay marriage/same-sex marriage. It is clear, however, that the Bible condemns homosexuality as an immoral and unnatural sin. Leviticus 18:22 identifies homosexual sex as an abomination, a detestable sin. Romans 1:26-27 declares homosexual desires and actions to be shameful, unnatural, lustful, and indecent. First Corinthians 6:9 states that homosexuals are unrighteous and will not inherit the kingdom of God. Since both homosexual desires and actions are condemned in the Bible, it is clear that homosexuals “marrying” is not God’s will, and would be, in fact, sinful.

Whenever the Bible mentions marriage, it is between a male and a female. The first mention of marriage, Genesis 2:24, describes it as a man leaving his parents and being united to his wife. In passages that contain instructions regarding marriage, such as 1 Corinthians 7:2-16 and Ephesians 5:23-33, the Bible clearly identifies marriage as being between a man and a woman. Biblically speaking, marriage is the lifetime union of a man and a woman, primarily for the purpose of building a family and providing a stable environment for that family.

The Bible alone, however, does not have to be used to demonstrate this understanding of marriage. The biblical viewpoint of marriage has been the universal understanding of marriage in every human civilization in world history. History argues against gay marriage. Modern secular psychology recognizes that men and women are psychologically and emotionally designed to complement one another. In regard to the family, psychologists contend that a union between a man and woman in which both spouses serve as good gender role models is the best environment in which to raise well-adjusted children. Psychology argues against gay marriage. In nature/physicality, clearly, men and women were designed to “fit” together sexually. With the “natural” purpose of sexual intercourse being procreation, clearly only a sexual relationship between a man and a woman can fulfill this purpose. Nature argues against gay marriage.

So, if the Bible, history, psychology, and nature all argue for marriage being between a man and a woman—why is there such a controversy today? Why are those who are opposed to gay marriage/same-sex marriage labeled as hateful, intolerant bigots, no matter how respectfully the opposition is presented? Why is the gay rights movement so aggressively pushing for gay marriage/same-sex marriage when most people, religious and non-religious, are supportive of—or at least far less opposed to—gay couples having all the same legal rights as married couples with some form of civil union?

The answer, according to the Bible, is that everyone inherently knows that homosexuality is immoral and unnatural, and the only way to suppress this inherent knowledge is by normalizing homosexuality and attacking any and all opposition to it. The best way to normalize homosexuality is by placing gay marriage/same-sex marriage on an equal plane with traditional opposite-gender marriage. Romans 1:18-32 illustrates this. The truth is known because God has made it plain. The truth is rejected and replaced with a lie. The lie is then promoted and the truth suppressed and attacked. The vehemence and anger expressed by many in the gay rights movement to any who oppose them is, in fact, an indication that they know their position is indefensible. Trying to overcome a weak position by raising your voice is the oldest trick in the debating book. There is perhaps no more accurate description of the modern gay rights agenda than Romans 1:31, “they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.”

To give sanction to gay marriage/same-sex marriage would be to give approval to the homosexual lifestyle, which the Bible clearly and consistently condemns as sinful. Christians should stand firmly against the idea of gay marriage/same-sex marriage. Further, there are strong and logical arguments against gay marriage/same-sex marriage from contexts completely separated from the Bible. One does not have to be an evangelical Christian to recognize that marriage is between a man and a woman.

According to the Bible, marriage is ordained by God to be between a man and a woman (Genesis 2:21-24; Matthew 19:4-6). Gay marriage/same-sex marriage is a perversion of the institution of marriage and an offense to the God who created marriage. As Christians, we are not to condone or ignore sin. Rather, we are to share the love of God and the forgiveness of sins that is available to all, including homosexuals, through Jesus Christ. We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15) and contend for truth with “gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15). As Christians, when we make a stand for truth and the result is personal attacks, insults, and persecution, we should remember the words of Jesus: “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you” (John 15:18-19).

Transsexual Returns to Original Gender After Relationship With Christ

By Jeff Schapiro, published by The Christian Post on 11 January 2012.

By his early teenage years, the fantasy had only grown. He adopted the female name Andrea West, and began cross dressing. At age 15, he also began learning about Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS) and, although he struggled against his desire to be female, he says those feelings were like a radio playing in his head that he just couldn't turn off.

"While I didn't want to be going down this pathway I seemed to be on this track that I couldn't interrupt, stop or change,” he recalled. “But I wasn't homosexual. I was having dates with girls, I never felt any desire to have relationships with men, so from the standpoint of my sexuality I was always heterosexual.”

“That I think, too, is one of the...misleading factors. Most people consider transgenders to be homosexual and, from my experience...98 to 99 percent of the people who contact me are not homosexual...It's really a gender identity issue, not a sexual preference issue.”

In the midst of his struggle, Heyer got married and had two children. He worked as an engineer for a while and achieved significant financial success.

“But the difficulty that I faced was that I couldn't shut the thoughts or the feelings off," he said. He turned to alcohol to cope with his issues, and eventually his life came crashing down around him.

He and his wife split after 17 years of marriage, and he lost his job when he began making the physical transformation into becoming a woman. He got breast implants, began taking hormones, had electrolysis to reduce the hair on his face and had his genitals removed.

As an adult woman, he gave himself the name Laura, and lived under that identity for eight years.

After studying psychology while still living as a woman, however, he says he eventually realized that a person can't actually change genders and that he was delusional. He also later found out that he had a dissociative disorder and multiple personality disorder as a result of his haunting past.

"You're not born transgender, something happens in your childhood that causes you to not want to be who you are...And today the only thing that is...socially acceptable is calling yourself a transgender,” he said.

“I don't think that's an accurate description of where the people are. They're individuals suffering from a delusional disorder that is going to become very self-destructive if, in fact, they don't get good psychological counseling or psychiatric help during that process.”

While he was living as Laura, Heyer says that he believed in Christ but struggled to be accepted in the church. He recalled one church he attended where he entered as a woman but was asked to leave by the pastor once his identity issues were revealed.

Not all his church experiences were bad, however. He found a church that welcomed him in, even with the knowledge of what his struggle was. The pastor of that church told him, “Our job is to love you and it's God's job to transform you.”

“The church, what it did for me was it allowed me to really get to the point where I asked the Lord for forgiveness. I began to pray for forgiveness. And I realized that the critical point is understanding that you can accept Jesus Christ, but there's a point where that doesn't become real...until you're walking with Christ,” he said.

“Because the real truth that Christ is alive is the fact that you see a transformed life. And so what happened in my life is that when I finally... got down on my knees and was working through these things many years after I had accepted Christ – probably 10 to 15 years after I accepted Christ – I finally felt that I was broken enough as a man that I got on my knees and prayed.”

He says that one day he had a vision while praying with his psychologist. He saw Jesus pick up a baby version of himself, look at him and say, “You will now be saved with me forever.” From that point on he could feel the Holy Spirit moving and guiding him in his life.

Today, Heyer says he no longer struggles with his gender identity and uses his testimony to speak out in support of those who have similar struggles and against those who advocate sex reassignment surgery as the solution to the gender identity problems.

A Swedish study published online in February 2011 examined individuals who had sex reassignments between 1973 and 2003, and found that switching sexes can have a significant negative impact on the individual and is not a good solution to someone's gender identity crisis.

“This study found substantially higher rates of overall mortality, death from cardiovascular disease and suicide, suicide attempts, and psychiatric hospitalizations in sex-reassigned transsexual individuals compared to a healthy control population,” the study's authors write in their conclusion. “This highlights that post-surgical transsexuals are a risk group that need long-term psychiatric and somatic follow-up.”

Heyer is the founder of websites such as Sex Change Regret and True Trans Christians, and is the author of several related books including Trading My Sorrows and, most recently, Paper Genders, which was published in June 2011.

He emphasizes the point that SRS is cosmetic surgery only, that it is “scientifically, medically and surgically impossible” for a man to actually be changed into a woman, but also says other people need to show compassion toward those who are struggling with gender identity issues.

Today Heyer is married once again, and he says that he has found happiness in being the gender that God created him to be.

Read more here: http://www.christianpost.com/news/transsexual-returns-to-original-gender-after-relationship-with-christ-66932/

Why Catholics and Evangelicals Can Be United Against Nihilism

A Christianity Today editorial [ posted 6/27/2012 ].

Chuck Colson's vision for Christian unity and full-orbed reform lives on.

Chuck Colson knew that we must aim our reform efforts at a long horizon. On this score, he took inspiration from the historical example of William Wilberforce, who for almost four decades pursued in the British Parliament the abolition of the slave trade and then slavery itself. Colson's 1985 CT article celebrating Wilberforce's persistence was titled "Standing Tough Against All Odds." Colson was under no illusion that we could mend American society as the result of a single election or Supreme Court decision. He knew that he, like Wilberforce, was called to a long obedience in the same direction. That is why he titled one of his CT columns "The Sky Isn't Falling." He perennially fought evangelical tendencies to play Chicken Little because they undermine efforts to reform society.

Like Wilberforce, Colson knew that he was called to comprehensive reform. Wilberforce fought not only the slave trade but also the poor working conditions of chimney sweeps and textile workers. He advocated education and prison reform and founded the world's first animal welfare organization. Likewise, Colson worked for justice reform and against prison rape. He advised the George W. Bush administration to fight against HIV/AIDS in Africa and to support human rights around the world. In all of these things, he built coalitions.

Unlike Wilberforce, Colson did not live to see his greatest aims achieved. But before he died, he saw his leadership exert tremendous force on American Christianity.

Read more here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/june/united-against-nihilism.html