God’s place in a humanist society (23) [Locul lui Dumnezeu într-o societate umanistă]

Not only that they are fewer, but British practicing Christians are more and more pressured to hide their faith, in order to go on enjoying the privilege of living in a democratic, progressive and prosperous country like the UK.

Wearing a cross at work, even exhibiting one in an electrician’s van have become unofficial offences that irreligious zealots are eager to punish.

More and more – of the already few! – Christians in Britain are at risk of being put in front of a stark choice: “Take off your cross or you’ll get sacked!”.

Supervisers, bosses, co-workers or any other politically correct authorities have no scruples about threatening Christians like this, whilst no one would dare asking a Muslim woman to remove her veil, a Jew to take off his kippah or a Sikh to renounce his turban.

Indeed, that would be outrageous in a country like Great Britain, wouldn’t it? But shouldn’t the same laws the same right for Christians?

It seems that the answer is definitely negative, according to the Conservative (?!) Chameleon in office at 10 Downing Street.

For the UK Government, wearing a cross is not a “generally recognised Christian practice,” thus it needn’t be supported by the State in front of the ECHR. In a country where any wacky minority can ask for protection, Christians are defenceless…

Then why is the British monarh still called Defender of the Faith? Why is the Union Jack still bearing not one but three crosses?

And what kind of faith is that which the Monarch defends? The faith that Christianity is a relic of history whose demise should be hastened?!

There’s no doubt that being a Christian has become a deficiency for one’s employability in the UK. Unless you’re a New man, you can hardly integrate in a society obsessed with material wealth and with loathing its Christian heritage.

Just like in the USSR, when politically correct bolsheviks in Britain can’t snatch crosses from people’s hearts by brainwashing, they forcibly take them off chests.

They are probably relying on the fact that those of churches will fall by themselves. If not, one day they will take the cross down even from St. Paul’s Cathedral in the City of London…

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

Chains for a former Prime Minister of Romania [Lanţuri pentru un fost premier al României]

Former Romanian Prime Minister, Adrian Năstase, has just been sentenced to two years of imprisonment, by a definitive decision of the highest court in Romania (ÎCCJ).

He was found guilty for illegally obtaining electoral campaign funds, although he has been repeatedly claiming his innocence.

Not since the late 1940s and 1950s, when under USSR’s boots, or since Nicolae Ceauşescu’s execution in 1989, has Romania witnessed such a controversial decision.

Neither Năstase, nor his political allies would accept the decision, unless the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ever confirms it.

By that time, he will have most probably spend his two years in prison, while most of the world will be sure of his guilt.

The length of the trial (8 years!) serves as enough ‘evidence’ for most people, either his political enemies, voters or onlookers from the EU.  

Just like an imprisoned former PM in Ukraine has done nothing to improve the country’s image in Europe’s eyes, Năstase’s chains won’t bring dividends for Romania on the long term.

Symbolically, the sentence has huge significance. Chaining a demigod like Năstase appeared to be in the early 2000s is a huge blow to the perceived omnipotence of political leaders.

It’s long since the defendand’s arrogance has deprived him of any presumption of innocence, and not few would be those opening champagne bottles tonight.

One of these would surely be Năstase’s archenemy of 2004, Traian Băsescu – another character who lives under the spell of a presumption of guilt.

Irrespective of how many praises of the ‘independent Romanian judiciary’ we read in foreign media for the next days,  it would be foolish to believe Băsescu has nothing to do with the decision.

In less than a year, Băsescu could be suspended by a hostile parliament, and later even put on trial just like Năstase.

Unless he manages to pulverize the former opposition – USL (= PSD + PNL + PC), already in power, before the next election (another Romanian bizarrery!).

Let us not forget that the now condemned Năstase was the PhD coordinating professor of Romania’s current Prime Minister, Victor Ponta.

Ponta had been accused of plagiarism two days before Năstase was sentenced. The court’s decison comes two days before Năstase’s 62nd birthday.

Rather than destiny’s irony, it’s a masterstoke of Băsescu.

Will Băsescu be the one who laughs last, thus laugh better?! Too bad that there’s nothing to laugh at for most Romanians...

The ruling class is as unprepared for the cataclysmic times ahead of the world as those in power in the late 1930s.

[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]