Church and State blog: The Catholic Church and freedom of expression

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

The Catholic Church and freedom of expression

Last night was as cold as the previous night, and I have pain in my legs from it. As predicted, the police turned up – only not at our patch. As we were preparing to bed down, we heard two of them across the road, chatting with two guys. We decided to get into our sleeping bags straight away and wait until they were gone before sorting things – just in case they thought we were in a chatty mood too!

It was about 20 minutes before the two policemen left the street. So, yes, as we suspected yesterday, they are growing increasingly impatient with their lack of harassment of us over the past few days.

Just like two of nights ago, Declan didn't find any cardboard in the skip nearby, which usually has plenty of it. This time, however, he was prepared and had brought lots of it from the Whitechapel Road. So it seems somebody went to some trouble for nothing.

The Whitechapel Mission didn't have any clothes for me this morning either, despite it being women's clothes day. Although they advertise their clothes store by the front door, a member of staff asked me what I wanted her to get me. I don't buy that the homeless in the Whitechapel Mission (and there are some who you wouldn't know are homeless) are all dressed top to bottom by members of staff, and with whatever they want to dress them up in. It doesn't sound practical, for a start.

I do believe, however, that I am being excluded from choosing my own clothes. Obviously, if I can see the clothes first, I am going to take good, nice, comfortable and warm clothes. But they don't seem happy about me doing that.

Anyway, I told the member of staff (a Polish woman) what I needed most: a pair of jeans, belt and gloves. She told me to wait, which I did until we couldn't wait any longer. I had to leave a message with another member of staff (the Polish woman was nowhere to be seen) to the effect that I couldn't wait any longer and that I will collect whatever she has for me tomorrow morning.

As we were walking towards the Dellow Centre, Declan said that as far as the staff in the Whitechapel Mission are concerned, we are bringing it all on ourselves. My answer to their misplaced attitude is that I have a right to freedom speech. I would be in jail by now if I didn't have it.

We have a right to run an organisation that believes in secular government and science, and that campaigns for reproductive rights (including the legalisation of abortion), the use of condoms (especially in the fight against AIDS), embryonic stem cell research, voluntary euthanasia, gay rights, and more. We do not incite violence.

The Catholic Church is inconsistent on liberty, democracy and freedom of expression. In an article published by the International Herald Tribune on 19 August 2005, the journalists point out that Pope Benedict XVI himself links contemporary liberal democracy with fascism. In my opinion, nothing threatens the authority of the Church more than liberal democracy.

At the heart of liberal democracy lies the fundamental principles of reason, free inquiry and freedom of speech; whilst, for the Catholic Church, it is the subordination of individual freedom to the teachings of the Church.

I would like to know what kind of credibility the Catholic Church has when it comes to democracy in particular, especially in light of its horrific history of oppression and barbarity. The Inquisition and the persecution of Galileo aside, there are countless recent atrocities to choose from. For example, the association of the Church with European fascism, not only in Spain but in Italy and Germany. Or the complicity of the Catholic hierarchy in the horrors of Argentina's military rule that "disappeared" up to 30,000 citizens from 1976-83. Even closer in time is the ongoing sexual abuse scandal, with the extensive role of bishops in silencing victims, blocking investigations and facilitating abuse by moving offenders around the place.

The list of atrocities by the Catholic Church against democracy, freedom of speech and human rights is without doubt endless.

Church and State

MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY
DAY 406 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A SECTION 21 NOTICE

(SEE PARA. 3 BELOW)

1. Our 308 Honorary Associates include 20 Nobel Prize laureates. Declan and I are engaged in a project that deals with the publication of issues significant to social policy in a number of key areas, e.g., climate change, population, futurism, atheism, and free speech. Established as Network for Church Monitoring, a non-profit company limited by guarantee, our main publication, found at the website, Church and State, calls attention to subjects, not the least which have been critical of the interaction between religious and secular institutions. We have been the target of numerous threats and actions, e.g., the former resulting in threats to Declan's life, and the latter, which have led to vandalism. The various incidents are on record with the police and other official agencies.

2. There are no less than 63 Nobel Prize laureates on the Church and State website from 20 Honorary Associates, eight articles, nine book excerpts and 33 petition signatories. (For example, one Nobel laureate signed our Nobel petition in support of human embryonic stem cell research and gave us permission to excerpt from one of his books.) Our list of associates also includes 18 US National Medal laureates, and six Turing Award laureates (the equivalent of the Nobel Prize in computer science). We have published one article and excerpted from the books of seven members of the British House of Lords. And there are 31 knighted professors on the site from 13 Honorary Associates, one book excerpt and 21 petition signatories. These figures are despite the never-ending assault on our email (this link reveals the targeting of our emails to, among others, a close colleague in Washington, DC as well as space advocates and Nobel laureates).

3. This is Day 406 for us living under the threat to life of a 'no fault' eviction by Peabody Trust.[1] We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) property. Peabody's appalling new terms of tenancy have forced us into an unstable weekly periodic tenancy that poses a threat to Declan's life and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. Declan accumulated quite a history with the Housing Ombudsman Service before he received the Ombudsman's decision not to investigate a referral from Lyn Brown MP on jurisdictional grounds. The Ombudsman was asked to consider whether or not our tenancy has been renewed like for like; and whether, if not, it should be in light of the landlord having accused us of not signing a like-for-like agreement. The Equality and Human Rights Commission will not accept a referral of discrimination from Ms Brown, the Commission's helpline (EASS) having grossly distorted the complaint against Peabody. We no longer have pro se access to the courts (see next paragraph).

4. This eviction matter came before District Judge Ruth Fine at the Central London County Court on 30 June 2020, when both counsel for St Mungo's (the charity in effective control of our tenancy) and Declan presented their positions. Declan lost the case and was ordered to pay £1,850 in costs. A publishing colleague in America cleared these costs within 24 hours of my blog post about this hearing for strike out on a related issue that was the essence of the claim, i.e., that St Mungo's would take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of the Mayor of London's RSI programme. Within a week of the hearing, St Mungo's had agreed to take this phone call for us both, the Court having ruled that they were not obliged to do so despite our circumstances. This time we escaped bankruptcy (counsel for St Mungo's asked for £3,407.50 in costs), but consider that to seek pro se access to justice in the courts has become far too dangerous for us. Declan currently has before the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman the decision of the Information Commissioner that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that also poses a threat to his life.

5. When it comes to traffic, we have had 10.7 million hits in the past three years on Facebook; however, I left the platform on 13 March 2021 for one year rather than risk being banned for life. It is indisputable that with any sort of level playing field Church and State would have far exceeded 2.5 million hits last year. In addition to a large variety of blocks without explanation, Facebook had so severely restricted our Page's distribution by October 2020 that it was almost as good as an unpublished page.[2] Currently, we are up to their 85th block since 1 December 2015, and as usual without an explanation. This block records as one half of their 3rd double block in the first five weeks of this year that lasted 60 days. Our traffic has also been curtailed by over 2.5K blocks on access to Church and State since 26 July 2016, including 29 full distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks since 17 May 2019 that have lasted for as long as 54 hours at a time.[3] About 70% of our hits are from Americans.

"This is precisely the hard hitting kind of response needed to clarify the unfair way Facebook is treating your highly reputable site." Don Collins, Founder, International Services Assistance Fund, Washington DC

Last updated: 26/06/21

_________________________

[1] Once a fixed term has elapsed, the landlord has the option to seek eviction even if the tenant has upheld their obligations in full (though of course the landlord must still apply for and obtain a county court order).

[2] 17/10/20: We have permission to publish this ISAF letter of 30 September to Facebook COO Sheryl Samberg. Facebook has so severely restricted our Page's distribution since 4 September that it's almost as good as an unpublished page

[3] Since October 2019, we have been defining a full DDoS attack as having such a high volume of up to 4-minute blocks on access to Church and State that we don't bother recording them all.

Church and State blog

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

The Catholic Church and freedom of expression

About me

My Picks

Church and State

Blog Archive